[quote]By Prashant Shankar
Online Writer
Photos courtesy of MichaelVadon (Wikipedia) & Jotagueerrepe (Wikipedia)
Graphic by Drew Danko[/quote]
With the 2016 Presidential Primaries beginning Feb. 1, 2016, voters on both sides of the political spectrum are debating over which candidate to elect for their party. But as an avid Sanders supporter, do you know what I’d like to see in the general election?
Trump vs. Sanders.
I’ve probably shocked people of both parties here. “Why would you want that socialist running our economy?” “Why would you want that racist in charge of foreign policy?” But allow me to explain why a Trump-Sanders election would get America active and invigorated in politics again, regardless of political party. Keep in mind I’m not necessarily arguing either would be the most qualified president, but that a Trump-Sanders match-up would get America politically active again.
America likes taking sides on major issues, and Sanders and Trump are polar opposites on nearly every major issue. Bernie Sanders is pro-choice, while Donald Trump is pro-life. Sanders is all for universal health care and expanding Obamacare, while Trump has recently called Obamacare “a catastrophe that must be repealed and replaced.” Sanders is concerned about climate change and wants to expand green energy, while Trump disagrees and wants to prioritize oil energy. Most contrastingly, Trump is renown for being against unregulated immigration from Mexico, while Sanders has wanted to cut down security on the Mexico-United States border. All these opposing views would guide voters to a clear choice, as opposed to voting between two candidates who have either taken unclear stances or refuse to take stances on the important issues facing our country.
But despite all their differences, neither of them are your typical candidate, like a Bush or Clinton, two names you’ve already heard before. Candidates that have been involved in the same old politics for years, whether it comes to flip-flopping on issues, or letting their donors make decisions for them. But Sanders and Trump aren’t like most other candidates. Neither Trump nor Sanders has accepted any money from Super-PACs or large corporations. Both candidates are getting funding either by themselves or small donations, which at least proves they’re not slaves to banks or corporations when it comes to making decisions. Both Trump and Sanders’ followers share the same view: they’re passionate about their candidate, and tired of the same old politicians that never listen to the public.
So both Trump and Sanders supporters are very passionate about their candidate, something most other candidates can’t say. But why does that matter? Because increased interest in a candidate results in higher voter turnout, something America desperately needs. Voter turnout hasn’t topped 60 percent since 1968. According to Pew Research, the United States’ 53.6 percent voter turnout in the 2012 election was lower than every developed country’s most recent election, except Switzerland and Japan. Candidates like Trump and Sanders would likely bring more voters to the polls. Their clear-cut differences in views and attitude would bring voters out of apathy on the major issues, and be encouraged to spark debate on key issues such as Middle-Eastern relations, taxes, abortion, health care, and more.
No matter what your stance on the issues or opinion on the candidates, there’s no denying that Trump and Sanders are passionate about their views and have sparked more debate and activism than any other candidate on either side. And that debate and activism is what matters the most. With more active voters, we could create a Congress that better represents us, and in turn create a country that’s made by the people, for the people.
Cian28 • Jan 25, 2016 at 12:46 pm
China!
Robbie Dozier • Nov 17, 2015 at 7:41 am
It’s hard to convey how strongly I disagree with this. I’m sure Sanders supporters believe that a Trump v Sanders General Election would be great because that’s likely the only ballot where Sanders would actually win. Both Sanders and Trump supporters probably believe that a Trump v Sanders General Election would be great because they each think their respective candidate has superpowers.
Let’s talk about some similarities between Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. First, they are running self-funded campaigns. Second, they’re running substanceless campaigns. Don’t believe me?
What is a concrete thing Trump has said about what he plans to do as President, other than his tax plan? And “we’re going to build a big, beautiful wall with a big beautiful door that people can come through” doesn’t count.
What is a concrete thing Sanders has said about how he plans to pay for his campaign promises? Over 10 years, the government spending Sanders is proposing will add an additional $18,000,000,000,000 to the national debt, on top of the $18,000,000,000,000 we already have. If you ELIMINATED defense spending for 10 years and taxed income levels over $1,000,000 at 100% for 10 years, you would get to about $12,000,000,000,000, which doesn’t come close to paying for Sanders’ campaign promises. Mr. Sanders, do you care to explain how the laws of economics and mathematics don’t apply to you?
The real reason Trump and Sanders have so much support right now is because they’re sensationalist candidates. They’re basically the kid running for class president promising everyone no more homework and free cookies for everyone. The best thing to happen to american politics would be for voters to start backing sane candidates.
Dakota Franz • Nov 17, 2015 at 10:43 am
Robbie knows what he is talking about. Politics today is a joke.
Matt Fitzgerald • Nov 17, 2015 at 1:09 pm
Building a wall is not a bad idea. It would also even strength our countries defense in case of foreign attack. Also it isn’t that difficult to man since their are many national guard troops in the southwest. Also it isn’t a bad idea to focus on oil power and becoming independent on oil power would help the economy. Also if we were to be a leading oil producer, then we could export oil and generate trade revenues just like how we did in the 1940’s. Also the math is right, the debt would just grow and hurt us more.
In the end, at least neither of them are Hillary Clinton. We shouldn’t trust her after the email leaks and Benghazi incident. She pulled a Bill Clinton and covered it up while not doing anything to solve the problem or to avenge the deaths of the Americans that were their.
Robbie Dozier • Nov 19, 2015 at 11:04 am
The problem with building a wall is that it’s incredibly expensive. It’s much cheaper to let Border Patrol actually do their jobs.
Vassily Petrov • Nov 17, 2015 at 10:28 pm
While I agree that both Republicans and Democrats are pushing very generous plans, I disagree that this is a bad thing. On the contrary, I would rather see a candidate with ambition rather than a candidate that whats everything to remain the same. Certainly, it would be impossible for either candidate, if elected, to enact even a majority of the things they proposed. However, getting people engaged and excited about politics, creating a demand for major reform, that is what’s most important.
Also, the notion that “Sanders is proposing will add an additional $18,000,000,000,000 to the national debt “ is patently false. Under Sanders’ plan $18 trillion would not be added to the national debt. In fact, it would actually save people money and reduce the national debt. With our current healthcare system, we are paying $3 trillion a year (that’s $30 trillion over 10 years) on health insurance premiums, deductibles, etc. Under Sanders’ program we would spend $18 trillion on healthcare through taxes INSTEAD OF the $30+ trillion we would be spending on health insurance. Yes, taxes for everyone would increase, but people would save money because they wouldn’t need to pay for health insurance and associated costs.
I hope you can see that $18 is a smaller number than $30. We would save money.
I would suggest reading the following article:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/09/15/no-bernie-sanders-is-not-going-to-bankrupt-america-to-the-tune-of-18-trillion/
Robbie Dozier • Nov 19, 2015 at 11:17 am
That Washington Post article is based on the assumption that a Sanders Administration would spend Federal money more wisely than it’s been spent in the past. Either everything experts know about politics is wrong, or Sanders’ proposed government programs will drastically increase our debt.
Please stop • Nov 21, 2015 at 1:59 am
Have to agree with Robbie on how terrible this article is, but we need to get the national debt issue clear. The 3 trillion a year figure as you probably know is the money in the healthcare market as a whole, which includes a lot of services that don’t get paid for through health insurance, meaning we won’t magically shave 12 million off of healthcare by going with Bernie Sanders.
On top of that, the quality of healthcare would certainly decrease as it does in all single payer systems. Why do you think Canadians are coming to America to use our doctors? Are you aware that the Canadian single payer system keeps them from getting care for months at a time?
Also, expecting taxpayers to cover 18 trillion dollars over 10 years is one of the stupidest things I’ve ever heard, clearly you are unaware that cost is literally impossible to pay for through taxes, if it were possible then we wouldn’t have an 18 trillion+ debt as it is. There is no way to go through with his economic plans without dramatically raising the national debt.
I would figure if you had the audacity to include links and mock your opposition that you would at least have some common sense to back it up, but I guess you’re like the typical Bernie Sanders supporter and don’t.
S • Nov 18, 2015 at 8:39 am
See here’s the thing though. If you have been following politics, Sanders has shown us the math and economic policy that he plans to use to fund his campaign promises. It’s the thing that he’s been the most targeted on, so of course, he’s going to have a reply. You should probably check out what he’s actually saying before calculating America’s potential debt.
Akhil Tummala • Nov 19, 2015 at 1:16 pm
I think Sanders will win because trump wants to build a wall that separates Mexico and the us and it sounds pathetic because not all Mexican Immigrants are illegal immigrants and that’s basically blocking people to enter our country which is bad because our country can shine economically if more people come in and they like other immigrants are searching for a pursuit of happiness in the USA.
Robbie Dozier • Nov 20, 2015 at 11:06 am
You know that Trump is not the only GOP candidate, right? He’s not even in the lead now.
Please stop • Nov 21, 2015 at 2:01 am
Trump won’t block legal immigrants. The wall is meant to deter illegal immigrants. I’m not a fan of trump, but having some basic knowledge of his policy would be useful.