Election conspiracy thinking: Leadership matters.
Bernie Sanders squashed crazy election fraud talk in February 2020.
"U are a blind monkey if u can't figure out it's more corruption and election rigging."
Democratic readers have reason to be frustrated with "good" Republicans. They are frustrating because they aren't pushing back against Trump and his 2020 conspiracy theories. "Good" Republicans are laying low. They don't want to disagree with a mass delusion. They mumble and say "move on" because a majority of GOP voters take cues from their still-popular leader. He continues to insist on a secret nationwide conspiracy that stole his landslide victory. The election theft somehow took place under the watchful eye of Trump's loyal Attorney General William Barr, his election security chief Christopher Krebs, and scores of Republican election officials in battleground states, and then multiple auditors.
Democrats think this "Big Lie" conspiracy thinking is nuts, especially so since it isn't limited to a crazy fringe. It apparently is a widespread belief among GOP primary voters which is what scares the "good" Republicans into silence.
That started the conspiracy talk among Sanders' supporters. The prime theory was that Buttigieg's campaign donated money to a software company somehow aligned with Hillary Clinton--a fellow "corporate Democrat"--six months prior to the election. The software company planned to deliver bad product that the Iowa state party would neglect to test. The theory continued that Buttigieg, then considered a long shot, knew he would gain popularity and would approximately tie Sanders in the caucus vote. The theory further predicted that Buttigieg knew Sanders would wait until victory was certain on election night before announcing likely victory. That would give sneaky Buttigieg a window to step forward amid the ambiguity and look like a happy victor before Sanders did. That would give Buttigieg a boost prior to the upcoming New Hampshire primary. It was clever and diabolical.
Who would believe such a complicated fairy tale? Who would believe that anyone--especially Democratic campaign operatives--could carry out such an elaborate plot? Lots of Democrats. I tried in this blog to dismiss this as crazy divisive thinking. I got serious and persistent blowback within Facebook groups. For example:
*****"It was a carefully planned mess. The DNC is completely corrupt and Buttleakage is a corrupt candidate being installed by a desperate and corrupt establishment."
6 comments:
Nor is this some distant issue happening elsewhere. An article in today’s Mail Tribune credits Peter’s blog with reporting on threats to local election workers after the 2020 election, as a result of Trump's ongoing conspiracy theory about election fraud.
Bernie Sanders arguably got jobbed by the Clinton DNC in 2016, too, over counting delegates and over superdelegates, as many a Democrat will still attest.
Bernie Sanders' leadership in '16 and '20 came not from rejecting supposed "conspiracies", but from recognizing faita accompli and putting party first.
"Conspiracy theory" is an overbroad term as commonly used today. It should signify that which is not only unproved, but fanciful and improbable on its face.
The Bernie instances are neither fanciful nor improbable. (The Trump election imbroglio is). The DNC has a long list of Byzantine maneuvers to help favorites.
It's also often misused in the other direction, to describe concerted action by like-minded partisans. A conspiracy is a secretive agreement to engage in illegal or least illicit conduct. Substantive partisan preference and corresponding action is not a "conspiracy", nor is alleging it a "conspiracy theory".
Sigh. Should read "faits accompli"...
Sen. Sanders supporters have a certain victimhood and underdog mentality, as well as well intentioned, however unrealistic, idealism, which I applaud although with what I admit is no small amount of patronizing. But that's just me.
In the Iowa case it's pretty obvious they overreacted, an unforced error.
As it worked out, the stakes were too high to gamble on a Bernie candidacy, and it soon became clear that Biden was the best bet. However this leaves the question of whether a more progressive candidate might have done better. No way to know.
It may well be that Progressives missed an opportunity by having Sen. Sanders as their leader, but that goose has been cooked for some time. I've noted here before that I thought he was overdue for a successor.
I'm not an expert on political party organizations, but it seems from observing them both locally and nationally that they are even more prone to palace intrigue than your average Rotary.
You know what the Democratic Party also has that the republicans don't?
Moral, ethics and a plan to improve the lives of Americans.
The Mail Tribune and local tv news are what is wrong with media in this country.
Post a Comment