The real differences between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, explained

[Uncle Joe]

Sanders believes the interest of the public is not divided, it is united, and only the corrupt influence of big business has thwarted it. He consequently vows to smash its power through a combination of a mass upsurge in political activism and campaign-finance reform.

That was the vision Clinton challenged tonight. She declared, pointedly, “I’m not making promises I cannot keep.” And her campaign blasted out emails attacking “Bernie’s Unachievable Revolution.” She tied her beliefs to those of the Obama administration, whose method of incremental progress and negotiation with business she embraced.

(snip)

To be clear, there are very legitimate, substantive policy disagreements between Clinton and Sanders on a range of issues. Sanders’s appeal is not just about his ability to make his supporters feel as if he understands the depth of the challenges facing them and the country, though it is partly about that. Many of his supporters surely side with him in the policy disputes themselves.

But the broader argument between the two ultimately is about bigger questions, such as what the American people really want and the deeper reasons for polarization, divided government and gridlock. Sanders basically has faith that there is a majority view in this country that supports much more aggressively redistributive policies (much higher taxes on the wealthy than Clinton can stomach) and a much more ambitious government effort to set a high minimum standard of living (single payer, a higher minimum wage) than Clinton can accept. Sanders believes that there is a majority view out there that understands this to be in everyone’s common interest, transcending racial and class lines, and that it can be accessed by adequately communicating this interest to the American people, thus mobilizing them, and by breaking big money’s distortion of the discourse and political system.

This is not necessarily a naive view. Sanders believes that we must essentially re-imagine American democracy, if only because so doing has at least the chance of broadening the scope of what is possible.

(snip)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/02/05/bernie-sanders-has-deep-faith-in-the-american-people/

[fourcents]

1. I know if he became POTUS they will be a lot more engaged populous than if any of the other

candidates won.

[Uncle Joe]

2. I couldn't agree more, fourcents.

[Live and Learn]

3. K&R nt

[RobertEarl]

4. All Bernie is saying

If it's what you want - and I believe it is what you want - together we can make it happen.

This requires no re-imaging. It is what our democracy is based on... the People having their way.

[Uncle Joe]

5. Precisely, I do believe some people are "afraid of taking yes for an answer." n/t

[99th_Monkey]

6. K&R nt

[libodem]

7. Sometimes you just need a white haired old man

To fight the forces of evil!

[Uncle Joe]

8. Bernie just needs to grow a beard.

[libodem]

10. Wizard Power

[Octafish]

9. Money's trumped peace around here since 1964.

Same old same old isn't getting it done. Seems like we need to try what Bernie is suggesting. We need to imagine a better world and work to make it so, not because some people say we can't do it, but because we have to do it if we are to survive as a nation and planet.

Thank you for another great OP, Uncle Joe! (Good to read ya!)