This uproar over Wasserman Schultz proves the Democrats have a real uprising on their hands. The liberal half of the country are just as upset with their elected politicians as are the conservative half of this country. They feel their politicians do not represent them and they are correct. Instead, most politicians represent the big banks, their donors, and of course, themselves.

Sanders and his supporters plan to take the fight all the way to Philadelphia, where the Democratic Party National Convention is being held this summer. "Philadelphia has approved four demonstration permits in support of Sen. Bernie Sanders… including a large rally planned near the convention’s epicenter," The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday. The report noted that while the city expects 30,000 people to turn out at one of the Sanders rallies, organizers hope there will be even more. What they hope to gain is anyone’s guess.

But are Sanders and his fevered voters doing more damage to the Democratic Party? Or are they having a worthwhile, much needed debate?

It doesn’t seem too cordial.

Sanders says the system is rigged in a way that subverts the will of the people. Even though Clinton has a few million more votes than Bernie, the system is definitely tilted. With the existence of the superdelegates, tied in to the party apparatus, an established and politically connected candidate like Clinton becomes inevitable, poised to steamroll any real challenge.

Sanders is not wrong to see corruption in the political process. But, is it rigged against him or rigged for the political elite? Clare Foran recently wrote in The Atlantic that “suggesting the entire political process is unfair is quite different from drawing policy contrasts—and more likely to have negative and destabilizing consequences for the party as a whole.” As Sanders continues to hammer home the corrupt nature of our political system, he is sure to continue to increase the level of anger in the base of the Democratic Party, making things even more complicated as we get closer to November.

Maureen Dowd of The New York Times wrote an illuminating op-ed about Clinton’s inability to shed Sanders recently. The former Secretary of State has been “reduced to stomping her feet on CNN, asserting her dominance in a contest that has left her looking anything but dominant.” As she continues to lose states to Sanders (7 out of 8 in landslides at one point), she looks weaker and weaker as the campaign drags on. And yet, Clinton expressed her unbending confidence, recently telling CNN’s Chris Cuomo, “I will be the nominee for my party, Chris. That is already done, in effect. There is no way that I won’t be.”

Unless she’s indicted.

Hillary’s inability to create enthusiasm for her campaign has led to Bernie becoming “the surprise belle of his side’s revolutionary ball.” And now that he has taken it to Hillary and gotten a taste of victory, he seems to like it. “He’s bedeviling the daylight out of Hillary,” and she doesn’t know what to do.

Hillary wants Bernie to “do his part” and unify the party, as she did in 2008 after losing to a certain senator from Illinois. Still, Dowd points out, after being mathematically eliminated, Clinton still “came onstage to Terry McAuliffe heralding her as ‘the next president of the United States.’ She then touted having more votes than any primary candidate in history.” So, who can blame Bernie for being a little bitter about being behind after he keeps winning states by large margins?

Democrats across the country are now getting nervous, if they weren’t already. If Hillary cannot dispose of an old socialist from Vermont, how can she defeat Donald Trump in the fall? These voters are certainly feeling dynasty fatigue, unmotivated by a traditional politician during an election cycle that seems to favor non-politicians outside of the system versus those of the system and in the political elite.

Clinton has been unable to drum up any excitement for her candidacy. The latest big idea to get people going is to put Bill in charge of the economy again. She has no new ideas and does not believe in anything with real conviction. Therefore, Dowd concludes, “Hillary can’t generate excitement on her own so she is relying on fear of Trump to get her into the White House.” This is a strategy doomed for disaster. People will be coming out to vote for Trump. People will be coming out, not to vote for Hillary, but to vote against Trump.

Not exactly a get out the vote strategy.