Sanders, Occupy Wall Street and the liberal Tea Party surge

There is a direct lineage between the Occupy Wall Street movement, the enormous and historic contribution that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) made in the 2016 presidential campaign, and what some call the progressive Tea Party movement that, along with other Americans, has besieged Republican officeholders at town meetings across America.

The Sanders campaign for president was a defining moment in American political history — one that has continuing impact on his work in the Senate today, the creation of groups such as Our Revolution that supports his agenda, and Sanders’s coming role in the 2018 midterm elections and the 2020 presidential campaign.

The continuing power of the Sanders movement results from the fact that not only did he inspire a large number of citizens to participate in politics, but revolutionized campaign finance by inspiring small donors. Those donors broke the old politics paradigm of seeking large contributions and special interest money that usually paid for consultant-driven negative television ads.

In 2016 Sanders inspired, motivated and organized a continuing political movement based on progressive ideas, institutional reform and the kind of dramatic change that voters hunger for.

Before the Sanders campaign, there was the Occupy Wall Street movement, and today, there is the so-called progressive version of the Tea Party movement — reminiscent of the movement that brought conservatives and Republicans to power beginning in the 2010 midterms.

{mosads}These three movements have some important and profound things in common. They all mobilize large numbers of voters who extend beyond the traditional liberal base, including large number of working-class voters and middle Americans who want a democracy that is not dominated by large donors and special interests to whom politicians pay homage far too often.

The Occupy Wall Street movement, which I strongly supported and continue to support, was a frontal challenge to the power exercised by the 1 percent, who do so at the expense of the 99 percent who are the heart and soul of America.

The mistake many Democrats made, including the Obama White House, was that they felt threatened by Occupy Wall Street. After all, President Obama was not elected in 2008 to name Timothy Geithner, a close ally of the largest financial institutions of the world, as his Treasury secretary. But Obama did.

The mistake Occupy Wall Street made — understandably so, but still a tactical mistake — was to respond by rejecting involvement in electoral politics.

Sanders and his campaign filled this gap, brought together grassroots action and direct political involvement, and brought large numbers of new people into politics who remain active and engaged in politics today.

The continuing Sanders movement embodied by Our Revolution is critical to the future of American politics, and the so-called liberal Tea Party movement is similar and also important by forcing Republican officeholders to publicly answer questions they would rather duck at town meetings.

With two critical elections approaching in 2018 and 2020, it is important to fully understand and act on the differences between presidential elections and midterm elections — just as I mentioned in my last column on the anti-Trump wave that could define the midterm elections in 2018.

In the 2020 presidential election, Democrats and all Americans will have the opportunity to elect a transforming progressive president. In the midterm elections, though, the prime directive is to elect the progressive and moderate Democrats needed to put a brake on the power of President Trump and the Republican Congress.

The anti-Trump wave extends far beyond the traditional Democratic base. It includes the huge number of Americans who now realize they will be hurt by repeal or destruction of ObamaCare; the huge number of Americans who are angered and fearful of attacks against a free press; those appalled by the key members of the Trump administration who bear false witness about meetings with the Russians who attack our democracy; and those who reject the “swamp” in Washington that has actually gotten worse, since a number of Trump officials embody the special interests of political “swamp” Trump falsely claimed he would drain.

Democrats and progressives have an opportunity in 2018 to restore and widen our traditional coalition, maintain the momentum of the Sanders movement, inspire voters who stayed home in 2016, and end the one-party monopoly of power that the GOP now holds.

This will require supporting progressive Democrats and also supporting moderate, red-state Democrats, and, above all, finding new and appealing challengers to take the fight to Republicans in every district and state across the nation.

Brent Budowsky was an aide to former Sen. Lloyd Bentsen (D-Texas) and former Chief Deputy Majority Whip Bill Alexander (D-Ark.). He holds an LL.M. degree in international financial law from the London School of Economics. He is a longtime regular columnist for The Hill and can be contacted at brentbbi@webtv.net.

The views of contributors are their own and not the views of The Hill.