How many beans is having a pro-choice woman president worth to you?
Hillary and the Other 1%

If electing a president was just about electing a status symbol, then Clinton would definitely get a fair share of the “beans” simply for being a woman. Maybe for those who are doing well right now, that’s all that this election is about. For most of us, however, this election is about fixing a country that is broken in real, hurting ways.

Therefore, the only thing that matters in this election- the only thing- is which candidate will do a better job at fixing this country. For this, the fact that Clinton is a woman is worth very little. Yes, women statistically are more likely to help women. Yes, women statistically have less partisan pressures than men. But we’re not discussing statistics, we’re discussing two very real candidates that we can look at and make judgments.

Looking at Sanders, there is nothing to suggest that he’ll be less aggressive on women’s rights than Clinton. There is not a single instance that I can envision in which he’d have a less progressive stance on behalf of women than Clinton would. Similarly, there is nothing to suggest that Clinton will be less divisive than Sanders.

There are big differences, however, between the candidates. The biggest concern today is not abortion, though it is a concern. Very few people are dying because they can’t get an abortion. It’s not guns, it’s not terrorism, it’s not even immigration. The biggest concern, by the numbers, is poverty. That’s what’s killing people, that’s what is causing the majority of our struggles. And one candidate is clearly better equipped to help the poor: Bernie Sanders.

Sanders will give the people healthcare. Sanders, with his infrastructure plan, will give the people jobs. Sanders will give the people an education, and decent working conditions.

Clinton won’t even raise the income taxes of all millionaires. And that’s why I’ll be voting for Bernie Sanders.