Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumimthevicar
(811 posts)This horse race has just started.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)I tend to agree that Bernie Sanders isn't well enough known by the largest groups within the Democratic party. Once they do understand that what he stands for affect the working poor and middle class, those numbers will change.
It's a wise campaign use of real information strategy.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)he got (IN ONE POLL) dissipated pretty quickly. I've said it time & time again that Bernie's appeal, such as it is, is very limited. He'll top out at about 20%-23%. What's clear is that his numbers haven't affected Clinton's numbers at all. Just the facts, please.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)You're entitled to your own opinion, but that fact thing
well, it lives here, now!
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)posted at 12:00 pm on July 24, 2011 by Jazz Shaw
President Obama is under attack these days from all manner of nasty conservatives who dont care for his liberal, big spending ways. They seem to have found an unlikely ally, though, in the person of the only officially declared socialist in Congress Bernie Sanders. (Emphasis in original.)
SANDERS: Brian, believe me, I wish I had the answer to your question. Let me just suggest this. I think there are millions of Americans who are deeply disappointed in the president; who believe that, with regard to Social Security and a number of other issues, he said one thing as a candidate and is doing something very much else as a president; who cannot believe how weak he has been, for whatever reason, in negotiating with Republicans and theres deep disappointment. So my suggestion is, I think one of the reasons the president has been able to move so far to the right is that there is no primary opposition to him and I think it would do this country a good deal of service if people started thinking about candidates out there to begin contrasting what is a progressive agenda as opposed to what Obama is doing. So I would say to Ryan discouragement is not an option. I think it would be a good idea if President Obama faced some primary opposition.
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/24/bernie-sanders-lets-primary-obama/
If that doesn't "endear him" to the president's most loyal supporters, I don't know what will.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Your 'proof' is very, very thin gravy
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)I was unaware that he said that. I think less of him for it, frankly. He was my solid 2nd choice but I'm now gonna look at O'Malley.
I am really not liking that one bit. Not cool.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)Ain't gonna happen.
MADem
(135,425 posts)comment really pisses me off. A LOT.
More and more, now that I think on it.
With all the shit POTUS had to deal with from the right, and Senator Sanders was talking that kind of trash?? Shit, he was CAUCUSING with us. He got a sweet committee assignment that enabled him to bring USAF jets and jobs to VT...was the GOP offering him a better deal, or what?
That is some disturbing information, really. I don't know how I managed to miss that story-- I may have been traveling, I guess!
Sucks!
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)that the DNC accede to his demands. Shit, he's been a member for what? A couple of days? My fellow AA's will never support Bernie Sanders once they are reminded that he wanted to primary the First sitting black POTUS, as if the president weren't already going through hell.
Bernie Sanders, to me, is a snake in the grass ala Ralph Nader. There's always some asshole wanting to tear down the Democratic Party, and rebuild it in some fantastical new way. I love my party, and I wish outsiders would leave us the f**k alone.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Or, rather what he was not doing.
I seriously doubt black had anything whatsoever to do with it.
His comments do not bother me at all.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)his support will remain in the single digits. Write it down!
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)You were never in the market for Bernie Sanders. It is foolish to try and argue that you were open to him but your mind was swayed for one reason or another.
Of course his numbers amongst minorities are low. At this stage of the race Obama's numbers amongst minorities were just as low. As late as December '07 Clinton was outpolling Obama amongst AAs by 52 to 39:-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/05/27/are-black-voters-fired-up-for-hillary-clinton/
The reason given (accurately enough) at the time for Obama's poor polling amongst African Americans was lack of name recognition and brand penetration. You probably have no problem with that, but on the other hand you say that its racist to say that Sanders' low numbers are down to a lack of name recognition. Its ridiculous.
Meanwhile, the top three issues for AA voters are all related to costs of living (SS, medicare and education), and black median income has contracted faster than any other sector of the community:-
http://www.alternet.org/economy/black-america-living-through-great-economic-depression-whats-obama-going-do-about-it
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)And if you guys don't think the socialist thing will hurt him in a general election, then Chris Christie's got a bridge........
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)just like being a Jew will hurt him with some people, and being black hurt Obama with some people.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)of BS. He's got other problems that will hurt far more.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)being black hurt Obama with some white voters, but most of them would never have voted Democrat in any event. I think I recall that Obama got more white votes than any Democrat since Jimmy Carter. On the other side, Obama received excellent turnouts from AAs, particularly in 2012.
Being Jewish will hurt Sanders, he'll get support from Jews but their participation rate is so high anyway and they already vote Democratic, so it won't make much difference.
Minorities typically report higher levels of anti-semitism than whites, so it is true that Sanders' support from minorities, even in the general, will sag compared with a comparable, non-Jewish candidate.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)the AA vote in dramatic fashion?
Show me the data that in 2016 your assertion is true.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)That might be tough. I know a thing or two about quantum physics but building a time machine is probably beyond me.
The latest data from 2014, however, says that about 9% of whites hold anti-semitic attitudes, but about 30% of Latinos and African Americans do.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/02/19/entrenched-anti-semitic-views-very-rare-among-whites-and-asian-americans-common-among-blacks-and-latinos/
So yes, I do recognise that his support from African Americans is likely to lag behind what it might be for a non-Jewish candidate.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)Well, Bernie's got a whole other problem I hadn't accounted for. That's unfair. He didn't choose his parents, neither did Barack Obama. Jewish people have always been on the front lines with us in the struggle for civil rights. I don't get the whole anti-Semitic thing, and I hope I never will.
I still say that Bernie's ethnicity will have little impact on whether or not he gets the Democratic nomination. He's got many more things working against him. The whole "socialist" thing is a problem. As I said before, Obama being black didn't prevent him from being elected TWICE. So, being Jewish is not an impediment. However, being an asshole certainly could be.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)Not sure about the second.
1) This is a non-sequitur, as being Black and being Jewish are two separate things.
2) The last statement is in rather bad taste. A bit like a non-Black person saying that "being Black is not an impediment". Strikes one as being some type of "splaining".
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)stand Bernie Sanders.
Cheviteau
(383 posts)You presume to speak for all AAs just because you are AA? I've voted a straight democratic tick for the past 56 years. I voted for Hillary in our state's primary as a promise to my wife. So Obama shouldn't have been contested from the left in his re-election bid? Simply because he's AA? He has been somewhat of a disappointment to me and many others. He let bank robbers and embezzlers walk free. He never called anyone to account for the Iraq fiasco. He tried too many times to appease the republicans after it became obvious they weren't interested in anything he tried to do. If there is any single segment of our society that should sit up and take notice of the message that Sanders is preaching it is the AA community. I remind you that if it had not been for the Jewish community standing shoulder to shoulder with the AAs in the sixties, you might still be drinking water from "colored only" public fountains in the south. Don't even try to deny that part of history. President Obama was not "owed" the presidency because he is AA. He earned it the old fashion way - he got the votes. Mine included. Just because Sanders remarked that he should have been contested from the left doesn't make him unworthy for consideration by the AA voters. Oh, and I don't care if this response bothers you.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)A... a.. snake in the grass....?
I don't know how old you are,how far back you go, but the "Democratic Party" has to a great degree moved so far to the right as to be unrecognizable.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)he's a shifty snake in the grass.
Are you seeing what they're hinting at? I think I do.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)Obama told the truth , and Hillary cynically attacked him for it. Fox news couldn't have done a better job.
Bernie is straightforward, and tells the truth.
TITLE: Pennsylvania
LENGTH: 30 seconds.
AIRING: Pennsylvania.
SCRIPT: Clinton: Im Hillary Clinton and I approve this message.
Announcer: Barack Obama said that people in small towns cling to guns or religion
as a way to explain their frustrations
Woman 1: I was very insulted by Barack Obama.
Man 1: It just shows how out of touch Barack Obama is.
Woman 2: Im not clinging to my faith out of frustration and bitterness. I find that my faith is very uplifting.
Man 2: The good people of Pennsylvania deserve a lot better than what Barack Obama said.
Woman 1: Hillary does understand the citizens of Pennsylvania better.
Woman 3: Hillary Clinton has been fighting for people like us her whole life.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)suggests that the President & Sec. Clinton have put the 8 year old primaries to rest, and so have I.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)As a Democrat, I felt personally betrayed.
It keeps me from being whole-hearted in my support.
If she gets the nomination, she has my support......but the level of political calculation that I've seen in the campaigns of both Bill and Hillary in the past will leave me on pins and needles in fear of a political misstep.
Mnpaul
(3,655 posts)When MLK gave that speech in 1963, Bernie Sanders was there. He has been fighting for civil/voter rights for over 50 years. Do you think those numbers may change a little when that fact becomes more widely known?
BlackClouds
(5 posts)"In his 1988 autobiography, however, Buchanan describes reporting on the 1963 March on Washington, and personally witnessing the "I Have a Dream" speech" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Pat_Buchanan#Martin_Luther_King.2C_Jr.
Mnpaul
(3,655 posts)Sanders was participating in it.
Bernie Sanders: It was a question for me of just basic justice the fact that it was not acceptable in America at that point that you had large numbers of African Americans who couldnt vote, who couldnt eat in a restaurant, whose kids were going to segregated schools, who couldnt get hotel accommodations, living in segregated housing. That was clearly a major American injustice and something that had to be dealt with.
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20130824/NEWS07/308240004/-1/rss?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&gcheck=1
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)posted at 12:00 pm on July 24, 2011 by Jazz Shaw
President Obama is under attack these days from all manner of nasty conservatives who dont care for his liberal, big spending ways. They seem to have found an unlikely ally, though, in the person of the only officially declared socialist in Congress Bernie Sanders. (Emphasis in original.)
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/24/bernie-sanders-lets-primary-obama/
This is Bernie's more recent history. If you insult the man who is the object of 95%+ approval of the party's most loyal & reliable demographic, and you reap the whirlwind. I think it's cute that Bernie supporters think that he, of all people, would be the inheritor of the affection we have for our first black POTUS. Cute, but delusional.
To answer your question...."Do you think those numbers may change a little when that fact becomes more widely known?"
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!
PatrynXX
(5,668 posts)oh did she turn them off. so if not Bernie who? give him time
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)<...>
But if you look at what the polls are telling us so far, Democrats seem quite happy to have Clinton as their presidential nominee. In the latest Pew poll, 77 percent of Democrats see her favorably, and she has strong approval across ages, incomes, and races. (African-Americans, the most important Democratic sub-group, rate her particularly highly, at 87 percent favorable.)
<...>
http://theweek.com/articles/556175/hillary-clinton-fewer-problems-democratic-base-than-might-think
by Perry Bacon Jr. and Dante Chinni
But another divide has emerged that favors Clinton: white versus non-white Democrats. In a new Washington Post/ABC News survey, 56 percent of white Democrats backed Clinton, while 14 percent supported Sanders. Among self-described liberals, Sanders had 17 percent support, compared to 63 percent for Clinton. (Vice President Biden, who has given no indication he will run, polled in double-digits among both groups.)
But among non-white Democrats (the survey did not break them down by ethnicity), Clinton had 72 percent support, compared to 5 percent for the Vermont senator.
This finding mirrors that of other surveys. As Dante Chinni wrote last week, Wall Street Journal/NBC News polling shows that 68 percent of non-white Democrats say Clinton does not need a primary challenger, while the majority of white Democrats (53 percent) want her to face other candidates.
Among white Democrats, 56 percent say Clinton will bring "real change," compared to a whopping 81 percent of non-white Democrats, according to the WSJ/NBC survey. A CNN poll showed Sanders with 14 percent of the white vote, compared to 5 percent among non-white Democrats.
A Pew poll in March, before Clinton formally started her campaign, showed that 74 percent of black Democrats said there was a "good chance" they would back the former first lady. Only 54 percent of white Democrats agreed with that statement, with many of them (34 percent) opting with the less enthusiastic "some chance."
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/bernie-sanders-surging-among-white-democrats-others-love-hillary-n369251
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)even a dent in comparison.
Do not forget that Hilary comes with the huge bonus of a two term President by her side.....it is a good thing.
Who will Bernie have at his side?
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)doing this to ensure his re-election:
2012 Explainer In Chief
This is what we'll remember in 2016.
swilton
(5,069 posts)translate to doing things for middle class AAs?
Those components are mutually exclusive and that is precisely where the Clinton strategy is flawed and is failing.
It is a major fallacy also to assume that when a candidate who has just entered the Democratic primary less than a month ago should have the same appeal as someone who has been posturing themselves for decades....
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)If we were looking for an alternative to HRC, we wouldn't have picked Bernie Sanders. Ask Howard Dean how that worked out.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Doesn't mean I'm about to give her access to nuclear launch codes.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)That is, it's possible to view someone favorably without necessarily wanting them to be running the place.
as others are saying, we'll see once the campaigning has been going on for a while.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)While letting you know that "view favorably" is not the same thing as "want to lead the nation."
These are different phrases with different meanings.
onecaliberal
(32,895 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)infrastructure and mailing lists built by Democrats for decades. Your post encapsulates the divide that AA's have been talking about since Bernie announced. A whole bunch of economic gobbledygook that plays well with people who already adore Bernie. He's not speaking to me, and there's nothing he can do about it.
Mnpaul
(3,655 posts)Bernie joined your cause 50 years ago when he joined with MLK to march on Washington in 1963. You couldn't have a better ally on your side.
Response to Mnpaul (Reply #92)
Post removed
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)Of course no one ever despises Obama because he's black, and no one ever despises Sanders because he's Jewish. Ever.
BainsBane
(53,066 posts)Hurl insults and see if you can get them to come around.
The irony of using the jury system to hide a post by a person of color saying she won't support Sanders in a thread on that very subject is rich. How will you all hide in real life the single most loyal Democratic voting block?
Number23
(24,544 posts)But oh, if only she'd called him a Trojan Horse. A piece of shit. A lightweight lying con man. A used car salesman.
If only she'd called him "Republican lite". A liar.
If only she'd called him a fascist and chose to lie through her teeth that he called himself a "moderate Republican" when it could not more clear to honest and reasonable people that he did nothing of the sort, DU we know would have been beyond okay with that. Yep.
swilton
(5,069 posts)campaign is less than a month old.
The Clinton supporters (going on how many years/decades is it now) must be getting worried to be starting the smear campaign so early.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)If we're "scared"....you guys must be "scared shitless".
swilton
(5,069 posts)It's easy to distract from Obama/Hillary's record for people of color by attacking the messenger. To make the kind of statement that Bernie doesn't appear to non-whites at this stage of HIS campaign is pure mythology. Hillary has been on the campaign trail for decades now....and her record is at best questionable. Sanders and Clinton are both going to meet with Hispanic leaders this week.
I predict at a minimum to soon be seeing Cornell West and Tavis Smiley on his campaign.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)in the AA community. They appeal to the same demographic that Bernie appeals to. It has nothing to do with their positions on the issues, but all about their anti Obama trash talk. "Cornell & Tavis"? Really? This is what black scholars think of Cornell West.
The Ghost of Cornel West
President Obama betrayed him.
Hes stopped publishing new work.
Hes alienated his closest friends
and allies. What happened to
Americas most exciting
black scholar?
By Michael Eric Dyson
Illustration by HelloVon
April 19, 2015
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121550/cornel-wests-rise-fall-our-most-exciting-black-scholar-ghost
It's well worth the read. A public endorsement from West, at this point, is the last thing Sanders needs if he's serious.
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)Trash talk would indicate Smiley and West are lying about the President ... Any examples.. If one negative article is enough to discount Dr. West with his years of work in the black community then what does a dozen negative article do to Hillary?
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)raindaddy
(1,370 posts)Speculation as to why West has been critical of Obama but didn't find anything specific pointing out West's criticisms aren't based in fact..
Here's a few for you to enjoy!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017269516
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026730662
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025049343
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)raindaddy
(1,370 posts)I didn't think you'd be interested..
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)Stellar
(5,644 posts)And as far as the Clintons are concerned...
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/04/bill-clinton-i-am-not-a-racist/
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7845.html
http://www.progressive.org/news/2008/01/5995/obama-trounces-clintons%E2%80%99-racist-entitled-sc-campaign
Hillary and the first black president have got some work to do. The black community don't know Bernie that well yet. But he still has time to make them see him for who he is. Especially if he (either one) start to incorporate the issues that they're having with the police in this country. THAT will get their attention big-time.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)underthematrix
(5,811 posts)Tavis and Cornell with a passion. They're both very jealous of PBO. REad the article.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)for miles to fall at the feet of Saint Bernard. Except.....NOT!!!!!!
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)if Senator Sanders (I-VT) wants America to "look like Scandinavia" (and Vermont has similar racial diversity), it may not be real reassuring to American racial minorities.
I'm sure he'll address this issue better as he campaigns farther away from the "Great White North" - Canada, you hosers!
I just can't help myself... am I a bad person?
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Once this message is directed to those who have not ordinarily followed him, they will follow him.
You bring up a good point, because anyone who has paid attention would see this Vermonter knows the message.
The message has no borders, but the range of how that message has been carried sure has had its hurdles to clear.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)Here is another problem http://www.salon.com/2015/06/10/diane_rehms_massive_bernie_sanders_oops_npr_host_falls_for_anti_semitic_israeli_citizenship_hoax/
For some reason there are huge divides between ethnic groups and minorities. I don't get it, but the biggest racists against black people that I have known is among non-white Hispanics.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)in the White House. Of that I am sure.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)where minority voters are needed. I doubt he can ever get the support Hillary has with minorities.
As the video states Bernie is supported by mostly White Dems.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)in the primaries against Hillary.
I really don't see Senator Sanders (I-VT) possibly doing that.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)see below. Obama won the primary largely based on support from mostly rural, mostly white states.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)"mostly rural, mostly white" voters were for Obama and not Hillary?
In the South, that demographic doesn't vote in the Democratic primary. From Virginia all the way to Louisiana!
Now all states are actually mostly white, so you got that right!
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)Obama did not do well in the South, or anywhere else where he needed to count on the votes of minorities (in the primaries, not the election). This was because Clinton tended to vastly outpoll him amongst Latinos, and also because he was initially a bit of a slow burn with African Americans as well, although by February of 2008 they were supporting him strongly.
Obama's main support in the primary came from places like Iowa, etc, where the Dem base was made up of progressive whites inclined to distrust Clinton and prepared to support an outsider candidate.
See the graph below, big losses for Obama in California and the South, big wins in largely white regions like the Pacific Northwest and Midwest.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)Senator Sanders (I-VT) really just needs the white rural voters who elected Obama.
I got it now.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)He'll need to expand his support, for sure. But the people who are saying he's got no minority support, he's fucked, blah blah blah are talking out of their arses. Either that or its a blatant ratfucking exercise, as has been mentioned. No outsider candidate ever started out with a lot of minority support, Obama included.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)And in about ten months from now his name will be on everyone's lips, even Republicans.
You will then need a new talking point. That one is already becoming obsolete.
swilton
(5,069 posts)Sanders has been running his campaign < 1 month.
Hillary has been running her campaign < 240 months.....Her track record is clear.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)bowens43
(16,064 posts)america doesnt need another clinton/bush right of center corporate ass kissing administartion
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)It talks to minorities. Listen to his Burlington speech again. There are parts there that are better for minorities than any other candidate has mentioned.
We just need to get out Bernie's story in its entirety to folks
The campaign is what, a month old? Of course he's going to be behind.
He is catching up quite quickly though.
Not that O'Malley, or Mrs. Clinton are not good candidates, it's just the fact that Bernie is the BEST candidate, and it will take time for people to hear his whole story. Once they do, he shall win the nomination, and win the presidency in a landslide like never before seen in this country.
And what are all these Bernie Bashers doing in the Bernie group? When I said similar stuff about Mrs. Clinton in her group, I was immediately banned from it. Could we have some action from the moderators here? Thanks.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)badmouthing a Democratic candidate should be shunned.
Yes I know that I did it, but I sort of learned a lesson there.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)It was pure hell Obama vs Hillary.
This time it seems to me the most negative stuff is coming from the Bernie side. Being a Hillary supporter I have nothing negative to say about Bernie but at times the truth is interpreted as a slam.
There was a video post that said Bernie wasn't doing well with minorities. I used different words but showed a similar viewpoint and got hidden.
whathehell
(29,090 posts)and you're right, it was hell. I hate to see it happening here again.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I'd say that calling to primary a sitting Democratic POTUS is some pretty significant badmouthing...and we Democrats have a right to know about and process that rather disturbing information.
randys1
(16,286 posts)BeyondGeography
(39,379 posts)http://www.salon.com/2008/05/05/clinton_blackvote/
That is from an article about how Hillary lost the black vote...to Obama. How that happens again with Bernie racking up 90-10 margins is a head bender that no one can explain.
randys1
(16,286 posts)support from the Black community as Hillary would have.
And, I truly believe NOBODY who would vote Hillary will NOT vote Bernie, and many who wont vote Hillary will vote Bernie
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)swilton
(5,069 posts)Koinos
(2,792 posts)He is going after the white disaffected class.
In a general election, minorities would vote for him, I would think.
It will be interesting to see how he does in the South Carolina primary, where the majority of democratic voters are black.
bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)Basically white electorates there.
Because in South Carolina and Nevada you have substantial black and Latino primary voters.
azmom
(5,208 posts)Obama's immigration executive Order, and that he supports comprehensive immigration reform that includes a path way to citizenship.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)azmom
(5,208 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)azmom
(5,208 posts)Will make congress listen to the people.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)azmom
(5,208 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)azmom
(5,208 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)first response. C'ya.
BainsBane
(53,066 posts)including the must maligned Third Way. For all y'alls talk about change, it's amazing how many status quo positions you tout as something new. First a claim that funding foodstamps was enough to address poverty, and now you think his adopting a position that 90 percent of more of the Democratic party supports is going to send voters flocking to him? Why?
KansDem
(28,498 posts)Bernie -- Rated 97% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)
Hillary -- Rated 96% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)
http://www.ontheissues.org/
Granted, it's only one percentage point but still, he scores higher.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Yeah, that's so right
It's actually many, many persons of color.
That's okay, though, Tarheel. By reading this thread, I see we have a pretty good picture of how you have "written" it down for history. The rest is history.
Many happy returns to your new found love for the Democratic party
The party that recognizes everyone's role in the electorate
The party with room enough for everyone's voice in the workplace for a living wage, the party that recognizes that everyone deserves to not have to go into debt when reaching for higher education, and a party that understands that corporations are not people. Umm...
See? You recognized that the NAACP is not a person, right along with Citizen's United saying corporations are persons. Keep track of some future heavy duty questions from the podium. I know I look forward to hearing the answers from your favored candidate.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,240 posts)the least. On the flipside, there's nothing "your favored candidate" can say to change my mind either. Alas......
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)Obama was consistently outpolled by Clinton amongst minorities and won the nomination chiefly as a result of his strong support from predominantly white states:-
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)By that I am talking about the projection phenomena. Many people are using the same descriptions about HRC that they used about Obama. Comments about being a progressive, about caring about the working class, or the middle class. Or comments that the candidate will "take on" Wall Street.
Many Democratic candidates talk a good liberal game when running, but govern as center right people. They justify the right wing move as being pragmatic, or working within the system.
Any talk about Sanders and his supposed lack of appeal for minorities must be measured against the minimal coverage his ideas are given by the corporate media.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)The world was on the precipice of economic collapse. We were in 2 wars!
Then, Obama liberalizes national healthcare in his spare time!
Now the US is more Republican than ever!
Was this Obama's move to the right?
And why would we expect a Republican Congress to approve liberal left agendas?
Is it really all Obama's fault?
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)2 months. But the Affordable Care Act, rather than liberalizing healthcare, is basically a multibillion dollar subsidy to the health insurance industry. It could have been done by a Republican, and in fact was proposed by Richard Nixon.
I would disagree that the US is more Republican than ever. Their electoral success is due to massive gerrymandering in the 30 states that they control, and the gerrymandering was made possible by the minimal turnout of Democratic voters in 2010 and 2014.
My take.
BlackClouds
(5 posts)Very simple why that is the case. The lack of voting in off year elections. People apparently think the President is a King that can rule by decree.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)And very true. Voter apathy, whatever the reason, leads to right wing politicians being elected by an aging, white, rural electorate that is terrified of change and terrified and angry at any people who do not look like them.
BainsBane
(53,066 posts)Obama is black and knows what it is like to experience racism.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)My feeling is that President Obama wasted far too much time trying to find common ground with a group of GOP politicians who represent their base of older, whiter, and generally more rural Americans. They are a group of racist whores who appease their racist base while doing the bidding of their capitalist owners.
But my feeling with Sanders is that exposure to his message will increase his support. Assuming of course that the US corporatized media will actually report the message.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)In other words, try to turn people away from him in advance.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)he has never said or done anything racist that anyone can point to.
Some have even tried to paint him as the homophobe's candidate, even though he supported gay marriage long before Clinton even commissioned a focus group to see whether it was in her interests to support it or not.
Even his age. Remarks about him being a "seventy year old socialist". Of course Clinton, at 67, is a spring chicken by comparison.
Strangest ratfucking exercise that I have ever seen.
kath
(10,565 posts)Support it or not"
Ha - you've got that right! Totally the way she operates.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)BainsBane
(53,066 posts)So you can control which poll results are released.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)jjewell
(618 posts)I'm calling shenanigans, and I suspect a serious case of "ratfucking" going on here.
I'm a "minority" (African American) as are a lot if my friends and associates, and I know of
very few that are supporting anyone but Bernie Sanders as the next President of the United States.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)There is absolutely nothing in this thread or anywhere else that I have seen that indicates Bernie Sanders is a racist or that even his policies are unappealing to Blacks and other minorities.
This is just shit made up and repeated ad nauseum, until some people accept it as fact. In other words, a Big Lie by the Hillary crowd.
BainsBane
(53,066 posts)showing more people of color support another candidate and saying Sanders is a racist. Why should that have to be explained to you?