A "long slog"?

From the NY Times' above-the-fold story this morning, "Hillary Clinton Gets Set for a Long Slog Against Bernie Sanders," this passage might rattle some of the heretofore idealistically committed:

A prolonged primary campaign against an opponent widely popular with the party’s liberal base could exhaust donors who will also be asked to contribute to an expensive campaign to defeat the Republican nominee. A contentious race against Mr. Sanders could also weaken Mrs. Clinton’s standing among Democratic voters she would need in November.

This should be fascinating to watch: progressive idealism and liberal pragmatism (those two nouns representing the fundamental difference between the adjectives, in my opinion) ramming each other, perhaps even to the finish line.

I'm also enjoying, from where I sit, the tortured irony of it all: rooting for the pragmatist — whom I have regularly derided — because of her pragmatism.

If I believed Sanders' idealism possessed favorable odds of survival, I might change seats. But I don't believe that; I see little evidence of it beyond New Hampshire — the rest will be a terrible waste of resources. A shame, but fascinating nonetheless.

 

Comments

[Peter G]

I think that captures the essence. That's Bernie in a nutshell, progressive idealism. And I think pragmatic liberalism is a fair description of the Clinton camp. Of the two Bernie's vision is certainly more inspiring to youth. And to many others it seems. Have I not felt that siren call myself? In my own youth honesty compels me to confess that I would be firmly in the Sanders camp. But experience is a stern teacher. Mostly what it teaches you is there are few simple solutions in this world to complex problems. And now I find it all too easy to dissect those easy solutions and see that they will not answer. Most of Bernie's proposals sound great but either don't do anything (breaking up banks) or would actually be counterproductive (initiating trade wars). I still think he'd make a better president than any conceivable Republican alternative. He almost certainly would not be permitted to do much harm. His own party's interests would prevent that. But he still might do some real good in alternative ways. You never know.

[Bob]

He'd certainly be a better president than any of the 2015 deep Republican bench. By light-years.

[Peter G]

If he dropped dead before inauguration and they propped him in a chair in the oval office for four years that would still be true. Bernie's a dreamer but dreamers are always the first to ask the question why not?