Holding Center: Assessing the Donald Trump-Bernie Sanders comparison
Washington D.C. was founded on a swamp. This murky geography has been used as a metaphor for American politics since the early 1900s, but President Donald Trump revived the tradition in 2016, turning “drain the swamp” into a cornerstone of his campaign. The message was simple: The systems of government are rigged for the ruling class, and it will take a “man of the people” to fix them.
Given the trajectory of his presidency, it’s easy to forget that Trump ran on a populist platform. He promised to end lobbying and raise taxes on the rich, following in the footsteps of other anti-elitist politicians including Sen. Bernie Sanders.
While Sanders and Trump are wildly opposite in terms of approach, the two share a similar pathos. Both candidates have leaned into their status as champions of the common man. Where Trump chants “drain the swamp,” Sanders promises a government that “belongs to all of us, and not just the one percent.”
They play the same role — the outsider candidate wringing an unwilling establishment for change. They also both faced fierce opposition from their own parties during the 2016 election. A substantial sect of the Republican Party levied the “Never Trump” movement in hopes to prevent Trump from winning the ticket. Likewise, the purportedly neutral Democratic National Convention showed a vested interest in Hilary Clinton’s campaign during the 2016 election.
The trend recurs in the ongoing Democratic Primary, with Democratic Party leaders opposing Sanders on the grounds that he’s unelectable or that he will hurt the party’s chances of claiming more seats in Congress.
And just days before the Super Tuesday election day, both democratic candidates former South Bend, Ind. Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Kloubuchar withdrew their bids and endorsed former Vice President Joe Biden. The timing is no coincidence: Buttigieg even said that his reason for withdrawing was to prevent Sanders from gaining an “insurmountable” lead.
If the outcome of Trump’s much antagonized campaign is any indication, the efforts to suppress Sanders’ populism will fail. One poll showed that the plurality of Buttigieg supporters would vote for Sanders as a second choice.
If the efforts fail and Sanders wins the nomination, it will be for the same reason that Trump overcame the “Never Trump” movement and the millions spent by super PACs to undermine his bid. Both candidates target frustrations with a system that floats economic benefits to the top. When pundits brag about a booming economy, it means nothing to the working class Americans who have yet to see a piece of that prosperity.
The indignation that Trump and Sanders share on their behalf, however, means everything.
But the comparison breaks down when we look at actual policy. Trump claims to care about “the middle-income people in this country who have gotten screwed,” yet his policies have played a large part in the screwing. Through tax cuts to corporations, permanent tax increases on the middle-class and a series of tariffs that costs the average American family $831 per year, Trump has solidified his position at the head of the swamp.
Whether Sanders will make good on his “common man” appeals is to be seen, but his consistency over a 29-year career is nothing if not a signal of good intent. That is, if the Democratic establishment will allow him to try.
Dillon Cranston is a sophomore writing about politics. His column, “Holding Center,” runs every other Wednesday.