But, for now, Sanders is in the midst of the far more difficult first stage --- one that requires overcoming the corporate-owned media's marginalization of his campaign. It also entails overcoming the exercise in self-protection by the Democratic Party establishment. Long before the first vote has been cast in either a caucus or primary, the Clinton campaign boasted that its backroom deals had already netted one-fifth of the delegates needed to secure the nomination from amongst the unelected super-delegates --- party leaders who do not have to abide by the will of the electorate in their respective states. Simultaneously Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL), the DNC chair and former co-chair of the Hillary Clinton 2008 campaign, has sought to blunt Sanders' attempt to eliminate the "democracy deficit" --- the significant gap between the policy positions of the electorate and their "representatives" occasioned by the manner in which elections are skillfully managed to avoid issues and marginalize the underlying population --- with her imposition of severe limits on the number and timing of the Democratic Party Presidential Debates.
That's the current battle of phase one of the electoral math. More interesting, however, is the dynamics of what could become the second and third phases of a Sanders-led democratic revolution...
In other words, Sanders is "stunned" by how swiftly he's pierced the MSM's electronic curtain, but he's not surprised that, once heard, his message appears to be resonating with the American people.
His hope is that those same numbers work to his advantage during phase two, the general election race, presuming he is able to secure the nomination.
Envisioning a Third Phase
As Sanders discussed in his speech at the DNC Summer Meeting, the target of what he describes as a "political revolution" is much broader than the Presidency. He seeks a radical transformation from our current oligarchy to a functional democracy. It would be a transformation that renders as meaningless the suggestion that Sanders' progressive agenda would be doomed to failure because it would never get past square one in a Republican-controlled Congress.
President Obama, Sanders asserts, made a huge mistake in seeking to negotiate with radical Republicans in Congress, who were committed to making him a one-term President. That negotiating process served only to squander the Democratic majorities then held in both Houses of Congress and to suppress the vote, to the point that 63% of the American people; 80% of young people, were so disillusioned that they didn't bother to even turn out for the 2014 midterm.
"Any serious President that wants to represent working families," Sanders proclaimed, "has to mobilize the people all over this country to make the Congress an offer they can't refuse."
Thus, the success of a Sanders-led revolution will not be measured by him securing the Democratic nomination, or even being elected to serve as President, but by the extent to which the 2016 election and its aftermath transforms our society.
= new reply since forum marked as read
