I appreciate the detailed and researched responses but you're making an imaginary argument, I've never claimed to hold the US as a model for anybody and have posted on many occasions about these socioeconomic issues, including criticism of centrist Democrats. I'm all for fundamental change but you keep avoiding the issue - how do you practically achieve it ?
It's useless having idealistic visions you cannot deliver. Sanders failed dismally in two primaries, you can blame the DNC or the media, but he failed to turn out the youth like 2016, his support stagnated with black voters, and lost massively amongst over 45s. And even with the remote chance he was elected as President, HOW does he get his policies through Congress ? I again ask for a response - if you cannot get universal healthcare passed through liberal Vermont, how will you do so nationwide ?
Look I don't disagree with you on the goals, but I've heard these arguments here in the UK from Jeremy Corbyn supporters, that he was going to bring real change like you mention. Ultimately, he oversaw the worst Election defeat since 1935. He had no ability to compromise, to win over swing voters and made so many wild spending promises he wasn't seen as credible.
Again, I reject the status quoism of Clinton and Blair as vehemently as the impracticality of Sanders-Corbyn politics. But I cannot agree with some leftists that some change isn't better than no change simply because you didn't get everything on your wishlist. Obamacare wasn't singlepayer but it insured 20M people and saved lives. The Paris Accords didn't go far enough but was better than accelerating environmental destruction under Trump. History is not a linear curve but of progress and regress, but you keep fighting and take your victories when you can as opposed to giving up all hope holding unrealistic expectations.