1) Electability

Bernie Sanders is the most electable candidate in the entire race.

Hillary Clinton wins by a smaller margin, or even loses, to the Republicans, while Bernie wins handily.

*

Bernie is the most well-liked and trusted candidate, nationally, in the entire race.

“Sanders has the highest favorability rating of any candidate and the highest scores for honesty and integrity, for caring about voters’ needs and problems and sharing voters’ values.”

Hillary’s 53-percent unfavorable rating would, as Princeton’s Matt Karp noted, “make her the most disliked presidential nominee in modern history.”

Good thing Trump’s ratings are even lower.

*

Bernie is the favorite among Independents by a huge, huge margin (even crushing Donald Trump).

This is very important in 2016, as a record number of voters now identify as Independent.

*

Additionally, Bernie Sanders’ employers, the people of Vermont, love him more than any other state loves either of its senators.

*

Why wouldn’t we nominate the guy who beats the Republicans more soundly than Clinton does, who has the highest favorability ratings of any candidate in the race, who kills it with Independents, and whose constituents — the most important opinion you need to consider when looking at a political candidate — love him?

Also, the constituencies he struggles with — namely older/Black voters — are Democrats and would vote for the Democratic nominee.

Independents, not so much.

That could pose a real problem for a Clinton general election coalition, especially if she faces someone less polarizing than Trump.

—*—

2) Experience

*

(leadership)

Clinton has never been an executive of a city/state/country — Bernie Sanders has.

As the Mayor of the largest city in Vermont, he transformed what it meant to live there and how people engaged in their political system: exactly what he wants to do now on a national scale (contrary to what people say, he has led a Revolution).

“Burlingtonians give Sanders credit for steering the city in a new direction that, despite early skepticism, proved to be broadly popular with voters.”

Sound familiar?

As for “bringing people into the political system”—

The Sanders administration carefully nurtured neighborhood planning assemblies (NPA) in each of the city’s six wards, providing them with modest budgets to deliberate and advise on projects affecting their neighborhoods. The NPAs had a voice over the use of federal Community Development Block Grant funds in their neighborhoods. Today, Burlingtonians credit the NPAs with raising the level of resident participation and discussion in local politics. ...Sanders jump-started the city’s participatory energies in other ways as well. Early on he established a Youth Office, an Arts Council, and a Women’s Council, whose first major initiative was an ordinance requiring 10 percent of all city-funded construction jobs to be filled by women.”

The man’s done it before, folks.

Furthermore:

“﻿Sanders’s track record as mayor was so successful that Burlington voters elected his CEDO director, Peter Clavelle, to succeed him in 1989 — ...the coalition that coalesced around Sanders in 1981 governed Burlington for all but two of the next 31 years.”

Bernie wasn’t like Martin O’Malley, who did good things for his constituents, but then had his progress sucked back after he left office.

Sanders built a lasting coalition.

*

(fiscal policy)

Bernie often comes under fire for not being realistic about finances. Contrary to this unfounded position, he has shown a consistent and pragmatic approach to money.

Republicans even say he manages to “out-Republican the Republicans” because of his fiscal conservativeness and responsibility.

As mayor of Burlington, Bernie ran a tight ship on a tight budget, grew the economy, and attracted local business by creating trade associations, giving new entrepreneurs start-up funding, and offering technical assistance.

﻿“Bernie was never anti-growth, anti-development, or anti-business,” explained Monte. “He just wanted businesses to be responsible toward their employees and the community. He wanted local entrepreneurs to thrive. He wanted people to have good jobs that pay a living wage. If you could deal with that, you could deal with Bernie and Bernie would deal with you.”

Bernie was great for the economy — but he was also great for people.

﻿“Bernie realized that the economy doesn’t have to be dominated by bad guys,” explained Raap, a founder of the 750-member Burlington-based Vermont Businesses for Social Responsibility, an alternative trade association. “He saw that and he fostered it.”

The man will work to enrich our country with support for small businesses, training and aid for entrepreneurs (especially women), intelligent trade deals, and comprehensive business regulations.

The economy booms when small businesses flourish — that’s what Sanders did as Mayor, that’s what he’ll do as President.

Additionally, Bernie is the ranking member of the Senate Committee on the Budget.

He’s good with money, to say the least.

*

(“getting stuff done”)

As executive of Burlington, he protected low-wage workers, financed training programs for women, implemented neighborhood planning assemblies to foster community political engagement (NPAs), raised taxes on business, and created organizations to empower the people, including a Youth Office, an Arts Council, and a Women’s Council.

During his time in the House of Representatives, Bernie passed more amendments than any other representative serving with him.

In the Senate, Bernie has protected our troops, greened our government, restricted the bail-out to protect U.S. workers, helped veterans’ kids, exposed corruption in the military-industrial complex, and supported treating autism in military health care.

*

(compromising)

Bernie got the first-ever audit of the Federal Reserve (a cause that Republican congressman Ron Paul had been pursuing for decades) through a compromise.

With the Affordable Care Act in danger, Bernie leveraged his influence to win free health treatment for 10 million Americans — the program is so popular that even Republicans ask for funding for it now.

Bernie also worked with Republican John McCain to overhaul the Veterans Administration and pass the most comprehensive VA bill in decades.

Bernie’s co-workers, both Republicans and Democrats, have wonderful things to say about his ability to negotiate and compromise, and his personality in general.

Senator Jack Reed (D)

“[He’s] a gentleman, thoughtful, a leader… If you want to have a pleasant discussion on not only policy issues but just issues of the day, he’s a pleasant guy.”

Senator Richard Burr (R)

“[Sanders is] one who’s willing to sit down and compromise and negotiate to get to a final product.”

Senator Roger Wicker (R)

“I learned early on not to be automatically dismissive of a Bernie Sanders initiative or amendment… He’s tenacious and dogged and he has determination— And he’s not to be underestimated.”

Senator Sherrod Brown (D)

“[Sanders] would call them ‘tripartite amendments’ because we’d have him and he’d get a Republican, he’d get a Democrat and he’d pass things. He’s good at building coalitions.”

Senator Chuck Schumer (D)

“[While working on the VA legislation], he knew when to hold and knew when to fold and, I think, maximized what we could get for veterans.”

Senator Jack Reed (D) (again)

“Frankly, without him, I don’t think we would have gotten [the Veterans Affairs legislation] done… It was a great testament to his skill as a legislator.”

—*—

3) Foreign Policy

Bernie has always thought globally.

He was one of the only mayors in America to have a foreign policy.

At a debate on the subject in 1986, Burlington’s Republican Party chairman:

“argued that city officials who couldn’t resist getting involved with foreign policy should move on to bigger things. A person like that should run for Senate.. “Or even for president.”

He has traveled the world as a member of Congress, where he has met with diplomats and military officials to discuss matters of national security and foreign policy:

As a member of Congress, Sanders has visited at least 41 countries, including Mexico, China, Israel, Vietnam, and South Africa, over the course of more than two dozen government-sponsored and privately-funded trips. His travels have taken him to the Middle East to visit a refugee camp in Jordan, discuss the Syrian conflict with diplomats in Turkey, and meet U.S. military officials in Afghanistan. Sanders has traveled to Central America to warn against the dangers of flawed trade policy, and spent a considerable amount of time visiting Nordic nations that he now holds up as models for America to emulate.

He has consistently fought for the rights of people, not corporations:

Throughout his travels, Sanders has articulated the idea that domestic and foreign priorities are inextricably linked. He has consistently railed against corporate power and advocated for workers’ rights, applying the same lens to foreign policy that he uses to diagnose many of the problems he sees in American society.

The U.S. is a militaristic, dominant, abusive world power.

Sanders has fought for us to become a nation that spreads peace, not bloodshed, and does not use our power to terrorize other nations, but to forge relationships.

Sanders outlined a vision for U.S. conduct on the global stage, arguing that America is at its best when it engages with the rest of the world on an equal footing, and not on the basis of brute force. “We want our nation to be bold and brave, but not with guns, and not with machine guns, and not with Napalm,” Sanders said in a speech during his trip to Nicaragua. Instead, Sanders argued, America should “work out problems based on mutual respect” with other nations.

And, of course, again, as Mayor, he viewed foreign policy as essential:

While serving as mayor of Burlington, Vermont, Sanders made foreign travel something of a priority, a rarity for an elected official involved in city government.

Bernie also voted against the Iraq War, against all odds and the lying Bush administration: he has proven his judgment to be sound — Hillary Clinton voted for it, and has not.

He opposed the first Gulf War, but supported the use of force to “hunt down the terrorists who attacked us in 9/11,” so he’s not a pacifist — but he’s not going to spill American blood for no reason.

He is the former Chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs and passed the most comprehensive legislation on care for veterans in decades — he knows war doesn’t just stop when our troops come home.

Bernie also has a comprehensive plan for the United States’ role in the world.

As Lawrence Korb — senior adviser to the Center for Defense Information and former director of national security studies at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York — says:

“In my dealings with him, and in analyzing his record in Congress over the past 25 years, I have found that Sanders has taken balanced, realistic positions on many of the most critical foreign policy issues facing the country.”

Clinton has a poor record, with far more experience.

She has consistently advocated for the U.S. to dominate and control the world, overthrow dictators, and invade other countries — to disastrous effect.

She has approved and encouraged the selling of military weapons to other nations for profit, while they have had a devastating outcome on the nations to which they were sold.

In Iraq, Syria, Libya — she has aided the spread of blood, weapons, and warfare: and has learned NOTHING from Iraq.

Even a mildly critical look at her time as secretary of state reveals a chilling record. ...Perhaps [her] crowning disaster has been [her] relentless promotion of CIA-led regime change in Syria. Once again Hillary bought into the CIA propaganda that regime change to remove Bashar al-Assad would be quick, costless, and surely successful. In August 2011, Hillary led the US into disaster with her declaration Assad must “get out of the way,” backed by secret CIA operations. Five years later, no place on the planet is more ravaged by unending war, and no place poses a great threat to US security. More than 10 million Syrians are displaced, and the refugees are drowning in the Mediterranean or undermining the political stability of Greece, Turkey, and the European Union. Into the chaos created by the secret CIA-Saudi operations to overthrow Assad, ISIS has filled the vacuum, and has used Syria as the base for worldwide terrorist attacks.

She has aided the arming of the world.

It seems Secretary Clinton’s hawkishness was matched only by her arms dealing. As the Intercept’s Lee Fang recently reported: after making weapons transfer to Saudi Arabia a “top priority” as secretary of state, emails from Clinton’s private server recently released under a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit show her aides kept her well-informed of the approval process for a $29.4 billion sale in 2011 of up to 84 advanced F-15SA fighters, manufactured by Boeing, along with upgrades to the pre-existing Saudi fleet of 70 F-15 aircraft and munitions, spare parts, training, maintenance, and logistics. The deal was finalized on Christmas Eve 2011. Afterward, Jake Sullivan, then Clinton’s deputy chief of staff ad now a senior policy adviser on her presidential campaign, sent her a celebratory email string topped with the chipper message: “FYI — good news.” As for what became of the arms: Saudi Arabia is almost a year into a bombing campaign in Yemen that, as Fang explains, has been led by the American-made F-15 jet fighters: The indiscriminate bombing of civilians and rescuers from the air has prompted human rights organizations to claim that some Saudi-led strikes on Yemen may amount to war crimes. At least 2,800 civilians have been killed in the conflict so far, according to the United Nations — mostly by airstrikes. The strikes have killed journalists and ambulance drivers. The planes, made by Boeing, have been implicated in the bombing of three facilities supported by Doctors Without Borders (Médicins Sans Frontières). The U.N. Secretary General has decried “intense airstrikes in residential areas and on civilian buildings in Sanaa, including the chamber of commerce, a wedding hall, and a center for the blind,” and has warned that reports of cluster bombs being used in populated areas “may amount to a war crime due to their indiscriminate nature.”

It gets worse.

But the Saudi deal was just one small part of a larger and even more troubling picture. As the International Business Times (IBT) reported, under Clinton the State Department signed off on $316 billion in arms sales to countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation. Now the Clinton campaign has received vastly more supportfrom arms manufacturers than any other candidate of either party. A look at her work in Latin America adds to the trouble. In June, Salon’s Matthew Pulver showed how Secretary Clinton provided cover for a right-wing coup in Honduras. Political violence spiked in the chaos that followed, and the country went on to have the highest murder rate in the world. And as the IBT reported last April: As the United States was liberalizing trade with Colombia in 2011, “union leaders and human rights activists conveyed … harrowing reports of violence [by the Colombian military against striking oil workers] to then–Secretary of State Clinton … urging her to pressure the Colombian government to protect labor organizers, she responded first with silence, these organizers say. The State Department publicly praised Colombia’s progress on human rights, thereby permitting hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. aid to flow to the same Colombian military that labor activists say helped intimidate workers.” The IBT report continues: At the same time that Clinton’s State Department was lauding Colombia’s human rights record, her family was forging a financial relationship with Pacific Rubiales, the sprawling Canadian petroleum company at the center of Colombia’s labor strife. The Clintons were also developing commercial ties with the oil giant’s founder, Canadian financier Frank Giustra, who now occupies a seat on the board of the Clinton Foundation, the family’s global philanthropic empire. The details of these financial dealings remain murky, but this much is clear: After millions of dollars were pledged by the oil company to the Clinton Foundation — supplemented by millions more from Giustra himself — Secretary Clinton abruptly changed her position on the controversial U.S.-Colombia trade pact. Having opposed the deal as a bad one for labor rights back when she was a presidential candidate in 2008, she now promoted it, calling it “strongly in the interests of both Colombia and the United States.” The change of heart by Clinton and other Democratic leaders enabled congressional passage of a Colombia trade deal that experts say delivered big benefits to foreign investors like Giustra.

And then there’s Libya:

After Clinton’s dramatic hearing on Libya in Congress last October, Patrick Cockburn (for decades one of the most incisive and sober journalists covering the Middle East) wrote that: “Neither Clinton nor the Republican Congressmen showed much interest in the present calamitous state of Libya, which is divided into fiefdoms ruled by criminalised warlords reliant on terror and torture. Benghazi is partly in ruins and is fought over by rival factions, while Islamic State has carved out enclaves where it decapitates Egyptian Copts and Ethiopian Christians.” Cockburn continues: “Of course, there is a strong case against Clinton’s actions in Libya, but they relate to her support for the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in 2011 …There is no doubt that she played a crucial role … in the decision by the US to intervene on the side of the anti-Gaddafi rebels. … Clinton was proud of her action, proclaiming in October 2011 after the killing of Gaddafi: “We came, we saw, he died.” She said during the recent Democratic presidential candidates’ debate that what she did in Libya was “smart power at its best.” ---- Arguing that “Hillary is the Candidate of the War Machine,” Columbia’s Jeffrey Sachs recently extended Cockburn’s point: “After the NATO bombing, Libya descended into civil war while the paramilitaries and unsecured arms stashes in Libya quickly spread west across the African Sahel and east to Syria. The Libyan disaster has spawned war in Mali, fed weapons to Boko Haram in Nigeria, and fueled ISIS in Syria and Iraq.”

If you are have heard Clinton press the arguments of electability, experience, “getting stuff done,” and foreign policy — look into Bernie’s record.

He has an incredible, long history of getting things done for the people, involving himself intelligently and pragmatically in world affairs, and, of course—

HE IS THE MOST ELECTABLE CANDIDATE.

If you want to win in November, vote Bernie.

It’s the realistic choice to make.