Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said the reelection of former President Trump would be the “end of democracy” in an interview released Saturday by The Guardian.
“It will be the end of democracy, functional democracy,” Sanders said in the interview.
The Vermont senator also said in the interview that he thinks that another round of Trump as the president will be a lot more extreme than the first.
“He’s made that clear,” Sanders said. “There’s a lot of personal bitterness, he’s a bitter man, having gone through four indictments, humiliated, he’s going to take it out on his enemies. We’ve got to explain to the American people what that means to them — what the collapse of American democracy will mean to all of us.”
Sanders’s words echo those President Biden made in a recent campaign speech during which he said that Trump’s return to the presidency would risk American democracy. The president highlighted the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol in an attempt to cement a point about Trump and other Republicans espousing a kind of extremism that was seen by the world on that day.
a vote for west gets counted as a vote for west and puts him one vote closer to winning the election.
West will not win any election, so any vote for him is a vote thrown away.
Elections are won by 50%+1. Anything that takes away from a legitimate candiate reaching 50%+1 actively hurts that campaign, it’s not helping someone whose support sits in the margin of error.
the language of “legitimate candidate” implies there are illegitimate candidates. and that’s peak irony: i am continually told that this election means the end of democracy.
There are a whole host of illegitimate candidates. My favorite was a guy named Lyndon Larouche who was grade A insane, but he also had a major fanbase and was always running for President.
His main platform was that the primary enemy of the United States was England and that the Queen of England was a cocaine smuggler.
He regularly got about the same number of votes Cornel West will get.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyndon_LaRouche
nothing about his candidacy is illegitimate, and votes cast for him were legitimate. to try to stop people from voting for him would be undemocratic.
cornel west is a legitimate candidate for president. he’s the only candidate i want to win this cycle, but i can still be won over again by jill stein. my vote for him would be a legitimate vote.
I recognize he’s the only candidate you WANT to win, but he’s polling less than just about anyone else. Even RFK is doing better than West and RFK is a nutball. You need to prepare yourself for the fact that he will likely drop out before you even get a chance to vote for him.
The winner in 2024, barring some sort of medical or legal event, will be Biden or Trump. A vote that takes away from one of them only helps the other.
good news: i’m not taking a vote away from biden. i voted for him once in 2008 and i learned my lesson.
You couldn’t have voted for Biden in 2008 because he dropped out of that race virtually instantly after he came in fifth place in Iowa with less than 1% of the vote. Even if you were in Iowa, you would have caucused for him, not voted for him.
I mean, I guess you could have voted for someone who dropped out, but there would be even less of a point in doing that.
he was on the ticket with obama.
>West will not win any election
you can’t prove this.
Sure I can. The most successful 3rd party candidate we ever had was Ross Perot in 1992. He got just under 19% of the total vote and won exactly 0 elections.
West is nowhere NEAR the level Perot was at in 1992.
roosevelt pulled 27%
that’s not proof about cornel west’s campaign.
West is running a FRACTION of Perots numbers in '92, Perot won zero elections… It’s basic math at this point.
But if you want HARD evidence… Since leaving the Green party back in October, the only state where he has qualified for the ballot is Alaska.
https://www.cornelwest2024.com/alaska
So he hasn’t even gained ballot access in enough states to earn 270 electoral college votes. He likely won’t even be on the ballot in your state.
that’s not proof that he won’t win.
even if you could provide that (which you can’t because it’s impossible to have proof about the future), if he is on my ballot i will be voting for him.
if he’s not, i might write him in, or just vote for jill, who i am sure will be there.
Follow the logic… you need 270 electoral college votes to win. West is on the ballot in ONE state with a total of 3.
It’s not that he won’t win, he quite literally CANNOT win.
that’s conjecture, not proof.
hey, as an aside, i don’t think the mastodon-to-lemmy dms work, but do you think you can do something about the personal attacks (ad hominem, poisoning the well (which is a form of ad hominem), and name-calling) in this thread?