FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

America’s Party-Line Corporate Media

Reading the papers and listening to the radio about the Democratic primary race, which is reaching its climax tomorrow in California, New Jersey, Montana, New Mexico and South Dakota, I’m having a powerful sense of deja vu harking back to my years living and working as a journalist in China in the 1990s.

The news reports all feel like the regurgitation of a party line:

“The primary is over. Hillary Clinton has come within a handful of votes of the total she needs to clinch the Democratic Party nomination. She will be over the top with a majority of pledged and unpledged delegates by midday tomorrow when New Jersey voters cast their ballots. It won’t matter what happens in California, whether Sanders wins there or not.”

And there you have it. California, the largest state in the nation, with nine percent of the nation’s population and a demographic that closely mirrors the nation’s could vote to reject the Democratic Party’s “presumptive” nominee on Tuesday, perhaps bringing Bernie Sanders to within less than 200 votes of Hillary Clinton’s total of pledged delegates, but because of the 400 super delegates who said way back before the first primary vote was cast that they would back Clinton — all of them unelected, and many actually lobbyists who have their delegate positions because they bought them — and a hundred more, most of whom were bought by the Clinton campaign, Hillary Clinton according to this party-line corporate media, will still become the party’s nominee for president.

And this is supposed to be a democratic process in a democratic country!

What a sad joke.

Fortunately, millions of Americans aren’t buying it.

Hopefully, California will go the way of Michigan and prove to be a blow-out Sanders win. The latest California poll, just released by the Los Angeles Times, shows Sanders actually ahead of Clinton for the first time, 44 to 43, over Hillary Clinton. That’s a phenomenal achievement, going from a 50% deficit last fall to a lead in the pools the day before the voting. And with a record number of new registrants since Jan. 1, most of them young, and with independents able to vote in California’s Democratic primary (if they ask for a special ballot that allows them to register as Democrats at the polls), it’s possible that the Sanders vote could turn out to be significantly higher than the polling even indicates, given that pollsters typically miss young voters who use cell phones, and also given that Sanders has been doing better and better among minority voters over the course of this long primary season.

At that point, of course, given Clinton’s abysmal performance in national and state by state polling against Donald Trump, who has become the Republican’s presumptive presidential nominee, the Democratic superdelegates who had long ago pledged to back Clinton — the corrupt union leaders who backed her candidacy ignoring the wishes of their rank-and-file, the current and former Democratic elected officials, particularly members of Congress, who feared to buck Clinton because of worries about paying a price in terms of support for their own campaigns, or of loss of influence in Congress, the lobbyists seeking to curry favor with a candidate they had assumed would become the next president, can be expected to start worrying that they are betting on a lame horse who could lose to Trump and the Republicans.

If that happens — and a small trickle of state party leaders who are superdelegates have just started saying they are unhitching themselves from Clinton and are backing Sanders — those votes that the party-line media claim have “clinched the nomination” for Clinton may abandon her, leaving her well shy of a majority with just her pledged delegates.

At that point we have the “contested delegation” in Philadelphia on July 25 that Sanders has been predicting. And then who knows what happens.

Again, I am urging all Sanders supports across the country to make plans now to head for Philadelphia and to join those already in the city and who have already made plans to be here, to make it clear to the Democratic Party hacks that they either nominate Sanders, or they lose in November.

This is not a typical election, where the choice of the Democratic Party is between a Tweedle Dum corporatist candidate and a Tweedle Dee corporatist candidate. This year, it’s between Hillary Clinton, a corrupt, money-grubbing, neoliberal pro-war, pro-Wall Street, pro-Israel candidate who has sucked up as much corporate money as she could grab, and Bernie Sanders, an honest guy with a life-time record of progressive political action, who calls for dialogue and diplomacy not war as a default national policy, an at least arms-length, neutral relationship with Israel and Palestine who has funded his campaign with no corporate money, just small donations from his supporters.

Fully half of Sanders’ backers are saying that they cannot and will not support Hillary Clinton if she wins the nomination — a sentiment which, if correct, would doom her chances of winning in November even if she otherwise had a chance of winning (which is debatable given how widely loathed she is among independent voters).

So contrary to the pathetically obvious party-line reports from the corporate media, Clinton’s nomination, at least until the results come in tomorrow evening from California and the other states holding their primaries tomorrow, Hillary Clinton does not have the Democratic nomination sewn up. And even if she does win California, it’s not over.

We still don’t know what Sanders’ voters, or even Bernie Sanders himself, will do if Clinton does manage to get the nomination in July.

Will Sanders kneel down and humbly endorse a woman he has so effectively exposed as a corporate shill, and more recently as an influence peddler in her role as Secretary of State? It’s possible, I suppose, but increasingly hard to imagine. Significantly, when asked by those same party-line “reporters” of the corporate media to confirm that he will back Clinton, and that he would not accept an offer from Green Party activists (including that party’s presumptive presidential candidate Jill Stein) to run as the Green candidate for president in the general election, Sanders has demurred on several occasions, leaving that possibility open by implication.

How exciting an election season that would be!

As I have written earlier, Sanders running as a Green candidate would be a historic event. Unlike Ralph Nader, who ran as an independent and had to spend most of his time battling just to get his name on state ballots, and who could not get into any general election debates, Sanders as a Green candidate would have already run in 50 states’ primaries and is as recognized a candidate already as Clinton and Trump. Polling ahead of both Clinton and Trump, he would have to be allowed into the televised presidential debates, and his supporters, who have already provided close to $190 million in primary-season donations, could be expected to up the ante in a general election race.

Sanders as a Green could upend the whole election. Running against the two most unpopular major party candidates in US history, he might even win outright. Or as some electoral college experts have noted, he could win big enough to deny any of the three candidates a majority, and if he outpolled Clinton, could create a situation where Clinton’s electoral college delegates (who are free to vote for anyone they choose) could vote for Sanders to avoid having the election go to the Republican-majority House of Representatives.

There’s another reason for Sanders backers to make it to Philadelphia next month: to push for Sanders not to endorse Clinton if the gets the Democratic nomination, but instead to announce his plan to seek the Green Party’s nomination instead at their early August convention.

I’m hoping for one or the other: a California Sanders win and a swing of superdelegates from Clinton to Sanders, giving him the Democratic Party nomination, or a Sanders Green Party campaign against Clinton and Trump. At a minimum, it would be worth it to see the party-line corporate media journalist hacks choking on their words.

More articles by:

Dave Lindorff is a founding member of ThisCantBeHappening!, an online newspaper collective, and is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press).

July 18, 2018
Bruce E. Levine
Politics and Psychiatry: the Cost of the Trauma Cover-Up
Frank Stricker
The Crummy Good Economy and the New Serfdom
Linda Ford
Red Fawn Fallis and the Felony of Being Attacked by Cops
David Mattson
Entrusting Grizzlies to a Basket of Deplorables?
Stephen F. Eisenman
Want Gun Control? Arm the Left (It Worked Before)
CJ Hopkins
Trump’s Treasonous Traitor Summit or: How Liberals Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the New McCarthyism
Patrick Bond
State of the BRICS Class Struggle: Repression, Austerity and Worker Militancy
Dan Corjescu
The USA and Russia: Two Sides of the Same Criminal Corporate Coin
The Hudson Report
How Argentina Got the Biggest Loan in the History of the IMF
Kenn Orphan
You Call This Treason?
Max Parry
Ukraine’s Anti-Roma Pogroms Ignored as Russia is Blamed for Global Far Right Resurgence
Ed Meek
Acts of Resistance
July 17, 2018
Conn Hallinan
Trump & The Big Bad Bugs
Robert Hunziker
Trump Kills Science, Nature Strikes Back
John Grant
The Politics of Cruelty
Kenneth Surin
Calculated Buffoonery: Trump in the UK
Binoy Kampmark
Helsinki Theatrics: Trump Meets Putin
Patrick Bond
BRICS From Above, Seen Critically From Below
Jim Kavanagh
Fighting Fake Stories: The New Yorker, Israel and Obama
Daniel Falcone
Chomsky on the Trump NATO Ruse
W. T. Whitney
Oil Underground in Neuquén, Argentina – and a New US Military Base There
Doug Rawlings
Ken Burns’ “The Vietnam War” was Nominated for an Emmy, Does It Deserve It?
Rajan Menon
The United States of Inequality
Thomas Knapp
Have Mueller and Rosenstein Finally Gone Too Far?
Cesar Chelala
An Insatiable Salesman
Dean Baker
Truth, Trump and the Washington Post
Mel Gurtov
Human Rights Trumped
Binoy Kampmark
Putin’s Football Gambit: How the World Cup Paid Off
July 16, 2018
Sheldon Richman
Trump Turns to Gaza as Middle East Deal of the Century Collapses
Charles Pierson
Kirstjen Nielsen Just Wants to Protect You
Brett Wilkins
The Lydda Death March and the Israeli State of Denial
Patrick Cockburn
Trump Knows That the US Can Exercise More Power in a UK Weakened by Brexit
Robert Fisk
The Fisherman of Sarajevo Told Tales Past Wars and Wars to Come
Gary Leupp
When Did Russia Become an Adversary?
Uri Avnery
“Not Enough!”
Dave Lindorff
Undermining Trump-Putin Summit Means Promoting War
Manuel E. Yepe
World Trade War Has Begun
Binoy Kampmark
Trump Stomps Britain
Wim Laven
The Best Deals are the Deals that Develop Peace
Kary Love
Can We Learn from Heinrich Himmler’s Daughter? Should We?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Franklin Lamb, Requiescat in Pace
Weekend Edition
July 13, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Brian Cloughley
Lessons That Should Have Been Learned From NATO’s Destruction of Libya
Paul Street
Time to Stop Playing “Simon Says” with James Madison and Alexander Hamilton
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: In the Land of Formula and Honey
Aidan O'Brien
Ireland’s Intellectuals Bow to the Queen of Chaos 
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail