Home | About | Donate

10 Reasons I Support Bernie Sanders for President


10 Reasons I Support Bernie Sanders for President

Zephyr Teachout

I first saw Bernie Sanders speak in early November 1993, when I went to a brown bag lunch he held for voters in Montpelier, Vermont, a few days before NAFTA was passed. At that lunch, he explained how NAFTA would undermine workers rights, and American democracy. He turned out to be years ahead of his time.*

But I bring it up now because it relates to why I am proud to endorse Bernie Sanders for President of the United States.


He also was one of a very few to vote against the original Patriot Act which showed great courage politically and great patriotism as an American.


While Bernie Sanders calls for a mass movement to promote a political revolution, Hillary Clinton maintains an perspective on political power. The Sanders' campaign has led Hillary Clinton has made statements to the left of her past comments, but she has rebuffed efforts by progressives to engage in developing her platform priorities.

Establishment Democrat Party leadership has been quite vocal in insisting that Sanders supporters vote for Hillary Clinton, in the general election, if she is the Democrat nominee.

If they do, the Democrat establishment will conclude that they should move the party platform far to the right, since they can take support of progressives for granted.

On the other hand, were progressives to strongly support the Green Party nominee, political consultants who compile the data, would be forced to advise the politicians who hire them, such as Clinton, that failure to incorporate a more progressive agenda will loose them significant support.


Excuse me but what is the choice you pretend to offer?

Let me guess? You don't think progressives should vote because this is some profoundly principled stance which the rightwing applauds more than anyone else. They love it when the left babbles about principle when it helps elect the republicans.

So jmowrey, maybe I am wrong and you advocate the left throwing away their votes on some token or fantasy candidate instead. Last election 160,000 people voted for the green party out of how many tens of millions? Just because a few diehard Greens are vocal online that doesn't change the fact that nobody believes in them. 160,000 votes is not making a principled stand... it is throwing away your vote.

But even then, maybe I am wrong and you have some other solution to offer besides helping the rightwing keep control of our democracy?

So tell us jmowery ... what should we do with our votes? Stay home? Throw them away as a token gesture which helps the right immensely? What?

What should we do with our votes?

I want Bernie's carbon tax and investing in solar and wind.
I want Bernie's ending subsidies to oil companies.
I want Bernie's helping seniors and single payer.
I want Bernie's free college education.

Our votes are not contingent on one single issue and what is amazing is that you would have us help the rightwing.

I wonder if you can even vote in the USA. I also wonder if you are a shill because simple common sense shows people that what you are doing is trying to keep progressives from voting.

I want Bernie actually. He at least is seeking some sort of peace in the middle east. Or do you think Hillary is less hawkish? Or Trump?

You are a fake who just wants to cancel out progressive votes for Bernie.


Bernie needs more people like Zephyr Teachout and the Working Families Party to come out of the Clinton closet and support him. Meanwhile, the MSM give the Trump campaign millions in free air time, juxtaposing Clinton's responses to his insanity thereby making her own corporate rightest positions seem reasonable by comparison, and so it goes.

If it isn't Bernie, it will be either Trump or Hillary, regardless of what Bernie does or does not do after the campaign. I see the "he said he will support Hillary if he loses" red herring is being trotted out again. Pro forma endoresements mean nothing and they never have, many of the politicos running agianst McGovern said they would support him if he got the nomination, remember Nixon?

I must again mention Alphonse and Gaston, those two of studied deference fame, it is all an act to prevent fist fights, it means nothing, like pro forma endorsements.


This is an important article and endorsement! Why not also EDIT it as though it mattered? There are multiple connecting words left out in the article, which indicates sloppy or inattentive editing. Come on CD, you can do better.


That crowd over at Counterpunch likes nobody, they are sort of secular Chris Hedgeses, wallowing in sour year after year after year looking for perfection, it ain't going to happen. Bernie is a man of high moral principles and I trust him over any of the other possibilities to make the right decision, when and if, such decisions are his to make. Keep mining Counterpunch you'll find Paul Street, Joshua Frank, and even Jeffrey St. Claire with Zillions of anti Bernie screeds, it is a cottage industry there, Stay there too long and you too will be pickled from the sour.

Each member of the Congress, out of necsssity, specializes, Bernie's forte has been domestic economic issues, issues of economic inequity. Foreign policy is not one of his specialties, and that is not a negative. I trust if he were to win he would surround himself with non interventonist and internationalist advisors. There is nothing less appealing to Corporate American than a candidate truly interested in redistribution of wealth. Such programs would, among other things, lessen the dollars available for the military. Bernie often speaks of the bloated military, the only candidate to do so.


Yes, Bernie has a lot of excellent points and his political assets far outweigh Bernie's political liabilities and compared to the satanic Trump he is an angel and compared to the punic, Wall Street walker HRC, Bernie is the epitome of political virtue. It is just too damn bad that Bernie has no chance to let us vote for him!

Just like Bernie had an overwhelming vote for Time's person of the year; it did not matter because they choose the German Chancellor over Bernie even though Bernie had so many more votes.That should tell us, like that rotten rag, Time Magazie, the rotten dems. will acquiesce to the Wall Street whore!


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


Thank you.


A critique of a politician does not require the naming of an alternative.

In fact, of all possible political actions one might take, voting for a presidential candidate is among the least effective.

But what voting does do is invest the voter with a sense of obligation to the candidate, so that when the candidate inevitably starts bombing Muslims or selling out to the rich, the voter will give him the benefit of the doubt. I don't know why it works that way, but it does. Look how well it worked for Obama!

Sanders is the Obama of 2016, depend on it. If you prefer having a so-called 'liberal' wage WWIII and give your wages to the War Profiteers, so be it, vote for Bernie.

But some of us don't like aiding and abetting our oppressors.


The fact that this CFR/CIA riddled fish wrap/rag didn't endorse Bernie is one of the best endorsements for Bernie I can think of-
The very first time I ever heard the name "Barack Obama" was from A front page photo with the caption "This Man could be our next President" or something in that order- Time Magazine sucks and always has as far as I am concerned-

And don't forget that Mosadegh of Iran was once Time "Man of the Year" and shortly afterwards was overthrown by Brits and CIA- And then there was Adolf.....


Yes, Bernie is a man of high moral principles, he has demonstrated such throughout his long life. I think you would feel much more at home over at Clinton Headquarters.


I believe that you did not understand my comment. I will try to rephrase it.

In the recent years, advanced analytical methods have been used by groups that provide services to the financial industry, sports teams, and politicians.

Many are familiar with the fact that Wall Street hires 'Quants' to develop algorithms used to analyze data so that profit is maximized while the risk of loss is reduced to amount approaching zero. Many are also familiar with how advanced statistical methods are used in sports decisions ( for example http://statsportsconsulting.com/ ). Fewer seem to be aware of the fact that political consultants pay for advise from groups specializing in the use of advanced statistical mathematics, including Markov modeling, multi-variant copulas, differential probability, and 'intelligent' computing such as neural networking and meta-heuristic algorithms (for example: http://mvsolution.com/ ).

When data show that a candidate has a higher than acceptable chance of loosing a significant demographic, the suggestion is to modify the platform to appease that demographic - to wit: Hillary Clinton's change on trade policy and the Keystone pipeline. However, when data show that more centrist/right leaning candidates, such as Hillary Clinton, get a high degree of support across all demographics of Democrat and Independent voters, even after a more progressive challenge in the primary, the recommendation is for the candidate to hold strong to a more right/center platform.

My suggestion is that the chance of progressive measures getting incorporated, in future elections, is increased when it is clear that a candidate that holds to a center/right platform losses a significant part of one or more demographic to more progressive alternatives, in the general election.

I encourage you to articulate your disagreement with ideas rather than reacting with straw man arguments, ad-hominems, and/or hate speech. I am happy to engage in dialog if you keep it to a discussion about ideas.


It bears repeating over and over and over again, Bernie is not a Democrat.


You've said this same thing about Bernie being another Obama so many times already and it is dishonest.

Bernie has a long record of being a progressive that speaks for him while Obama spouted promises but had nothing to back them up. He conned people but Bernie has a long and very detailed record that can't be faked. It is there for all to see and yet you never once look at it.

So what does that prove about you? You want attention? Maybe you want just to stir up a response?

I prefer intellectual debate so are we done now or will you say this same thing to me another time too.

Obama had only shallow promises but Bernie has the record of being an independent and voting progressive and it is that which is the difference between him and Obama. If ever you decide to read that progressive record then we'll continue from there. Till then...okay?


Please! After 9/11, Bush asked Congress for authorization to seek out an kill people responsible for the attack on the US. Therefore, the drone strikes are not illegal.

You may not like the drone strikes, but the president has congressional authorization to use drones to defend the US. The Constitution states that the president is commander-in-chief of the military and must protect us from all enemies domestic and foreign.

If you don't think there are enemies out there who want to hurt us (ISIS wants to kill us because we are infidels and they must do this because it is the will of Allah), that is you opinion. But it is also the opinion of Mr. Sanders that the president should use drones to protect us. He has a right to his opinion as much as you have a right to your opinion.

If you want a pacifist for a president, you will have a hard time finding one because the president has a constitutional mandate to use the military to protect us from all enemies domestic and foreign.

You might want to think about revoking your citizenship and moving to a Buddhist monastery because Buddhists are pacifists.


Where did you learn logic? Simply because Sanders votes for Hillary, it does not logically follow that he is not a well-meaning and honest person.

It may be your opinion that anybody who votes for Hillary is not well-meaning and honest and you are certainly entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

You might want to Google the fallacy of Russell's teapot. The philosopher Bertrand Russell once said a teapot exists in orbit somewhere between the orbits of the Earth and Mars. He then said it is nonsense to believe him simply because you can't prove the teapot doesn't exist. The burden of proof is always on the person making the claim.

You think anybody who supports Clinton is not well-meaning and honest. Now prove it.


Everyone who says this always leaves out the alternatives confronting Americans. We end up with Hillary who is more hawkish or we end up with Trump's mania or some other republican know nothing.

Bernie at least tries to do what is right.


I agree that a president needs to represent the will of all the people or should but I disagree about the drones. They are a mistake and I think Bernie would probably not use them actually.