Lyin' Steve
SteveMcQueen
Sr. Member
Posts: 3,310
|
 |
« on: April 24, 2016, 09:59:47 PM » |
|
Yeah they would be worse. As you point out, the Sanders campaign likely wouldn't want to run against Warren because she's too ideologically close and difficult to criticize. So if they did both run, Sanders would have to find a way to ideologically distance himself from her and criticize her, which would almost certainly involve lurching even further to the left, perhaps fully embracing socialist figures like Fidel Castro the way he did in the 1980s, and instead of just a bunch of self-righteous occupy-lite supporters you'd have a bunch of self-righteous communist-lite supporters.
For example, he might propose seizing the assets of Wall Street executives and employees of Goldman Sachs, Countrywide, AIG, etc. who were proven after audit to have made decisions leading to the subprime mortgage crisis, and using those assets to pay back investors or whatever. Maybe he'd propose giving everyone who went bankrupt due to the crisis the option to reset to a 620 credit rating. Both of those are idiotic ideas that Warren would never go along with, but they would also appeal to Bernie's base. So we'd get basically the same scenario we have now, where Bernie runs to the left and hits his opponent by saying the only reason she doesn't agree with him is because she's too close to Wall Street. The main difference would be that his insufferable supporters and irritating rhetoric would be defending and promoting even more boneheaded policies than what he has now. As psychprofessor said, this would become the true purism, because that's Bernie's brand, and he would still get 30-40% of the far left, because those are the true purists, and they would go along with whatever he said and behave exactly as they do now.
|
Poll
