Warren. Sanders supporters, with some exceptions, are some of the most annoying people in politics.
"Sorry, person who needs cheap insulin - I'm not going to vote for the other candidate that favors medicare for all because I find his fanboys annoying. Have fun dying due to my annoyance!"
Also FYI, I've donated the same amount of money to both, and I'm just going to vote for whoever is in the lead by the time of the Tennessee Primary, which will very likely be Elizabeth Warren.
I can't figure out who the bigger morons are - media-brainwashed people who reject Sanders because he's a "selfish," "narcissistic," "racist," "misogynistic" "impractical" "non-Democrat" with irritating followers (despite their agreeance with most of his superior, impactful policy programme)...
...or the jimmy dore / jFern types who reject Elizabeth Warren out of hand because she deigns to cultivate political influence every once in a while or occasionally has a position that isn't as progressive as Bernies. It's a tough contest.
And I'd be willing to give the Sanders campaign a pass and just write off his more annoying supporters as unhelpful but it's hard to do that when people in charge of his campaign such as Jeff Weaver are encouraging further toxicity by claiming that the mainstream media is rigged against Sanders, causing a sizable chunk of his supporters to go full conspiratorial mode which you apparently seem to be peddling as well if you think I'm being "media-brainwashed".
So as you can see, I'm perfectly capable of giving logical rejoinders or whatever to your posts. 
I think the mainstream media is definitely biased against Sanders and a lot of people have made solid, evidence-based cases why, including actual political scientists.
I think Elizabeth Warren doesn't get treated all that well by the media, either, because it tends to take the perspective of wealthy elites, and I think as soon as Bernie drops out of the race, she will become their next whipping boy.
I don't think my argument was at all in poor taste, I actually think if you aren't thinking about the life and death implications of your vote, you are being irresponsible.
I will, however, grant you that my post was poorly worded / unclear - I don't really object to people who choose the very similar Liz Warren over Sanders, more the people who inexplicably have her at #1 and him at #20, which kind of by definition has to be based on superficial, non-policy based reasons.
My passionate outlook is that your vote shouldn't be about you making a statement about yourself and casting it for someone you "like personally," "identify with," "don't find distasteful," etc like according to research most people do. - it should be a cold hard choice about which vote will help America the most.
For instance: Hillary and the group of people she associates with are distasteful and I do not want to be associated with them, they do not reflect my values and ideology, and I find a lot of aspects of her record /philosophy/platform problematic.
However, I was never going to stay home or vote third party in 2016, because my vote for her has huge positive real world consequences for billions of people.
I wish more people thought that way, particularly millions of people who stayed home / voted third party/NOTA in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.
I would ask you and the other readers of this thread to consider that basic idea. Even if I think some aspects of your outlook are dumb, I will say that I am sincerely grateful for your general high level political interest and your support for a fantastic politician like Elizabeth Warren. She needs as much support as she can get.
Poll
