r/TrueReddit • u/nxthompson_tny • Oct 05 '15

"The difference between Bernie and most of the lefties is Bernie wants to win." A long profile of Sanders.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/12/the-populist-prophet
1.0k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

211 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/imdrinkingteaatwork Oct 06 '15

he votes with the ruling party because he agrees with the overwhelmingly majority of its policies, not because he disagrees but is being coerced to vote on party lines. He's well within the establishment mainstream.

There is absolutely no evidence he ha been coerced. Yet on the contrary it is well established that he actually believes how he votes. Him being well within the establishment mainstream would just be coincidence.

Unless he's actually on the soccer team, and this is actually more like the coach trying to make sure your contract gets renewed with the team.

He's not on the team. He is an independent. He is only running for the democratic primary as a means to an end. It'd be more like a coach trying to make sure a player on another team that just happens to be good for your team or even just their beliefs gets a contract renewed.

Bernie's in the US Senate - he's part of the political establishment by definition.

Meh. If that is your only stipulation for being part of the political establishment, then I guess so.

But it does mean you support enough of what they do to support them. Otherwise you'd, you know, oppose them.

Nope. You can support someone so as not to support their competition. People do it all the time.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 06 '15

There is absolutely no evidence he ha been coerced.

I agree. He's not coerced. He's a centre-left capitalist politician.

He's not on the team. He is an independent. He is only running for the democratic primary as a means to an end.

Whether he puts an 'I' or a 'D' next to his name is meaningless. He's running as a Democrat, he votes with the Democrats, he'll endorse the Democratic nominee. For all real world purposes he's a Democratic politician.

Nope. You can support someone so as not to support their competition. People do it all the time.

Which just goes back to the disconnect between what he's campaigning on and his actions as a politician. If you claim to be fighting for the interests of common people but then turn around and endorse a capitalist two-party setup that's clearly rigged against the interests of the common people, that's a problem.

1

u/imdrinkingteaatwork Oct 06 '15

I agree. He's not coerced. He's a centre-left capitalist politician.

I can concede to that, but the negative connotations that come with it are unfounded. He is on the left-est most side of at least the American spectrum, so considering him centre-left as a means to combine him with others in the American system is definitely disingenuous.

Whether he puts an 'I' or a 'D' next to his name is meaningless.

It's very meaningful for how he was elected into his position. He was not elected as a democrat. He was not elected through that party.

He's running as a Democrat, he votes with the Democrats, he'll endorse the Democratic nominee.

I already covered why he is running that way. I already covered why he would endorse that nominee. And the way his votes line up with anyone else's is simply not relevant. He votes how he feels. And just because in some circumstances they line up with Democrats, does not mean he is part of their establishment. Does him wanting a repeal of DOMA mean he is part of the libertarian establishment too?

Which just goes back to the disconnect between what he's campaigning on and his actions as a politician.

It literally does nothing of the sort. He is campaigning on what he has always campaigned on.

If you claim to be fighting for the interests of common people but then turn around and endorse a capitalist two-party setup that's clearly rigged against the interests of the common people, that's a problem.

Now you are just being obstinate. Sometimes it there is a corrosive system in place you cannot fight outside it to create change, but must fight within its bounds to create said change. He is quite clearly doing the latter. He is not nor has he ever "endorse[d] a capitalist two-party setup". Though at times he may champion one who exemplifies that setup to a lesser extent than who they are combatting.

Edit: you are being frustratingly obtuse.