Some of us actually support Bernie Sanders because we believe in ideas that can actually make a difference. We believe he’ll actually pursue policies and programs whose purposes don’t revolve around enriching the 1%. We’re not stupid, and we’re not naive ; we just believe that the way things have been don’t have to be they way things will be now and forever, amen.

Then there are pundits like Dana Milbank of The Washington Post, who’s summed up the punditocracy’s take on Sanders’ candidacy- great guy, great idea, not a chance of being elected.

I get it; we’re so used to airbrushed, focus-grouped, sound-bitten, vanilla candidates who are incapable of offering a word that hasn’t been polished and vetted for blandness. We’ve been spoon-fed non-specific, vanilla, all-things-to-all-people-all-the-time candidates for what seems like forever. When we come across one who’s genuine, authentic, and doesn’t sound as if he has a master’s degree in banal and insipid public speaking, we don’t know how to process that. It’s silly and stupid, but unless our politicians look and speak like television news anchors, we assume there’s something off about them.

I’m sick to death of Very Serious People holding forth about how Bernie Sanders might have some great ideas…which will never stand a chance of seeing the light of day should he be elected President.

Today I read for maybe the 10,000th time an assertion that supporters of Bernie Sanders are unrealistic, that Bernie Sanders supporters will all be disappointed if they elect him because he won’t be able to bring the change he’s promising, that Bernie Sanders’ policies will be “just another example of Democrats making promises they can’t keep,” and so on and so forth. And I’d like to briefly dispel a misconception about people who support Bernie Sanders as the next president of the United States: We’re not stupid.

[I]f Democrats hope to hold the presidency in November, they’ll need to hold their noses and nominate Clinton. Ultimately, I expect that’s what Democrats will do — because as much as they love Sanders , they loathe Donald Trump more. It seems more evident each day that Republicans have lost their collective reason and are beginning to accept the notion that Trump will be their nominee. And I doubt Democrats will make an anti-immigrant bigot the president by nominating a socialist to run against him.

It’s not a surprise that I’d categorically reject Milbank’s lazy take on Sanders. Not only is he NOT a socialist (Milbank evidently lacks the wherewithal to learn what “democratic socialism” means), he’s not the pushover-in-waiting that he and so many others believe him to be. The idea that the only way to defeat a demagogue like Donald Trump is with a tried-and-true conventional Democrat is to sell America and the Democratic Party short.

Yes, Republicans will throw “SOCIALIST!!” at Sanders a million and one times, but that just means Sanders and Democrats need to be aggressive and disciplined in putting their message forward.

The first questioner from the audience asked Sanders to explain why he embraces the “socialist” label and requested that Sanders define it “so that it doesn’t concern the rest of us citizens.”

This is exactly the sort of ignorant, uninformed pursuit of disinformation that Clinton supporters and the GOP are counting on.

Sanders, explaining that much of what he proposes is happening in Scandinavia and Germany (a concept that itself alarms Americans who don’t want to be like socialized Europe), answered vaguely: “Creating a government that works for all of us, not just a handful of people on the top — that’s my definition of democratic socialism.” But that’s not how Republicans will define socialism — and they’ll have the dictionary on their side. They’ll portray Sanders as one who wants the government to own and control major industries and the means of production and distribution of goods. They’ll say he wants to take away private property. That wouldn’t be fair, but it would be easy. Socialists don’t win national elections in the United States .

So Republicans will lie, spread propaganda, and engage in blatant character assassination? Since when is that news? When last I checked, that’s what Republicans do during election campaigns. It doesn’t mean that Sanders and Democrats have to stand idly by while Republicans frame the debate or engaging in red-baiting. If Trump is the opponent, there will be a treasure trove of racist, sexist, misogynistic, and/or homophobic statements to mine for usable material. Republicans can only frame the tone and tenor of the debate if they’re allowed to do so. I think Sanders understands what he’s be up against, that Republicans are selling will only contribute to the decline of government and the quantity and quality of services it can offer. Sanders is the only candidate willing to speak to the truth, that we can’t continue to expect ever more from government when we’re unwilling to pay for it.and I get the sense he feels up to the challenge.

Guess what? Sanders is honest enough to admit we need to be willing to pay higher taxes. The “something for nothing” attitude Republicans are selling can only result in the degrading of the role and quality of government we get. If we want government that actually does what government is supposed to do, it’s not going to be done on the cheap. Republicans will never admit that. Sanders already has.

Bernie Sanders is a realist, which is more than can be said for any other Presidential candidate- in either party. That realism is the very reason I support him. Whether you call it “revolution” or “evolution,” the choice seems stark. We can either go with variations on a recurring theme…or decide to head in a different direction. That’s where I’m going.

Whatever your approach to the Clinton-Sanders debate, believing that Clinton is the only electable candidate is an exercise in self-delusion. Both are capable of beating Donald Trump…or any other Republican in November. The question is whether to make the easy choice or the right choice.