The Obama-Sanders Divide
In Sanders' view, the problem is not that voters are discouraged, it is that they are disenfranchised by the corruption of the existing system. He does not believe in political climate change but in political revolution.
Which leads to the third, striking difference: Obama's clash with Sanders over the role of money in politics.
Obama, correctly, perceives serious flaws in the system -- in particular, undisclosed, unlimited "dark money" contributions. But he puts the problem in important historical perspective, while Sanders depicts the situation in far bleaker terms. Part of Obama's Springfield message was that folks who subscribe to the Sanders' worldview should get a grip.
"There's also the notion sometimes that our politics are broken because politicians are significantly more corrupt or beholden to big money than they used to be," he said. "Folks aren't entirely wrong when they feel as if the system too often is rigged and does not address their interests."
Still, he noted, invoking America's rich history of political pocket-lining, ward-bossing and vote-buying, "the truth is that the kind of corruption that is blatant, of the sort that we saw in the past, is much less likely in today's politics." You wouldn't know this from Sanders' thundering.
Too bad Obama's speech didn't get more attention. Too bad voters won't get the chance to hear him and Sanders debate directly.
========
Ruth Marcus' email address is ruthmarcus@washpost.com.
Copyright 2016 Washington Post Writers Group
