Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

This Bernie Sanders ad perfectly demonstrates his problem on foreign policy

Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign has released a 30-second ad on a subject that the candidate doesn’t usually put front and center: foreign policy – specifically, ISIS:

The video’s message is pretty straightforward: A President Sanders would fight ISIS by building a coalition of anti-ISIS allies, but would not send American ground troops. That’s a politically palatable message, and it also happens to be the strategy currently employed by President Obama.

But the purpose of the ad is primarily political, and the spot attempts to thread a difficult political needle by communicating a message I would summarize as something like this:

  1. A President Sanders will “end the quagmire of perpetual warfare in the Middle East.”
  2. This quagmire is the fault of the Washington status quo, which Sanders’s campaign is broadly about challenging.
  3. Sanders will challenge that status quo on foreign policy by doing exactly what Obama is already doing.

Sanders doesn’t talk about foreign policy much, and when political observers try to explain that, they generally say the issue is that he just doesn’t get it or just doesn’t care about it, or that his actual views are more centrist than his base might like.

But this ad speaks to what I suspect is the actual cause: Sanders wants to position himself as challenging the status quo, but on foreign policy he is pretty in line with that status quo. At the same time, he doesn’t want to embrace Obama on foreign policy during the primary, because that policy is associated with one Hillary Clinton.

In sum, when it comes to foreign policy, Sanders doesn’t feel he can embrace Obama and doesn’t feel he can offer a compelling alternative. So he is trying to position himself as challenging the status quo while in fact upholding it.

That perhaps explains why this ad talks more about the 2003 Iraq War: Sanders wants to remind voters that Hillary Clinton voted for the invasion and he did not. That certainly worked well for Obama back in 2008. But that vote is now well over a decade old, so it’s not clear how much that will resonate.

Perhaps Sanders is hoping that Clinton, in anticipation of the general election, will edge to the right, thus allowing him to use messages like this one to hit her from the left. But this is all a bit silly, because Sanders and Clinton are offering broadly the same position on ISIS, which is to maintain the Obama administration’s current policies.

Clinton herself has a different version of this problem, though not one that will become quite as awkward until she gets to the general election (assuming she does). She, as former secretary of state, is too close to the Obama foreign policy legacy to run much against it, and will be forced to own a legacy that is not particularly popular among the general electorate. But for purposes of the primary, she can just remind people that they like Obama and be mostly okay.

By the way, the Republican candidates are doing the exact same thing: Their plans are broadly identical to Obama’s. But this is easier for them to manage, in political terms, because they can criticize Obama and then present their similar plans as novel.

Democratic candidates are in the awkward position of feeling they can neither fully embrace nor reject Obama on these issues. So you get ads like this one, which, if you removed the references to ISIS, could just as easily have come out of the 2004 or 2008 election cycles when George W. Bush was still in office.

More in Politics

Podcasts
The Supreme Court abortion pills case, explainedThe Supreme Court abortion pills case, explained
Podcast
Podcasts

How Louisiana brought mifepristone back to SCOTUS.

By Peter Balonon-Rosen and Sean Rameswaram
Politics
Trump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expectedTrump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expected
Politics

As Trump heads to China, attention and resources are being shifted from Asia to yet another war in the Middle East.

By Joshua Keating
Politics
Are far-right politics just the new normal?Are far-right politics just the new normal?
Politics

Liberals are preparing for a longer war with right-wing populists than they once expected.

By Zack Beauchamp
The Logoff
Flavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA headFlavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA head
The Logoff

Why Marty Makary is out at the FDA, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters
Politics
Virginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymanderVirginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymander
Politics

Democrats just handed the Supreme Court’s Republicans a loaded weapon.

By Ian Millhiser
The Logoff
Can Trump lower gas prices?Can Trump lower gas prices?
The Logoff

What suspending the gas tax would mean for you, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters