3 ms·
> I'm not sure it would really matter which establishment candidate was in office Obama was the change candidate that didn't have a long history in congress.
by Steeeve 10y ago
> I'm not sure it would really matter which establishment candidate was in office
Obama was the change candidate that didn't have a long history in congress. He gets labeled "establishment" by Bern victims out of propaganda. It's kind of funny how there's an anti-establishment candidate every 4 years that has a long history of being part of the establishment. At some point people have to start realizing that "anti-establishment candidate" means underdog who wants his small donations to add up.
- braveo 10y agoObama was supposed to be the change candidate, it's what he ran on, but he didn't really do anything. That's part of why Trump won. People have been wanting significant change for that long, yet we never got it.
- chaostheory 10y agoObama may have sounded like he was an outsider in his first presidential race, but he's proven otherwise repeatedly over the years even during his first term. To be fair, Sanders would have probably been the same had he been elected. Trump was the only major party choice in the last election though other choices of change were Gary Johnson and Jill Stein. To be clear, I am not advocating anyone; I'm just differentiating candidates who will uphold the status quo and others who won't.