Which fanbase is The Worst

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The trouble with Sanders is he's hardly the most radical person ever. Unlike say, his right-wing equivalent Ron "Happening" Paul (who genuinely had notions radically different from his party). pretty much everything his mouth wouldn't be too out of place in the DNC national platform. He is merely a sexed up Clinton wearing antiestablishment clothes. With that in mind, his rabid fandom acting

- as if Sanders is "the only politician speaking the truth", (I can name at least politicians people saying the same stuff) and throwing everyone else under the bus. I actually find this really creepy, if I'm honest.

- act as if presidency is equivalent to the DPRK's Supreme Leader. No there's no point in primarying incumbents; or even building a more progressive coalition at the state or local level; no just elect our magic man to congress and all our problems will poof away.

- talking with lame, dorky catchphrases like "feel the bern"

- flooding all criticism (or even non-glowing coverage of the man) with hysterical accusations of being part of teh anti-sanders conspiriceh.

Yeah, Clinton is infinitely worse than Sanders, but I'd take her fanbase over the cult any day.

Sanders is a lot more liberal than Clinton on a lot of issues. Iraq war, Syrian war, TPP, fracking, Glass Steagall, and so on. There are significant ideological differences.

You are correct that he's not the most radical person ever. He's more conservative than the frontrunner to be UK Labour party leader.

[Leinad]

Hillary's. Why? She's nothing different than all these other presidents we've had, maybe worse. Just another corporatist establishment politician--not only that, but one from a dynasty. Granted, not as bad as the Bush dynasty, but still pretty bad. Yes, I'd like to have a woman president, sure, but what we need is a good president. More of the same won't be that good president. Whether you think he's a genius or an idiot, Bernie is not more of the same.

In other words, Bernie fans have a reason to be annoyingly excited about him. Hillary fans (or, for that matter, Jeb fans) do not.

Sanders. His fanbase includes a lot of conservatives who only want him to win the primary because they hate Hillary.

I wouldn't call those people part of his fan base.

Nope. No more than one would call ironic Trump supporters part of his fanbase.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I wasn't talking about the BLM people Willips; I was just talking about the tendancy for Sanders fans to associate the mildest scrutiny of their candidate from the media as some terrible ordeal that is only being targeted on their man Sanders. Corbyn fans are more annoying in this regard though (HOW DARE YOU SPEAK AGAINST THE HERO AGAINST NEOLIBERALISM)

The other odd thing about Sanders (and why I've been mum on his campaign so far) is that in stuff he genuinely would have a lot of power over as president (namely foreign policy) the guy has barely touched. The only real thing I've seen from him is the parochial obsession (shared by a lot of modern lefties, sadly) of grinding free trade agreements to a halt. Not that I particularly care for the TPP (in particular the esds courts and the patent/IP sections), but it's hard to deny that a lot of the opposition is typical anti-Asian fearmongering. His domestic plans would be dead almost from day one in congress.

The problem with the rOn Paul campaign is worth noting. Paul had a substantial following that has had very little effect in the long run on the party. The trouble is the Paulbase quickly became marginalised for an obsession with their man to the extent that building a coalition with them became unfeasible. The whole movement was a victim of their own insularity. Sanders can avoid this problem for the most part. As I said, he has the advantage over Paul in that he doesn't speak in a particularly unorthodox manner in the party he's running.

 I do think it is important that Sanders is running to hold the Clintonista machine to account on the million issues where she is vague; and to promote essential ideas like single-payer and campaign finance. But those ideas need a wide political cover, and the lack of interest in building a broader movement focused on these ideas, as opposed to the current shallow glorification of their standardbearer is ominous.

[Famous Mortimer]

Outside of the race issue, there honestly isn't that much negative coverage of Sanders. I can't think of any at all. Usually if the media says anything they just say that he holds big rallies. So I don't know what reaction you're thinking of.

As to foreign policy, the main reason he doesn't talk about it is because he doesn't want to upset his own base. He's pretty middle of the road. He backed the Kosovo War, backed the Afghanistan War, wouldn't vote to de-fund the Iraq War, thinks Hamas are bad, and won't denounce Zionism. He's not Jeremy Corbyn and that's a good thing.

[Republican Michigander]

Write in - Trump's internet brigade.

Or any cult of celebrity (Obama 08).

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Outside of the race issue, there honestly isn't that much negative coverage of Sanders. I can't think of any at all. Usually if the media says anything they just say that he holds big rallies. So I don't know what reaction you're thinking of.

As to foreign policy, the main reason he doesn't talk about it is because he doesn't want to upset his own base. He's pretty middle of the road. He backed the Kosovo War, backed the Afghanistan War, wouldn't vote to de-fund the Iraq War, thinks Hamas are bad, and won't denounce Zionism. He's not Jeremy Corbyn and that's a good thing.

Compared to crazy warmonger Hillary, that's quite good.

[Figueira]

There are extremely annoying elements in both; it's hard to say which one is worse.