It's Time to Look in the Mirror, Bernie: Sanders Needs to be Criticized for his Failed Theories

[bravenak]

It’s a really appealing theory, in no small part because the Democrats used to have broad appeal to white voters in the old days, and if they could win back voters that defected to the Republicans decades ago while keeping the majority of non-white voters, they’d have an unstoppable coalition.

Sanders himself is a huge proponent of this theory. In 2014, he told NPR that the reason Democrats lost the white vote is because “if you are in the working class, you are struggling to keep your heads above water.” He suggested the way to win them back is for Democrats to suggest “a massive federal jobs program.”

Critics of this theory, including myself, have suggested that, as nice as it would be to believe that it’s all about economics, the likelier reason is that white people who vote Republican simply put a priority on maintaining racial and gender hierarchies over economic justice, and that won’t change no matter how many goodies you offer them.

http://www.salon.com/2016/05/28/its_time_to_look_in_the_mirror_bernie_now_more_than_ever_sanders_needs_to_be_criticized_for_his_failed_political_theories/

[onehandle]

1. This is at Salon?

Say it ain't so, Salon!

[bravenak]

3. Yep

Everybody is tired of this campaign

[Gothmog]

100. I was surprised also

[hollysmom]

32. people with all sorts of ideas post at salon, it may have more people writing liberal, but there

still is a mix.

[hobbit709]

2. Now even the kitchen sink has been tossed into it today.

[bravenak]

4. It's wild in gdp

[cali]

5. I actually agree with that. Most of those voters prefer to vote their bigotry

over their economic interests

[bravenak]

8. I watch them do it year after year, no fail

Nothing we can do will ever change them. Best to work on the children, the long termers are set in their ways.

[brewens]

16. I bought my buddies kid a beer for using the "N" word when talking about Obama. My

motivation was that at least he came right out and said it, and I told everyone there that too. I'd prefer a racist talk like a good old fashioned racist and not deny it.

[brush]

131. That's a different strategy. How did it turn out?

[Autumn]

62. Oh yes they do. It amazes me

[brush]

129. They like to cozy up to the rich because as they are temporarily between millions.

Nah, they're victims of their own white skin which many of the rich have used to blind them from discerning the divide and conquer tactic that has been played on them for centuries.

They don't get it's all about class warfare and not the race of "the other" that has them down and out.

[BootinUp]

6. Good article. nt

[bravenak]

12. She always comes through

[XemaSab]

7. Race baiting!

Yay!

[bravenak]

10. Bull

Yall love saying that but it makes you guys look bad

[XemaSab]

20. Serious question:

Do you believe that Bernie or his white supporters are any more racist than a representative sample of white Clinton supporters?

Or sexist or homophobic?

'Cause I feel like there's this argument that goes something like: "Black people support Hillary. Therefore, if you oppose Hillary, you oppose Black people."

In a normal year with normal candidates, this would be bad enough, but bless me, I remember 2008 and I remember what the Hillary campaign said and did. I remember their dog whistles and their insisting that white votes matter, and I remember how well Hillary did in Appalachia, which is the whitest, most racist part of the country. I have links, if you want them.

You can make up your own mind, but I think the efforts of certain people to make Bernie supporters out as racist, sexist, homophobes are gross.

And the argument that turning the superdelegates away from Hillary is some George Wallace-type voter-disenfranchisement shenanigans is gross, too.

[bravenak]

23. No I don't

But I do think they don't check each other and never once apologize for their actions.

[XemaSab]

26. Thank you

That's a valid response.

[hollysmom]

41. I agree.

[cali]

28. Heaven knows I have my differences with bravenak, but she isn't

race baiting

[PeaceNikki]

30. That's such a right wing phrase.

And as overused and misused as the word "meme" on DU.

Here read this: http://fusion.net/story/155681/if-youre-confused-about-what-race-baiting-is-heres-a-bit-of-context/

[brush]

133. Race baiting is what Trump does.

When someone actually says Mexicans are criminals and rapists, that's race baiting because he actually said a racist thing.

When someone mentions that race may or may not be a factor in an argument doesn't constitute "race baiting".

Using "race baiting" in that way is in a sense, racism itself, as it's an attempt to deflect the conversation away from discussing actual racism by making an accusation of "race baiting" to thereby turn an actual honest attempt at resolution against itself.

[ebayfool]

9. Look at the NPR link, he does NOT say white voters - the NPR interview posits the question that way.

BTW, your writer lost any cred by calling him an "old coot". Yeah, nothing partisan with that crack.



http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2014/11/19/365024592/sen-bernie-sanders-on-how-democrats-lost-white-voters


His reply?

snip/

On why he says Democrats are losing white voters

Well, I am focusing on the fact that whether you're white or black or Hispanic or Asian, if you are in the working class, you are struggling to keep your heads above water. You're worried about your kids. What should the Democratic Party be talking about, Steve? What they should be talking about is a massive federal jobs program. There was once a time when our nation's infrastructure — roads, bridges, water systems, rail — were the envy of the world. Today that's no longer the case.

I would say if you go out on the street and you talk to people and say, "Which is the party of the American working class?" People would look to you like you were a little bit crazy, they wouldn't know what you were talking about, and they certainly wouldn't identify the Democrats.

[bravenak]

11. Oh, he said it elsewhere

Jusy google it. It's out there.

[ebayfool]

24. You made the statement, provide the link. I already proved your OP was based on non-fact.

And the writer? Checked her Twitter, no wonder she twisted the facts. She's a full on Clinton acolyte. She took an interview and changes it to fit her theory, then calls him an old coot for saying what he did NOT say. You have no problem with that I take it?

Her entire article is based on a misrepresentation of the NPR interview.

https://twitter.com/AmandaMarcotte

[bravenak]

34. Here:

We have been talking about it in black spaces for a full year.

But that’s not important. You should not be basing your politics based on your color. What you should be basing your politics on is, how is your family doing? In the last election, in state after state, you had an abysmally low vote for the Democrats among white, working-class people. And I think the reason for that is that the Democrats have not made it clear that they are prepared to stand with the working-class people of this country, take on the big money interests. I think the key issue that we have to focus on, and I know people are uncomfortable about talking about it, is the role of the billionaire class in American society.

working class people must all be white since democrats seem to attract damn near the entirety of the black voting population.

[ebayfool]

56. In the NPR interview he does not say what YOU interpret it to mean.

The interviewer asked: On why he says Democrats are losing white voters and On African-American support for Democrats

Your cite was after he was a specific response to the question asked about losing white voters.

His response was:
"But that's not important. You should not be basing your politics based on your color. What you should be basing your politics on is, how is your family doing? ... In the last election, in state after state, you had an abysmally low vote for the Democrats among white, working-class people. And I think the reason for that is that the Democrats have not made it clear that they are prepared to stand with the working-class people of this country, take on the big money interests. I think the key issue that we have to focus on, and I know people are uncomfortable about talking about it, is the role of the billionaire class in American society."

Do you disagree with: "You should not be basing your politics based on your color"? If so, I don't know what to say to you.


"whether you're white or black or Hispanic or Asian, if you are in the working class ..."
That's pretty straight out the opposite of what you and the writer are maligning him with.


How do you distort the above to mean what you, not Sanders, said -
" ... working class people must all be white since democrats seem to attract damn near the entirety of the black voting population."

He, in fact, does NOT say that. You are seeing what YOU WANT to see. You have to cherry pick what I saw as an inclusive message ("whether you're white or black or Hispanic or Asian, if you are in the working class ...&quot to turn this into anything racist or demeaning.

And that goes for the OP link as well. It's ginning up a controversy based on a false narrative.



I'm including the link in this response, so that others can go to the source that the OP link is spun from - for elucidation purposes.

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2014/11/19/365024592/sen-bernie-sanders-on-how-democrats-lost-white-voters

[bravenak]

63. Damn right I disagree!

Us colors of folks have to consider our color just by driving down public roads. Why the hell should we not consider who has the best policies for people of color? He is dead wrong.

[ebayfool]

66. Ok. Can you tell me what policies Clinton proposes (that Sanders does not) that address your ...

concerns of racism outside of economic policy? I ask that with the caveat that we are now not discussing the premise of the original OP.

How does Sanders' economic policies make this worse? I'm truly trying to 'get' why they are offensive to you. Without spin or cherry-picking - just an honest reply/answer.

Economic policy effects everyone. Black, white or purple. Equality on any front helps to build equality on more fronts. It's not an all or nothing battle. You attack on many fronts, yes? Economic equality allows people to take on some of those fights. It's hard to fight a war when you are ground down trying to make it day to day.

[bravenak]

74. She wants more anti discrimination laws and accepts as fact that racial concerns need to be

addressed head on, not avioded to play to color blind ideology that neglects the facts that race keeps many from succeding economically. He avoids discussing race directly in favor of a 'helps EVERYONE!' aporoach, never once stating as fact the any new policies will help whites MORE unless we address race and apply affirmative action laws to any new program.

[azurnoir]

122. Lol pot meet kettle

[bravenak]

124. I once thought you were real

[azurnoir]

125. real what? I am singular and very real ETA and old enough to remember

what the 3rd way is really about and who it was formulated to attract back to the Democratic party

[bravenak]

132. I do not believe you

[azurnoir]

135. Well then don't believe me , but out of curiosity what is it you don't believe me about?

[floriduck]

102. I do agree with that and it's a shame that whites doing well economically lose sight of all minor-

ities. But I am sensitive to all who fall into the minority category. Native Americans come first to me due to their owning the land we took from them. And now they sit on land we gave back to them so they could barely exist. Next I consider African Americans and Hispanics. We destroyed much of Vietnam Nam so I include them high on the list of Asians too.

[bravenak]

106. I agree with you

Yes. We have wronged many groups and should help heal the damage, starting with the first nations. We can do it simultaneously but give the most to who lost the most.

[polly7]

35. Now that's scummy.

But it's been happening since he first announced he was running.

Sad.

[lunamagica]

13. K&R for visibility. Good find, Bravenak

[bravenak]

18. Maybe we need a bunch of mirrors

[mmonk]

14. Your Republican theories on economics betrays you.

We see you. A non racist Republican is still a Republican in our eyes.

[bravenak]

15. Who are you TALKING ABOUT?

[mmonk]

51. The racists left for the Republican Party in the 60's.

Creating economic opportunity and a ladder called a middle class is not a failed theory. When you have a billionaire class and everyone else struggling, that is more of a failed policy that will leave us more in a third world status. My opinion backed by years of study. I may be wrong on some issues but stats and history of world economics seems to back what I learned.

[bravenak]

53. Black anericans have done better and better every single year SINCE that time. Our wages are still

rising.

[Warren DeMontague]

17. Except, that "theory" was never advanced by Bernie Sanders.

The theory he has been running on is that Democratic Party voters want real progressive policies and leadership, not the ersatz DLC kind.

Whether he is right or wrong on that, that has been what he has been advancing.

[bravenak]

19. He has been advancing that very theory over and over

Colorblind economic equality. Which is stupid because we aint nver been colorblind in this nation. He want to work with some idealistic america, not the one we live in.

[Warren DeMontague]

36. He never pushed the whole "whats the matter with kansas" line, marcotte made that up.

As for "colorblind economic equality", again, you're reading something into his campaign that just isn't there.

[bravenak]

47. Oh really?

But that’s not important. You should not be basing your politics based on your color. What you should be basing your politics on is, how is your family doing? In the last election, in state after state, you had an abysmally low vote for the Democrats among white, working-class people. And I think the reason for that is that the Democrats have not made it clear that they are prepared to stand with the working-class people of this country, take on the big money interests. I think the key issue that we have to focus on, and I know people are uncomfortable about talking about it, is the role of the billionaire class in American society.

Is it not color blind to say that we blacks should not vote based on our color? We should just pretend we don't have a color and just worry about money, it his thing. Of course we vote based on our color, our COLOR is there and gets us KILLED. Yes, we vote for who treats people of COLOR best. Rich blacks too. It would benefit the greatly to have lower taxes, but they black. So, they vite for what is best for all blacks, not just their own pocketbook. That was his issue. Never listened to us on race.

[Warren DeMontague]

48. Do you have a link on the context of that statement?

It's undeniable that Sanders did poorly with POC, just as Hillary has done poorly with Millennials.

If it was Sanders who made that statement, I can certainly see how it wouldn't help.

[bravenak]

50. Yep

http://www.mediaite.com/online/remember-this-moment-when-bernie-sanders-is-courting-black-voters-this-week/

[Warren DeMontague]

69. surely you'd agree, if "you shouldn't vote based upon your color" is an admonishment to white voters

as a demographic, that is very different than spinning it like he was saying it to African Americans?

[bravenak]

70. He was speaking of AA's in tht same breath. Nothing about it being whites who vote based on skin

[ebayfool]

59. Yes, it's out of context.

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2014/11/19/365024592/sen-bernie-sanders-on-how-democrats-lost-white-voters

[ebayfool]

60. See post #56 n/t

[Armstead]

84. A hint: Don't bother. Debating brick walls only gives one a headache.

[Live and Learn]

123. +10,000 nt

[forjusticethunders]

21. Not just that

White voters voted to take food out of the bellies of their children because they preferred the psychological wage of white supremacy to the real wages of an economy that would provide a secure life not just for them, but for black and brown workers. It was racism that got Reagan and Nixon and both Bushes into power, and it will be racism that gets Trump into power if god forbid that happens.

With that said, to a certain point it is a GOOD idea to try to win back the white working class, especially now when white people are starting to feel the pain working class black people have always felt. I thought Bernie could have been the one to square the circle and wake up at least some of those whites to the fact that the Republicans are using bigotry to rob them. But in the end he didn't do that, and he should have.

[bravenak]

27. Yep

Rather stay poor than share with 'those people'.

[forjusticethunders]

33. With that said, the Dems have been too tilted towards the middle and upper middle classes

In terms of their outreach and the decline of the union movement has led them to compete with Republicans for big corporate money. There are a LOT of POC in red states that haven't been reached out to (Texas is a case in point, if Texas Hispanics voted like California Hispanics we'd be already winning that state) and many of them are itching for an economic populist message. But it has to be crafted for the particular concerns of said POC, not a whitewashed colorblind stump speech.

[bravenak]

37. I agree

We have to taylor our message and our policies to include the poor as well and stop the shaming behaviours

[Autumn]

22. Yes people should look in mirrors, perhaps they will see their own ugliness

[bravenak]

25. Umm hmm

Whatevs

[Autumn]

45. Umm hmm

Hell yeah.

[msanthrope]

68. Matthew 7:3-5. nt

[Autumn]

71. Nah, not my type of book or philosophy.

But it's interesting you don't share that with the author if the POS OP. Maybe you ought to do it.

[opiate69]

29. Ah... good old Amanda "Rape-loving scum" Marcotte..

That this intellectual gnat actually gets paid for her imbecilic ramblings should chap the ass of any thinking creature.

[karynnj]

31. It is the same as Obama speaking of the same reagan Democrats as voting their guns and religion

Bernie and Obama are making the same case -- one I called wrong in 2008. The reason is that BOTH were troubled that people were not voting their clear economic interest. The problem is that people do not vote just on their economic interests.

In fact, just as many liberals who are reasonably well off vote against their economic interests because of their commitment to social and economic justice, many of these more socially conservative, poor white men vote their social values -- against more power for women and POC, which they see as stealing "their" jobs and because they view what we see as social progress as losing important values. NOTE: I disagree strongly with them, but am trying to explain.

I like the article you point to because it more articulately says that. However, though Sanders speaks more about economic justice, this is what every mainstream Democrat has said or done.

[bravenak]

39. You might be right

I was troubled by his seeming dismissiveness to our social justice concerns. I had hoped he'd change as time went on so I could support him.

[hollysmom]

38. the ignroance that was displayed in this article is beyond reason

1 first criticize Sanders for not immediately dropping out of the race genuflecting and kissing ass. because the author thinks he should.
2. then attack the poplulist vote - didn't happen, Interesting.ly it very rarely showed it's face inteh media - they were more about (a) ignoring Sanders (he can' win), then (b) attacking Sanders on false pretenses (he can never win and he dared to attack Hillary personally on her corporate views - that is way to personal he should be ashamed) and then (c) trying to invalidate him - so many stupid lies and people here are posting them over and over even though they have been exposed - people just love lies!!!! Oh his imaginary bernie bros etc.

Well against all that and the manipulations and behind the scenes threats and favors I think he is doing damn well. The theories atha I believe are discredited are
trickle down
business does stuff better - and ha ha ha cheaper. so lets privatize everything
Rich people pay their fair share - heck when I was raking in the big bucks, I could have taken even more tax write offs but I do have a conscience - I took some but others were too far out there for me to even consider them - totally legal, but unconscionable. Like I have an office in my home - so all my commuting to work is tax deductible. completely legal, I talked to an official about it. I could say I was traveling between offices not commuting to work.

[bravenak]

40. This is why Sanders did not appeal to the rest of us

But that’s not important. You should not be basing your politics based on your color. What you should be basing your politics on is, how is your family doing? In the last election, in state after state, you had an abysmally low vote for the Democrats among white, working-class people. And I think the reason for that is that the Democrats have not made it clear that they are prepared to stand with the working-class people of this country, take on the big money interests. I think the key issue that we have to focus on, and I know people are uncomfortable about talking about it, is the role of the billionaire class in American society.

[hollysmom]

42. I believe you are replying to someone else.

Please take you post and reply to the person you meant to reply to. This has nothing to do with what I said.

I had barely posted when this reply appeared, I believe this is your error.

[Recursion]

78. No, read it again

That was entirely a propos to your post.

[alittlelark]

43. I so miss the 'unrec' feature................................

[bravenak]

46. We have ignore...

[alittlelark]

64. I have over 300 on 'ignore' - most low post count

Some of the really nasty ones I choose to not ignore. They should be called out - especially the race-baiters.

[bravenak]

65. Oooohhhh!

[Number23]

73. Post #30 has an excellent bit of info on the extra special folks that use the terms "race

baiter"

Hint: No moderately decent person or progressive uses this phrase.

[alittlelark]

97. Can't read it - that poster is already on 'ignore.

[ljm2002]

44. "working class" is not synonymous with "white"...

...although I do not expect you to get that, since it does not fit with your narrative.

Interestingly, the only candidate who made some very specific references to "hard working, white voters" was... wait for it... Hillary Clinton back in 2008.

Who were you supporting then, bravenak? Were you even paying attention then? You seem pretty young. But the videos are out there, surely you have seen them.

[Eric J in MN]

49. Bernie Sanders is doing better than Clinton in polls against Trump

...because there is an appetite for liberal populism (which this article denies.)

[bravenak]

52. Mc Cain was beating Obama in the polls this far out. Means nothing.

[Eric J in MN]

57. The article calls the response to Sanders' populism 'a giant whiff.'

John McCain got 46% in the 2008 general election.

Fortunately, McCain lost, but McCain's campaign wasn't a 'a giant whiff.'

[bravenak]

61. I am not understanding what you mean

Mc Cain had way more votes than Bernie, he was the candidate. It still was a giant whiff. It gave them the tea party which is a cancer they will not survive with our demographic changes.
Sanders populism failed with most groups, she has the majority with women, hispanics, blacks, mos poc, etc. Those are the oppressed groups, the ones you need to get in this day and age in order to be considered effective at messaging if you are on the left. His failure with us shows that his type of populism was geared towards a message that diverse groups were not as interested in as they were in Hillary's. A whiff is right Im afraid.

[katsy]

54. Just an opinion piece

giving an alternative theory to SBS economic policies.

That's just fine... Everyone has an opinion.

But wait. Let HRC ignore the economic concerns of SBS supporters. Wanna put your $ where your mouth is? Encourage HRC to support more bigger better for the 1% faster shinier trade deals. Let her support her hubby's clusterfuck trade deals and let's see trump pivot to her left on that.

Yeah. That's the ticket to victory. ROFLMFAO.

Problem with opinion pieces,,, everyone takes away what they want to take away from it. I find the article stupid & hope HRC doesn't pivot right on economic issues. SBS is perfectly correct about the rigged economy.

[Agnosticsherbet]

55. "white people who vote Republican simply put a priority on maintaining racial and gender hierarchies

over economic justice"

This is the winner.

it is also insulting to imply that black voters are not part of the "working class."

[bravenak]

58. Very insulting.

[ebayfool]

67. What Sanders did say is "Well, I am focusing on the fact that whether you're white or black ..."

... or Hispanic or Asian, if you are in the working class, you are struggling to keep your heads above water."

In the NPR piece the OP was based on:
http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2014/11/19/365024592/sen-bernie-sanders-on-how-democrats-lost-white-voters

A reply to a question asked ...


Republicans? Yeah, what you said!

[Number23]

72. Paging Starry Messenger! Starry please pick up the rainbow phone at reception

Because Starry has been saying every single thing in this article for MONTHS.

That’s why it’s important not to give up criticizing Sanders. His political theories were wrong. Instead, there’s significant supporting evidence for the competing theory, which was popularized by Barack Obama and embraced by Hillary Clinton, which is that the Democrats do better by focusing on core constituencies, like women and people of color, rather than continuing to chase the elusive white working class male vote.

Democrats do better and the entire country becomes more equal.

If anything, it’s all more important now than ever for critics to stay on Sanders. Right now, he’s pushing this idea that the only reason he lost is because the system was rigged against him, rather than admitting that his bold plan to win white working class voters back into the Democratic fold failed. If he’s permitted to do this without pushback, he might convince some gullible Democrats to keep wasting time and energy on trying to win over white voters with economic populism, rather than committing to the winning strategy of building up the Democratic coalition through old-fashioned liberalism.

K&R

[bravenak]

75. I am so happy that people are finally talking about this. FINALLY!

[Number23]

76. Now you get one of the MANY reasons that Starry is a host in the AA group, even though she's.. WHITE

"Clue" knows no color and we know who has one around here.

[bravenak]

77. Oh my god, her whiteness upsets them ever so much. Cracks me up!

[Armstead]

87. What the hell good is a coalition for if it is not advancing the interests of participanmts?

Jeeze Lousie. I had always though the Democrats were supposed to be the party of unification, and that "divide and conquer" was the GOP strategy. But now it's touted as the formula for success in the Democratic Party?

Okay so let's forget white people and build a multicultural NON White coalition....ironically under a very white Democratic Elite and an ultra white President.

And once we have our White-Led Rainbow Coalition -- We must Never Ever address economic issues or challenge inequalities as a unified working and middle class because.....Well because we're not supposed to have anything to do with white working people because you know, they're all racist. And forget the poor who are white. They don't count either.

And let's forget the paradox that many working white people are women. But I guess women don't matter unless they disavow their economic interests in favor of Democratic......What? It's all so dang confusing.

So we'll let the White Elites keep dividing us and screwing us all economically, and not unify to ask for anything in the economic sphere because -- well you know we don't want to have anything to do with white working people. They don't count. Let the GOP have 'em all.

So what the hell is left for an agenda?

[BootinUp]

90. Are you saying you believe there are policies

of the D party that are discriminatory based on race? Serious question.

[Armstead]

94. No and I don't know where you got that from

I was referring to the nonsense that it is wrong for the Deomcrats to try to attract working class whites based on common economic interests.

If a significant section of the working class is left out of a coalition, the coalition is giving up its ability to actually fight for their economic rights. In unity there is strength. In division there is weakness.

We can all huddle together in our seperate demographic tents but we're not gonna get anything for it. Only when the middle, working and lower classes acknowledge their common interests will economic justice ever be achieved.

The GOP has been sucessfully working the divide and conquer strategy for decades. I hate to see the Democrats doing the same thing in reverse.



A

[BootinUp]

95. Its not that complicated, the coalition also includes those

who don't trust Sanders with the economy and other things as well. Then there are those who simply doubted his chances in the GE. We don't normally get perfect candidates to choose from. But when you look at Clintons economic platform, you should be able to get on board.

[Armstead]

96. This is lessabout Sanders and more about core issues and values.

That predated Sanders, and will continue long after this primary.

I'm sorry but I look at the Clintons' shared background, their too tight bonds with the elite class and the corporations and banksters who have been screwing us....And I just don't trust or believe her.....She Represents the problem not the solution, IMO

Bernie or no, we could have done a Lot better than that.

I hope I am proven wrong if she makes it into the WH

[forjusticethunders]

105. The door is open for the white working class to join the coalition

But they have to give up their racism and prejudice and work to solve the problems specific to marginalized groups.

[Armstead]

109. There are millions of people in the white working class

I prefer to think that we're individuals forst and labels second.

Some are bigots who will never work with those they hate.

But many others do not have racism and prejudice.....And many are a mix and can work it through with exposure and shared purpose.

Maybe I'm silly, biut i happen to think that one way to overcome bigotry and ignorant stereotypes is actually working together for shared purposes...Doesn't mean people will agree on everything all the time, but that's the nature of a coalition.

[Number23]

107. Your post is so embarassing I think I'm just going to pretend that you didn't write it.

It will be better for both of us this way.

[Armstead]

108. Some of the craop I read here is embarrassing focusing on differences and rejecting....

common circumstances and needs and personal and collective goals.

It does sound like a mirror image of the GOP divide and conquer strategy.

[Recursion]

79. Great piece (nt)

[calm_thinker]

80. An attempt to change focus a bit.... hopefully for the better

It's my opinion that many times we all have the potential to vote against our best interest when wrapped up in emotional (and valid) positions. I would not underestimate any candidate's ability to exploit that. And would you expect anyone in the 1% to vote against their own interests either?

Whether this should be a separate topic I do not know, but I would like to move this discussion towards a policy position which we know candidates differ; from the excerpt below -

I think the key issue that we have to focus on, and I know people are uncomfortable about talking about it, is the role of the billionaire class in American society.

I would like to offer a simple significant policy point, which regardless of the outcomes in Primaries or General Election, or emotions (valid) expressed in the rest of this thread, should be acted on: that is the minimum wage.

Would it surprise you that $15/hr is probably too low as of 2015???

http://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/oor/OOR_2015_FULL.pdf#page=18

If not now, when?

I am posting the relevant NPR talking point from here: [link:http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2014/11/19/365024592/sen-bernie-sanders-on-how-democrats-lost-white-voters|] and I added carriage returns after sentences for readability. Notice how quickly NPR shifts the focus, and we all lose focus of the billionaire class.

On African-American support for Democrats
Well, here's what you got.
What you got is an African-American president, and the African-American community is very, very proud that this country has overcome racism and voted for him for president.
And that's kind of natural.
You've got a situation where the Republican Party has been strongly anti-immigration, and you've got a Hispanic community which is looking to the Democrats for help.

But that's not important.
You should not be basing your politics based on your color.
What you should be basing your politics on is, how is your family doing? ...
In the last election, in state after state, you had an abysmally low vote for the Democrats among white, working-class people.
And I think the reason for that is that the Democrats have not made it clear that they are prepared to stand with the working-class people of this country, take on the big money interests.
I think the key issue that we have to focus on, and I know people are uncomfortable about talking about it, is the role of the billionaire class in American society.

On why Americans are uncomfortable talking about the 'billionaire class'

Because they fund organizations like NPR and the media in general.
Because they make huge campaign contributions, to politics, to politicians of all stripes.

On the U.S. approach to battling the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq

[bravenak]

82. You have to understand

African american are not focused on the billionaire class because we are not only oppressed by rich white men, but white society as a whole. What do we focus on goldman sachs for when our problem is that the white office manager won't even LOOK at our resume because of our names? When cops focus most of their negative attention on us? Fix racism and we might have the energy to focus on the oligarchs, but as it stands, all of white privilege is our oligarchy in a sense.

Whites can focus on the rich because the rich are the only ones above them in the social strata. When you are black and you look up, almost EVERYONE has a boot on your neck, they actually HELP the rich keep us down and recieve psychological wages in place of the economic benefits they might have recieved instead.

He was dead wrong in saying 'don't vote based on color'. White republicans do it everytime. We do it to protect our selves from THEM. Tone deaf.

So, it is not that we do not talk about the billionaire class, it is that they are not the only problem for black folks, everyone is. We never know who might be the one that we run into that does something terrible to us just baseed on our color. So we damn sure better vote based on who will do us LEAST harm. For a candidate to not get that... It means he dont get our votes.

[calm_thinker]

83. I understand, and your emotions are valid

and you are correct that he was dead wrong in bluntly saying

'don't vote based on color'.

just trying to shift focus without dismissing your valid viewpoints to something which does affect everyone not in the billionaire class, and where candidates have differing viewpoints on how a minimum wage would be implemented.

Apology if my observation minimized your valid emotions and viewpoints

[bravenak]

85. Oh, no, you're fine

I understand both povs on the minimum. She is actually right on this but should be able to articulate it in a non wonky way. In many places the cost of living is so low that 12.00 per hour would be wonderful. They are paying 600 bucks a month for a two bedroom house and money goes farther because of lower prices.

Here, the cost of living is very high, the cost of produce is extremely high. Housing prices have shot up and you'd pay about 1100 for a two bedroom apartment. We passed a measure to raise it to 9.75 this year and tie it to inflation forever more. Ours really needs to be more, like Seattle and NY, and Cali. Raise it to 15 and these employers will be very selective of who they hire, this is a red state. We are in major budget crisis.

My issue with bernie's plan is the fact that he will raise taxes on lower income folks even those on ssi to get his grand plan. People out here would actually be willing to fight a bloody war over too much washington control. Many places would. Remember? Our revolution stated over the Stamp Act. We could actually start problems by moving too fast for more than half the nation. His plan is not supoorted by the entire party, most support hers. It is unrealistic and quite frankly, his plan of bullying republicans into passing it sounds far fetched. Progress is better than a losing battle. He is unwilling to tak what he can get and then work for more. We'd get nothing done his way, ever.

[calm_thinker]

89. Glad I didn't offend, but as a hypothetical

If you had more money than was needed, would that be a bad thing???

It's my opinion on minimum wage that less than 15$ across the board, while phasing a minimum over time is not in the workers interest, but in the employers interest.

When when I think of government I think of people (workers) first and not employers (corporations)

[bravenak]

93. Nope. But there will be less demand for the unskilled, uneducated, or trained labor.

Which means all jobs will require background checks and drug tests. Our felons are nearly unemployable as it is, with such a high minimum it will be that much harder to get a foot in the door. And looking a black incarceration rates, many of the rejected will be black. Unless we get programs to hire felons and train them for free at tech schools or inside the prison as a rehabilitation element, we will fail the least among us. Imagine how hard it would be for the undocumented to get a job if every job require a background check or finger printing? Might make it difficult to live.

We have to hav a wholistic approach and think of thing that may cause a butterfly effect o unentended consequences.

Would I like a program that trains felons and helps them find jobs? Yes. I also think child support should offer job training and placement for absentee parents. I am way to the left of both candidates so I try to think of how to help the ones eberybody feel safe ignoring.

Trade school should be free. Works projects are sorely needed. We need to used the public and private sector to get it done. Tax credits shoukd go to those willing to hire at 15 dollars an hour in a non discriminitory way, help transition people into the wirkforce and help them gain skills, pay them well, get a nice tax reduction. Then they can stop tax aviodance and still help the community.

We need more public housing in nice easy to access locations, designed to build a community atmosphere. We need to zone it in our city plans and enforce it. More daycare subsidation.

This is why I chose Hillary. She thinks about all of it.

[calm_thinker]

98. ok good, more money is ok (not disagreeing with the validity of issues you raise in your replies)

Last edited Sun May 29, 2016, 02:25 AM - Edit history (1)

So if you have more money available then that money will either get saved or get spent.

For me, when I spend money, I choose spend it locally (with what I have left post child support,) with a small mom and pop store or restaurant (community) and not the big box stores or chains (corporations). When I choose to save money, I lessen my dependence on my employer or my need for community services..

The net effect of that (however small) is an increase in demand for services and goods (local jobs and improved economy), and the local tax revenues increase (supplying money needed for local community services).

In essence, by me spending my money locally (and having more of it) - I provide my community's elected officials an opportunity to increase the services they provide to my community (and me). Whether they actually do that is not up to me, until I vote them out for not representing my needs.

When it comes to money in your pocket and spent in your local community, (which is not NYC based or your previous reply) what is more important: money in your your pocket or a big corporations profits (the so called job creators).

And who is the government for (the people or the corporations)?

As to who you cast a vote for is up to you ... but in my opinion - the power your voice lends you, far outweighs the money spent to influence and suppress it, especially when it benefits corporations and not people.

If not now - when?

[baldguy]

81. K&R

[lumberjack_jeff]

86. "and that won’t change no matter how many goodies you offer them"

It's amazing how some people can
1) take a fact, such as: "young white independents are supporting Sanders"
2) turn it into a strawman: "why are Sanders supporters such racists?"
3) and use it to attack the fact itself: "Whites will always be racist Republicans"

[wildeyed]

88. People vote against their own economic interest all the time.

I do. You probably do too. People vote for values above economic self-interest. This is not a secret. And the values of many working class whites seem to be diametrically opposed to the values of the modern Democratic Party. The focus on justice and equality for immigrants, women, blacks and LGBT conflicts with their values. Not ALL working class whites, of course. There are many who love justice and equality for ALL. But enough to be statistically significant.

I am not interested in compromising on justice issues to get them back. I don't think we have to as much anymore, because of the direction demographics in this country are moving. And I am not interested in Bernie Sanders or any politician who wants to drag us back there.

And he IS wrong. Obama ALREADY proved that. So why are we trying to go backward?

[Sunlei]

91. No thank you Salon. I'd rather Thank Senator Sanders for what he brings to our Primary process.

As Obama said, "they're both good people".

[Kang Colby]

92. Look no further than Venezuela...

Socialism is a failed experiment. No thanks, Bernie. The voters have spoken.

[Gothmog]

99. Great OP

[beachbum bob]

101. we are not a socialist country and to have policies that offer free stuff and say we

just have the wealthy and corporations pay turns off a lot of americans...whether the free stuff would benefit them or not...Sanders still thinks he is in the 60's with his revolution mindset...we aint that country...

His message would be so much better to say we need to fix the tax code and concentrate on 2 or 3 different changes. His message would be better to say we can have zero deficits and make inroads into the national debt while finding ways for the government to help those who need the help the most....having a more concrete policy than pie in the sky tax the wealthy one

[rickford66]

103. Get the money out of politics

That's his basic message. Then government will work for us, the 99%, not the 1%. There will always be the 1% so no matter how much you get educated and work hard, there will always be the 99% also. Half of us are below average. It will always be. Safety nets make sense. If Bernie's ideals don't take hold again as they did in the 1930's, then our democracy is history.

[beachbum bob]

113. allowing a trump to be elected won't get the money out of politics...the prospect of 3 Supreme

court justices he could name

[rickford66]

114. So Hillary is going to get the money out of politics?

Until the money is taken out, Congress, the Senate and the Supremes will always favor the 1%.

[bravenak]

104. His message lacks specificity that is necessary to draw a majority of voters

We get promised stuff every cycle, but nothing he says he wants has any chance in hell of being delivered. I agree, he just has too much pue in the sky and too many vague taxes

[Time for change]

110. So you think that a massive federal jobs program won't help black people and other minorities too?

What exactly do you have against a federal jobs program? You might recall that FDR used it to help get us out of the Great Depression, and it was quite popular. Lots of criticism before he did it, but not much after it was a great success.

The New Deal created a thriving middle class which lasted for a few decades. Now it has disintegrated over the past few decades with Republicans and "third way" Democrats, as the middle class continues to shrink and poverty levels rise (among people of all colors).

[bravenak]

111. We get left out. I want affirmative action applied to any and all programs or i am not interested.

[Time for change]

140. So why do you think that affirmative action wouldn't be applied to a federal jobs program

I worked for federal and state governments for many years, and as best I can recall they all had affirmative action programs.

[bravenak]

142. Did Bernie ever once say it would? If so, I never once heard him saying he would apply affirmative

action to any of his ideas. It would have made me interested in how he would get ut done and maybe I might have thought he was actually listening to us. But ge wasn't. Ever. Becaus he never did once say he would even think about it. He had plenty of time.

[Time for change]

145. Rated 97% by NAACP on affirmative action

http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Bernie_Sanders_Civil_Rights.htm

[bravenak]

146. That is for PAST positions!

Nothing about AFFIRMATIVE ACTION in his PLATFORM

[Time for change]

147. He's been consistent on that

He doesn't waffle on issues the way Hillary does. But I can see that nothing will ever satisfy you about Bernie, no matter what the facts are.

[bravenak]

148. Exactly. Because he did not include it in his platform. Not satisfactory

[Recursion]

112. Probably not very much, no

They'll be skewed against non-white applicants (by location, by requirements, by lots of stuff) and if they're ever unskewed, enraged white voters will elect in a landslide any Republican that vows to cut those programs off.

[TheSarcastinator]

115. more "NO YOU CAN'T" from Team Hindenburg

Keep beating that horse, you brilliant strategists.

[bravenak]

120. It beat the brakes off Bernie

[JCanete]

151. Yeah, because you like the message. nt

[JCanete]

116. But it is all about economics. It really really is. Just take a tiny peak at human psychology.

Do you know what bandwidth poverty is?
Do you understand the damage that shelter instability has on a child's ability to learn?
Do you understand what the cost of malnutrition has on the development of cognitive function?

Or what about the cost of mental burnout from overwork, or the unrelenting threat to security that even the middle class feels now?

Do you think under these conditions people have been given the support necessary to self-advocate, or to make reasoned, empathetic decisions about the needs of their neighbors? Do you know what confirmation bias is? When people feel insecure and threatened, they aren't exactly the most amenable to questioning their apriori assumptions about the way the world works. They are going to fall right back on their most tribal "fear the other" tendencies. That makes them susceptible to the most divisive and race-baiting messaging, because it feeds into the fear people have, and it confirms their most entrenched animal brained instincts.

How about cognitive dissonance? when people feel the need to horde what they have in contravention to a sense of themselves as generous and good people, how do you think they go about justifying that? I know I know! By dehumanizing the people they aren't sharing with. By justifying the reasons why some people are deserving and other "kinds" are just lazy or violent, or whatever bullshit that can be then confirmed by looking at underserved communities and seeing the different crime rates, or joblessness rates.

You want to actually erode racism or homophobia or sexism? Then please, quit acting like these are issues that aren't in large part about economics! Do the world a favor and reconsider why a message that is trying to unite people of all races across the spectrum of the poor and the middle class for the purpose of self advocacy while also advocating for our neighbors, IS THE WAY to fundamentally disrupt the status quo.

The common enemy, and only because they do a far better job of self-advocating, not because they are actually bad people in their hearts, are the wealthiest in our nation. If you don't want to chip away at that stranglehold, then you are signing up for another century of divisive politics, because hey, divide and conquer works. If you can't see how the DNC for the last 30 years, has been part of the machinery that has brought you Donald Trump, by only tackling the symptoms of the sickness while actually helping the sickness to get worse, then you should probably look again, because democrats love fighting over social issues while slowly giving ground on the economic ones. Because hey, they're in the same 1% club. They know who deserves the money too, and why we don't, or why the system "has to be" how it is. That's how they sleep at night with a clear conscience.

[bravenak]

119. You are wrong to tell black people it is not about race when you do not experience it

[JCanete]

149. So you didn't read my post did you? I was pointing out how they were connected. nt

[forjusticethunders]

138. "Your issues are not/less important" is NOT A UNIFYING MESSAGE nt

[JCanete]

150. Who's message is that? You can't just make shit up and say it's Bernie's or mine.

Come on, did you even bother to read my post, or just my title?

[aikoaiko]

117. its hard to see 40-45% of primary voters as a failure.

Does Marcotte not want white males in the Democratic coalition?

[bravenak]

121. She wants them to respect that they are not the majority

The rest of us are so they have to respect that and us

[aikoaiko]

134. Fair enough. I realize that white males are not the majority in the party or the country.

I need to think about what respect means in the context of this primary.

I do think some Bernie supporters were disrespectful of POC and women. And Bernie made mistakes that were disrespectful. I see that.

Maybe the next fierce liberal will learn and do a better job. Maybe I will too.

Right now it's difficult to see my place in the party except to help others. What does HRC offer the white working class male? Not really looking for an answer from you - just thinking out loud.

[bravenak]

143. The same as us without the power to boss the rest of us around. That is what she offers. Equality.

Trump offers them nothing but hate and racism and fear. It's an easy choice.

[aikoaiko]

144. Hmm. She offers equality. That's interesting.

I'll think about that. I don't think I've ever heard her use the word equality except in a way that benefits POC and women directly.

I suppose I do want an equal society.

I wonder when we will get it if she is President.

[andym]

118. It's not just ethnic superiority, it's playing up that they are the only "true Americans"

on the side of "freedom." That is what drives many right wingers, that they believe they bear the torch of freedom: only they are "true Americans." Sure government jobs programs would help them do better, but they don't want these programs, since they want to be "free." They believe help is for "moochers" and they may somehow become rich anyway, though if you ask them how they couldn't tell you. Of course they don't realize that their quest for freedom serves the large corporations' interests.

Don't forget John Steinbeck's famous quote (which he might not quite have said, but might have originated with Ronald Wright):
"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”

[Live and Learn]

126. More projection: Hillary's status quo policies are what keeps us all down and in our place. nt

[bravenak]

127. She keeps us down without even being elected. Magic!

[Live and Learn]

128. She was elected to the Senate and she influenced policy for years as SOS and first lady.

The policies you are now living under have a hell of a lot to do with Hillary.

[bravenak]

130. Her record is much deeper than bernie's, eh?

[Live and Learn]

136. Her influence on the status quo was. But I guess you like things as they are. nt

[bravenak]

137. Better than having bernie take over

He is just rhetoric

[Live and Learn]

139. Good to know you won't be complaining anymore if Hillary gets elected.

I expect you will realize that you had a chance to change things and decided to keep them the same and won't be complaining about them any longer. Just remember that you advocated for things remaining as they are and the proof is all over this board.

[GulfCoast66]

141. Wait, there is more to it than that

I am a middle aged white southern guy so needless to say I know countless people who used to be/vote Democratic but now go the other way. Whole lot of my family.

And race is a big part of it but not the entire story. They also left because the feel they no longer need government help. FDR, Truman, Ike and to a lesser degree Johnson helped move them from poor rural white folks to middle and upper middle class status. Of course they think it was all on their own.

So when Reagan started up the whole dog whistle thing about Government only helping African Americans, a huge part of the whites were willing to believe it. Hell, they did not need no guv'ment help.

That is the cruelest irony. The Success of the Democratic platform cost it a huge part of it's support. As economic conditions get worse that support will shift back, but will be slow.