What's your take on the significance of Sanders as a candidate?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
36 Answers
I think he is growing. He is leading Hilary in New Hampshire, statistically dead even in Iowa, and polls better in a simulated general election.
He’s keeping Hillary honest.
Does he have a chance of victory? Not one iota.
Any of the republicans, even Trump, would squash Sanders like a bedbug.
He is promising more free stuff than Hillary. It worked for Obama in ‘08 and again in ‘12.
I like him, because I feel he is trustworthy, honest, and would be unlikely to give in to party pressure.
I think he is too extreme in some of his social ideas, especially regarding free college education. Although, for many years I have spoken out against tuition costs rising.
I like that I hear almost nothing about him being Jewish. I wonder if that will come up more if he winds up directly facing the Republicans. I don’t think it will be a big negative to most Christians (I only mention the Christians, because they are the majority, and they often bring religion into politics) but I’m assuming, I don’t know, that he is fairly secular, maybe even an atheist, I don’t know, and that would be troublesome to some people if that is the case. Hopefully, his religion and beliefs will never come up. Most Evangelical Christians I have met assume Jews are pro Israel and theists, and they like that.
I noticed that he and Hillary differ quite a bit on how they would handle international situations, and because of my ignorance on those topics I don’t know which one is better. I think international affairs are extremely important right now.
I don’t know if Sanders supporters are jazzed about him more for domestic issues or international, or is it both?
If I had to vote today I would vote for Hillary, but I’m very interested in Sanders, and I have been encouraging people to vote for him in the primaries if they think he is the best choice. Some people say they won’t, because they think he won’t win in the end.
His being a registered Socialist will prevent him from winning, which is too bad since he could say the exact same things and run away with the election if he were a registered Democrat.
As it is, he is good practice for Hillary’s debating skills.
@elbanditoroso I’d be interested to hear why you think any Republican candidate would trounce him. Is it because the Great Unwashed Masses have been taught to fear the implications of the word Socialist?
What happens if he wins in Iowa and New Hampshire? Does the Democratic machine begin to take him serious or does it turn against him instead of just ignoring him?
I think that even a close loss in both states will up his standings with the people, just not those why buy and sell elections.
As to his significance, I think he represents the true underlying beliefs and desires of the people supposedly represented by the Democratic Party in a similar way to how Donald Trump/Ted Cruz show what is in the heart of the Republican Party citizenry. And in both cases it highlights the disconnect between those in charge and the party membership at large.
Bernie Sanders is too old. He’d be close to 80 by the end of his first term.
@rojo I disagree. I think there is a big section of the Democratic Party aligned with what he says, but there is also a lot of people who aren’t. Plus, he is looser on gun laws than many dems would like.
@JLeslie You can say that about any one of the candidates. The one who will win is the one who appeals the most to the independents and the disenfranchised voters…and that is a LOT of voters on both sides of the isle.
@rojo
Part of it is the word ‘socialist’.
Another is that Sanders is too nice a guy and the Republicans are mean and nasty (see David Brook’s column in today’s NY Times)
Third is that Sanders has ZERO foreign policy experience. He’s a domestic guy, only.
He is on the rise. He is even beating Hillary in some polls. He has a huge Pack (not PAC) that supports him. Young people and people of color are on his bandwagon, and those that want their fucking country back. The DNC is refusing to promote him, because they just want the status quo. Hillary is just another puppet. Sanders is no one’s puppet. If the media oligarchs stop shunning him he’ll get even bigger. He will win.
If she wins the primary the Republicans will win. Too many democrats will not vote for her no matter what.
I desperately hope that he wins the primary. There is no reason that he shouldn’t, except for the wishes and influence of the DNC. He is the president America needs, and I think the president that would be best for America in the world right now.
People need to VOTE in this primary.
@tinyfaery I don’t know if that is necessarily the case. Admittedly there are few Democrats or Independents here where I live but those who are here seem to be of a mindset that voting for her is better than the Republican candidate no matter who it turns out to be. (Sounds like a very Republican mindset I know but it is what it is). Of course, there is always the chance that if they are not given Sanders, they just won’t vote which would lead to the same outcome you describe.
I would agree that Clinton trumps Sanders in the foreign policy arena, but if elected, he could always install her as Secretary of State. The age thing is worthy of consideration, considering the experience with Reagan, but Sanders is free from all of the signals that Ronnie displayed when he was “around the bend”. No one has yet had to ” clean up” with “what Bernie meant to say was….”
Out here is CA (and our 55 electoral votes) most people I know will not vote for Hillary, no matter what. Some of Hollywood is beginning to place their votes in Bernie’s corner (I expect more to come) and we know how much $ and influence they have.
@stanleybmanly I doubt Clinton will serve as Secretary of State for Sanders, having already made that concession to Obama. And yeah, I know, the correct answer is always “I serve at the pleasure…”, but ego does still play a role here.
And it’s a tough grueling job
I don’t have an idea why there aren’t more running for the Dem nominee. I just watched a documentary about the Clintons. It was very persuasive in labeling them gangsters in the truest darkest sense of the word. It’s hard to imagine anyone supporting her for president.
@stanleybmanly So is the presidency. That’s not why she’d turn it down.
@MollyMcGuire – who made the documentary? Did the movie maker have an agenda?
A great deal of effort has been devoted to bad mouthing the Clintons. It must be frustrating that nothing seems to stick. God knows the Republican Congress has devoted years to the effort and just can’t seem to understand why no one other than rabid Republicans take all the demonizing seriously. I mean even the dullest of the dimwitted must eventually recognize the cries of “WOLF” for what they are.
@stanleybmanly Are you serious? Impeachment proceedings of a sitting President and undisclosed settlements with his female victims and this same President upon leaving office had his license to practice law stripped from him. And then we have Hillary facing 2 unprecedented Federal investigations of her email scandal and now corruption investigations and do not leave out Benghazi just yet. These were are and all very serious and not trumped up charges and you of anyone here knows that walking on water will be much easier than to get a conviction on anyone as powerful as a Clinton. Far from lily white are either of these 2 people and why so many voters are running for the exits from establishment trash like the Clintons et all. The fact that Biden is kicking himself on a daily basis now for not joining the race should be a clear sign as to how serious and desperate the situation for Hill has become.
@Cruiser And the sad thing is even with the baggage, given the choice between her and a Republican opponent, she is still the lesser evil.
@rojo Respectfully I will have to disagree. A Presidential leader leads by the virtue of their character and the cabinet of people they choose to counsel them and Hillary and a Cabinet of her choosing sends chills down my spine.
@rojo Those unprecedented proceedings are unprecedented for their very CLEAR partisanship, and the fact that Republicans walk this unprecedented road alone is powerful evidence that these are indeed trumped up charges. And the knuckleheads responsible lack the clarity of mind to understand the harm to the country in the stark appearance of misusing Congressional powers to achieve what you couldn’t accomplish at the polls! I am by no means defending either one of the Clintons as monuments to morality, but the unceasing Republican witch hunt is an irresponsible and dangerous changing of the rules as well as stupid. And if you think they aren’t stupid, consider those impeachment proceeding and the ramifications of those idiots standing before the Supreme Court trying to sell the notion that a blow job is an impeachable offense.
@Cruiser I am not about to disagree with you about her and her eventual cabinet, I am just saying that the alternatives offered by the other side are so much worse. I cannot even fathom putting those who dwell upon such negatives in charge. My God, why do I want someone who wants to wall us in or turn us into a police state or set the social clock back to the 1890’s.
Is that all ya got guys? Be afraid and elect us to keep you safe? My ass! If it wasn’t for your insatiable greed we would not be in this mess. And if I had my way, there would be no SS protecting your ass.
We have not had a “leader” here in the US in a long, long time. The few measly choices we are offered are those who can be bought and stay bought. We do not get to choose except from a pre-approved list of candidates.
And there is not a single one in the present pack that I would consider being even close to a leader. It has always been my contention that in order to lead you have to be in front of me; not pushing me from behind. If I can’t see your ass, you are not leading me and there is no one offering to put their butt on the line.
@rojo What qualities of “being a leader” you are looking for that are present in either Hillary or Bernie that are not in any way shape or form present in any of the Republican candidates??
@Cruiser good question. My best answer is that neither of them strike me as a better leader than any of the Republican candidates and I guess that is because I no longer expect the Prez to be an actual leader.
Clinton is somewhat slimy, but she doesn’t want to build a wall around me, nor is she anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-EPA, anti-ACA or anti-anything the other guys want. Sanders strikes me as more real. He believes what he is preaching, not to say that others do not believe what they profess, but what he believes is more in line with what I also believe. I also figure we have tried and retried to do things the same way in the past (and we know what the definition of insanity is) so I am willing to give his way a shot to see what happens.
Here is a somewhat simplistic guide to the different political positions of the two parties. In truth I am probably somewhere in the middle of the two stances in many cases but when presented with choices as stark as those listed I am going to lean Democratic because to me they are less restrictive and better for the overall good.
@rojo I don’t like that chart at all as the definitions/answers it gave as comparisons are oversimplified and do not begin to scratch the surface to revealing the true sentiments of the majority of either parties goals and ambitions. That said…you are right, Obama for one has destroyed the notion that the presidency has any functionality as a leader of the direction of Congress and our nation. Epic fail there. Most Liberals will disagree with my assessment of Obama but that brings me to my desire to have a true leader as President. Someone who can lead ALL the people of this country and not just the 35% who are pledged to the party he is affiliated with.
I truly don’t see Hillary capable of inspiring and leading anyone outside the Dem party and I will say the same about Bernie. Conservatives may put up with some of Hillary’s agenda but there is so very little that Bernie stands for that any true conservative could get behind. So if either of them get elected you can be sure we will have another 4–8 years of a do nothing Congress.
@Cruiser As I said, it is simplistic but does give a starting point for discussion.
In all fairness, I think you can go way back before Obama. He is just the last in a line of Presidents who can be considered party hacks and not leaders.
I think you may have hit the nail on the head. NO Democrat will be good enough for a conservative and NO Republican will be good enough for a liberal. So how do we get a real leader? I don’t think you will get one without having something to lead toward or fight against. Take a look at the party platforms. The priorities are completely different, we can’t even agree on what is a problem, let alone what the solution might be.
As for a do-nothing Congress; that is yet another reason I would put a progressive in the White House. I don’t want to think about the damage the Republican Party in the form of the Tea Party could do to the US and my way of life. Better to have an impasse than allow the country to move backwards to a period of Robber Barons and Caveat Emptor with the citizenry (albeit well armed citizenry) at the mercy of the corporate powerstructure.
@rojo You are absolutely correct. I wish I could give you an educated answer as to who all the Presidents are as to who successfully led our nation as a leader and who also got Congress to play nice together. But I can say I did live through and witness both Reagan and Clinton lead and bring Congress together to pass key legislation’s that would not stand a hope in hell of passing in both GW Bushes and Obama’s tenure.
To be fair Obama did pass some landmark legislation but most passed with little to no Republican support and that is IMHO not how this country should be lead. We sorely need a leader who can lead and negotiate bi-partisan support for all our policies and laws that serve most if not all of this countries constituents.
Answer this question 
