The Washington Post editorial board is out with a “non-endorsement” of Senator Sanders. Check it out. They pretty much torch him in their column.
SEN. BERNIE Sanders (I-Vt.) is leading in New Hampshire and within striking distance in Iowa, in large part because he is playing the role of uncorrupted anti-establishment crusader. But Mr. Sanders is not a brave truth-teller. He is a politician selling his own brand of fiction to a slice of the country that eagerly wants to buy it.
On his single-payer healthcare plan:
But he does not adequately explain where those massive savings would come from. Getting rid of corporate advertising and overhead would only yield so much. Savings would also have to come from slashing payments to doctors and hospitals and denying benefits that people want.
On the revolution:
Mr. Sanders tops off his narrative with a deus ex machina: He assures Democrats concerned about the political obstacles in the way of his agenda that he will lead a “political revolution” that will help him clear the capital of corruption and influence-peddling. This self-regarding analysis implies a national consensus favoring his agenda when there is none and ignores the many legitimate checks and balances in the political system that he cannot wish away.
And their closing remark:
Mr. Sanders is a lot like many other politicians. Strong ideological preferences guide his thinking, except when politics does, as it has on gun control.
It’s a pretty blistering non-endorsement of the candidate. To me, it’s a comparison made here many times against the tea-party GOP candidates who throw red meat to their base.
It’s also one of the reasons why I support Hillary. I believe her plans and policies are actionable and attainable with this electorate. While eventually I hope we achieve universal healthcare (not necessarily single payer), I know we’re not there yet, and I know electing Bernie Sanders won’t get us there. I’ve also just never understood the vitriol toward the banking system. Maybe it’s because I’m a Texan and don’t have the up close exposure many have in the NE, but even after the recession I’ve never had some over-archingly negative view of the industry (although I did realize then that we needed strong regulatory oversight of it).
In my view, Bernie’s rhetoric and policies shine a light toward an important path we should take as a nation, but Hillary is the one who can actually move us toward it. As someone who believes people of color, LGBT, and women are still second-class citizens in this country, I want a President who can pivot away from the economic equality we never had in the first place and let us know she understands that sometimes our issues should be priority over economics. Only when we’re on a level playing field as human beings and American citizens can we really begin to approach our problems with economic inequality.
