I think that is why Sanders runs as an independent - freedom to preach progressive ethos. It is quite hard for progressives to create a major 3rd party or movement - because the 2party system is an entrenched dictatorship. Ross Perot tanked Bush Sr, Ralph Nader tanked Gore, Gary Johnson could have tanked Trump... that's as far as it gets. Progressives' archilles heel is their idealism - because any extreme idea is an ideal until its reality. It is easier for Sanders to tank Biden/Dems than to meaningfully alter their policy - they said it themselves they rather Trump carries on. At worst they would pretend to badge over the elections but later disown any agreement.
Yes, the danger of running as a third-party in the general is that you're most likely going to help the pple farthest removed from your ideas/agenda. That's why I don't think they should necessarily run a presidential candidate of their own, except maybe as a threat only: "Give us a little something, like Med4all, and we throw our full weight behind you—Compromise, compromise."
The benefits of a bonafide American
Labour Party that runs independently of the DNC is, of course, organizing and mobilizing which makes negotiations possible: You really can better control who your people back. When they're under a group with a very different agenda, they are fractured and voiceless: Weak. In addition, I think with the grassroots work done by Bernie in 2016 and now, it would be much better positioned than Gary Johnson, the Green Party etc. They simply don't have the level of recognition and support Bernie does: they'll prolly join
his Labor Party if he forms it--Jill Stein would, not sure of Johnson. There is a significant chunk of Right-leaning pple who are into economic populism too: they just don't like the woke stuff. So if Bernie forms that party, you might just see a similarly significant thing start happening on the Right, i.e. another Party breaking away from the RNC: the RNC and DNC both maintain their choke-holds over huge swathes of the population by making each other the fearsome boogieman and selling this to their constituents 247 using their various MSMs. Or, maybe a chunk of Right economic populists may just join Bernie's party even if they dislike some stuff. It's either this or rolling over for the establishment for good, IMHO. It's worth a shot.
Bernie has a plan for every single social program he has proposed: How to fund it, how to take care of workers dependent on the old system who would be left out, and how to use the bully-pulpit of POTUS to push individual law-makers into supporting it for their own political survival. That's exactly how powerful lobies have been keeping them in line; they make it a matter of survival for them: "Support me or I'll fund your opponent." But POTUS can be used powerfully to campaign in these very states/districts: if these guys are exposed to their immediate constituents, showing them the relationship btw how their particular chosen law-maker votes and WHO funds them, in a 1:1 relationship, it puts them in a precarious situation. It's only if they have to choose btw survival and their donors that they'll tell their donors to screw off for a minute. Then pass laws to publicly fund campaigns and kill the relationship between private money and who gets into office.
There's a reason they are terrified of him and it's not 'He'll lose to Trump'.
PS: Elizabeth's 'plan' for Med4all is to wait until Republicans retake the houses before asking for single-payer, lmao. There's a reason her support plummetted the moment she came out with her "plans", pple saw right through them which made her look like a fake/planted progressive to huge chunks of her supporters.
