Alienation, autonomy, and ideology
These are posts on elections from the blog Base and Superstructure. Topics include international elections, American elections, and local Iowa elections. There’s a particular focus on describing and explaining leftist electoral results.
After a…very long slog, looks like the primaries and caucuses almost here. Just kidding! There’s another…debate, and a couple more months. Many of us in Iowa are ready to be done with them, for sure. A question going into the Iowa caucuses: For each of the first four states, which are ‘must win’ for which candidate?
Let’s find out.
In recent weeks, Julián Castro argued against Iowa and New Hampshire’s position as the first voting states in the presidential nomination system. Why? He said Iowa doesn’t reflect America’s diversity. By contrast, Elizabeth Warren took a big pass on that question. She said she’s ‘just a player in the game‘.
A couple of questions: Is Castro right? What kind of system might be better?
Let’s start with an argument. It’s a general argument about electability, but that’s no fun. Instead, I’ll use the more provocative case of Bernie Sanders. The motivating claim is that electability stands in tension with systemic change. Or, to put it differently, that not being a threat to the capitalist system is a prerequisite to attaining electability. Replace ‘Bernie Sanders’ with any other candidate and it works roughly the same. With other candidates, it’s usually so obvious it approaches triviality.
Here’s the argument.
1. Either Bernie Sanders is electable or he isn’t.
2. If Bernie Sanders is electable, his presidency isn’t a threat to capitalism.
3. If Bernie Sanders isn’t electable, his presidency isn’t a threat to capitalism.
4. Therefore, a Bernie Sanders presidency isn’t a threat to capitalism.
Back in 2017, Bernie Sanders introduced a Senate bill on Medicare for All. It’s hardly the first version of this proposal. John Conyers introduced a less detailed version of it in the House each term since 2003. But Sanders has done more than anyone else to popularize the idea in US politics. So much, in fact, that just about all the major Democratic presidential contenders hopped on board. Literally co-sponsoring the bill in the case of the senators running for president.
And that’s no exaggeration. Here’s a list of Medicare for All co-sponsors who ran for president: Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, and Elizabeth Warren. Let’s not forget several others also endorsed the proposal: Pete Buttigieg (!), Julián Castro, Tulsi Gabbard, Tom Steyer, and Andrew Yang.
But times get tougher when you’re running for president. It’s one thing to announce a bold agenda, but it’s another to defend that agenda during the invisible primary. Consequently, it’s time to ask which ones chickened out. Who pulled a flip-flip on Medicare for All?
© 2025 Base and Superstructure
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑
