2016 Postmortem
Showing Original Post only (View all)Senator Sanders is an Outsider, thankfully! [View all]
Last edited Sun Jan 17, 2016, 02:12 PM - Edit history (1)
Hillary for VP? Not likely.
She's an "Insider" who has accepted campaign finance money from the large banking and investment interests.
The possibility of bringing Hillary in as VP would have occurred to Mr. Sanders, I'm sure.
The relevant question, I'm thinking, is whether or not he'd need Hillary's support to get those voters. Based on current polling, that's not likely, so I'm guessing he'd not carry her as VP Don't think she'd accept that "Secondary" position, regardless.
And what would an Outsider like Senator Sanders be like in the White House?
As an established outsider, would he maintain that viewpoint, IE "Philosophy", as he's been doing all along up 'til now?
Well, he's already got that "Status", so why not use it in his favor?
I've heard it said that if elected to the White House Bernie could be a "Catalyst", would bring about a landslide of change and sweep both houses causing Dem/Progressive majorities, bring progressive candidates along for the ride.
Possible, right? Is there evidence to support that?
Our current POTUS had that kind of support once in office, but lost it as time played out. Impressive win, historically, and had majorities in both houses at one point BUT lost much of that support 2 years later in the next election cycle.
Why? Public Disappointment, you would think.
He spoke as a Progressive Outsider before the Presidential election, ran on that platform but behaved as a Centrist Dem, or Liberal Republican, perhaps, once elected. We "Disappointed" voters understand that he could have used his Presidential influence much more progressively once in office, but chose not to.
Examples?
So this President COULD HAVE refused to bring Wall Street insiders into his cabinet, he COULD have NOT supported further investment bank bailouts, and COULD have NOT decided that investigations of Political Corruption against the Bush Administration were a bad idea, War Crimes or not.
This President COULD HAVE shown us all that "Too Big to Fail" concerns didn't necessarily apply within our political system, that combined Wall Street and Investment Banking influences didn't control behavior of that administration, that their money wouldn't buy influence within the Obama White House.
That outcome has been quite unfortunate for all of us, since the "Lock-down" of Congress and Senate bills has remained in place ever since we lost the Congressional majority. So Public Programs have been in decay across 2 full Presidential terms in office, all because Constituent Support was lost based on (mistaken?) policies over the last several years.
So as President, would Bernie "Sell Out", once elected?
One of the latest comments on another thread gave Bernie 90 days before he "Sells Out" to some extent or another, but I honestly don't think that would be the case. I think this Senator recognizes what few today seem to, that supporting the "Status Quo" isn't a benefit to a candidate running for office in our current political climate. Wouldn't benefit him in office, either.
Not in terms of "Voter Support", at least. Media airtime can be bought. Voter Support, tho, cannot.
What's the difference?
If you have no message, no resonating Hope and Change! platform of policies that lift you above the other candidates, you may as well have nothing in terms of actual political influence and support.
Because campaign finance alone will not buy the TRUST & INTEGRITY needed as currency for votes, money won't necessarily get you elected in the current campaign environment.
Which seems to be the factor that plays in favor of "Outsiders" like Senator Sanders, these days many of us are fed up with the current political process and results to date, especially over the last few terms.
BUT those with "Insider" money can at least broadcast their message to the public. Like Hillary
So what WILL "Insider" money get you?
Giving in to questionable sources of Campaign money like Super PAC Corporate provided financial support?
Or Koch brothers (Tea Party!) money? That money buys "Media Air Time" as mentioned above. Politically Beneficial coverage on what passes for news these days, that's what money CAN buy.
Just Ask Trump
That is what I attribute the popularity of Mr. Jacka$$ Donald Trump to, he's a Loud Outspoken Outsider who's not supportive of the "Status Quo". He's also a Stupid Bigot obviously, but he's quite Popular.
Regardless of his obvious lack of informed or coherent opinions. Media air time? He's got all that money can buy
And What about Senator Sanders, is he just another Outsider?
Bernie? He's an Outsider who's not either Stupid or a Bigot.
AND he seems to realize that it's to his advantage while running for office to REMAIN an outsider, hence he's not taking money from the usual corruptive influences. Instead, he's getting media attention (and funding) thru Grass Roots support, and limited donations from private donors.
He's also using Social Media feeds to gain support, as President Obama did while running for office (Go ActBlue!).
NO Corporate or Wall Street money like Hillary, NO Super PAC money like the Tea Publican GOP primary insiders.
Because of that, there's another VERY large difference between "The Donald" and Senator Sanders, one that should serve all of us once he's in office. This difference applies to Hillary Clinton, also.
Senator Sanders has ALWAYS been an outsider, and is actually running on that premise. In fact, he's been elected on that platform for his entire political career, and Big Money sources haven't ever purchase an election for him. Hence, he's not a Sock Puppet for any of those Special Interests.
In his case it's actually Integrity that defines him as an outsider, not politics as usual to support an election campaign.
For what it's worth, Thanks.