Objectively speaking Bernie Sanders is a normal legitimate politician -- not an "other"

[Armstead]

Remember how Obama, another normal legitimate politician, was "otherized" by Clinton and the GOP?

He's not one of "us." He has a messianic complex. He's some indeterminate race, not really black or white. He grew up in a foreign country. His father was a Kenyan. He has a funny name. Is he really an American? He might be a secret Muslim. There's just something odd about him.

Bernie is now getting the same treatment. He is being "otherized." He has been portrayed as too "outside the mainstream" to actually be a good politician or presidential candidate. He can't possibly win an election because....well he's an "other."

He's...shhhhhh..Jewish. He Tawks with a funny accent. He's kind of bedraggled. He's not smooth and slick. He's not a member of a political party. He's a -- gasp -- socialist. And -- don't tell anyone -- he has a problem with women and minorities.

BUT in reality, he is basically a normal All American politician. A successful one. And for years many liberals and progressives have admired and liked him because of his positions and integrity and tendency to tell the truth.

Take away the preconceptions and just look at his resume. Elected and reelected Mayor of a city three times. Named one of America's Best Mayors. He actually ran a successful city administration that worked with businesses and Republicans and balanced the budget, fixed the potholes and brought a lot of civic improvements.

He then was elected to the House. And he was reelected. And reelected. And.....And he kept getting sent by ridiculously large margins of the vote. Then he ran for Senate. And got elected by a very healthy margin again.

Normally, that would be ample qualification to at least be considered a respectable, electable politician.

But not Bernie. Because he has actually stood up against the vested Interests of Big Money and Big Power for years and years. He didn't just spout tepid tapioca. He actually challenged the Elites and took positions that did not adhere to the Corporate Centrist Litmus Test. He was a progressive populist. And we don't like them.

So therefore he is an "other." Not one of us. Shhhhhhhhh....you know.

Only fly in that ointment is that a lot of people agree with him. His message resonates with millions.

But that too is a bad thing. He gets people enthusiastic. He raises people's hopes. These are bad things now.

There must be something wrong because after all, he's an "other."

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. It was her turn in 2008

they won't let him ruin it this time... as an observer I expect variations of the same dirty tricks. And we are already seeing them.

As to being the other, in a way they got a point. He does not play the patronage game in DC. And that is what makes him so attractive to people who have had it with the system. This is a base revolt, from both parties.

[MaggieD]

2. He's an "other" to me because he is not a Democrat

And dissed my party for 25 plus years. YMMV.

[Armstead]

4. He worked with Democrats in Vt. and DC.

Yes he criticized both parties as being too beholden to Money and the Powerful. Frankly, he has a point.

Party membership is not required in a country where many many people are political independents.

But he also chose to NOT run as a third party spoiler, to avoid handing the election to the GOP.

[LexVegas]

3. So, hes part of the establishment. nt

[Armstead]

5. In a sense, yeah.

In another sense, no.

[msongs]

6. he is a lifer career politician living off the taxpayer dime. that's about establishment as one gets

whether that is good, bad, or neutral is another issue