With all due respect of course, I wholeheartedly disagree with you. You mentioned that no candidate is perfect, and that is a very valid point. But what the sander’s movement is asking for isnt perfection, its trustworthiness and being held accountable to the people. Now I wont get into the long rant about the number of times Mrs. Clinton has flip flopped , as that argument has been long over done. But what I will say that government has long not been held accountable to the people. In fact, according to a yale study, a law has a chance of passing 30% of the time regardless of the amount support it has among the population. But when a bill is more popular among lobbyists, it has a higher chance of passing. And the simple reason behind this is the sheer amounts of money people like clinton take from donors. This drastically changes where their loyalties stem from.
Perpetually accepting the notion that these realities are just apart of our system, and thus voting for individuals who take money like this, has literally transferred ownership of our government from the people, to big money. This “bernie or bust” movement isnt focused on ONE individual, but a simple request: be accountable to your constituency. And that isn’t a request that is nearing perfection….its just common sense. When 50% of the country does not vote, if in the long run, we can get individuals to ONLY vote for candidates that do not accept this money, we can dramatically change the outcomes of our government. And the longer we continually vote for individuals who clearly have no desire the represent the people , the longer this problem will persist, and the longer our government will see its people as a mere side thought when producing policy. Clinton isnt “the best choice we have”, its the choice that will continually destroy our government. That is why sander’s supporters may heavily vote 3rd party this year, even if that increases trumps odds of winning. After all, its not there fault that the democratic party ignored them. And if trump does win as a result, that is on the party, not the people.