As voters cast ballots in Michigan, Missouri, Kansas, Virginia, Washington and Tennessee, candidates have weighed in. Political commentators have weighed in. Strategists, activists and voters have all offered their own theories of the case. Depending on whom you ask, the results were either a rejection of the establishment, a victory for the establishment or proof that the establishment isn’t nearly as powerful as people think.
When someone says Democratic voters are rejecting “the establishment,” who are they talking about? National party leadership? Major donors? Incumbent elected officials? The woman who’s volunteered for Democratic candidates and worked the polls every election for the past eight cycles? Those are not the same people. Yet increasingly they are talked about as though they’re interchangeable.
What’s changed is that the word itself has eclipsed ideology. Almost everyone now claims to be running against “the establishment.” The question is whether we’re all talking about the same thing.
This is a preview of a column by Symone D. Sanders Townsend. Read the full column here. |
