Bernie Sanders's Myth

During the last weeks of Democratic Party preliminaries in 2008, at which time the main contestant usually touches the moment of victory, something unusual happened. White working-class voters flocked to Hillary Clinton, the failing racer. Clinton won Ohio with 10 points, Kentucky with 35 and West Virginia with 40 points.

And while Obama's evental triumph in November softened the strain of nerves in the party, panic returned in the last eight years [particularly on two mid-election parties] when the democrats' base seemed to be going that way to Clinton's adviser prophesied as “kokes [persons who are many academics or studios] and approaching Americans.” For Obama's defeated enemy, who grew to popularity on his 70s, it was a kind of comfort.

When I think Secretary Clinton had more influence than any other Democrat with white working-class voters, I believe she has a special connection with them,” said Clinton adviser William Winter. “Bill and Hillary are from South. They understand South and understand the uses of political strategies that will bring voters. They're moderate people, and most people in the South are like this. ”

It doesn't have to be said that it didn't work that way. And now the hopes of resurrecting white working class voters are based on the candidate Clinton himself defeated: Bernie Sanders.

Sanders's campaign has circulated a strategy promoting that their candidate would compete with the Trump not only in Michigan and Ohio but also in countries like West Virginia, Kansas, North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Montana. Sanders “is popular with traditional working classes, industrial workers in those countries,” said his adviser, Jeff Weaver. “Bernie Sanders,” says shout Bhascar Sunkara, “is the only person capable of gathering millions of American workers with the message that politics can really improve their lives. ”

Their evidence is constant support for Sanders during the time he was racing against Clinton. There is something family, similar to the model of Sanderson's support in 2016. Nate Silver, has found that nearly a quarter of Sanderson's voters were among the voters who were sharply opposed to Hillary Clinton with the stance <x0); never for Hillary”. They are conservatives, many of whom voted for Donald Trump later in the general elections.

Dan Hopkins had found something similar in 2016. Sanders' vote joined approximately the protest votes against the Democratic Party standards. Sanders received the same voters in 2016 that Clinton himself received in 2008. Both votes presented the protest against the Democratic Party by voters who had neither left the party nor been part of it at all. Sanders in 2016, such as Clinton in 2008, raised votes at extra time in the preliminary by winning voters who were not really with him.

How big was the vote “never for Hillary” for Bernie Saunders? Very big. They made the difference in the eight states he won, Silver says. Without that protest vote, like a growing voice of authentic democratic base, it would never have taken place. And this basic data misreader created the Foundation for the Abucian Dream blossom that the American white class is seeking to turn against neoliberalism if it is offered enough clear and sharp criticism.

Ironically, Sanders's supporters have made the same analytical mistake as Clinton fans after the 2008 elections. They saw increased support among the working white class and saw a basis for the future for winning elections, never realizing that the only reason these voters have supported them is that they were practically lost. /Periscope

The article is translated adapted from NYMAG.com