I was asked in a diary:



A question for Kos: Isn't Bernie Crashing the Gate?

I get that Bernie Sanders' fans around here think that's a hilarious gotcha question, but as someone who wrote that book, it suggests that none of you actually read it. (And given sales numbers of the book, you probably didn't.)

Crashing the Gate wasn't about sitting around whining that someone wasn't supporting your candidate or issue. The central thesis is that we now have the tools to take charge of our own politics and advocate directly for the things we care about. It was a point that I further emphasized in my follow-up book, Taking on the System. And given the pace of technology advancement, that thesis has never been more true. Just look how #BlackLivesMatter activists have used Twitter to build an entire movement. It's pretty amazing stuff!

So what does that have to do with me and Sanders? Nothing. He's not crashing any gates. He's a freakin' senator. He's already on the inside, a respected candidate of one of only two major parties, and one of just 100 members of the nation's most influential club. You don't crash any gate with Tad Devine. You ring the doorbell and get ushered in.

Furthermore, Sanders' mostly white, mostly male, mostly highly educated supporters aren't exactly the kind that historically sit outside the gate. Those getting shot and killed and deported outside that gate are currently supporting Clinton. Brutally ironic, that.

You're excited about Sanders. That is genuinely awesome! Me, I'm too much of a realist to get too excited about a guy that will get blown out once the votes are counted, nor one who—10 years later—didn't learn from the mistakes of the Howard Dean campaign and work for a more inclusive campaign. (Yeah yeah, his campaign is supposedly now 25% people of color? How many are in his inner circle who make actual decisions? None, that's how many.)

Ironically, the criticisms of Sanders on race are the EXACT SAME CRITiCISMS I made about Daily Kos proper. I'm not throwing stones from a glass house. I'm acknowledging this as a fundamental problem in which I myself share. So if I'm "attacking" Sanders for it, I'm attacking myself for it too. And yes, it's an attack. It's 2015, our party is 40 percent people of color, overwhelmingly female. It's a travesty that our institutions and campaigns (and this website) don't reflect that. As a Latino and liberal, that shit matters to me, and you dismiss it at your own peril.

Heck, someone accused me of being "racially divisive" by bringing up race. You know who uses that kind of argument, right? Exactly. (Hint, the answer isn't "Hitler", although he probably would've used it too.)

Funny thing is, I'm not "supporting" Hillary Clinton anymore than I'm "supporting" Bernie Sanders. They are both incredibly popular people in our party. I'm glad there's a primary, and I'm glad we don't have any real asshole candidates. We'll be fine no matter what, and since it's going to be Clinton anyway, I'm not going to get worked up about it.

But for those of you who are convinced this is a thing, you have to understand that your paranoia and craziness isn't winning any votes. Remember, Clinton is over 50 percent in every poll, so to win, Sanders has to win undecideds AND eat into Clinton's support. So ask yourself—are your actions and the conspiracy mongering and all that craziness—is it winning any votes? Because if not, then what's the point?

Instead, we get people claim that because I started another incredibly successful company, that makes me bad! Success is offensive, even the kind that doesn't involve exploiting people or natural resources! As a wise person (Susan Gardner) once said, money is to liberals as sex is to conservatives, and this is proving her adage true. So the fact that Vox is doing well has to be the only reason I'm not irrationally exuberant over Sanders. There's no other possible explanation.

Well, except perhaps the secret payments I'm getting from the Clinton campaign to stymie Sanders' momentum? (As if I had the power to make or break him, which I don't.)

Did you hear the one about me being a CIA plant? Maybe that has something to do with it, and not merely the objective observation that Clinton is objectively popular and has objectively dominant support?

Feel free to add your favorite conspiracy in the comments.

Fact is, this is a political discussion site, and passions run high. I don't share your adoration of Sanders because I see no reason to get my hopes up for something that isn't going to happen. I'd rather try to push the one who is actually going to win to the left (and failing miserably this week, but that's another story).

But that's what I'm focused on. Now, you can keep saying crazy shit about me all you want, and you can even do it here on Daily Kos! But just think about a few things as you do so:

1) If I'm an evil conservadem profiteering Clinton plant, then why are you supporting that evil by being here? Now that is obviously nonsense crazy shit, but if you really believe it, then why are you still here? I wouldn't be caught dead trying to participate at, say, Breitbart or Free Republic. If I'm as horrible as you claim I am, then it makes zero sense for you to hang out here. I just don't see the logic in that.

If you really believe that shit, go find a site that is pure and virtuous and uncompromised and unsullied. No one would stop you. The PUMA's did that in 2008 and everyone was happy in the end. (At least I assume they were happy. I didn't do a follow up survey.)

2) Are you helping Bernie Sanders win? If I was a big supporter, I'd be putting pressure on the campaign to diversify, and I don't mean someone deep down the social media team, but in that inner circle that is helping him make strategic and messaging decisions. Sanders' biggest hit of his campaign came at Netroots Nation, and you getting defensive or angry about the confrontation doesn't change the fact that he was unprepared for the situation. A better staff would've prepared him. As a supporter, you should demand that, not close ranks and insist all is well and the only problem is other people being mean.

I also wouldn't be raging assholes online. Doing so isn't winning you any supporters here at Daily Kos, and it certainly isn't putting forth a good face for the campaign on Twitter and other mainstream social media. You Sanders supporters are his grassroots ambassadors, yet your tactics are so over-the-top hysterical that you're actively doing harm to his chances.

I like Sanders, he's a great guy, and he doesn't deserve what some of you are doing in his name. (Kinda like what fundamentalist assholes are doing to Jesus' name.)

And perhaps most important,

3) Don't play this bullshit "more liberal than thou" crap if you can't bother to fight for other great progressive candidates. I've tried to get people excited about Donna Edwards, who would be a huge ally to the Elizabeth Warren/Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party. You want someone who is truly crashing a gate? How many African American women have ended up in the Senate? Go ahead and count, it won't take long. Yet people can't be bothered. Here is someone with a legitimate chance to win, but nah, you'd rather spend your time screaming about people not giving the guy below 20% in the polls his proper due.

I'm not even saying it's an either-or proposition. It's not. You can fight for Sanders, AND fight for Edwards. And I sure as heck would take his most rabid supporters seriously if they would transfer that intensity to other great candidates who desperately need that help, and would strengthen our ability to accomplish everything we want to accomplish. But no, this feels more like a cult of personality, or a I-hate-Clinton thing, than a true movement to make ours a better, more liberal party.

Again, you guys can do what you want. You have my permission to be as much of a dick to me as you want. I won't lose any sleep over it. But you sure won't win me over on anything with that approach, and I don't see a single other person outside of your Bernie-supporters bubble who will be likewise persuaded.

But if you persist with that approach, just know that you are no longer helping Bernie Sanders win. If you continue to persist, it means you have admitted defeat in this campaign and are merely venting your frustration that others don't share your passion and devotion. In other words, you'll be the PUMAs of 2015, and really, that's not something anyone should aspire to be.

Crashing the Gates was about the power of individuals to take on entrenched interests who were actively harming the party. In 2003, we didn't sit there and demand that the NY Times or Time or Newsweek share our passion for Howard Dean, we built our own alternative media to spread the message. We were the change we were seeking.

So worry less about me, and worry more about what you can do to build Bernie's support base. That's what Crashing the Gates was all about. And then maybe, just maybe, you can end up proving me wrong, and wouldn't that be the sweetest revenge of all?