Bernie Sanders is not a radical candidate

From the moment Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont suggested he might run for president, we started hearing about how he couldn’t possibly win the nomination against the juggernaut that is former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her fundraising machine. And, even if by some miracle he did, why, he’d lose in a landslide because he’s just too radical for America.

There’s surely some validity to the first of those statements. But for those of us who have long bemoaned the “big money, big influence” method of selecting presidents, it’s also a wake-up call.

Far more “radical” candidates—Rand Paul, Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee come to mind—are treated seriously.

What’s so weird about Sanders?

Not that much, when you think about it. His “if they’re too big to fail, they’re too big to exist” mantra where the banks and investment firms are concerned seems like good, common sense—and has been extremely popular among the crowd that wants to draft Senator Elizabeth Warren to run.

So, why should we write Sanders off?

A better question might be: Who wants us to write Sanders off? The very best reason to pay attention to Sanders’ candidacy is that he scares Wall Street spitless. He frightens investment bankers, venture-fund capitalists and the top half of the 1 percent to death.

And anyone who scares those people is worth a good, long look.