Bernie Sanders should be the Democrat nominee

Before I begin I would like to take time to thank the honorable gentleman for taking up the debate motion, and introducing another interesting paradigm to the debate. I will address what I mean by that as I go through my discourse. First, however I would like to address some of what my opponent has said. "As I states in the comments, Mr. Sanders lacks establishment and broad support. He is trailing in the delegate count and mathematically cannot win. " This is correct, Sanders does lack "establishment support" (this is quite an unusual term for UK citizens as both our main parties are polar opposites, there is always a wide variety to vote for and therefore never any reference to the "establishment"), because he does not promote the normal politics of the USA, as my opponent points out "Sanders, for many Americans, is too far to the left for comfort". He is behind in the delegate count by just under 300 delegates, and while it is possible for him to win it is almost impossible in pragmatic terms. But I will dispute that he lacks broad support. He does have the support of Democrats, just not all, but then again neither does Hillary. Sanders has far more support from independents that either Clinton or Trump; just take for example the events that occurred in New York when millions of independent voters were outraged (wrongfully) at the closed nature of the NY Primary, as they could not vote for Sanders. Sanders has carried 20 states out of the 43 that have had primaries so far; he does have support. "The main point of the pro side is simply that all the voters are wrong. This is a statement holds no real backing besides opinion. " Not all voters, only the ones that do not vote for Sanders. This is most indefinitely an opinion. "He would be bad for the country." how so? "So I hope I hope he understands my view on my (sic) Sanders would not get anything done. " Perhaps not, "Congress and our government as a whole has been divided by Republicans and Democrats." But perhaps it is better to try and introduce good change and fail, rather than elect someone who will get "anything done", because what they might try to do is perhaps not what is right. You yourself even said it, you voted for Sanders because you like his ideas, even though you didn't think they would actually work out. You subscribe to the idea I have put forward that it is better to attempt to make good change and fail, than attempt to make change that isn't good and succeeding. And while you have listed several utopia driven politicians who succumbed to the forces of political deadlock, lets think about the most blaringly obvious example of a controversial president who did make change. Barack Obama rose to the presidency with some extremely controversial ideas in US politics; he was crowned a communist, the death of America and so on, yet he did not succumb to political deadlock. He went on to be, in my opinion one of the greatest US presidents in history. Why can Sanders not be the same? "He lacks broad support of the public, and establishment republicans and democrats alike." I hate to bring this point up as i'm sure you have heard this a million times over; Sanders trounces Trump in the Presidential election polls, by quite large margins. He has carried 20 states out of 43, he has millions of donations, including from you. Thousands attend his rallies, and most Democrats believe he should stay in the primary race even though they aren't voting for him. This brings me to what I said in round 1; he is a force the USA needs more than ever. While he is losing, and the majority of Democrats do not want him to be the nominee, that does not necessarily mean they are right. They may not like the force he represents, because people do not like change. He may be too far to the left for comfort, but because he isn't comfortable it doesn't mean he isn't right. "The president is suppose to represent the people.", exactly my point, he should represent the people, by being able to make the tough decisions no one else can make. The tough decision in this case is addressing the future problems the USA will face. "If we want change, Clinton is the way to go. People know this. This is why she is winning." If you want a president who changes their mind every so often, or changes their story to win as many votes as possible, of course, vote for Clinton. She will bring change, but then again every president does. Any bill vetoed by the president or any decision or executive order by the president will make change. But the only candidate offering REAL change for the better is Sanders. That is why he should be the democrat nominee, because he represents a change in political dynamic that the USA may not be comfortable with, but needs. He will not win the nomination, unless he convinces super delegates to change sides and choose him because he is the candidate that will do better in the presidential election, but he should win the nomination.