As Trump And Sanders Rise, The Two Major Parties Fall - Joe Trippi/LATimes

[WillyT]

As Trump and Sanders rise, the two major parties fall
By Joe Trippi - LATimes
September 3, 2015, 5:00 a.m.

<snip>

Does the 2016 presidential campaign seem chaotic? For good or ill, that's because it is. The rise of Donald Trump on the right and Bernie Sanders on the left is proof that the country's two major political parties have lost their grip on the nominating process. They can still provide two guaranteed spots on the ballot, for a self-identified "Republican" and a self-identified "Democrat." But that's pretty much all.

It wasn't too long ago that party bosses picked candidates at the national conventions, in proverbial smoke-filled backrooms. The two parties also controlled everything crucial for winning the presidency: The money needed to fund a campaign, and the organization needed to build support.

Primaries and caucuses of course killed the conventions; for at least 35 years they've been purely ceremonial. The 1976 GOP convention fight in which Ronald Reagan challenged President Ford for the nomination was the last time there was any suspense in the outcome for Republicans. Nothing dramatic has happened at a Democratic National Convention since 1980, when Sen. Edward M. Kennedy sought a change in party rules to open a challenge on the floor to President Carter.

Lately, technological change has disrupted fundraising and networking as surely as the primary system disrupted the conventions.

In the 2004 cycle, Howard Dean stunned the Democratic Party by using the still fairly primitive Internet to demolish the party record for fundraising — set by President Clinton in his 1996 reelection campaign — and communicate with supporters. (I was Dean's campaign manager.)

Yes, Dean failed. But four years later, Barack Obama succeeded using the same techniques: leveraging online fundraising and nascent social media to defeat the Democratic establishment's chosen candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton. He brought in more money — half a billion dollars from millions of Americans giving less than $100 each online — and attracted more volunteers than any party-backed pol before him.

This campaign season, a combination of small-dollar giving over the Internet and "super PAC" funding is sustaining the largest Republican field in history. Long-shot candidates typically do not leave the field because they are low in the polls; they leave because they can't afford an airplane ticket to the next debate or the next state. But the Republican Party can't cut off Ted Cruz's tea party revenue stream or prevent Rand Paul from soliciting money over Twitter.

The parties can also do nothing to stop disfavored candidates from attracting attention...

<snip>

More: http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-84344498/

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. Good. Enough with the party bosses.

[WI_DEM]

2. I think there is a real chance that one or both conventions

will be open with no candidate having a majority of delegates.

[in_cog_ni_to]

3. Perhaps now the D.C. PTB will understand -

A government of the people, by the people, for the people.

They're not choosing for us ever again.

[senz]

17. Well said.

That is the fundamental truth of democracy. So easily lost sight of in the corporate age.

[m-lekktor]

4. that was an interesting read! nt

[NorthCarolina]

5. The establishment may not get a candidate in the race

from either party...imagine that. Perhaps they'll run a third party establishment candidate then just program the electronic voting machines accordingly.

[AgingAmerican]

6. The two party system is irreparably broken

...and getting worse

[Vattel]

7. I think it is important to realize that Obama's success in the primary

was a gift to our democracy. Now everyone can see that the party insiders can be beaten.

[bvar22]

9. Unfortunately, that "not a Party Insider" thing was just a scam.

Obama is the consummate insider from Chicago who has been "groomed" for a Presidential run since well before his appearance at the 2004 convention.

This is all the proof I need:
[font size=4]
The DLC New Team
Liberals or Pro-LABOR advocates Need NOT Apply
[/font]
(Screen Capped from the DLC Website)

[jwirr]

11. GOTV

[left-of-center2012]

8. Guess he didn't get the word

Sanders has peaked and is fizzling.

[Oilwellian]

10. I don't think the Democratic Party is falling

I think they're finding their way back to their roots. Third Way control is falling, not the party.

[WillyT]

12. Good Point... I Hope You Are Correct...

[virtualobserver]

13. "self-avowed democratic socialist" in the Trippi article

that is an improvement from "avowed socialist"

I find the fairly consistent use of "avowed" to be quite amusing though

I do realize that avowed is accurate in his case, but it still makes me laugh.

[WillyT]

14. Hell... At This Point... I Take It As A Badge Of Honor...

[virtualobserver]

15. I'm happy with it

I just find it funny that they almost never say it without "avowed"

[Katashi_itto]

16. K&R!

[Stardust]

18. More from Trippi's article particularly about Sanders:

The parties can also do nothing to stop disfavored candidates from attracting attention. On the Democratic side, Sanders is a self-avowed democratic-socialist and independent senator from Vermont who has never before run as a Democrat. Running for the Democratic nomination is just the easiest path to a spot on the ballot in the general election. The establishment may not like his style, but, with Internet buzz, who needs an endorsement from party regulars?

Candidates relying on and playing to the party establishment are failing, while candidates adept at breaking party norms are gaining ground or taking the lead. That's in part because the parties' loss of control over the nominating process has coincided with the decline in their brands. People are almost embarrassed to call themselves Democrats or Republicans, so even candidates avoid party labels and are instead building their own brands.

Brand Sanders is rolling. The Democratic Party couldn't stop his money or kill the energy in his campaign if it tried; and if it did try, it would only help Sanders raise more money and generate even more energy.

The only thing surprising about this situation is that it seems to have come as such a surprise to party leaders. Somehow they have been blind to how vulnerable they are to insurgents, and even more blind to a successful third-party independent candidacy at some point soon. If any candidate surprises in Iowa or New Hampshire, he or she will have millions of dollars within hours and hundreds of thousands of volunteers signing up within days — and like it or not, that is something the parties can no longer stop.

Some are comparing the 2016 campaign with a circus. This isn't a circus. This is just what it looks like when political parties lose power. Democratic and Republican leaders alike should prepare to be surprised.

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-84344498/

[grahamhgreen]

19. Sanders rise shows strength in our party, not weakness.

[Uncle Joe]

20. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, WillyT.