Very few economists hold that there was any strong connection between these two events, nor was the repeal of two sections of Glass-Steagall a Clinton administration initiative, though Clinton did sign it. The GOP written and forwarded repeal of these sections passed both the Senate and House with huge, veto proof margins (362/57, 90/8). Clinton could have made himself look more irrelevant with a veto but little else.

Why does this matter? Well, your piece is shot through with inaccuracies and hyperbole, not a very legitimate way to persuade people. Much of the country would disagree with you on the “hell scape” issue, though many would like significant changes. Much of the country would also like to see Trump’s attempts to unwind the many Obama admin. progressive regulations, executive actions, and laws stopped cold. The first priority in bring around the changes and stopping the assault is defeating Trump.

Bernie may be the guy to beat Trump , he may not. We will know much more about that after the first couple of months of primaries. Bernie’s thesis is that he will raise an army of progressive and disenchanted voters to sweep his ideas into action. The fact is that in ’16 he raised much enthusiasm but millions of fewer votes than Mrs. Clinton, and of course that was on the progressive side of the nomination.

It’s possible that he can bring those voters out now, the primaries will tell. But your own analysis of the current state of the nation does reflect on Sanders’ ability to bring about big changes so far. He has promised much, Medicare for All, the relief of your student debt, free higher education, good goals for the nation but I wonder; will you stick with him if he gets none of it in his first two years? Any one of those promises will be a huge lift and I worry that the young and passionate will turn cynical and drop out if he has over promised and, in their eyes, under performed. Bold systemic change is exceedingly difficult to bring about. Are you in it for the long haul?