What part increased your admiration for him? I read it and other than a few details I didn’t see anything new about the guy or his campaign that I already didn’t know.
I did find the claim that the only reason for him running was because he believed he could defeat trump a little disingenuous since he’s still in the race despite being unable to turn out his “base”.
Spoken with your usual arrogance in my opinion. How would you know what someone else felt they saw or learned from the article or what changes in attitude it might create. Perhaps he read it with an open heart and you read it emotionally dead. Or perhaps he knows more about Sanders than you ever will and still added to that collection, whereas all you saw was our own propaganda created opinion. But I understand the lofty place you deal such judgment from, wise as Solomon and emotionally unmoved in your ivory tower, looking down at the masses who can be influenced by other people's opinions like the ones in the link.
And as for the disingenuous claim you make, it strikes me as so often before, you just don't seem to be able to comprehend what you read:
From the piece:
“The only reason Bernie’s in this race,” Jane Sanders told me in early February, “is because we think he’s the best chance to defeat Trump.” Sanders himself acknowledged this foremost priority the day after his electoral firewall collapsed in Michigan — and then added, with a degree of candor that was remarkable even for him, that millions of Democratic voters across the nation happened to disagree that he represented the best chance of doing so."
But it goes on to say:
“It’s never been about only winning the election,” Jane Sanders told me in February, back when victory was a distinct possibility. “I mean, if you won just because you were the one with the superior campaign strategies, that would not be terribly satisfying in the end. It’s much more satisfying to pick up the paper, go online or watch TV and see town halls of people questioning their senators about Medicare for All from a more informed point of view, using facts rather than vitriol. That’s been so moving to see, really. So gratifying.”
The notion that political change and electoral victory were often two different things — that the former could and did occur without the latter — has been an essential tenet of Sanders’s underdog career. On the day after Elizabeth Warren announced that she was suspending her campaign, the Vermont senator held a news conference. He wore his navy blazer and a matching tie, an implicit show of respect for the vanquished; and though he took handwritten notes to the lectern, he barely glanced at them, instead gazing reflectively at no one in particular. He observed that many politicians “fade away” as their losing campaigns do. This would not be Warren’s fate, he said. Then he explained why:
“She has changed political consciousness in America — which, at the end of the day, is the most important thing that any candidate could do.”
Bolding added by me.
And why he should not leave the race.
