Let’s get this out of the way first. I think that caucuses are idiotic and undemocratic. We’re no longer a nation of farmers looking for ways to spend off-season winter hours debating our “neighbors” in churches, libraries, and private homes in order to determine which candidate should represent us.
What’s happening in Iowa is the latest chipping away at my support for Sanders. His people are behaving like cultists and blatantly saying they intend to cherry-pick and spin Iowa’s rule changes and numbers; changes they are credited for having inspired.
The details are in the Snopes piece, “New Iowa Caucus Rules Could Spark Clashing Claims of Victory.”
In short, the rule changes were made in Iowa “as a nod” to Sanders supporters who (still) claim he was cheated. The change is that Iowa will report additional numbers in 2020. The new ones are the before and after vote counts that will accompany the one number that matters in this anachronistic process; the delegate count.
Putting aside the fact that I think caucuses belong only in history books, what troubles me is what Misty Rebik, Sanders’ Iowa state director, says she’ll do:
“<Rebik> said that “the popular vote is very important. We fought for (the reporting change), and we’re proud of that.” Rebik suggested the campaign is going to tout the first alignment numbers no matter the outcome.
“We want to emphasize that the way that we beat Donald Trump is by having the biggest, largest grassroots coalition, and that’s through pure numbers,” she said.
What? You’re going to tout the number you like best no matter the outcome because that’s how you think we beat Trump?
It’s absolutely outrageous that she’s cherry-picking data. Just as bad, she’s making an unequivocally false statement about how to beat Trump. It’s absolutely NOT through ‘pure numbers.’ That’s not how presidents get elected, and sadly, that’s not the worst of it.
Thinking you can pick the number you like instead of the one that matters is the very definition of cherry-picking, and I’m betting that this is all in preparation for claims of DNC rigging and cheating and ignoring the will of the voters should Sanders not win Iowa.
I realize that this will be seen by many of my fellow Sanders supporters as an incendiary position, and that it will likely elicit some emotional responses from some. I’m writing this because I think we as Sanders supporters must speak truth to one another and to Bernie and his team.
The truth I see is a strategy by the Sanders team meant to intentionally mislead, misinform, and likely gin up outrage depending on the outcome in Iowa.
On a personal note, I’m really getting pretty fed up with the petulance, self-righteousness, and arrogance of the Sanders team and some of his supporters. It seems to me that all too often all that one would have to do is replace “Trump” with “Sanders” and whatever the claim, complaint, or criticism was coming from the supporter or staffer would be indistinguishable sans context.
Iowa looks to me to be another example of this.
This change in Iowa purported to be of his team’s doing and intended to increase transparency is now something THEY say will be cherry-picked no matter the outcome? Where have we heard that before? Where do we hear it still?
I’m also admittedly pretty fed up with unsubstantiated claims of rigging and cheating against Bernie. Please, save your tirades about the DNC emails. There’s no there there, and I don’t want to have to rehash how predictable and justifiable it would, in fact, be for every Democrat at every level to prefer Clinton, the life-long Democrat, to the usurper, vocal critic, and fellow Democrat-of-Convenience, Bernie Sanders.
Please also spare me the complaints of how our guy is mistreated by mainstream media, too. I hear enough of that from Trump and his supporters, as well as from the biased and unreliable sources on the Left that make pretty regular appearances here.
What’s happened in Iowa in terms of transparency is a good thing. It improves a terrible process a little.
What I think should piss everyone off now is that Sanders’ team is already telling us THEY will cherry-pick and spin the data.
If you’re thinking of telling me that this isn’t what Bernie wants or supports, then how is this not a troubling sign in and of itself?
If that defense is true, then he’s either out of a loop he clearly ought to and must be in, or the claim that he isn’t is actually a lie. Either way, it’s a signal to me that he’s either not engaged enough as the leader of his own organization, or that he’s willing to go too far to win Iowa.
Most troubling of all is how a mindset like Misty Rebik’s has all the hallmarks of a cult follower……
Our leader is the best ever. Only he can save us. He’s under constant attack by those in power and the non-believers. Power hates him because he threatens them, and non-believers will never understand him. They are his and our enemies, and he and we must do whatever is necessary to protect him, advance his cause, and elevate him to power; otherwise, our enemies will destroy him and us.
Sound familiar? It should. Let’s not be like that.
Let’s hold Bernie and his team and ourselves to higher standards, and let’s call out poor decision making, bad behavior, biased information, and corrupt strategies and tactics when we see them. That’s all I’m trying to do here.