It seems highly improbable, at best, that the media’s declaration that Hillary Clinton had won the Democratic nomination, in headlines across the nation and on the television news, the night before the last big round of primary votes were cast on Tuesday, was a coincidence or an act of poor judgement on the part of news organizations.
In my opinion, and that of many others, what occurred was nothing less than an all out coup-assist by the media to steal the nomination for Hillary Clinton, by knowingly printing deceiving headlines about how Clinton had “just” clinched the nomination before the most populous state of California and five other states had yet to cast their first ballot. The heads of the Associate Press, the New York Times, The Washington Post, and the major television networks are not stupid people, and it would take a pretty ignorant person to not realize that printing such headlines already declaring a winner, right before the polls opened, would suppress voter turnout.
Bernie Sanders was counting on a win in California to keep his momentum going into the Democratic convention in July to make a case to the superdelegates to support him instead of Hillary, who would not have won enough pledged delegates alone to secure victory. Polls conducted before the vote showed a very tight race, and in such past contests where independents were allowed to vote in the primaries, Sanders usually prevailed. His past victories were fueled by enthusiastic supporters who flocked by the tens of thousands to his rallies, as they were doing in California, who showed up in large numbers in the primary to vote for him. Suppressing the vote in California was Hillary Clinton’s best way of securing a win, and the vote was no doubt suppressed by the press calling the election before the voting even began. It seems obvious that the press assisted, and that the only real doubt lies in whether or not their was collusion from Hillary Clinton’s political machine, and the media.
The lack of debate in the press about whether or not their headlines affected voter turnout, and whether or not it was ethical or professional to print such headlines – which were merely based on the A.P.’s assurance that their count of anonymous superdelegates guaranteed Hillary the nomination – is indicative of a media conspiracy, in which all the major players agreed to pretend as if it were completely routine for a winner to be declared the evening before a tightly contested, close race for a party’s nomination for President. The lack of willingness by any of the major pundits or editorial writers to pursue the question of the impact on voter turnout by the premature announcement of a winner, is hard to interpret as anything other than a deliberate, coordinated, propaganda feat designed to undermine our so-called democracy and ensure that at least one Establishment candidate, sponsored by one of the two corporate parties, was available as contrived “choice.”
Today, the last of the primary contest is being conducted in Washington D.C. Even though Bernie Sanders declared as recently as this past Sunday to fight on to the convention, there is sad indications that he is ready to conceded defeat to Hillary Clinton, and help “unify” the party in order to defeat Donald Trump. Mr. Sanders and Mrs. Clinton have a meeting planned today, in which they will discuss the contest going forward. The indications and speculation are that Bernie will withhold his delegates at the Democratic convention and cause a P.R. problem for the Democrats, unless most of his signature issues are officially included into the Democratic Party’s platform. Presumably, he will view this as a victory that will allow him to bow out of the race gracefully, and support the corrupt, cheating candidate who won.
This is disappointing. Political revolutions, as Mr. Sanders has cast his campaign, shouldn’t end with accepting defeat to a corrupt candidate, aided and sponsored by a corrupt political party, in a rigged system, and assisted from the beginning by the corporate owned media who under-reported, misrepresented, and in the end fabricated her victory, ahead of the remaining votes.
Now the narrative in all of the media, dutifully trumpets the uniform talking points within the Democratic Establishment (another coincidence?) of how Bernie Sanders and his supporters need to “unify” the Democratic party, and support Hillary Clinton, in order to stop the dangerous madman from getting his fingers on America’s nuclear weapons.
Sadly, Bernie Sanders seems to be moving in the direction of “party unity” over political revolution.
Given all that we know about the level of corruption within both of the corporate owned parties, both the Republicans and the Democrats, we should be calling for the destruction of both political parties, and supporting independent candidates and third parties that are not owned by the all powerful corporate elite, who have rigged our Presidential elections into a charade of choice between their sponsored puppets, whom their media,m which they also own and control, protects through their choice of coverage, participation in debates, and now, fabricated victories ahead of the votes.
Of course, the professional propagandist are working overtime to stop a real democratic change in American politics from happening. Thomas Friedman of the New York Times, says “America needs a healthy two-party system.” (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/08/opinion/dump-the-gop-for-a-grand-new-party.html) in a recent column. This is after he longs through feigned moral idealism, for a “new Republican party,” which in reality means the same Republican Party, with the same wealthy owners and managers, coming up with a new line of rhetoric that tricks their primary voters into voting against their own bests interests, that does not prey upon the fears and divisions that the Republicans have lied on for years to motivate and deceive.
Mr. Friedman’s call for a “healthy two-party system” assumes that only two political parties are the only natural expression of a vibrant democracy. Since the days of Ross Perot, and every independent presidential candidate to follow, the voters have become aware of the corruption and double talk and selling out of the general public that occurs in the backrooms of the real power brokers of the country. Now more than ever, Americans understand that “superdelegates” and “arcane” Republican party “rules” are nothing more than thinly veiled mechanisms being orchestrated from atop high by the top one percent of one percent who write the rules for our current economy and society.
The old tools of propaganda and message control, from media blackouts to exclusion from televised debates, that protected the two-party oligarchy from such independent voices as Ross Perot and Ralph Nader, are becoming less effective in the age of the internet and social media. Donald Trump has exploited the media’s formula for distraction, and at the same time pointed his finger in condemnation to much adoration, that the mainstream media is “scum of the earth.” The most shameful of the pundits, from Chuck Todd to Andrea Mitchell and Anderson Cooper, appear to act shocked and frightened at what they deem as intimidation by a candidate that plays on the fear and anger of voters. Given the arrogance and pledge to allegiance to the power structure of the government and its puppet master, it is hard to discern whether or not their surprise is sincere. But to the rest of us who don’t who don’t work for the Establishment as the gatekeepers of false history and propaganda, Donald Trump as merely confirming, out loud in front of the media’s camera, what we have already come to realize.
The current play of the Establishment, who earlier openly flirted with the idea of parachuting in a “white knight” at the Republican convention that would steal the nomination from the candidate who won within their corrupt and rigged party system, is to wage and all out war of fear mongering that will hit all the greatest hit notes: Mr. Trump is a racist, a bigot, an isolationist, a crazy person with no experience in leading the nation into wars based on lies, etc. The Establishment, including the Republican wing of the oligarchy, prefers Hillary Clinton to Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders. They have made that clear in both words, and actions of the media.
The Establishment is playing their ace card, again, that a vote for the other candidate – meaning either the Democrat or Republican, whichever you happen to fear and loathe the most – would lead to disaster.
AGAIN, we are told we must chose between the lesser of two evils, the “practical” choice, the one closest to our beliefs, even if we know they are full of shit. We need party “unity.”
Bernie Sanders has shown signs of buying into this useful tool of the powerful, the conquer and divide strategy. He has made it clear he will do everything he can to avoid electing an extreme “right-wing” Republican. The problem with Mr. Sander’s logic, is that his fear is overstating the case of Donald Trump being a right-wing Republican. The Republican Party, and especially the right-wing elements of it, are still fearful of Donald Trump being a Democrat in disguise, based on his previous, pre-candidate statements on policy, such as healthcare. It is understandable that Bernie does not want to go down in the false history that the media has portrayed consistently of third party candidates, that they are “spoilers” who allow the likes of Bill Clinton – in the case of Perot – or Gorge W. Bush in the case of Nader – to ruin the country.
This time, more than ever, with the unlikely rise of Donald Trump to the top of the Republican ticket, to the suprise superstardom of the media blacked out coverage of the “socialist” Bernie Sanders who raised his historically high amount of campaign contributions from exclusively small donors, is the time for all of us to say that enough is enough of the two-party charade of democracy. With social media, an awareness of the mainstream’s bias and loyalty to Establishment politics and the truth, and genuine anger felt and understood by the majority of Americans who have been screwed over, lied to and taken for granted, there is a real possibility for a change within the limited system of democracy that we currently have.
Both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump had to calculate their odds of success by figuring out if it would be easier or more realistic to change the corrupt system by running within its rigged electoral rules, or as a true outsider. I think that both men chose practicality first. Fearful of a lack of party loyalty, the Republican Establishment sought to immediately neuter Mr. Trump by pressuring him to pledge not to run as a third party candidate, should he lose the Republican primary. He made it clear that as long as he was treated “fairly” he would support the Republican nominee.
Bernie Sanders seems to have made a pledge of loyalty and support to the Democratic party’s nominee, even though he knows in his heart and mind, that Hillary Clinton is the epitome of corruption. At times, he has acted surprised at the low depths the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Shultz has been willing to engage in to cheat him of the nomination. His talk now, though not a concession yet, of somehow “transforming” the Democratic party, seems at best optimistic thinking, and at worst, rationalization. Surely Mr. Sanders already knows, that as Hillary Clinton has been more than willing to lie about her previous positions, and change her previous positions out of political expediency and outright pandering, that any official changes to the Democratic party’s “platform,” is not worth the paper that it is written on.
The fight for real political revolution need not end if Bernie concedes the nomination to Hillary and endorses her. The grassroots fire that propelled the Bern’s message can continue, and rally behind other qualified and legitimate, independent candidates. For the “any-one-but-Trump” crowd Republicans and independents, there is a libertarian candidate. For the Bernie Sanders supporters, the Green Party that Ralph Nader ran under for President, is alive and vibrant, and deserving of our vote so much more so than either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.
Here is a video interview of Jill Stein, the Green Party’s leading candidate, talking about Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, and the state of American democracy. She is a wise and truthful voice in what we need to remember going forward. Should Bernie Sanders bow out, I will be supporting her or the Green Party nominee. The movement will live on if we refuse to bow to the powers that be and “unify.”
http://www.democracynow.org/2016/6/9/green_partys_jill_stein_what_we