This was an interesting read, but your support of Sanders and disdain for Clinton really turn me off.
“Sanders is a viable third-party candidate”? Sure, if you’re okay with a candidate who loves to talk about all these “really cool” ideas he has but has no idea of how to achieve them. Sure, he was popular, because people were excited about his ideas, not realizing that his lack of plans are a pretty big indicator that he would never achieve any of them. Electing a third party candidate like that would only serve to disillusion the American people even more. They would think either that he was lying to them the way they think every other candidate is lying to them, or else that “the establishment” held him back, rather than what would ultimately be the obvious reason: his ideas have no basis in reality. Our government can’t change things like basic arithmetic. His numbers have never added up, and, while asked many times to explain how they worked, he sidestepped.
Really? That’s the candidate you wanted on the ballot? I hate to out myself here, but Hillary Clinton is the ONLY candidate who actually has plans for what she wants to achieve, has run those plans by people within our government to check for feasibility, and has passed. If you don’t agree on what she wants to do and how she wants to do it, fine, but you cannot tell me that any other candidate (conventional or otherwise) has anything close to the qualifications and preparation that Clinton has.
I want a third party candidate, too, but they need to be VIABLE! Ideas are cheap. Everyone has ideas. I can say I have a great idea, but if I have no reasonable plan to achieve it, I’ve got nothing.
Or maybe I’ve got a good shot at getting elected President, who the hell knows.