However the trajectory is never interrupted automatically by itself during these system shocks. There has to be a candidate who is capable of capitalizing on the shock and rallying the party to accept their candidacy as a response to said shock.
For the 2016 Democratic Primary, we have that candidate. His name is Bernie Sanders. However what is missing from the Sanders Revolution calculus is the system shock which can propel his candidacy to the nomination. I'm sure his supporters will disagree with me. They are fiercely passionate about Bernie and what he stands for. They wholeheartedly believe that these are extraordinary times with the rise of the plutocracy and the 1% hence the ground is fertile for Sanders to nab the nomination.
While the argument put forward by the Sanderistas is compelling, it is not entirely convincing. For a system shock to play an interruptive role in the nomination process it has to pass a critical tipping point with a wide enough swath of the primary electorate. While the Sanderistas will define economic inequality as the most defining issue of our time, it has not reached that critical tipping point with the broader Democratic electorate which would compel them to go with an unconventional candidate like Bernie. In other words almost all Democrats are upset about income inequality, however only a minority of us are willing to pick up the pitchforks in protest.
While George W. Bush was enough of a shock to compel the Democrats to embrace the political phenomenon named Obama and the Vietnam War was enough of a shock to propel George McGovern to the nomination, there is no comparable system shock today which has reached a tipping point with a broad enough swath of the Democratic electorate to seal the deal for Bernie's insurgent candidacy. Hence the trajectory remains. This, among other factors, is why Hillary will prevail over Sanders in the 2016 Democratic Primary.
Comments are closed on this story.