Skip to content
Link copied to clipboard

Will Philly (not Cleveland) be the crazy convention?

After a chaotic standoff between Clinton and Sanders supporters in Nevada, Democrats are starting to fret about unrest at their Philadelphia convention. But should they?

We've been hearing for months now that the Republican National Convention in Cleveland this July was going to a bat-guano crazy affair -- maybe even a replay of the unrest that overran the Democratic confab in Chicago in 1968, when a notorious "police riot" pitted blue-helmeted lawmen against hippie protesters in the streets of the Windy City.

Blame, or credit, the rise of Donald Trump -- who definitely is "not Hitler," according to an authoritative source, his wife Melania. It was Trump who suggested there'd be riots in Cleveland if he were denied the GOP nomination, and, given the violence that occurred at some of his rallies, few folks doubted him. But...there's that old saying in U.S. politics, that Democrats fall in love with a candidate, while Republicans fall in line. So now, instead of Chicago '68, it looks like the falling-in-line RNC will be more like San Francisco '67...the Summer of Love.

The Democrats? Definitely not falling in love.

Now, turning on a dime, the Beltway elites are fretting instead about large-scale unrest, and maybe even violence, at the Democratic National Convention right here in Philadelphia, This suddenly became an issue after the Nevada Democratic state convention Saturday night in Las Vegas, which sought to put the final word on how many Philly delegates to award Sen. Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, based on a highly convoluted caucus process that began back in February.

What happened in Vegas didn't stay in Vegas. Squabbling, booing, etc., devolved into chaos -- allegedly some Sanders supporters threw chairs, and, undeniably, some lowlifes followed that up by harassing or making threats against state party officials. Now the whole thing is a national cause celebre; Sanders issued a statement today making clear that he doesn't condone violence but also not apologizing for his most out-of-control supporters -- which has made the Democratic party establishment even more livid than it was before.

Now, some top Democrats are beginning to realize that -- if this much chaos occurred over a swing of maybe two convention delegates, in a race where mathematically Clinton has all but clinched the nomination -- there probably won't be a peaceful Clinton coronation in the City of Brotherly Love.

According to CNN: "Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois said 'of course' he's concerned that the same tactics would be replicated in Philadelphia." There were similar fears voiced by other leading Democrats.

Illinois's Durbin told the cable network: "We saw what happened at the Trump rallies, which broke into violence, people punching one another. I don't want to see that happen at the Democratic Party. I call on Bernie to say to his supporters: be fervent, be committed but be sensible. Don't engage in any violence."

It's becoming increasingly likely there'll be more drama surrounding the convention at the Wells Fargo Center than anyone would have predicted. Several pro-Bernie activists have told me they expect a large turnout of Sanders supporters in the streets of Philadelphia -- especially if the Vermont senator pushes hard for a fight over the nomination (delegate math be damned) or over a more liberal platform o issues like campaign finance or single-payer health care.

A large "March for Bernie" from City Hall down Broad Street to the WF Center is currently planned for July 25, the first day of the convention. It's not the greatest barometer, by a long shot, but about 5,500 people have said on Facebook that they'll attend, and that's with not much publicity.

It's worth noting that fears (or expectations) of violence seem way overblown. Unlike, say, Donald Trump, Sanders has drawn hundreds of thousands of people to rallies from coast to coast without violence or unrest. That doesn't excuse how a handful of unstable Sanders supporters acted in Nevada this past week. Any vandalism, terroristic threat or online harassment is a crime -- and should be handled as such. And, yes, I do think Sanders should have said something more forceful along those lines in his statement today.

However, it's also important to understand that Democratic party leaders are making as much of a deal as possible about the Nevada chaos -- because they see this as a golden opportunity to squelch dissent, and prevent any kind of open dialogue on the floor of the Wells Fargo Center about where the party stands on the key issues facing regular folks. Rather than deal with the forces unleashed by the Sanders movement -- including his off-the-charts popularity with young voters -- they are working to minimize them, and to suddenly slur and offend millions of peaceful Sanders voters as people having "a penchant for violence."

This new party line is a terrible mistake for the Democrats. Look, I wouldn't expect any violence in Philadelphia, and that's always a non-starter for bringing meaningful change. But party chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Clinton campaign. and other top Dems should also realize they hold the keys to peace and harmony this July -- by opening up Philadelphia to the voices of the party's progressive rank-and-file. Let the Republicans have their "Mistake by the Lake." Don't be the "Unaware by the Delaware."