As reported by The HIll:
“I chose to run proudly in the Democratic primary and caucus and look forward to winning that process. But clearly, as a nation, I think we flourish when there are different ideas out there,” Sanders said during MSNBC’s Democratic presidential candidate forum in Nevada on Thursday.
“Sometimes the two-party system makes it very, very difficult to get on the ballot if you are a third party, and I think that’s wrong. I think we should welcome competition.”
Passive-aggressive? No, just critical, along with the deserved praise. If I didn’t want to bring attention to the fact that he said this, I wouldn’t have posted it. But how is not relevant that he happily joined in the campaign to attack and discredit a third-party candidate *that included* major efforts by his party to rob that candidate of ballot access?
As for who I support: being anti-duopoly is a consideration, but it’s not the only consideration. You know who else has run third-party before and is now running in opposition to the establishment in his party? Donald Trump. I don’t support him either. Just like I wouldn’t vote for a Nazi on my ballot just because they aren’t a Republican or Democrat.
It’s still good that Bernie raised this issue and said what he did. I’m actually convinced this is closer to his real personal feelings on the matter, than the don’t-be-a-spoiler bashing he’s joined in before. I also don’t think he has any intention of trying to do anything about it, given the deal he’s made with the Democrats to run as one and support them and otherwise act as a member of the Democratic Party. He will not do or support anything that would allow the progressive/socialist/far-left wing of the party to leave the Dems and split off into their own substantial party.
“Credit to him for saying this, but somewhat hypocritical for someone who helped bash and discredit Nader in 2000, and again in 2004, when the DNC was coming down his ballot access like a ton of bricks. Who himself dismisses those who want him to run outside the Democratic Party as just wanting him to be a “spoiler.” — Andy Craig
I’m glad he posted this, but Andy’s passive-aggressive comments grow old after a while. Unlike Bernie Sanders, Andy’s uninspiring candidate for the presidency — Gary Johnson — has previously only run outside the two-party establishment once in his lifetime.
Andy mentioned the 2000 presidential campaign, but neglected to say that Johnson actively supported George W. Bush that year. He even campaigned for the nefarious and deceitful Dubya outside of New Mexico that autumn. Unfortunately, Gary Johnson has never been asked to explain exactly what he saw in the privileged Texan that year, an intellectual lightweight merely trading on his family name. It must have been some sort of mysterious quality that escapes the rest of the country to this day.
Just for the record, Sanders had already faced Democratic and Republican opposition a dozen times in his career — often on a shoestring budget and always against the longest of odds — by the time Johnson was initially elected governor of New Mexico as a Republican in 1994.
Unlike the aloof, austerity-peddling former governor of New Mexico — a guy with little understanding of economics who four years ago recklessly called for an immediate $1.4 trillion cut in federal spending that would have literally decimated America’s most vulnerable citizens, the very people, many on fixed incomes, currently rallying to Bernie’s banner — Sanders also supported minor-party candidates for the presidency on occasion, including actively campaigning for pediatrician Benjamin Spock, the People’s Party candidate for president in 1972. Sanders, who was flat broke at the time and had to borrow money for gas in order to pick Spock up at the airport, personally accompanied the famous baby doctor on a three-day swing through Vermont in the fall of that year. Eight years later, Bernie supported a little-known socialist for the nation’s highest office.
Has Johnson ever actively supported a third-party candidate for president? Other than himself in 2012, of course. It’s a reasonable and eminently fair question, particularly in light of Andy’s rather critical comments about Sanders.
While I would have strongly preferred to see him run as an independent this year, Bernie has more than paid his dues in the world of third-party politics. Keep in mind, too, that it’s still fairly early in the process. Who knows what the future might hold? Nobody thought he’d be doing as spectacularly well as he is — and few could have imagined that he would have already received more than 4 million individual contributions, mostly in small amounts.
This might really be a “political revolution,” as he has insisted all along, and Battling Bernie may yet have an encore performance. His candidacy is the culmination of his life’s work, and given his age — he’ll turn 75 in September — he realizes he won’t get another bite at the apple. I don’t think he’ll go down without a fight.
In the meantime, those truly committed to independent and third-party politics — the folks here at IPR, in particular — should be applauding Bernie’s positive remarks about the difficulties facing independent and minor-party candidates in this country.
Ron Paul might have got tired of being asked it, but I don’t think it was an unfair or unjustified question given that he *had* run for President as a Libertarian before and maintained generally friendly relationships with the LP and other third-parties and independents. He did end up refusing to support and endorse the nominee in both years, too, which is something Sanders has always denied he would do and hasn’t done since being elected to Congress with Dem support.
Ron Paul’s runs? They asked him constantly if he was going to run as a Libertarian again.
“Senator McCain, how will you deal with Iran?”
“Governor Romney, what’s the best way to balance the budget?”
“Congressman Paul, will you run third party if you fail to get the nomination?”
They’ve not asked Sanders as many questions of the sort, though that’s probably because he’s polling better. Though they have asked him about his past comments attacking the Democrats as being no different than the Republicans.
Credit to him for saying this, but somewhat hypocritical for someone who helped bash and discredit Nader in 2000, and again in 2004, when the DNC was coming down his ballot access like a ton of bricks. Who himself dismisses those who want him to run outside the Democratic Party as just wanting him to be a “spoiler”
Still, when was the last time third party ballot access or the two-party system was even mentioned in a major-party presidential forum or debate? I guess Trump’s threats to run third-party perhaps, but other than that?