RSN August 14 Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Glick writes: "Our suffering peoples and destabilized and polluted ecosystem are in desperate need of leadership in the national electoral arena that can truly bring about change we can believe in. Bernie Sanders is the guy."

Sen. Bernie Sanders. (photo: Sanders.gov)
Sen. Bernie Sanders. (photo: Sanders.gov)


Run, Bernie, Run

By Ted Glick, Reader Supported News

25 November 13

 

f you had a President who said: 'Nobody in America is going to make less than $12 or $14 an hour,' what do you think that would do? If you had a President who said: 'You know what, everybody in this country is going to get free primary health care within a year,' what do you think that would do? If you had a President say, 'Every kid in this country is going to go to college regardless of their income,' what do you think that would do? If you had a President say, 'I stand here today and guarantee you that we are not going to cut a nickel in Social Security; in fact we're going to improve the Social Security program,' what do you think that would do? If you had a president who said, 'Global warming is the great planetary crisis of our time, I'm going to create millions of jobs as we transform our energy system. I know the oil companies don't like it. I know the coal companies don't like it. But that is what this planet needs: we're going to lead the world in that direction. We're going to transform the energy system across this planet - and create millions of jobs while we do that.' If you had a President say that, what kind of excitement would you generate from young people all over this world?"

~ Bernie Sanders, from the November 2013 issue of The Progressive

I support a Bernie Sanders campaign for president. I support it whether he decides to run as an Independent or within the Democratic primaries. I support it no matter what criticism he receives from more radical leftists for particular positions he has taken. I support it because I've believed for months that Bernie Sanders is easily the one person who, by running for president in 2016, can do the most to excite and inspire tens of millions of people in this country, give the kind of leadership needed to generate an independent and progressive, multi-issue mass movement for systemic change.

And it looks like a real possibility! For the last few weeks articles have begun to come out indicating that he is taking this idea seriously. In an interview with Politico just a few days ago, he said, "[The] major issues of this country that impact millions of people cannot continue to be swept under the rug. And if nobody else is talking about it [running for president], well, then maybe I have to do it."

My first direct contact with Bernie Sanders was about 30 years ago when he spoke at a fundraiser I helped to organize for the National Committee for Independent Political Action. At the time he was the mayor of Vermont's largest town, Burlington, elected on a third party line and as an open Socialist. Soon afterwards he was elected to Congress, where he has been ever since either as a House member or a senator.

In that role he has been a consistent voice for low-income people, working class people, the middle class, and our threatened ecosystem. Earlier this year he co-sponsored with Senator Barbara Boxer a major piece of climate legislation, a "fee-and-dividend" bill described as a "gold standard" type of bill by The Nation magazine.

In comments made by Boxer at the press conference announcing the introduction of this bill, she referred to Bernie as a straight shooter, someone who didn't play political games. I remember thinking at the time that for Boxer, immersed as she has been for so long at the highest levels of a pretty corrupt two-party system, that was high praise indeed. It was as if Bernie had been an inspiration to her.

This strength of Sanders as an outspoken champion of the oppressed and beaten down, at the same time that he has shown his ability to navigate and have some impact even on Capitol Hill without being corrupted, is an additional reason why he really is the progressive left's best option for 2016.

Is the fact that he is an open Socialist a potential political problem? Well, there's no question but that this will be used by Fox News and the right-wing smear machine to try to discredit him, but the fact that he has been elected as an open Socialist to the House and then the U.S. Senate is going to make it hard, it seems to me, for those attacks to stick, with the exception of the usual 25-30% of the electorate that is ideologically on the far right. And Sanders has plenty of experience in dealing with this kind of stuff.

And how many of us are aware of a poll released by the Pew Research Center at the end of 2011 which found that 31% of the American people say they have a positive view of the word, "socialism," with 49% of young people ages 18-29 having a positive view? It's hard to believe that those numbers wouldn't go up when there is a campaign led by popular US senator Bernie Sanders that articulates what a socialist approach to the major issues is all about.

Should Bernie run as an independent or in the Democratic primaries? As someone who has been a member of and sometimes leader in efforts to form a progressive third party since 1975 to the present day, I'm open-minded on this question. It is a fact that, as things now stand, Sanders' running as an Independent would mean he had no chance of winning and could, instead, make it more likely that Chris Christie, Jeb Bush or - God forbid - Ted Cruz were elected president. Sanders has said that he is not interested in that kind of campaign.

But the presidential election is three years away. A lot can happen in three years.

I would say that the key question as to how Sanders should run is what will bring together a critical mass of the constituencies that must unite if we are to have a chance of winning against the corporate rulers' hard (Republican) and soft (centrist Democrat) candidates. If significant sectors of labor, community-based, and people of color groups, the women's and LGBT movements, immigrant rights and farmer/rural groups, climate and environmental groups, small businesses and others are willing to support an Independent candidacy, that could well be the best route to take. Remember, Abraham Lincoln was elected with a plurality of votes, 36%, because there were four substantive presidential candidates in 1860. A three- or four-party race seems unlikely right now for 2016, but the political situation is very fluid, with severe divisions within the Republican Party that could see a Tea Party third party effort, and we need to remain open to all possibilities.

Finally, and very important, is the issue of a Sanders campaign being run in such a way that it creates a Democratic organizational network that continues past 2016.

Some of us who had experience with this critical, strategic question back in the 1980s, when Jesse Jackson decided to run for president in 1984, are still alive and still active politically. A number of us who were supportive of Jackson, as well as Jackson himself back then, felt strongly enough about this that by 1986 a National Rainbow Coalition was formed. By 1988 this effort was growing in organizational strength. State Rainbow conventions were being held in various parts of the country, with the electoral success of Jackson's 1988 Democratic primary campaign fueling this development. And Bernie was connected to this. His campaign manager for the 1988 Bernie Sanders campaign for Congress was also a leader of the Vermont Rainbow Coalition.

If Sanders runs for president, it is critical that something like that '86-'88 Rainbow Coalition phenomenon be created alongside a Sanders electoral operation. Bernie needs to support it and help to lead it, but it also needs its own collective leadership not totally dependent upon Sanders or any one person. It needs to be a 21st century version of that late '80s Rainbow, with more participatory democracy, internet and social-media savvy, a combination of from-the-top and bottom-up leadership, all about popular education and leadership development, etc.

As important as Bernie Sanders is right now, as much as he is the right person to lead us at this point in time, history teaches us that movements dependent upon one individual, even someone with credentials like Bernie's, are like houses built on sand: they may last for a while, but they will eventually be swept away.

It's time, it's way past time. Our suffering peoples and destabilized and polluted ecosystem are in desperate need of leadership in the national electoral arena that can truly bring about change we can believe in. Bernie Sanders is the guy. Run, Bernie, run!!

Ted Glick has been a progressive activist, organizer and writer since 1968. Past writing and other information can be found at http://tedglick.com, and he can be followed on twitter at http://twitter.com/jtglick.



Ted Glick has been a progressive activist and organizer since 1968. Past writings and other information can be found at http://tedglick.com, and he can be followed on twitter at http://twitter.com/jtglick.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+74 # jmar 2013-11-25 14:12
If Bernie Sanders runs I will give my first political donation since Elizabeth Warren announced she was running for the Senate.
 
 
+3 # HowardMH 2013-11-26 09:31
I agree, but Burnie hasn't got a snowballs chance in hell of wining, because Wall Street and the Big Corp. will fight him all the way with at least a billion $'s against him.
 
 
+79 # MEBrowning 2013-11-25 14:18
I would vote for Bernie Sanders regardless of his party affiliation.
 
 
+5 # Rain17 2013-11-25 14:21
If Bernie Sanders runs as a third party candidate, and chooses to be the Ralph Nader of 2016, I will definitely not vote for him. I'd consider voting for him in a Democratic primary, but not as a third party general election candidate.
 
 
+23 # Rita Walpole Ague 2013-11-25 17:58
We are in desperate need of real McCoy change here in the U.S. of (greed and power) A.(ddiction). And, yes, Bernie Sanders is and has been a great leader and guide, obviously not bought off, but rather a dedicated people/Mother Earth server. Vote for him, should he run, I certainly would - not that any of us can be certain of our vote(s) being honestly counted. Would it not be interesting if the Dems. should beg him to wear the Dem. label?
 
 
-12 # WestWinds 2013-11-25 20:05
Before I would vote for Bernie Sanders, I'd want to know where his campaign finance funding is coming from. If he's going to accept even partial funding or be financed heavily or completely by the corporations, then what's the difference? Just a lot of campaign rhetoric.

Call me a doubting Thomas, but I want to know exactly what I'm getting and not just fly away on a cloud of assumptions like this country did with Obama.

My advice?: Keep your two feet on the ground and run thorough checks on every aspect of his run and know exactly what you're getting before you slip the rings on in the voting booth.

We need real change in this country and not just a lot of campaign champagne promises that sound good.

Time is running out for some things (like global warming and the Keystone XL disaster they are going to build over the Ogallala Aquifer.)

We, the people need to get it right this time and not get into bed with another covert Right-wing spelunker.
 
 
+21 # Billy Bob 2013-11-25 20:14
You don't need to make any assumptions about Sanders. He has a long and well documented record.

As for worrying about his funding, I'm sorry, but if you want to win, you have to play by the rules currently established. That doesn't mean he couldn't try to change it after he's in office. Of course the only power he'd have over that as President, would be through his Supreme Court nominations.
 
 
-4 # Kathymoi 2013-11-26 10:26
You probably vote for the lesser of two evils.
 
 
+4 # Rain17 2013-11-26 11:11
Oh yeah that reminds me about the 2000 election. Nader gladly took Republican money.
 
 
0 # bingers 2013-11-28 14:13
Since he has never in his long career accepted corporate funding it's unlikely he would in a run for president either. Which, of course, means he wouldn't have a snowball's chance in Hell of winning, and neither would Elizabeth Warren. We needed Howard Dean in '04 and we need either of them in '16, but the Rolling Stones got it wrong, "If you try sometimes you will find you (never) get what you need."
 
 
+56 # AMLLLLL 2013-11-25 14:26
Bernie would definitely conduct enough polls to know if he has a chance. I would love love love it if he were President!
 
 
+61 # thekidde 2013-11-25 14:45
Do it Bernie. And run as a Democrat to make them finally stand up and be counted one way or another. We'll find out who the true Americans are.
 
 
+17 # frankscott 2013-11-25 15:03
he should run in the democratic primaries and if/when bought out by whoever the corporados select, run as a green...and maybe bring a couple of truly progressive dems with him to that party...an anti-corporate, anti-capital movement - what we need - cannot win in a corporate political party race...the primary will offer a larger voice to be better heard in the controlled political marketplace, but he must ultimately run as a member of a party that stands against corporate capital..face it, radicals, or just shut up , give up, or continue kissing up to the fantasy of a kinder, gentler profit and loss destruction of the planet.
 
 
0 # Rain17 2013-11-26 11:11
As I said above, if he wants to be the Nader of 2016, he will not get my vote in the general election.
 
 
+43 # WinslowMyers 2013-11-25 15:29
And Elizabeth Warren for Vice-Prez!
 
 
+35 # mblockhart 2013-11-25 15:36
Bernie will not be up for re election as a Senator until 2018. So, that means he can run for President without losing his Senate seat. In my view, he is most essential as a Senator and unlikely to get elected as President. However, if he ran as a Democrat in 2016 he would participate in the debates and speak on the issues. That would be a good thing. A 3rd party run would be stupid - no debates that anyone significantly watches and it would only empower the Republicans by splitting Democratic/Prog ressive votes. He is supremely essential as Senator who can speak directly to the public on issues.
 
 
+34 # born1929 2013-11-25 16:16
I have never worked for a candidate but I am ready to pound pavement for Bernie Sanders and/or Elizabeth Warren ... I hope they will hurry up with this ... at 84 I only have sixteen years left to be of service ...
StanLevin ... veteran for peace
 
 
-14 # MidwesTom 2013-11-25 16:50
Democratic money, that is what counts, has already chosen Hillary. Bernie has to run as a Progressive in a new party, unless something changes with Hillary. She is literally unopposed at this time.
 
 
+2 # Billy Bob 2013-11-25 20:17
Nobody's even running at this time, including her. The field is wide open. The only purpose for running on another party is to split the vote.

I'm glad that this strategy is being proposed by you. As a right-wing conservative, posing as a "moderate Democrat", you can shed light on that fact.

Hey, 3rd partiers! Midwest Tom wants liberals to run against the Democratic Party, rather than in the Democratic primaries.

He has an agenda, and it has nothing to do with electing liberals and progressives.
 
 
+8 # Shorey13 2013-11-25 17:04
Much as I also love Bernie, he has too much baggage--age and the word"Socialism. " You might as well run Noam Chomsky. The only viable Progressive candidate is Elizabeth Warren. I also expect the Tea Party/Libertari ans to put up Cruz or Rand Paul to run in the general election. We are overdue for a multi-party system. Repulicrats and Democlicans (RINO's and DINO's) haven't represented ordinary folk for 30 years. I for one am hoping we have four fully funded candidates running in the 2016 election. The resulting chaos would be a great purgative.
 
 
+2 # Billy Bob 2013-11-25 20:24
If we had 4, fully funded candidates in 2016, they would probably include:

1. Hillary Clinton (because nobody bothered to oppose her in the primaries where they could have actually done some good).

2. The Republican (probably Ayn-Rand-Paul-R yan, or some permutation of that 4-headed word jumble)

3. liberal third party no. 1 (fully funded by the Republican Party)

4. liberal third party no. 2 (also fully funded by the Republican Party)

-----

End result:

Democratic Party candidate: 40%
liberal party #1: 8%
liberal party #2: 8%
Republican Party: 44%

Meet President Rand Paul.
 
 
+2 # Cassandra2012 2013-11-26 17:29
aargh! Rand Paul is a phony libertarian who thinks govt. should stay out of our lives (unless the lives happen to be women's, in which case gov't is invited into bedrooms, vaginas (for trans-vaginal ultra-sounds) etc.)
Ron and Rand Paul are incredible misogynist hypocrites (among other things.)
 
 
+3 # Rain17 2013-11-26 11:12
And Warren isn't running. She was one of many female senators who signed a letter to Clinton asking her to run.
 
 
0 # Cassandra2012 2013-11-26 17:25
And oh my, he is Jewish too ... right? Time to change the unspoken 'rules' and dare to have the courage of one's convictions! Remember JFK????
 
 
+8 # Texaninexile 2013-11-25 17:04
I admire Bernie Sanders, but if he runs as a third-party candidate to hand the White House to the GOP with things as they are, I'll be an admirer no more.
 
 
+9 # kitster 2013-11-25 17:23
of course, the u.s. needs a president like Bernie sanders. of course, the backward movement of the u.s. has been building since the presidency of Ronnie Reagan.

but the corporatist stooges have long ago bowed to the bullion of the financial/milit ary/industrial complex and given democracy and freedom new definitions directed by their funding fathers...whate ver puts money in their pockets.

unfortunately, the voters are the voiceless in the new amerika. the supreme court has seen to that.

now, whomever has the most gold...to galvanize the gullible into believing their negative advertising...r ules. the people have relinquished their say to the rich.

unless we progressives... who understand socialism and it's positive connotations for our country in crisis...start raising money right now (the stuff that determines elections), Bernie sanders will by a fleeting memory the likes of ralph nader.
 
 
+1 # Kathymoi 2013-11-26 10:22
What we need to do is find ways to run a campaign with a low budget. Bernie Sanders is a free, independent, honest, truthful senator and, we hope, candidate for president because he is not spending millions on his campaigns. He is not dependent on corporate millions to get elected. We, the people who want his integrity and his intentions in our government, need to vote for the low budget campaign. Spending less and very visibly spending less can be and should be a highly positive campaign plus for Bernie. Anyone spending millions and millions should be clearly understood as a paid representative of the billionaires providing the money. That is in Bernie's favor.
 
 
+8 # JoanF 2013-11-25 17:33
And some clones in Congress and the House. A president just can't do much without a little support there.
 
 
+3 # Kathymoi 2013-11-26 10:16
Absolutely. We need to get busy this year making sure we get independent progressive candidates on the ballot and elected for congress and for governor positions in 2014. That is the beginning of supporting Bernie for president. We want to send him in with support.
 
 
-5 # Sweet Pea 2013-11-25 17:35
What a disgusting circumstance that the best candidates are either too old or of the wrong sexual gender. What happened to the honest and. caring middle aged men?
 
 
+5 # Billy Bob 2013-11-25 20:28
What's wrong with an honest and caring woman?

First of all, "honest and caring"? Nobody fits that description and hasn't for 50 years. That said, Elizabeth Warren is by far the most qualified likely candidate I can think of. I don't see how being a woman is, in any way, a hinderance.

As a matter of fact, Shillary Clinton, will probably be the next president (I'd say 85% chance). So, obviously, being a woman is no problem for electability.
 
 
+4 # Kathymoi 2013-11-26 10:14
She's a strong supporter of the military industrial complex and its wars. She will have the backing of all the corporations and she will select corporate people for her staff and cabinet if she is elected. If everything goes along as usual, with the people voting for the lesser of two evils as usual, Hillary would be the democrat evil, and would get elected. I sincerely hope it doesn't go that way. Bernie is working on giving us an alternative. We have to begin with identifying and electing independent, progressive candidates in 2014 for governors and congressmen. That's how we start to support Bernie for president.
 
 
+4 # eosheawyatt 2013-11-25 17:42
God please anyone but Hillary Someone with a heart and a soul would be a vast improvement over what we have had.
 
 
+10 # hbheinze 2013-11-25 17:53
Bernie Sanders and/or Elizabeth Warren are the only people who could get me excited and inspired to get out and work in 2016. A long time ago I had a fantasy: Sanders/Warren 2016. Now it seems like a (distant) possibility. I don't know if I would wish the campaign or presidency on Bernie, but he is THE ONE!!
 
 
-3 # Kathymoi 2013-11-26 10:11
I'd like to see him do a low budget campaign. And Warren would be a winning campaign partner if she will jump the democrat party and run as an independent with Bernie. On the other hand, she's also good in the senate. I'm sure Bernie can locate true progressives to run with him -- for the vice presidency and for each of the cabinet and staff positions. I hope he is able to announce the people he would appoint for cabinet and staff during the campaign and that he is able to force the opposing candidates to do the same. Bernie is the only one who would not be appointing corporate (revolving door) representatives .
 
 
+9 # dougieg 2013-11-25 18:05
Bernie is my friend. I work with his staff here in VT all the time. He is Da Man. He speaks the truth. So it would be great if he could get a larger audience for that. But there is the danger of the Ralph Nader syndrome. I'm sure Bernie will weigh it carefully and make the right choice. Hey, he's in the November issue of Playboy! Woo Hoo!
 
 
-1 # Kathymoi 2013-11-26 10:06
Thanks for the heads up about the playboy November issue. I'll look into that. We need to make sure that people who want to protect humans and the environment on which humans depend vote for Bernie and not for whoever spends millions of dollars on tv ads in 2016.
 
 
0 # bingers 2013-11-28 14:20
Quoting dougieg:
Bernie is my friend. I work with his staff here in VT all the time. He is Da Man. He speaks the truth. So it would be great if he could get a larger audience for that. But there is the danger of the Ralph Nader syndrome. I'm sure Bernie will weigh it carefully and make the right choice. Hey, he's in the November issue of Playboy! Woo Hoo!



You're lucky. I met Bernie at a media conference in St Louis years ago and found him to be a kind and gentle man with a huge brain and a totally unexpected great sense of humor. I hadn't given money to a politician in years until I met him and when I got home I sent him all I could afford.

If every politician were another Bernie, the world would be Utopia.
 
 
+10 # Rich Austin 2013-11-25 18:09
I'd vote for him if he ran as a Democratic Socialist. The Party of FDR has become fetid with the stench of dirty corporate money. Third Way "Democrats", New "Democrats", and all the rest that have sold out America's working class aren't worth a damn. As I seventy-two year old retired working stiff I know of what I preach. The vast majority of lawmakers in both wings of the Corporatist Party have never gotten their hands dirty performing honest work. Working class Americans are horribly underrepresente d in Congress and State Legislatures. That won't change unless we change it. Voting for the same ol' same ol' won't get the job done. Run Bernie, run!
 
 
0 # Kathymoi 2013-11-26 10:04
totally agree. Well expressed.
 
 
+10 # rhgreen 2013-11-25 20:13
If Bernie ran in the Democratic primary, he would at least force Hillary out into the open on the issues. And he would force her to the left. It's a great idea!
 
 
-2 # Kathymoi 2013-11-26 10:03
She would have to say things during the campaign that would make her sound as if she were more to the left, but ...if you want someone who is for reducing the gap between the rich and the rest and someone who is for protecting the environment from corporate greed, you won't vote for Hillary Corporate Clinton. You'll vote for Bernie Sanders. And let's see who is runs with. We won't get real change by voting for the same old politicians. Bernie is independent of the corporate money that funds the democrat and republican parties. He is not "more of the same." he is not the lesser of two evils. He is a true man for the people, of the people. If he can be elected by the people, we've got a shot at real change.
 
 
+9 # angelfish 2013-11-25 21:07
I love Bernie with ALL my heart, and I'd vote for him in a minute, but I think we would be better served with him in Congress where he can rattle the bars on a regular basis. He's also not a young man anymore and the stress of the Presidency has NEVER improved anyone's health. A Dream ticket WOULD be Bernie and Elizabeth Warren but if Hillary stakes her claim, I believe she'll get the nod. If she does, I hope she chooses Elizabeth as her running mate. What a Powerhouse that would be! Bernie in Congress and the Golden Girls (and I mean that with the Utmost respect) In the White House! That would REALLY put a grin on my face.
 
 
+2 # jcdav 2013-11-26 06:44
I find it hard to get my head around Warren/Clinton combination...t hey are soooo different...Hil lary has the background and credentials for Pres. but is so sold out to the greedheads and so power hungry...Warren is what we need, but lacks experience in most areas with the exception of Economics. Bernie has the experience & cred to compliment Warren...but I too have concern about Bernie's health as Pres.--and could either Bernie or Warren not get compromised in the corrupt electorial process?
 
 
-1 # Kathymoi 2013-11-26 09:58
Hillary Clinton represents the military industry and war policies. She is not a reasonable running mate for Elizabeth Warren, who appears at present to be pro humans. What I'd like to see is Bernie/Elizabet h, both as independents. If Elizabeth Warren would jump out of the democrat party and run as an independent with Bernie, there would be real power! And I'd love to hear who they would appoint to each of the cabinet positions. You can bet your life that Hillary would appoint corporate representatives . The revolving doors would keep swinging with Hillary, but Bernie would appoint people to bring the kind of change that he envisions. I want to hear who he would appoint.
 
 
+2 # Billy Bob 2013-11-26 09:21
WHY THE ITALICS?

CAN WE NOW CONTROL THEM OURSELVES, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO USE CAPS TO EMPHASIZE THINGS WITHOUT CHANGING THE LANGUAGE?
 
 
+3 # BKnowswhitt 2013-11-26 20:02
because italics lean to the right .. hehehe .... which sanders would never do ... heheeeehhhehehe h
 
 
-2 # Kathymoi 2013-11-26 09:33
Bernie Sanders is the one elected official in our government who is independent of the multinational corporations and doesn't depend on either of the major parties to get their money and then tell him what to do. He can be a straight shooter because he is an independent. I hope he can get Elizabeth Warren to jump out of the democrat party and run with him--or that she stays in the Senate, where she can do good there. In addition, in order for Bernie to be able to bring the real change that he truly would like to bring, we need to select and then elect a large number of progressive congressmen and governors in 2014---preferab ly independents. It's hard for a member of the major parties to be truly progressive because they are funded by the corporate money that funds the party, and they have to obey the party line. This is a time when we need real change, and not just a weak compromise with the extreme right, not just another corporation-fun ded politician like Hillary Clinton. A whole string of independents who support people over corporate profits and the environment over corporate profits is the change that we need, not a safely elected Hillary, who won't bring the change.
 
 
+1 # BKnowswhitt 2013-11-26 20:04
real change won't come from this political system ... however does not mean it won't or can't happen .. so i guess i say be hopeful ... but not via the old traditional system .. or way .. but it will come eventually ... see how so many are so frustrated by it all .. and i mean the real population not the contrived Tea Party ..
 
 
0 # Stilldreamin1 2013-11-26 09:59
I remember when Russ Feingold opted out of the 2004? race. After that decision, he became superfluous. Bernie Sanders has an all too unique vision and voice. It's run or done. I hope he runs.
 
 
+2 # tswhiskers 2013-11-26 10:00
I think the reason why all of us are nuts about Bernie is that we watch politics while, I suspect the majority of the population don't. That is why I'm fairly certain that Bernie would not be elected. To us liberals he's the perfect candidate, but he is probably unknown to most people, and while interesting, I think he would be regarded as many of us regarded Ross Perot, an eye-catching fellow unashamed to list the problems we were facing (G.H. Bush only wanted to run on a flag-burning amendment) but a bit eccentric and not big on solutions to those problems. As others have hinted, we would need a voting population willing to listen to the campaign and willing to ignore the big money thrown at them. Bernie would need some of that big money and would have to run an exhausting campaign, and not a 6 week one like in the UK. He would have my wholehearted vote; I'm just not certain he would attract near enough votes to win and if he did, would he have the strength to govern? Has anyone noticed the gray hair on Obama, Clinton, G.W. Bush, etc.? It's the most demanding job in the world and would likely kill him.
 
 
0 # Kathymoi 2013-11-26 15:50
let's give him a chance. He is wise and strong. Let's give him, and us, a chance.
 
 
-1 # BKnowswhitt 2013-11-26 19:59
Great senator only real voice and has the balls to call himself a socialist in today's environs .. i love this guy .. but recognize he's ahead of his time ... like Ralph Nader .. he can't won't nor never will win ... however if he could be in the debates he's help a lot .. but like with Nader they won't .. that is the Dempuke and Repukes ... won't let it happen ...
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN