As the United States — and the world — prepares for another Trump administration, revisiting the question of whether Bernie Sanders could have defeated him in 2016 may seem unproductive. Eight years ago feels like ancient history. Yet reframing the question “Would Sanders have won?” to “What lessons from Sanders can help shape a better future for US politics?” proves more relevant than ever.
Over at the New York Times, David Brooks is already on it. In an episode of The Opinions entitled “Maybe Bernie Sanders is Right,” Brooks delivers a muddled, dithering mea culpa that inadvertently exemplifies the punditocracy’s complicity in Donald Trump’s rise. Brooks admits that Sanders was on to something in his bid to mobilize the working class, bring them into the political process, and challenge a system that has excluded them for decades.
Brooks hems and haws, of course. “[T]here has to be a shift in policy,” he notes, before declaring that he doesn’t agree with what he’s about to suggest — though, to his great discomfort, he thinks “it may be necessary.” Reminding us that he’s a “moderate,” Brooks says he “did not like the policies that Bernie Sanders proposes,” but, “one thing [Sanders] got right was disruption, disrupt the system.” He concludes that Democrats must find a candidate who can reach out to and resonate with working-class voters. (He then recommends John Fetterman, but that’s another matter for another time.)
It takes Brooks considerable throat-clearing and hedging to admit what should be obvious: the Democratic Party has entrenched itself in an elitist, insider, Rube Goldberg machine of incumbents, big donors, party officials, cozy pundits, cable news, and consultants. For years,…
Auteur: David Moscrop
