Amazing? How so?

The democratic party do not exactly support his candidacy over other people with better national appeal, and he does not have enough support to run as a 3rd party candidate.

Originally posted by Shadow:

Bernie Sanders never ran for presidency?

He's amazing.

becuse he says stuff wich americans hate centrist views are equal to far to left in america
sure his socialdemocratic views might benefit the majority but its not the majority that matters its the minority of the top he would do stuff like you have to pay taxes and would be a disaster for the health insurance industry

He has more than once...He just never gotten the nomination...He is two faced...He acts offended by oligarchs yet he is the biggest oligarch in the American Wannabe Socialist Party...

Originally posted by jimbalayajones:

He has more than once...He just never gotten the nomination...He is two faced...He acts offended by oligarchs yet he is the biggest oligarch in the American Wannabe Socialist Party...

considering how it looks in us now there probly wont be any new elections

Two things:

1.) He has. He's just never gotten out of the primaries, for a variety of reasons. Among them are exceptional excitement at his rallies/online, but low actual turnout for voting (the 18-25 demographic is the least likely to show up and vote, but the loudest about demanding their person win).

Turns out hashtags and tweets aren't votes. Who knew?

2.) His policy promises sound great in theory, but would be difficult to implement (he promised "free college for all," which I support if someone can articulate how that's getting paid for; after spending the time and effort to earn a terminal degree, land a teaching professor post, and earning tenure, I'm not taking a pay cut that would put me on par with the kid at McDonald's while still dealing with my current workload, responsibilities, and legal obligations), especially in anything other than a dominated Congressional environment. This is because--despite the behavior of the current occupant of the Oval--Presidents are not monarchs, and cannot simply wave a wand and declare "it shall be so."

Given the above, the likelihood of Sanders ever actually winning the Presidency has been negligible at best.

Originally posted by An Irate Walrus:

he promised "free college for all," which I support if someone can articulate how that's getting paid for

Free college tuition for everybody in the U.S. would cost around 1.07% of the Federal budget. The military really doesn't need a trillion dollars. There isn't a single nation on earth that poses a real threat to the U.S. borders. That's a higher military budget than the next nine countries combined, seven of which are allies.

Originally posted by tom milo:

Originally posted by An Irate Walrus:

he promised "free college for all," which I support if someone can articulate how that's getting paid for

Free college tuition for everybody in the U.S. would cost around 1.07% of the Federal budget. The military really doesn't need a trillion dollars. There isn't a single nation on earth that poses a real threat to the U.S. borders. That's a higher military budget than the next nine countries combined, seven of which are allies.

I agree, but I wish you and everyone else luck in passing literally anything that can be spun as "taking away from the troops."

For reference, my wife still serves (21 years and counting), my father was a 22 year officer, and I tried to go myself (lung issue discovered during BCT saw me out at week 6), so I'm generally very pro-military, and very little of the budget actually goes into servicemember salaries, so cuts *can* be made (Trump's doing it to the VA right now, somehow, with that Big Bastard Bill of his), but the problem is the sell in an environment where literally any redistribution of funding to people of lesser financial means immediately gets labeled "Socialism" by people who have no idea what the word means.

This will be doubly true if the redistribution comes from "the troops."