Exactly this. Sanders campaign is an actual grassroots movement. Individuals - people, not corporations or law firms masquerading as - who believe in something. I'm not in Bernie's camp because of the probability of him winning. I'm in it because I agree with what he says, and unlike most politicians, his voting record backs it up. I'm tired of political campaigns that are decided by which candidate spends the most money, has the best hair, or throws the smelliest mud.
That is exactly how I feel. Ditto for a surprising number of my friends and co-workers. I still see that being misunderstood in the media a lot. He's not a protest candidate, the "anti-Hillary" or the left's id or something. He's just on point, all the time, and he's ... knowable. That makes him an impossibly rare and appealing kind of candidate. And, speaking for myself, I like the Brooklyn accent. Sounds like my family back east. They don't take any shit either.
I also support Sanders for the same reasons. But I recognize that Clinton most likely has a lock on the nomination. She learned her lesson with Obama and is appealing to the party leadership rather than the grassroots. That's how Obama beat her in 2008 and how she plans to win for 2016. Only after she secures the nomination will she make a more nationwide appeal. Doing so now will expose her too much to attack from both Democratic competitors and Republican opposition.
Clinton remains my second choice. I would prefer to see Sanders in the top seat for the reasons you cite. But for all her faults, she isn't that far behind Sanders in terms of voting record and position platforms.
I know what you mean about Clinton, and I'll vote for her if she gets the nomination too. But I know a lot of folks who used to say that, and don't anymore. She's risking losing the mobilized, progressive left by trying to get her post-primary cash cows in a row right now. Ultimately, her problem as I see it is that she'll be her own worst enemy when it comes to winning over the typical Sanders voter down the road. When she comes to the Sanders voters, she'll be playing right into one of her most damaging image problems, and one that can overshadow her voting record (except the Iraq War, that's gonna leave a mark). It's one that Sanders' campaign exposes very neatly: she's not half as good as Bill or Obama at pandering outside her base. Sanders doesn't do much of it, if any, and she not only isn't very good at it, but Sanders voters won't have heard their issues from anyone else's mouth in a long time. Even if she believes in what she's saying, it'll sound weird. And the Sanders voter may protest by not going to the polls - which is how I see her losing the general election, if she does. I would not want to be one of her campaign managers right now. But, a lot can change in a year...
Exactly this. Sanders campaign is an actual grassroots movement. Individuals - people, not corporations or law firms masquerading as - who believe in something. I'm not in Bernie's camp because of the probability of him winning. I'm in it because I agree with what he says, and unlike most politicians, his voting record backs it up. I'm tired of political campaigns that are decided by which candidate spends the most money, has the best hair, or throws the smelliest mud.
That is exactly how I feel. Ditto for a surprising number of my friends and co-workers. I still see that being misunderstood in the media a lot. He's not a protest candidate, the "anti-Hillary" or the left's id or something. He's just on point, all the time, and he's ... knowable. That makes him an impossibly rare and appealing kind of candidate. And, speaking for myself, I like the Brooklyn accent. Sounds like my family back east. They don't take any shit either.
I also support Sanders for the same reasons. But I recognize that Clinton most likely has a lock on the nomination. She learned her lesson with Obama and is appealing to the party leadership rather than the grassroots. That's how Obama beat her in 2008 and how she plans to win for 2016. Only after she secures the nomination will she make a more nationwide appeal. Doing so now will expose her too much to attack from both Democratic competitors and Republican opposition.
Clinton remains my second choice. I would prefer to see Sanders in the top seat for the reasons you cite. But for all her faults, she isn't that far behind Sanders in terms of voting record and position platforms.
I know what you mean about Clinton, and I'll vote for her if she gets the nomination too. But I know a lot of folks who used to say that, and don't anymore. She's risking losing the mobilized, progressive left by trying to get her post-primary cash cows in a row right now. Ultimately, her problem as I see it is that she'll be her own worst enemy when it comes to winning over the typical Sanders voter down the road. When she comes to the Sanders voters, she'll be playing right into one of her most damaging image problems, and one that can overshadow her voting record (except the Iraq War, that's gonna leave a mark). It's one that Sanders' campaign exposes very neatly: she's not half as good as Bill or Obama at pandering outside her base. Sanders doesn't do much of it, if any, and she not only isn't very good at it, but Sanders voters won't have heard their issues from anyone else's mouth in a long time. Even if she believes in what she's saying, it'll sound weird. And the Sanders voter may protest by not going to the polls - which is how I see her losing the general election, if she does. I would not want to be one of her campaign managers right now. But, a lot can change in a year...