It’s beginning to feel like we are in the home stretch of the presidential nominating process. But before people start counting their chickens and making bold predictions about when this primary season will wrap up, it might be a good idea to recall 2008. I don’t buy into the notion that Bernie Sanders is the equivalent of Barack Obama. But the way this race has played out, with one side very close to a mathematical certainty, the Democratic primary definitely has strong similarities to 2008. And like the 2008 primary, having Bernie Sanders in this race is having an effect of Hillary Clinton, just like she had on then-Sen. Barack Obama. Folks can argue if this effect is a net negative or positive, but in my opinion, it will end up being a good thing for Hillary Clinton.
One consequence of having Sanders in the race is the attention his presence has brought to many policy issues that progressives care about. This is not to say that Clinton didn’t support raising the minimum wage or breaking up the banks prior to Sanders getting in the race – she did. But I truly wonder how much we’d be talking about these issues if Sanders wasn’t in the race. The media isn’t known to really delve into covering substance when there is so much distracting fluff coming from the other side. So how much coverage would the media has given to a Clinton speech on, say, Wall Street reform if they weren’t able to cover it in the context of a seemingly tight battle for the nomination? I don’t know for sure, but I’m going to guess not that much. In that sense, having Sanders in the race is a net plus for Clinton. (I think some of my friends on the Clinton campaign may disagree with me on that one!)
Another benefit of having Sanders remain in the race is the added organizing capacity it adds in the states. Of course, one could argue that Sanders staying the race forces Clinton to spend money she’d rather save for the general election right now. But like we saw in 2008, the upside of keeping states competitive is that the campaigns are activating networks and energizing voters and potential volunteers earlier in the process. And I have no doubt that the eventual Democratic nominee will be able to raise all the money they need to compete in the fall.
But there is a legitimate concern that I and others have, moving forward. After the New York primary, the math and the path to the nomination was becoming clearer for Clinton, with more clarity possibly coming this week. But something that has also become clearer is that her popularity has taken a slight hit in the past few weeks. This could simply be the normal wear and tear of any campaign; or it could also be because Sen. Sanders has been running an increasingly negative and personal campaign. Some media folks argue that this is his only path towards victory, and maybe they are right. But there’s collateral damage that comes with that tactic. Perhaps post-New York, we’ll see a return to the more policy focused disagreements we saw at the beginning of the race. Already, you can hear a shift in how Sec. Clinton addresses Sanders and his supporters—with an eye towards building party unity moving forward.
At the end of the day, there are differences between the two candidates. But what separates Clinton and Sanders is much smaller than the policy differences between either of them and the remaining Republican candidates running for president. And much like I believed in 2008 that Sen. Clinton made Sen. Obama a better general election candidate, I believe that Sen. Sanders remaining in the race this long will only serve to make Sen. Clinton a stronger general election candidate. Because if you believe for one second that this race won’t be more contentious, nastier, and all around awful come summer once both parties pick their nominees, I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn–you can pick which neighborhood.
Daniella Gibbs Léger, a former Special Assistant to President Obama, is Senior Vice President for Communications and Strategy at the Center for American Progress Action Fund
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Daniella Gibbs Lger is the Senior Vice President for Communications and Strategy at American Progress. Previously she was the organisations Senior Vice President for American ...
Read More +
PREV
