How Bernie Sanders Could Change The Course Of History

bernieWe’ve been inundated with positions, posturing, politics, and pundits.
Hillary has moved left. Bernie is stirring up the troops. Argument is rife about who will win and what they will do.

Democrats, it’s time for a political reality check.

Neither Clinton nor Sanders will be able to get a damn thing done. Period.

While the Democrats may retake the Senate, there is no way Democrats will win the House.

It will be politics as usual for the next four years.

Then it gets interesting.

In 2010, the Republicans swept the table in control of state legislatures and governorships. They used that power to gerrymander Congressional districts across the country, giving Republicans control of the House of Representatives even though the votes for Democrats outnumbered the votes for Republicans.

Which is why today the Republicans hold the largest number of House seats they have held since the Second World War.


The 2020 census will trigger reapportionment, and the Democrats can redraw Congressional district boundaries if they are successful in winning control of enough statehouses.


The 2020 presidential race will be the key to winning statehouses across the county, and will afford Democrats the opportunity to wrest control of the House for the next decade. 2020 could effectively end the Republican Party as a national party, reducing it’s influence to a few red states.

Such success for the Democrats will be predicated on a popular presidential candidate, most likely a popular sitting president seeking re-election.

Who would generate the largest turnout of Democratic voters in 2020, a President Clinton or a President Sanders?

That is the real issue. Nothing either is saying or doing means much, as neither will be able to implement anything during his or her first term.

Hillary supporters deride Sanders’ general election prospects. Sanders supporters point out Hillary is controlled by Wall Street.

Almost everyone is ignoring the fact that everything should be focused on 2020.

In that light, a Sanders victory in the 2016 primaries would do more for the Democratic Party than would a Clinton victory.

If Sanders wins the Democratic nomination, but loses the presidency to the Republican nominee, the 2020 Democratic field will be wide open, assuring vigorous campaigns to control the direction of the party, and generating a campaign of insurgency against the sitting Republican president.

If Sanders were to win the presidency, the enthusiasm of his political revolution will attract millions of voters into the process who have previously been on the sidelines; students, seniors, the poor, the working poor, etc. Sanders’ election would shift the political center substantially to the left, further reducing the chances of Republican success in statehouse contests in 2018 and 2020.

Contrast that with the election of Hillary Clinton. She would bring nothing to the table except the novelty of being the first woman president. The party base will not grow. Her effectiveness will be limited to whatever executive action she might take, the very same limitation to which Sanders would be confined. But Clinton’s would be a presidency of personality, not of philosophy. As such, all she will bring into the 2020 race is her record of accomplishment in her first term. It takes little insight to guess how poor that record will be.

A credible case can be made that Democrats would fare better against an incumbent Republican in 2020 rather than in defending a Clinton presidency seeking a second term.

Sanders, however, would lead his political revolution into 2020. His targets will be the obstructionist Republicans in the House and the Wall Street Democrats in the Senate.

A Sanders nomination in 2016 will change the course of history, whether or not he becomes president.

 

 

 

Author’s Notes:

I am unaware of any other blog with the Armory’s mission of radicalizing the animal movement. I certainly hope I am not alone, and that there are similar sentiments being expressed by comrades unknown to me.

If you know of other blogs dedicated to animal rights and the defeat of capitalism, please comment with a link.

• Be sure to follow the Armory and share it with your Facebook friends and email contacts, as well as on Twitter, Google, and all other social media platforms. Our influence and effectiveness is dependent upon you!

Natasha Sainsbury, of Good Karma Graphic Design, has joined Armory of the Revolution as Editor, and is responsible for the transformation of the blog’s appearance. Visit and follow her blog V Kind.

If you are not already subscribed to the Armory, please do so before you leave.

There’s a button to Follow us in the upper right sidebar.

• Be sure to visit Armory of the Revolution’s new commissary and bookstore: The Supply Depot

You will find recommended reading on Animal Rights, revolutionary theory, politics, economics, religion, science, and atheism. There is also a section of supplies for animal liberationists, hunt saboteurs, and social revolutionaries. This is all brand new, and we will be adding lots more merchandise in the near future!

Feel free to comment. I encourage open discussion and welcome other opinions. I moderate comments because this blog has been attacked by hunters and right wing trolls. I approve comments that are critical as well as those which agree with me. Comments that I will not tolerate are those that are spam, threatening, disrespectful, or which promote animal abuse and cruelty.

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “How Bernie Sanders Could Change The Course Of History

  1. This is all simply speculation and is not backed up by any evidence or factual information. Typical of Hilary haters. Bill Clinton was one of the best presidents we’ve ever had! Behind every strong man stands an even stronger woman. Hilary would make an amazing president! I for one would LOVE to have Bill as 1st gentleman! Despite my support for Hilary, I do not dislike Bernie and I won’t bash him! We are all on the same side! And I will be just as happy if Bernie wins! I think either candidate would make an excellent president! They are both strong and bold! And unlike many other Democrats, they are very vocal! They are not afraid to tell it like it is! Which is what Democrats so desperately need. Regardless of who wins, unless you’re a clairvoyant who has personally envisioned what the future holds, you couldn’t possibly know the outcome.

    Like

    • I adored Hillary during Bill’s first run and his first term. Her book “It Takes A Village” was brilliant. She fought for single-payer health care, she kept Bill from being a full-on Republican. Bill signed the Defense of Marriage Act, built more prisons than any president in history, supported federal minimum sentences, incarcerated an entire generation of Black Americans, sucked up to Wall Street, and moved the Democratic Party to the right.

      As for speculation, it doesn’t take a clairvoyant to know the Democrats cannot win the House. Without control of both the House and Senate, a Democratic president will be stymied, just as Obama has been.

      I was pleased when Hillary came out against Keystone, and then the Trans Pacific Partnership. I had predicted she would based solely upon political expediency. Sanders is forcing her to the left.

      The real test of her commitment to progressive values will be to see if she uses her weight and political influence to defeat TPP in Congress. My guess is that she will not, and that she will be pleased if it passes on Obama’s watch.

      Like

    • Every candidate for president supports animal serial killing. Sanders is not an animal rights supporter nor vegan. But his positions would do more for animals than would Hillary’s, or any of the Republicans. Why? Because Sanders opposes corporate influence in politics.

      It is corporate influence which allows and encourages the exploitation of animals and erects roadblocks to their protection. Corporate influence rewards policies favored by Big Ag, Big Pharma, Big Oil, Big Coal.

      The exploitation and murder of animals is profit driven. Impacting that profit helps animals. Sanders favors impacting that profit.

      Like

      • Animal cruelty is pandemic. Denmark murders pilot whales. Japan and Namibia murder dolphins, Canada commits unspeakable atrocities against seals. And the US murders almost 10 billion animals each year in slaughterhouses.

        From your post, are we to assume that will change under Clinton? If not, what was the purpose of pointing out Denmark’s horrors? Merely to try to taint Sanders? A very cheap shot, Marc.

        As for guns, I am not impressed with any scheme that would leave guns in the hands of hunters. The murder of a school child is no more horrific than the murder of any sentient being.

        Were it up to me, all guns would be banned. That Clinton is more strident about background checks than Sanders is a ridiculous distinction. Both would allow the unbridled, continuous murder of innocent wildlife to satisfy the urges of psychopathic animal serial killers.

        Neither Clinton nor Sanders will get anything at all accomplished in the first term, as the Republicans have a lock on the House until 2020.

        So let’s consider what the affect of a Democratic presidency would be: The opportunity to appoint to the courts.

        Whom would you rather be making appointments to the US Supreme Court?

        A president who favors a tax on Wall Street transactions or one who takes money from Monsanto and the Big Banks?

        That’s our choice! Sanders or Clinton.

        Like

    • Richard, you are absolutely right about Sanders. Sanders has actively campaigned against gun control, and proudly supports hunting. Since Sanders will lose the nomination anyway, it would be a good thing for wildlife if his position in support of the gun lobby played a major role in his defeat.

      Like

      • Marc, I cannot think of a less productive position to take.

        It is not a forgone conclusion that Sanders will lose the nomination, nor that if he loses would his loss be attributed to his position on guns.

        A Sanders loss would be seen as a repudiation of socialism, and would play into the hands of Wall Street and the oligarchy.

        Sanders position on hunting is no different than is Clinton’s, Obama’s, or Kerry’s, or any other elected official whose name comes to mind.

        Denouncing Sanders on hunting would be no more productive than using veganism as the standard for supporting a candidate.

        We are trying to grow opposition to capitalism. Taking down our strongest allies is doing our enemy’s work.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s