Would Trump-Sanders debate blow up politics as we know it?

Bernie Sanders isn't on track for a nomination win, so in theory presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump shouldn't debate him. But this is a new era in the media and politics. 

|
Brian Snyder/Reuters/File
An audience member wearing a t-shirt and cap for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump leaves a campaign rally for Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders in Binghamton, N.Y., on April 11.

Bernie Sanders is going to debate Donald Trump. Possibly – we’re not sure whether the proposal is just banter.

But appearing on ABC’s “Jimmy Kimmel Live” on Wednesday night, Trump said he’d be up for a Sanders showdown if proceeds went to charity. Within minutes Senator Sanders tweeted “Game on. I look forward to debating Donald Trump in California before the June 7 primary.”

Words cannot describe how exciting this would be, but we’ll try a few. “Unprecedented.” “Unpredictable.” “Bonkers.”

A presumptive nominee debating the second-place finisher of the opposing party? It’ll be the most unusual political clash in presidential politics since Clint Eastwood talked to that empty chair during the 2012 Republican National Convention.

If nothing else, a Trump/Sanders debate might signal just how much the big parties that govern America have lost control of the presidential nomination process, this year and maybe for every year to come.

A traditional Republican strategist might be aghast at a nominee focusing on a Democratic also-ran. That’s called punching down, and generally it can only distract a candidate and create problems you don’t need to have.

But Mr. Trump, who secured the 1,237 delegates needed to secure the nomination Thursday, doesn’t take orders from the Republican National Committee. He’s got a personal vision for his campaign, and it includes trying to win over as many Sanders voters as he can. Probably he sees Sanders as both an antagonist and a fellow populist. In “debating” Sanders, maybe he can broaden his own following.

In five or 10 years the Republican Party will be a “workers party, a party of people who haven’t had a real wage increase in 18 years,” Trump told Joshua Green of Bloomberg News.

Proposing cuts to Social Security to put it on a firmer fiscal foundation, as Speaker Paul Ryan has often proposed in the past? That’s wrong, according to Trump.

“Cutting it the wrong way is a big mistake, and even cutting it [at all],” Trump told Bloomberg.

Hmmm. Who does that sound like?

Meanwhile, the prospect of Trump and Sanders appearing on television together is probably making Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz apoplectic.

Hillary Clinton turned down an invitation to debate Sanders prior to the June 7 California primary. With the nomination a virtual lock, she wanted to start focusing on the general election, and trying to heal the divisions within the party.

Now Sanders has (maybe) seized an opportunity to remind her of how profound those divisions might be, and to reinsert himself into a race he’s already pretty much lost. And there’s little the Democratic Party can do about it. At this point, what leverage does the DNC have over Sanders? He’s an independent actor in the Senate. He’s got no interest in a Cabinet post, or really any sort of future as a regular party politician. He’s apparently just devoted to advancing his issues – the dangers of inequality, the distortions of big money in politics – any way he sees fit.

Enter Jimmy Kimmel. Sure, presidential candidates have been appearing on talk shows for decades. But the political infotainment industry has accelerated in the age of President Obama, driven by the explosion in web shows and other outlets and the competition for clicks and views. Producers are eager for any angle that will give them an edge. Can we broker an ad hoc debate? Great! So what if we have to put up money to make it appear as if the whole thing is a charity fund-raiser. It’ll be great for ratings.

But a bit of advice for Trump and Sanders here, as if they need it: Be careful. The aims of Mr. Kimmel and ABC don’t jibe with your own. They want the most exciting confrontation possible. And you know what their dream for this encounter really is?

It’s all notional. But what they’d really like is for special guest star Hillary Clinton to emerge from the wings just as Trump and Sanders get going.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Would Trump-Sanders debate blow up politics as we know it?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Decoder/2016/0526/Would-Trump-Sanders-debate-blow-up-politics-as-we-know-it
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe