Bernie Sanders endorsed Hillary Clinton sending electrifying waves of terror and outrage throughout his fan base. It awoke the millennial generation from their Pokemon Go daze and caused a vengeful uproar.
In their eyes the Sanders endorsement proved one thing: You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain. Or endorse the villain in this case, but is the grassroots movement he started truly over, or has it just begun? He might have thrown in the towel, but it appears that his supporters have decided to march on without him. Jill Stein: http://usuncut.com/politics/jill-stein-campaign-surge/ and Gary Johnson: http://www.inquisitr.com/3307223/gary-johnson-polls-many-2016-voters-feel-the-johnson-after-bernie-sanders-endorses-hillary-clinton/ have been surging in the polls and in donations as a result of his endorsement. Apparently Bernie’s supporters are not buying into the Goldman Sachs corporate swine that he previously painted Hillary Clinton out to be.
But who can blame his supporters? The fact that her top donors are Citigroup Inc and Goldman Sachs proves that she will likely be a poor candidate for anyone hoping to put an end to Corporate Welfare. The fact that Clinton is being supported by five members from the Neo-Con Bush Administration should alarm Sanders supporters enough as it is.
Even though Donald Trump is lost in the “twilight zone of America’s Racecraft” (pg.27, Racecraft: The Soul of Inequality in American Life by Barbara J. Fields, Karen Fields) and stuck in “the Dream” (Between the World and Me by Ta-Nehisi Coates) he was right about one thing: Sanders’ endorsing Clinton is indeed as insane as Occupy Wall Street endorsing Goldman Sachs. It’s surprising that such a clever statement came from Trump’s mouth after all of the garbage that’s been spewed, but even the most degenerate individuals are capable of saying something intelligent once every blue moon. But Sanders supporters should not be swayed based off of one clever statement, especially when that same person donated to the Clintons’ himself in the past.
Now let’s turn to the two alternatives outside of the two-party system, who share more beliefs with Sanders than Trump ever will; Gary Johnson and Jill Stein. First let’s look at the Libertarian Candidate. He has eight years of political experience as the governor of New Mexico (1995-2003), where he left with a budget surplus. How does that compare to Trump’s zero experience as a politician? Let’s not forget that Trump was also trying to get Obama to stop the Occupy Wall Street protests http://www.politico.com/story/2011/10/trump-obama-should-stop-protests-066135 while Gary Johnson on the other hand attended the movement himself. Plus, he doesn’t plan on spending ridiculous amounts of money in order to build something as useless as a wall. There’s a thing called digging tunnels Donald.
Gary is Pro-Choice, wants to end the Drug War, opposes the Patriot Act (unlike Clinton), and is also for ending Corporate Welfare. Not to mention while he was the Governor of New Mexico, he made it clear that he was against the war in Iraq while Hillary Clinton voted for it. Just these issues alone should make him appear as the superior candidate to Sanders supporters compared to Clinton and Trump based on their records. For Sanders voters that view socially liberal issues as their main area of concern, he’s the best candidate.
Now to the next candidate from the Green Party; Jill Stein. It’s appalling that people believe that Hillary Clinton was the first woman to win a political party’s nomination even though Jill Stein was also nominated by the Green Party back in 2012. Jill would likely consider moving forward with replacing the Affordable Care Act with a Single-Payer System, unlike Hillary. Clinton is for re-scheduling cannabis to a lower drug classification, but does not support legalizing it. Jill Stein on the other hand is for legalizing it completely. Jill Stein would also likely move forward with breaking up major financial institutions like Bernie has proposed, and due to Clinton’s corporate ties that doesn’t seem likely if she’s under the helm. Hillary Clinton supports federal common core testing while Jill Stein thinks common core testing should be eliminated and that students should be taught to their potential instead. And lastly Jill would likely make a better candidate for Sanders supporters when it comes to climate change since the environment is what the Green Party is based on after all. For Sanders supporters that view fiscally liberal issues as their main area of concern, she is the best candidate.
Although history hasn’t fared well with third party candidates, should the nation continue to vote blindly for a candidate solely based on the lesser evil in their eyes? There’s something called insanity; which is doing the same action over and over again, but expecting a different result.
I feel an election between Gary and Jill would be far more interesting than one between Trump and Clinton. The only way that would be possible though is if they are allowed to participate in the presidential debates. I could only imagine what a debate with all four of them on stage would look like: Gary and Jill would expose Donald Trump’s lack of political intelligence and corner Hillary Clinton until she finally breaks down and confesses for the crimes she committed; pleading hysterically for mercy as the FBI drags her off stage.
Then they would toy with Trump some more until he breaks into another race-based psychotic rant before storming off stage, then the true presidential debate would begin.
Now this is a hypothesis I’m willing to take
criticism for; but due to the delegate voting system, perhaps Sanders voters in Red states like Texas should consider voting for Gary Johnson, and in Blue states like California,
people should vote for Jill Stein. This is just an idea of mine, but it might
be the best way to take advantage of the way the voting system works.
Libertarians are more likely to win out in Conservative states (take away the votes from Trump) while Greens are
more likely to win in Progressive states (take away the votes from Clinton), and this might be the best way for
Gary and Jill to receive the highest amount of delegates. This is just an idea though, and I would be interested in hearing other perspectives on it.
Gary Johnson’s and Jill Stein’s political differences are mainly in their fiscal policies, but they are both excellent options for Sanders supporters to consider. I’ll admit I slightly lean more towards the Libertarian Party than the Green Party when it comes to my beliefs, but I’d still be willing to vote for any of the two candidates based on whoever appears to have a better chance at beating Trump and Hillary by November. Who will the Bernie Sanders supporters turn to though? Time will tell, nevertheless his supporters will be a force to be reckoned with at the Democratic Convention. Better be ready Clinton, don't 'blow' it.
This could’ve been something Sanders subliminally had in mind all along; to get his supporters to look outside of the establishment Democratic Party, and finally put an end to the two-party system. If so, then his plan looks like it’s working quite well so far.
If you are not sure about supporting any of the third party candidates yet, at least sign these petitions to help give both of them a chance to debate against Trump and Clinton:
2. http://www.jill2016.com/openthedebatespetition
