Honestly — I’m looking at the relative comparison between the candidates — and I’m listening to each person’s stances, and frankly to me, Bernie Sanders seems like a pretty centrist person on most issues. He wants our nation to act like most nations in terms of healthcare and in terms of the role of shared governance preventing corporate overreach. Oh, and cutting back some of our military overspending while still keeping out military crazy overpowered seems more than reasonable.
Seeing that those exact same approaches are basically commonplace outside the USA, I’m not seeing the where the centrists would have a problem with this.
Moreover, the whole idea of having a President is that they’re more of a moral leader than a writer of laws — they don’t really do 90% of the policy stuff that is put on them. They can veto, or refuse to enforce stuff — but their role is mostly being a loudmouth and consoling folks in times of hardship. In light of that, having a slightly more counterbalancing force of your party in that position seems the better idea, compared to having someone that will potentially pre-capitulate on important issues as a moral stance. Just addressing this from a strategic perspective.
None of the other candidates seem as practical as Bernie is from the perspective of correcting for Trump. The rest of them seem far more eager to cattle trade on things they don’t really have the power to change as president — just giving up that moral authority that the role is mostly there for. That very act also makes them more inherently dismissable by the random public as a disingenuous politician, breaking that moral authority even further for their time in the role.
Standard Disclaimer: Of course, any of them would be lightyears better than any member of the Trump delegation, or the party that supported him. I just can’t see the impracticality that some others see in Bernie — I see him as one of the most effective choices for exactly the limited role that a President really exists in. I also see where some of any candidates supporters can validly be seen as impractical — that has nothing to do with how the actual person would be in the role itself.
What am I not seeing?
Thanks!