You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: What's the Worst That President Bernie or Warren Could Be?
I think you are taking this argument too literally in this case. It's not like either of them would follow the advice blindly.
I think you are taking this argument too literally in this case. It's not like either of them would follow the advice blindly.
I don't think they would either. But did you watch the video? Pakman suggested that unlike Trump, they would follow the advice of the military and intelligence communities. I was just pointing out that it could be "the worst thing they could do", as those communities are part of them problem that needs change.
Definitely, blindly following the advice of the military apparatus would be pretty terrible. (It would probably continue the current course of the US further escalating with North Korea and Iran). But, in the context of the video, I don't think that would be a viable scenario for the two candidates. Especially Bernie is more the pacifist type (I don't know too much about Warrens background to say anything about her), so he'd probably only actually follow their advice if he thinks that there is a real danger.
I don't think Bernie would. But Warren's track record on foreign policy is pretty bad. At least for a progressive candidate. Anyways, the point here was to "imagine the worst", and not to make the case that these are likely outcomes.
Now we get into linguistics. "The worst case" for any candidate of any political party would be nuclear war ending with the human race. I believe the discussion was more around "considering the characters of the candidates, their track records and their planned policies".