I’m not asking whether he has a snowball’s chance of being elected, mind you. Take that to a different thread.
Nor is this simply a poll on whether you agree with his political views/agenda; even if you do, you might believe he would make a worse POTUS than a centrist like Obama or Hillary, because, what with how things are in Washington, he would find it even more difficult than they to get his agenda enacted or get anything done.
I think he would make a great one just because, stymied or not, his presidency would push the Overton Window leftward for cycles to come.
I agree with both of these statements, but I believe that the most important is that his treatment at the hands of the Republicans would make their relationship with Obama look like a church picnic.
I went with no…I think he’d basically be another Carter. I know liberals are all gooey about him, but I’m not seeing anything I like there, and Hillary is my candidate in this election, assuming she gets past the Democratic left wing and gets the nomination.
I think Sanders would be a good president insofar as he would push to get policies enacted that would lay the groundwork for more and better opportunities in education and employment, immigration reform that doesn’t have hurting people as an inherent byproduct, true gender equality, law enforcement reform, prison reform, drug policy reform, enforcement of all existing gun laws (baby steps), the minimization of religious influence in government policies, and further improving relationships between the US and other nations. That stated, I don’t think he would be an effective president as he wouldn’t be allowed to get a damned thing done.
Political outsider, IMHO out of touch left winger type who will basically be unable to get anything done, will be unable to work with Congress (on either side) and who’s potential presidency would be marked by a lot of rhetoric and hot air, but would get nothing done. You guys thought that Obama had problems getting stuff done, wait until you see what it’s like under Sanders. :eek:
He’d be fortunate to be another Carter. He hasn’t run anything recently, and then it was a small city fueled and stabilized by a large university. He hasn’t made the alliances and the compromises needed to get anything done in Washington, either because he doesn’t know how or perhaps because he prefers to maintain a self-image of moral purity (and the fatuous infatuateds supporting him aren’t helping). And he’s just old.
I think Sanders serves the liberal cause much better as a candidate than he would as president. I’m not actually convinced that he wants to win all that much, but more wants to use his candidacy to help promote the issues he cares about, not that he wouldn’t take it if he actually won.
If he did become president, he would either have to bow to political reality and heavily compromise his vision in the process becoming just another politician and disappointing all his supporters, or get stymied at every turn and have nothing to show for his 4 years in office. While I appreciate his ideas and would like to see as many of them as possible brought to fruition, I’d rather have Clinton down there in the mud doing the dirty work of getting things done.
Carter was a Washington outsider, his entire pre-presidential political career within Georgia. Obama was only a freshman senator when he became POTUS. Sanders has been a senator since 2007 and was a representative from 1991 to 2007 – he is an “outsider” only in an ideological sense.
My rational brain is in this camp. My enormous heart and wide eyes want to live in Bernie-land, but the few logical faculties remaining to me understand what would serve us best, right now, is something to keep the religious fundamentalists and antihumanists at bay. Regrettably, the best bet at the moment for a ruthless defense looks like Ms. Clinton. I note, however, Mr. Biden has strolled into the room. This is about to get interesting.
As much as I would love to see Sanders’s policies enacted, I know that he wouldn’t be able to get a damn thing done as POTUS.
For all that we liberals criticize the GOP for over stymieing Obama, that would PALE in comparison to how they would thwart the agenda of an actual, genuine socialist president.
It makes a huge difference if you don’t have the political capital and alliances that ElvisL1ves was mentioning. Simply put, you can’t get anything done in Washington without that stuff. Sanders is not going to have any of the Republicans on his side (a given these days for the Republicans with a Democratic President) and he won’t have enough of the Democrats on his side to achieve anything at all. He will be far more hamstrung, IMHO, than Obama was.
No, he is a Washington outsider in the real as well as ideological sense. The fact that he’s been in the senate since 2007 doesn’t make him a Washington insider. He won’t be able to rally support of the entire Democratic party in Congress and he will get even less support than Obama has from the Republicans, which means he won’t be able to do anything substantial in his one term in office…IMHO of course. YMMV and if you think that old Bernie Boy will be able to rally vast support from the Democrats and bridge the gap with the Republicans to be able to get stuff done, well, more power to you. Personally, I think Hillary, as hated as she is by the Republicans, has a MUCH better shot at getting stuff done than Bernie does because she IS the consummate insider and her hubby IS able to bridge the gap, somewhat, with the Republicans…at least with some of them.
