By Egberto Willies, co-host Move to Amend Reports
Bernie Sanders won in a landslide, a resounding victory against Hillary
Clinton in the New Hampshire primary, beat Hillary Clinton 60% to 38%. Based on
exit polls, his was more than a significant Hillary Clinton defeat. This was a
defeat of the establishment--a defeat
of incrementalism and inauthenticity. Both candidates
are promoting middle-class centric policies that at least on the surface,
appeal to most. In New Hampshire's democratic primary, rank and file voters
reviewed the democratic socialist and the establishment candidates' platforms. They found Bernie
Sanders message believable and attainable because it is consistent with his
long career in public service. They
listened to Hillary Clinton's incremental and pragmatic platform, purported to
attain the same goal (albeit with implicit corporate dictates) as unacceptable.
The classic example is Sanders'
health care proposal. Bernie Sanders wants to get corporations out of
healthcare administration (paying medical bills, etc) given that they deny
coverage to many in order to make a profit for a few (single-payer
/ Medicare for all). Hillary Clinton continues to
support that arcane construct that is nothing more than a transfer of
middle-class wealth to the executives and shareholders of insurance
exit polls were strikingly stunning. They indicate
that the masses are finally getting it. Bernie Sanders won every demographic
classification sans people over 64 and people making over $200,000. And even
those were too close for Hillary's comfort.
Bernie Sanders more than any
politician has raised the issue of Wall Street/corporate control of American
politics. He has promised to fund his campaign via the grassroots. Thus far he
that promise. Hillary Clinton's financing is decidedly
Many viewed former President
Clinton's attack on Bernie Sanders immediately before the New Hampshire
primary, when it was evident that Hillary would take a shellacking, as a faux
paux. It was not. As David Brock said
to Politico Magazine, it was a signal.
"I think that it's about time that voters got a glimpse of reality, which is what's happening, and President Clinton did that. It was a strong call to arms, particularly to her supporters -- and I include myself in that -- who have stayed too quiet in the face of those character attacks, and that's over. What she correctly called the 'artful smear,' we need to call attention to," David Brock, the founder of the Correct The Record rapid response and opposition research group that coordinates with the Clinton campaign, told POLITICO on Monday morning.
In other words, the Clinton
Super PACs, the corporatocracy, and Wall Street are ready to pounce. Ignoring
Sanders didn't work. Playing nice didn't work. We can now expect the media to
throw the kitchen sink at him--no 'artful' smears required. You can bet the
corporate-owned news will toe the establishment line, truth be damned, to
ensure a corporatist is elected and the status quo remains untouched.
Is America at a turning point?
Should grassroots movements pushing for a constitutional amendment to rid our
politics of Wall Street control and corporate control jump into Bernie Sanders
Hillary Clinton has received
almost unanimous support and endorsements from the Democratic establishment.
Bernie Sanders is a lone ranger attempting to remake the Nation Democratic
Party into one that is people centered. There is much intersectionality between
grassroots movement groups like Move
to Amend and others.
Bernie Sanders said the following in his New Hampshire victory speech.
"Tonight we serve notice to the political and
economic establishment of this country that the American people will not
continue to accept a corrupt campaign finance system that is undermining
American democracy and we will not accept a rigged economy in which ordinary
Americans work longer hours for lower wages while almost all new income and
wealth goes to the top one percent."
He has identified the core issue around which these groups coalesce, organize, and fight.
Sanders also pointed out that a large portion of the electorate is starved for solutions to their issues, and sent a clear message that voters on both sides of the aisle are fed up.