Elizabeth Warren is too smart a woman not to know what happened in Massachusetts and across the nation in the Democratic primaries. Hillary Clinton stole her way to the number of pledged delegates she has now, although a count of provisional ballots in California is changing the result, and according to the San Francisco Chronicle might even wind up cutting Clinton's lead by half. Since California is a huge state, that is still a lot of delegates.
Make no mistake: California Secretary of State Alex Padilla tried his hardest to suppress the vote by shunting new voters and independents to provisional ballots, which are not always counted. The one and only reason that Sanders is getting his votes is that citizens sued and hollered and demanded their right for their votes to be counted.
In Massachusetts, election integrity activists discovered that, inexplicably, in districts where ballots are counted by hand, Sanders won by an average of 17%, while in districts where the totals are entrusted to Diebold-manufactured "AccuVote" machines, Hillary won by one percent. Inexplicably, but not quite. The thing is, the explanation isn't a pretty one.
Add to that in Massachusetts the corroborating data of exit polls showing Sanders winning by 7 percent rather than losing by a hair, as well as Bill Clinton's widely reported blocking of certain polling stations with his rolling parade, and it is far from unlikely that Hillary's "win" was fraudulent.
Elizabeth Warren built her name and her legacy on good work challenging Wall Street, but she now allies herself with one of the best friends Wall Street ever had, who has taken millions from Wall Street PACs and won't release transcripts of what she said in her paid speeches to Wall Street bankers, whereas the only thing Bernie Sanders ever said to them is I'm going to bust you up.
Now Warren has badly miscalculated, not understanding that the center of gravity of her support is not the suburban soccer mom who likes that she's a woman from Harvard, but the progressives who know what she is talking about when she takes on Wall Street. Elizabeth Warren took no time at all in becoming your standard politician, selling out on principles and going along to get along. Fortunately for Massachusetts, the usual problem encountered by voters when they get double-crossed like this, that they have nowhere to go, is not really the case.
In this case, the timing couldn't be any better, as Warren is up for reelection in 2018, which is just exactly the lead time you want to start building a primary challenge.
In this case, a woman is waiting in the wings who has earned her place in the hearts of progressives in Massachusetts and beyond, and in fact is currently running for president. The comparison is as facile as it is obvious: Stein looks every bit the good, pretty witch in Oz to Clinton's bad, mean-looking one.
Jill Stein of Lexington, Massachusetts could not be better placed to offer a primary challenge to Warren, as Sanders supporters infuse the ward committees and the state committee, in the kind of true, on-the-ground revolution which Sanders has been speaking of, which is not over in a day. A medical doctor who is a graduate of both Harvard College and Harvard Medical School, Stein has faithfully carried the torch for progressives and is twice the Green Party's nominee for president, holding her own in debates with a platform almost identical to that of Bernie Sanders.
A third party challenge is more problematic, as there are still too many people who engage in party-line voting, something Sanders figured out before he entered the primaries as a Democrat. The Democratic machine is too large and well-oiled. The fort cannot be taken from the outside, but only from within. As Sanders has shown, the path to victory and coverage by the media runs straight through the lion's den, and were it not for rampant Clinton cheating, Sanders would be the nominee, or looking at a deadlocked, brokered convention. People will always remember. New York. Arizona. Massachusetts. Illinois. Nevada. California. Kentucky. And more.
The single fact that, in 24 out of 26 exit polls, the "error" shows Sanders ahead, is in itself a statistical anomaly which is as likely as a coin toss coming up heads 24 out of 26 times.
Jill Stein for US Senator from Massachusetts, 2016. The Sanders Revolution may have made it possible for a candidate like Stein to finally get elected, who has anti-war, anti-Wall Street, pro-American middle-class credentials to rival Bernie's.
This content reflects the personal opinions of the author. It is accurate and true to the best of the author’s knowledge and should not be substituted for impartial fact or advice in legal, political, or personal matters.