Warren or Sanders? 3 questions for undecided progressives
Image by Getty Images
I recently joined the Democratic Party. As a progressive, I’d always stayed away from such membership, more comfortable defining myself as an “independent” – albeit not of the pareve, middle-of-the-road variety. Come Election Day, I’d support Democratic candidates without fail, but, with a few exceptions, that support was generally lukewarm. Most Democrats, I felt, were more interested in light touch-ups to American society than in the need to address its fundamental structural ills.
That changed with the candidacies of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, both of whom realize that, in an era of climate emergency and a yawning, untenable American wealth gap, tinkering and quick fixes just won’t cut it.
But since I have but one vote to give to my party, I remain with the dilemma of having to choose between two progressive candidates. So I came up with three questions for choosing between them:
With which candidate’s policy proposals am I most aligned?
Which of the two would make the best president?
And which has the greatest chance of defeating the White House’s current occupant?
On policy grounds, I quickly called the contest a draw – in part because Warren and Sanders bring similar approaches to most (though not all) key issues, but primarily because their ability to deliver on their goals will depend largely on factors that go beyond the minutiae of their prescriptions, including the balance of power in the House and Senate and their capacity to frame public discourse and drive public opinion. Many of their ambitious plans, in other words, represent the worthy destination, not the roadmap to get there.
The ability to translate vision into practical achievement is part of what makes a good president, and on that score, I lean Warren, who has indicated a greater willingness to pursue a pragmatic strategy of incremental progress, should circumstances dictate. Sanders, by comparison, recently distanced himself from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, arguably his most prominent supporter, after the latter indicated that Democrats might have to “compromise deeply” on healthcare legislation in order to get a public option through. Until we reform and fully democratize the American political system, the name of the game remains getting legislation past a Senate that over-represents Republicans. Warren seems better suited to play that game.
Warren also wins when I think of the need for a president to function as role model who will begin to reverse the damage to our public discourse wrought by Donald Trump. While both Sanders and Warren are intelligent, fact-based politicians, Warren’s interactive style seems the more vital at the moment. While Sanders often seems to be “talking at” the American public, Warren tends to “talk with.” Sanders sounds like a preacher, Warren like a teacher.
Were it not for the third question, that of electability, my choice would clearly be the Senator from Massachusetts. But like most Democrats, the ability to remove Trump from office ranks highest in my list of priorities. And on that score, I’m much less sure.
Between the two candidates, Sanders is clearly the better movement leader, having built a large, energized, and dedicated following, especially among younger voters whose turnout in November will be crucial. And this appears to have translated into a small but not insignificant polling advantage, compared to Warren, in head-to-head matchups against Trump – both nationally and in key swing-states such as Pennsylvania and Michigan.
But polls take a snapshot of opinion, good for the day on which they were conducted and no further. They don’t predict future trends, and they certainly can’t indicate how public opinion will react should Sanders become the nominee and the Republican machine concentrate its fire on him and him alone.
As is the case for most Democratic voters, I categorize myself as #VoteBlueNoMatterWho and will unhesitatingly campaign for Sanders with all my heart and soul should he win the nomination. But I have nagging concerns about the possibly greater vulnerability of a Sanders campaign and an “educated hunch” that, in the Sturm und Drang of a presidential campaign, Warren might prove to be the more “digestible” candidate of the two – the progressive with the greater capacity to appeal to voters beyond the base and outside the Democratic Party and win the day in November.
I recall joking in early 2016, when Trump began to dominate the Republican field, that he must be a Democratic plant, designed to guarantee a win for Hillary. Almost all polls, we’ll recall, suggested she would cruise to victory. I’ve since become much more humble about “knowing” who is electable and who’s not.
And so my deliberation continues.
Ron Skolnik is an American-Israeli political columnist whose writing has appeared in Al-Monitor, Haaretz, Tikkun, Jewish Currents, Palestine-Israel Journal, and Jerusalem Report. You can find him on Twitter at @Ron_Skolnik.
A message from our Publisher & CEO Rachel Fishman Feddersen
I hope you appreciated this article. Before you go, I’d like to ask you to please support the Forward’s award-winning, nonprofit journalism during this critical time.
We’ve set a goal to raise $260,000 by December 31. That’s an ambitious goal, but one that will give us the resources we need to invest in the high quality news, opinion, analysis and cultural coverage that isn’t available anywhere else.
If you feel inspired to make an impact, now is the time to give something back. Join us as a member at your most generous level.
— Rachel Fishman Feddersen, Publisher and CEO
