Building an actual majority of delegates supporting M4A, a wealth tax & GND is 100% reason I've supported Warren.
It's profoundly anti-left that Bernie folks - and Bernie himself apparently - think getting nomination grudgingly based on a plurality is acceptable. A thread /1
It's profoundly anti-left that Bernie folks - and Bernie himself apparently - think getting nomination grudgingly based on a plurality is acceptable. A thread /1
Goal is not just electing a particular person (what #NotMeUS is supposed to mean) but building a movement around ideas that win the allegiance of the majority of the population. If we can't do that within Democratic Party, it's delusional to say we can do that nationally. /2
The profound reason for coalitions is recognizing that different groups are often mobilized around different leaders & specific ideas, even when they share many similar goals, and if your leader can't get a majority, you make a coalition to build majority that can win. /3
I voted for Bernie and profoundly support his goals - but reality is there are people and groups out there who his pitch doesn't reach (he couldn't get majority in 2016 note) so Warren brings a person and emphasis that can expand the votes supporting similar progressive goals. /4
But if Warren doesn't supply votes for left majority at Democratic Convention, then reality is need to find majority around as progressive agenda as can get an enthusiastic majority - which means compromising with other Dem leaders & groups of delegates. /5
That's not "selling out" or being "rolled by the establishment" but recognizing that better to build broad unity around a good progressive agenda than try to bully or threaten people to accept a "perfect" agenda a majority resent or reject. /6
This is the lesson of "balanced tickets" in past Democratic races - JFK and LBJ kind of hated each other in 1960 and had different support bases but the combo worked out on unifying party in the end around civil rights and the Great Society. /7
It's also the lessons of coalition governments in countries with proportional representation - you know the system in which Democrats are voting in the primary - where leaders from different parties and factions bargain for the agenda and leadership of any joint coalition. /8
Key concept here in is legitimacy or what Gramsci (you know the guy Pete's Dad likes) called hegemony: the goal is not a win based just on power politics, threats or intimidation, but gaining enthusiastic ratification of ideas as a consensus position. /9
Winning the Presidential nomination by itself is less of a prize than people think if it doesn't shift that consensus as well: if you lose, it's a recipe for discrediting ideas the rest of the party disowns as never ones they bought into/ /10
Even if you win Presidency, enemies outside & inside party that have no stake in your success can discredit movement just by non-cooperation. Winning people over in nomination process, creating coalition deals so their leaders on board, is part of successfully governing. /11
We know broad majority of party want goals of M4A, GND and wealth tax, but their fears are embodied in votes for more conservative candidates. Deals w their leaders that shift towards left position - even if based on compromise - is method to shift their voters as well. /12
Rules for convention that nominated FDR in 1932 required two-thirds vote. While I wouldn't go that far, it's not unreasonable that nominee build balanced ticket and consensus reflected in that kind of vote - which is reason FDR had support to drive his 100 Days. /13
Achieving ANY of Left's legislative goals will be hard enough; without first building as much consensus in the Democratic Party as possible, it will be impossible. Achieving at least a majority of delegates at the Dem Convention is the lowest bar for beginning to do that. /14
That Bloomberg is building counter-majority is all the more reason Bernie & supporters should be looking to build THEIR coalition, ideally with a partner like Warren who is politically closer, but if needed w forces supporting other candidates. /15
Unknown here is where actual delegates - usually local activists and leaders recruited by different candidates - will vote once released on a second ballot. Building broad alliances beyond your campaign will be key to reaching them (something Bloomberg does recognize). /16
I'm far less hostile to role of superdelegates. Most are elected leaders who have legitimacy & represent voice of party members through winning their own elections. So if no consensus among primary voters, having them play role in building majority seems quite appropriate. /17
Winning large plurality of votes in primary creates strong position for bargaining, but progressive need to see engaging successfully in that bargaining as the next task and opportunity to build greater consensus for left ideas, not an oppressive trick or unfair obstacle. /18
