Bernie Sanders should be the Democrat nominee

2015-2016 has played host to an absolutely spectacular primary election cycle, on both the Republican and the Democrat sides of the partisan lines. Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are still battling it out to the bitter end to win the party's nomination, Donald Trump has risen victoriously to the position of Republican nominee, defying all odds and wiping out all competition. This is the scene in contemporary politics, and never before has the future of the country been so important when electing a nominee in the Democrat party. Yet, millions of Democrat voters are voting the wrong way. Here is why they need to vote the right way. I agree, interlocutor (I can already sense it), Sanders is indeed proposing a move to nationalised healthcare and subsidised universities. You will most likely say that these things are non-achievable, because to increase taxes is theft, it isn't fair to take hard earned money and give it to those who are too lazy to work for their own. Some sort of free-market individualist spiel anyway. My answer is this: I do not know if it is achievable or not, just like you don't. But that isn't what attracts me to Sanders in the first place. What attracts me to Sanders is not his self-claimed Democratic Socialism. In fact he isn't even running on a platform of Democratic Socialism; Sanders is a Social Democrat undeniably. He really has shot himself in the foot by claiming he is a Socialist, when in reality he is not. There is a distinction between the two ideologies, I will explain in round 2 if my interlocutor does not seem to grasp the difference. What attracts me to Sanders is this: he represents something that hasn't been seen in US politics since Franklin Roosevelt. He represents a force the USA needs. Let me begin by pointing out according to World Bank Data the USA is the most economically unequal out of the world's top 22 most developed nations; with 0.42 out of 1 on the GINI index. That is almost as economically unequal as Russia. And this income inequality is continuing to rise in the USA. Why does this happen? Low taxation on the top tax bracket, absence of corporate tax payments, poor workers rights due to the smashing of unions since the 1980s (longer hours for less pay now), deregulation of markets, repeal of Glass-Steagal. Now you, my interlocutor may say this is completely fair, and that because the market is free the people are free and the ones that work the hardest rise to the top, and those who don't, sink. This is a blanket statement, and not completely fair. "The ones who work the hardest" are those that acquire as much human capital as they can, so they can become employed in a better paying job, therefore make a higher wage and will become wealthy. Except, according to the proven Cycle of Poverty model, those who are poor lack the ability to get out of poverty because they lack connections or the ability to get a good education (because universities are only available to the middle and upper class in the USA due to their astronomical cost). The main cause of the Cycle of Poverty is low salary; as the MIT living wage gap model shows, many states have higher costs of living than the minimum wage can afford for. One can work as hard as one can, and still never become wealthy enough to look down at his fellow man and say "work harder". So why do we need Sanders? Sanders is the only one willing to address this fundamental problem. He is a beacon in a world where individualism, and contempt for the poor has become the norm; as the saying goes "In the USA there are the conservatives and the all-most conservatives". Sanders represents a return to the time of FDR, when the aim of government was to develop the country for all, and to help all citizens, to provide each human with the freedom to live a comfortable life; not to be used as a tool to bury many in an early grave, and to give the few an excessively comfortable life. Ironically the USA is majority a Christian country, ironic because Christianity centrally preaches a collectivist attitude, to help the poor and the sick. Yet it is infected with neoliberalism like a parasite. Clinton on the other hand represents a continuation of the aforementioned; she is a candidate riddled with controversy (she may even be imprisoned). She will be a president that lasts for one term until the public become dissatisfied with her and vote Republican next election cycle, if she even wins. Sanders represents a chance for the USA to fix its main problem; economic inequality, and in doing so the USA will become one of the most spectacular nations ever seen on planet Earth; a nation that helps its citizens in its time of need, and can produce effortlessly, that can act as the world's protector. As inequality begins to rise, people will become discontent, and unless it is dealt with, a revolution, not as weak as the one Sanders is proposing (it is hardly a revolution), will occur. And when that happens the USA will regret not stepping in the right way, and will instead fall into instability.