Let’s face it: Bernie Sanders is a fun guy. He’s good at rallying people behind him. But he’s not a Trump-type (though they are far more similar than you’d think). I don’t even object to most of his policies. The problem for me, and what should strike everyone reading this article, is that some stances aren’t based on historical truths. Every country has its own personal relationship with certain issues. Sanders is just too inexperienced to be president and he should stay as the quirky, Independent senator from Vermont.
America was founded on white supremacy. This entire country's history is steeped in racism, specifically racism against black people. Because of this, many of his economic suggestions won’t help not only where needs help, but where he says where it’ll help. Bernie has been, and I’m sure he always will be, a supporter of civil rights. As a Presidential candidate, even as a senator, Sanders has a responsibility to have policies that make sense. His reliance on economic inequality has given him difficulties with gun rights. His recent change of position on guns should be something to be scrutinized. Because they are occurring during the presidential race, I can’t help but wonder if they are only to win over the more liberal voters.
In a broader sense, Sanders has a philosophy issue. He believes that every issue is linked to economic disparity. While it is very serious, for both women and PoC, that belief is simply wrong. Sanders doesn’t believe in reparations, something that I believe shows a lack of understanding of America’s history. Reparations are an attempt at righting the wrongs of the Tuskegee Experiments, of the whole concept of slavery, of James Meredith being denied access to Ole Miss in 1962, of the murder of Martin Luther King, Jr. This is not the only step, but it is an important step. He suggests more free public services which would help those who are not able to afford them now, but that doesn’t get to the root of the problem. He’s suggesting a remedy for a symptom, not for the disease itself.
On a more personal basis, Bernie Sanders desperately needs a concise foreign policy. The fact he doesn’t have anything solid in that area proves to me that he just isn’t ready for a federal position. He has promising foundations, but he lacks a knowledge of his policies’ consequences. Most prominently, I find issue with his blatant rejection of the many trade deals America has with other countries, such as NAFTA, CAFTA and the TPP. These deals not only lower prices on goods we buy every day, but they also boost the economies of those countries and help more people rise above the poverty line.
Finally, the chance that his far-left policies would pass a Republican-controlled congress is slim to none. “But, Regina,” you say. “We can vote more Democrats into congress. Problem solved!” 33 seats in the House and 34 in the Senate are being voted on this year. In the Senate, three seats are being projected as a toss up (Rubio’s seat in Florida, Ayotte in New Hampshire and Reid in Nevada). An additional ten aren’t an assured victory for the incumbent party, but seven of those are leaning towards a Republican victory. This doesn’t bode well for Democrats. The same story is happening in the House. They’d need to win every open seat plus an additional four seats just for the slightest of majorities. This would result in either compromised deals in which no one really gets what they want or an exorbitant number of executive orders, which, when used sparsely, are not the worst things in the world, but it is far from a desirable outcome.
