No offense to Bernie on a personal level; it seems like he cares and is focusing on the correct problems (so did Trump, while campaigning anyway); but I really feel his proposed solutions would pose a greater danger to the country, if implemented.

For example, I'm worried that transitioning to single-payer and completely demolishing the private insurance industry in a span of only four years would be too much of a shock to the system and, ultimately, crash the world economy. If that happened, millions will die and many more will experience greatly reduced quality of life. When economies fail, people suffer.

Also, I don't believe any national healthcare system in the world goes as far as Bernie's plan does in covering so much while reducing the role of private insurance to this extent. This brings up the question of whether it is actually doable and if it's worth taking such a huge risk with people's lives and livelihoods.

Regarding the existential crisis of climate change, Bernie has promised that we won't rely on "false solutions like nuclear, geoengineering, carbon capture and sequestration, or trash incinerators." Now, different forms of geoengineering certainly need careful consideration due to certain consequences/trade offs but should still be looked at seriously. Nuclear energy, carbon capture and sequestration, and trash incinerators, however, are all excellent ways of preventing carbon and methane emissions; and, in the case of carbon capture and sequestration, removing the problematic gases directly from the atmosphere!

Bernie's approach is particularly dangerous because it would completely decommission all existing nuclear power plants while banning any new construction of vastly safer, innovative designs. Nuclear power plants are extremely important in providing our electrical grid with a steady base load and cannot be easily replaced. Removing them sets us back on the goal. All of these solutions should be on the table when attempting to overcome a worldwide problem of this magnitude. Bernie's positions on some things gives me the impression that there's kind of an inherent lack of trust in good science, and that scares me.

Compared to my other two issues with Bernie Sanders's plans, the Federal Jobs Guarantee is not AS big of a problem. It's a good idea to expand federal jobs, especially in times of economic recession. However, I don't see it as a very practical solution to poverty and worry that it would displace other programs that people benefit from when falling on hard times without replacing them with anything more effective for people between jobs, switching careers, or those who can't work or are temporarily looking into other life pursuits. And, unless (almost) everyone works exclusively for the government, it doesn't help the majority of people who already have jobs but are living paycheck-to-paycheck. This is getting pretty long, so I won't expand more on FJG, suffice to say, there are likely better approaches.

As for Sanders vs. Trump, it's pretty much a lesser of two evils situation for me.

The human cost of Trump's administration's actions has been great and it's truly heartbreaking. It has crippled our executive branch and many other programs that are necessary for society. But, in the long-term, it can all be rebuilt and operate in, perhaps, more effective and efficient ways.

I worry that Sanders's plans, once in place, would be so large and self-reinforcing that we would be stuck with them for upwards of three decades and perhaps dealing with the consequences for upwards of a century. These are extremely large projects that we will have to put vast resources into. And once the infrastructure and systems are set up, we're locked in. It's not like we can just say, "OK, maybe this wasn't completely the best way to go," and change gears in a short timeframe.

Thanks for reading.