When Al Gore invented the internet he probably had no idea that a website called LiberalUp.com would someday emerge. LiberalUp recently ran a pro-Bernie item called “10 Reasons Bernie will be more effective than Hillary”.
To be fair, your average housecat would be more effective than Madame Secretary no matter how many lottery tickets she somehow purchased without attracting any attention from the media, store clerks, or anyone else. The Bern isn’t really achieving much by being “more effective” than H.
Like so much of liberalism, Bernie’s “ten reasons” are pipe dream fantasies tragically disconnected from reality. Liberals that visit the website will sit mouths agape at the majestic portrayal of Sanders. Later on, when Bernie doesn’t deliver, they’ll revert to being the angst-ridden, guilt-trippin, two-legged tantrums they normally are. To do them a solid and spare them a ride on their emotional roller coaster, here’s their top ten, debunked:
— “Track record of integrity”. Yes, Hillary and integrity don’t go hand in hand. She’s a living, breathing antonym for integrity. This doesn’t mean Mr. Sanders is as clean and pure as the driven snow. Indeed, it’s recently been revealed that his track record is littered with campaign monies being funneled into organizations his wife just so happens to be in charge of and draws sweet paychecks from. In other words, let’s say $100,000 comes into the Sanders campaign machine. They want to use it for voter outreach. His wife just so happens to be in charge of an organization that claims it does voter outreach. $100,000 slides over to that organization, Bernie’s wife pockets $30,000. And the Sanders family lives happily ever after.
— “Financially independent from SuperPacs”. Except the ones he got at least $569,000 according to Huffington Post. National Nurses United for Patient Protection is a SuperPac that happily funded Sanders. If there’s one there are others.
— “Holds true to his positions”. Those positions are about as far left as one can get without hoisting up a hammer and sickle. Sure, all the free stuff he says he’ll dish out sounds great. Like free college for everyone. But in practice, have policies like those ever achieved prosperity for anyone on the face of Gaia? Uruguay for example, has free college for all it’s citizens. Uruguay’s GDP (based on purchasing power parity) rates 57th according to the International Monetary Fund; 56th according to the World Bank. Sanders holds true to failed positions.
— “He’s extremely tenacious”. Umm okay. The write-up for this one goes on to essentially describe Sanders as a career politician. Mayor, Senator, Presidential candidate, tenacious. And just how tenacious is it of him to fold like a cheap lawn chair before Hillary at every single Democrat debate?
— “Sanders is pragmatic”. Oh is he now? Sure doesn’t sound that way in his speeches. Dogmatic maybe. But not pragmatic. “We’re doomed” isn’t pragmatic rhetoric.
–“Bargaining power”. The write-up for this one essentially insists that somehow, because Sanders has support among millennials he has bargaining power. Is this a veiled threat of some kind? His millennials support base will do what if the Sanders agenda is challenged – ease up on the selfies or make a mad dash to the nearest safe zone to cry about white privilege?
— “Knowledge of Congress”. Remember the bit about Bernie being a career politician? Here it is again. Supposedly, he’d make an effective President because he’s been in Congress since Bush – not 43 but 41 – was President so he knows Congress. If “knowledge of Congress” is such an admirable attribute, why doesn’t Sanders stay there instead of trying to micromanage the legislative branch from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?
— “Strong mandate”. Ever notice how when it’s a liberal they call it a “strong mandate” but when it’s anyone else they start talking about “reaching across the aisle”? Based on sheer mandate muscle, Donald Trump ought to be able to govern with impunity. That aside, where exactly is this “strong mandate” Bernie’s supposed to have versus the one Hillary wouldn’t have? Left of center, Sanders has some support. Waking baker Ron Paul types live in a weird alternative universe where Bernie Sanders is Dwight David Eisenhower incarnate. That’s no mandate. It’s barely a coalition.
— “Remains neutral”. This isn’t what it sounds like. According to LiberalUp, Sanders has never, ever, ever, not once in his political career, smeared an opponent. Not once ever. (We’ll see how true this is once people really start digging into his past campaigns). How this translates into Presidential effectiveness isn’t clear. It does bring into question his judgement though. He after all is up against the Clinton Death Star – a malicious juggernaut that’s left many a political contender impotent. His idea of playing defense thus far appears to be folding like the aforementioned cheap lawn chair. Or trotting our radical healthcare proposals. Which begs the question, if he can’t handle Hillary how would he fare against Putin, Rouhani, Xi Jinpeng, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, et al?
— “Grassroots activism”. Populism called. They wanted to know how the last progressive, grassroots, activist-backed candidate’s, aka Barack Hussein Obama’s, presidency turned out.
24d8796e44_c0).jpg; courtesy of www.flickr.com/photos/nicksolari/20033841412/in/