,
17 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
Thread. Here's my take on the game behind Bernie's charter play yesterday. And let's be clear, it is political machinations, not policy or ideology that is driving this.
1. There are two major factors in the Democratic primary that are playing out simultaneously, and also - somewhat - unexpectedly.
2. The first is the sheer number of candidates in the race. Politicos were expecting a lot, but I'm not sure anyone was expecting two dozen, with many of them credible.
3. The second is that, despite the crowded field, Biden has surged to undisputable frontrunner status nationally and in early primary states. His coalition is broad and diverse. He's performing the best in head to head matchup polls against Trump as well.
4. This isn't much of an issue for national newcomers that are rising or falling slightly in the polls - Buttigieg and, to an extent, Harris - but are still not well known by a majority of Democratic primary voters.
5. It is, however, an issue for Sanders who has a much narrower coalition and a need to replicate last cycle's wins in Iowa and New Hampshire to have much of a shot. To be trailing Biden by 20+ points, despite having 90%+ name recognition... that's a political crisis.
6. Given these two elements - Biden's poll performance and the crowded field - the very best play any of the others have is to hope that the field narrows quickly to a two person race and that contrasts can be made that will sway enough voters away from Biden.
7. That's easier said than done, given that Biden also ranks as the top alternate choice for Democratic primary voters that don't currently have him as their top choice. Sanders needs those alternate votes if he has a chance of besting Biden.
8. So that's the puzzle that Warren, Harris, Buttigieg, and Sanders all have to figure out: how to be left standing as the rest of the field winnows, while also capturing enough of the voters supporting former candidates to mount a serious challenge to Biden.
9. The surest way of doing that is to have rock solid support among particular segments of the electorate - and the more easily that segment can be mobilized, the better. And the best way to capture those segments is to be seen as the champion of the issues that mobilize them.
10. It's a very Mark Penn-esque strategy. I'd pay good money to hear what Axelrod would think of it - my guess is he wouldn't agree. (Of all the candidates, Buttigieg and Biden appear to be taking the most Axelrodian tact at the moment.)
11. But regardless, Sanders is going for it. And the teacher unions represent in his mind (and Harris', I believe) one of the golden geese in terms of support that can be mobilized if you champion their cause.
12. Though as @Dyrnwyn points out, the teacher unions don't have a great track record of backing winners in the Democratic primary - particularly when the candidate they endorse isn't already the frontrunner.
13. So Sanders does what he's done in several other areas - taken the most extreme position of the field, with little regard for policy impact. It's interesting to contrast him with Warren, and particularly Harris, who chose a more moderate play: boosting teacher salaries.
14. Sanders did this out of what he/his camp feel is necessity. And yet, it's clear they're worried that this position would have a negative impact on the already middling levels of support he has from voters of color - especially African Americans, or reinforce that narrative.
15. There's a reason he mentioned NAACP in the headlines of his comments. And that Randi did the same. And David Sirota. And now his most strident followers. Repeat, repeat, repeat. That's the tell.
END. It's an interesting strategy. I wish I could have been a fly on the wall as they were deliberating, but I doubt it will work. At the end of the day, Democrats want someone to distinguish themselves through competence in policy, politics, vision setting - not capitulation.
