Support NeoGAF

[Agent Icebeezy]

What can Bernie do to better-appeal to voters of color?

Nothing, absolutely nothing. All the jokes about Bill being the "first" black president and what that 'brings' has transferred to Hillary even though he signed off on legislation that put a lot of us in jail/prison way longer than we should have been. Just because he could play a sax doesn't mean shit. Overall, good president but like all, some shitty policies became law on his watch.

So, that is Bernie's problem in a nutshell. Optics aren't in his favor here.

 

[docbon]

I'm going to go out of a limb and say your white, male and Sight. IE someone who's life won't be adversely effected if a Republican is elected president.

He's black tho.

And whether he's right or wrong (Not voting for Hillary period is definitely wrong imo), I think people really need to ease up on guessing the ethnicities of posters to somehow discredit them.

 

[Agent_Carnage]

Yeah, i said that, and i double down on it.

I don't think Hillary deserves to be President. I will vote for Bernie in the primary round, and if he does not go further, i will not vote for Hillary.

And i do feel that those people who will vote for Hillary in the primaries, even knowing of many things about her record aren't taking a principled stance on the issues.

As i said before, a lot of people do not see this fight as a fight between a conservative dem and a liberal, but a fight between corporate interests versus fair governance. And in that position, there's nothing else i can do but abstain over supporting a flawed system by definition just so that the house of cards stays up for a little while longer.

There will be plenty of people, including Bernie who would do such a thing, many of us are not as reasonable as he is.

I understand that people see this kind of view as 'selfish', but many people see the opposite view as cowardly and self defeatist on the level of Tea partiers hating bailouts by voting for GOP members who collude with Wall Street fraudsters



Ok, we've gotten to the point where Killer Mike is an "uncle tom" because he supports Bernie Sanders and not Hillary, who along with her husband has been more detrimental in the past 30 years to black lives by supporting the private prison complex and harsher penalty sentencing for lower tier or non violent offenses and financial deregulation combined than any other administration. Wow.

That is what i mean when i say people have to get some goddamn sense of perspective instead kneejerk attacking.



What is liberal in your mind? Because our definitions must be pretty different to say something like that, just based on Hillary Clinton's statements and records.

For me, a liberal s not having a handful of policy positions that happen to not be conservative.

So if Hillary gets nom you rather have someone who is a Hitler to win? If Trump wins and starts deporting good people you have yourself to blame.

 

[Your Entertainer]

He's black tho.

And whether he's right or wrong (Not voting for Hillary period is definitely wrong imo), I think people really need to ease up on guessing the ethnicities of posters to somehow discredit them.

Yeah that's fucking stupid and they're most always wrong anyways.

 

[Aaronology]

Yeah that's fucking stupid and they're most always wrong anyways.

It's insulting and silly to blindly assume, agreed, but that claim will be right far more than it will be wrong.

 

[silvermember]

Nope card has been played

Goes pretty well with what MLK jr said in a letter once:

First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice;

https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

 

[silvermember]

He's black tho.

And whether he's right or wrong (Not voting for Hillary period is definitely wrong imo), I think people really need to ease up on guessing the ethnicities of posters to somehow discredit them.

To be fair people can claim any race since we can neither prove or disprove it. Better yet, some can even post fake pictures.

Assuming he is in fact black, I would classify him as someone who is as black as Clarence Thomas. Any poor minority aka not part of the 1%, that cannot see why a republican winning is a bad idea is extremely naive or privileged.

 

[pigeon]

How scientific is this survey?

Only 400 voters polled nationally? From which area? Landlines, mobiles? What options were they given in the poll -- ie were they read out the "I don't know/undecided" option or was it a leading question that forced them to pick a name they probably recognised more? Was any information about the candidates given during the poll?

I'm sure all this information is available from the poll results in the article. Why not go find out yourself?

 

[Coffee Dog]

He's black tho.

And whether he's right or wrong (Not voting for Hillary period is definitely wrong imo), I think people really need to ease up on guessing the ethnicities of posters to somehow discredit them.

There's nothing wrong with acknowledging the problematic posting trends of white posters when we have to confront this diet racist and not-so-diet-racist bullshit on a regular basis.

 

[Blood Diamonds]

Sad... I'd rather Trump win than her.

Wow what the fuck

 

[Jenov]

Sad... I'd rather Trump win than her.

/facepalm

 

[SaintMadeOfPlaster]

Some of you guys treat Bernie like he's the second coming of Jesus. I can't decide if it's pathetic or frightening.

 

[PsychBat!]

It's insulting and silly to blindly assume, agreed, but that claim will be right far more than it will be wrong.

Whether it'd be right or wrong, I don't think it should be done. I had one poster assume I was white and it was upsetting.

Spoiler

I'm not, but still.

 

[SolicitorPirate]

Some of you guys treat Bernie like he's the second coming of Jesus. I can't decide if it's pathetic or frightening.

Depends on what the long term implications are. I've seen some people say Bernie is great because he's energizing the young base who will be instrumental in future elections.

But if that base continues to behave in the way it has, the Dems really should worry about being eaten from within by its extremist elements, just like whats happening to the GOP.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Depends on what the long term implications are. I've seen some people say Bernie is great because he's energizing the young base who will be instrumental in future elections.

But if that base continues to behave in the way it has, the Dems really should worry about being eaten from within by its extremist elements, just like whats happening to the GOP.

I doubt the donor base will let any Ted Cruz/Mike Lee like demagogues take that much power on the Democrat side in the near future.

 

[Monocle]

Sad... I'd rather Trump win than her.

I don't like pie so why not munch on this box of rat poison instead? The box has a cute picture on it!

 

[excelsiorlef]

I don't like pie so why not munch on this box of rat poison instead? The box has a cute picture on it!

 

[Storm Chamber]

He's black tho.

And whether he's right or wrong (Not voting for Hillary period is definitely wrong imo), I think people really need to ease up on guessing the ethnicities of posters to somehow discredit them.

This wouldn't be a problem if some of you had more knowledge of self

 

[Spica]

I'm going to go out of a limb and say your white, male and Sight. IE someone who's life won't be adversely effected if a Republican is elected president.

As someone who is not male and is not straight and knows what it feels like to be in that vulnerable position, I get really really tired of hearing this kind of rhetoric about Bernie supporters. I have seen it several times in threads about Sanders and every time it makes me feel excluded, erased, and condescended to. Please stop.

I also feel quite strongly that social inequality and economic inequality are inextricably linked. (For instance, poverty is higher for queer and transgender people than the general population.) Bernie Sanders is the only person running who I believe will truly fight against economic inequality. That inequality, that hierarchy of economic class- I believe it is another face of the very same beast that produces the misogyny and other forms of hatred that have disadvantaged me and caused me so much hurt. Hillary Clinton may speak a socially progressive rhetoric, but her funding from Wall Street and other corporate donors indicates indicates that she serves the economic interests of the wealthy and not disadvantaged people like myself. I believe her policies will only worsen economic inequality and thus harm the most vulnerable members of society.

I don't want to get into any of the arguments or discussions in this thread. I just want people to know that my perspective exists. And my perspective is that as a minority I don't just support Bernie Sanders. I need Bernie Sanders and I need him because I'm a minority.

Please respect that.

 

[Jonnax]

As someone who is not male and is not straight and knows what it feels like to be in that vulnerable position, I get really really tired of hearing this kind of rhetoric about Bernie supporters. I have seen it several times in threads about Sanders and every time it makes me feel excluded, erased, and condescended to. Please stop.

I also feel quite strongly that social inequality and economic inequality are inextricably linked. (For instance, poverty is higher for queer and transgender people than the general population.) Bernie Sanders is the only person running who I believe will truly fight against economic inequality. That inequality, that hierarchy of economic class- I believe it is another face of the very same beast that produces the misogyny and other forms of hatred that have disadvantaged me and caused me so much hurt. Hillary Clinton may speak a socially progressive rhetoric, but her funding from Wall Street and other corporate donors indicates indicates that she serves the economic interests of the wealthy and not disadvantaged people like myself. I believe her policies will only worsen economic inequality and thus harm the most vulnerable members of society.

I don't want to get into any of the arguments or discussions in this thread. I just want people to know that my perspective exists. And my perspective is that as a minority I don't just support Bernie Sanders. I need Bernie Sanders and I need him because I'm a minority.

Please respect that.

So you need Bernie, if not you'll take a Republican that'll try their best to take rights away from you?

 

[Moofers]

As someone who is not male and is not straight and knows what it feels like to be in that vulnerable position, I get really really tired of hearing this kind of rhetoric about Bernie supporters. I have seen it several times in threads about Sanders and every time it makes me feel excluded, erased, and condescended to. Please stop.

I also feel quite strongly that social inequality and economic inequality are inextricably linked. (For instance, poverty is higher for queer and transgender people than the general population.) Bernie Sanders is the only person running who I believe will truly fight against economic inequality. That inequality, that hierarchy of economic class- I believe it is another face of the very same beast that produces the misogyny and other forms of hatred that have disadvantaged me and caused me so much hurt. Hillary Clinton may speak a socially progressive rhetoric, but her funding from Wall Street and other corporate donors indicates indicates that she serves the economic interests of the wealthy and not disadvantaged people like myself. I believe her policies will only worsen economic inequality and thus harm the most vulnerable members of society.

I don't want to get into any of the arguments or discussions in this thread. I just want people to know that my perspective exists. And my perspective is that as a minority I don't just support Bernie Sanders. I need Bernie Sanders and I need him because I'm a minority.

Please respect that.

Fist bump. In solidarity, friend.

So you need Bernie, if not you'll take a Republican that'll try their best to take rights away from you?

Take the time to look at names and read these posts. She never said she would vote for Trump.

 

[Zornack]

As someone who is not male and is not straight and knows what it feels like to be in that vulnerable position, I get really really tired of hearing this kind of rhetoric about Bernie supporters. I have seen it several times in threads about Sanders and every time it makes me feel excluded, erased, and condescended to. Please stop.

I also feel quite strongly that social inequality and economic inequality are inextricably linked. (For instance, poverty is higher for queer and transgender people than the general population.) Bernie Sanders is the only person running who I believe will truly fight against economic inequality. That inequality, that hierarchy of economic class- I believe it is another face of the very same beast that produces the misogyny and other forms of hatred that have disadvantaged me and caused me so much hurt. Hillary Clinton may speak a socially progressive rhetoric, but her funding from Wall Street and other corporate donors indicates indicates that she serves the economic interests of the wealthy and not disadvantaged people like myself. I believe her policies will only worsen economic inequality and thus harm the most vulnerable members of society.

I don't want to get into any of the arguments or discussions in this thread. I just want people to know that my perspective exists. And my perspective is that as a minority I don't just support Bernie Sanders. I need Bernie Sanders and I need him because I'm a minority.

Please respect that.

You have bought into a boogeyman narrative that Hillary is a corporate shill who will do nothing but please her wealthy masters.

There are arguments to be made about each candidate's proposed methods of tackling income inequality and campaign finance reform, but when you come into the discussion condemning one candidate as nothing more than a tool of the wealthy - well, that's not an opinion up for debate, it's just plain old diversionary politics.

 

[Indicate]

So you need Bernie, if not you'll take a Republican that'll try their best to take rights away from you?

Where did Spica say she'll take a Republican? Again with the assumptions. Also, she said she doesn't want to get into a discussion.

 

[Inuhanyou]

I'm going to go out of a limb and say your white, male and Sight. IE someone who's life won't be adversely effected if a Republican is elected president.

I'm a black male who lives in a pretty low income area with crime all around me.

Bernie is the best shot to enact actual change for people i see struggling every day. Hillary won't change a thing, and isn't interested in doing so, and that's what i know.

 

[Zornack]

Where did Spica say she'll take a Republican? Again with the assumptions. Also, she said she doesn't want to get into a discussion.

She was responding to someone who speculated that a poster was a white straight male due to their threat of staying out of the election should Bernie not win the Democratic nomination.

 

[danm999]

Where did Spica say she'll take a Republican? Again with the assumptions. Also, she said she doesn't want to get into a discussion.

The post being responded to is someone saying they refuse to vote for Clinton if she's the nominee.

 

[PsychBat!]

So you need Bernie, if not you'll take a Republican that'll try their best to take rights away from you?

Where did she say that????

I think people responding to this confuse "staying out of the election" = "voting Republican"

 

[Indicate]

She was responding to someone who speculated that a poster was a white straight male due to their threat of staying out of the election should Bernie not win the Democratic nomination.

The post being responded to is someone saying they refuse to vote for Clinton if she's the nominee.

Yes, I'm aware of this.

Where did she say that????

I think people responding to this confuse "staying out of the election" = "voting Republican"

This might be it.

 

[Inuhanyou]

To be fair people can claim any race since we can neither prove or disprove it. Better yet, some can even post fake pictures.

Assuming he is in fact black, I would classify him as someone who is as black as Clarence Thomas. Any poor minority aka not part of the 1%, that cannot see why a republican winning is a bad idea is extremely naive or privileged.

Okay, so if i don't vote for Hillary, *I* am an uncle tom too? How does that even WORK?

Alright.

Its not enough that i don't vote for a maniac like Trump, or any of the GOP field, i have to 'bend' and fall in line with someone i personally disagree with because you think she must be supported at all costs.

I have already done that with Obama, and it didn't do anything besides bring even more nonsense like the enshrining of TPP. Hillary will have her supporters. You could throw a blind monkey out there and beat Trump. Just don't expect a portion of the voting block to be happy with her if she is the nominee.

 

[danm999]

I think people responding to this confuse "staying out of the election" = "voting Republican"

People are treating it as a similar result, yes.

 

[SoRuffShoNuff]

Where did she say that????

I think people responding to this confuse "staying out of the election" = "voting Republican"

It is. A reliable base that will actually vote is why republicans are dominating local elections.

The first step to enacting any of Bernies plans is to go out and vote for the democrat even if they don't excite you!

 

[Zornack]

Okay, so if i don't vote for Hillary, *I* am an uncle tom too?

Alright.

Its not enough that i don't vote for a maniac like Trump, or any of the GOP field, i have to 'bend' and fall in line with someone i personally disagree with because you think she must be supported at all costs.

What is it about her record that makes you dislike her so much?

 

[PsychBat!]

It is. A reliable base that will actually vote is why republicans are dominating local elections.

There is no way in hell that any GOP nominee will win the general election.

 

[Feep]

Assuming you don't "mind" going out and voting, that is to say, you're not concerned with the x minutes it requires you on Election Day to go out and vote, there are three possibilities:

Help democrats
Don't vote/vote for a third party
Help republicans

You don't "send a message" by not voting, as someone said earlier. No one gives a shit. You're not helping to bring down the system. You're just not participating in it.

So, if you believe that one side is in *any* way better than the other, it would behoove you to vote for that side. Even if Hillary isn't who you want, if you think it'd be better to have Hillary in than Trump/Cruz/Rubio, you would maximize the point value for her side.

So as much I want Bernie in...and I do...refusing to vote for Hillary is idealized naiveté, in my opinion. You're effectively increasing the odds of an outright lunatic taking over the United States, and everything that entails, by "taking a stand". And the damage that lunatic can do is incalculable.

Edit: Unless, uh, you're a Republican. In which case, uh, good on ya?

 

[SoRuffShoNuff]

There is no way in hell that any GOP nominee will win the general election.

And as long as they dominate local elections, aka congressional and govenor elections, it doesn't matter who the democrats put in the white house. This is a two part problem folks, only completing the first part isn't good enough!

 

[Funky Papa]

"If you stay at home and don't vote for the candidate of my liking, it will be your fault when [awful person I despise] gets elected"

What about making a deeper analysis and realize that maybe the candidate of your liking is at fault of not being convincing enough in the first place?

 

[The Technomancer]

"If you stay at home and don't vote for the candidate of my liking, it will be your fault when [awful person I despise] gets elected"

What about making a deeper analysis and realize that maybe the candidate of your liking is at fault of not being convincing enough in the first place?

Casting a contrary vote is one thing. Not voting is another, which is specifically what's being discussed here. You don't have to be convinced that Hillary is better than Bernie, but if you have a good argument about how, at worst, even if you dislike everything about her, the marginal utility for at least a few million people still isn't going to be better under Hillary than under Trump than...I am real interested in hearing that argument

I get it if you don't want to vote because you're fed up. But the act of not voting does not, in any way, actually advance the causes that a person cares about. It doesn't send a message. It isn't "boycott" in any way.

 

[Nuu]

You don't "send a message" by not voting, as someone said earlier. No one gives a shit. You're not helping to bring down the system. You're just not participating in it.

People keep saying this but this isn't true. There is a reason why the Republican party is obsessed with getting the "low turnout voters." If parties energize their base up and the general public enough they will do so enough to turn some heads and get them to the voting booth. There is nothing controversial about this at all. It is one thing to "not vote no matter what" and another to "not vote because the candidate doesn't appeal to me." The former really doesn't matter, but is much more rare than most people think, the latter can do a lot to sway political parties if they are smart enough. The Democrats currently perform the best with the highest turnout in the nation which also leads to a more left wing electorate. The vast majority of disenfranchised voters lean left. It is the Democrats fault that they don't chase this populace. Contrary to what I see people say on here, elections don't work by reelecting people from the same political party and thus that party will continue to toward policy that is more concrete in terms of ideology, but more so by having a consistent voting base that demands things of a certain type of ideology. Again it is the Democrats fault that they don't realize this, instead of going after the disenfranchised populace they decide to say they dislike Obama and grab a gun while trying to chase the right leaning populace in states where people overwhelmingly voted to raise the minimum wage and legalize pot. That's being delusional to a tee if you ask me.

I'm voting Bernie and will be voting Hillary in the general. But the hostility toward "Bernie or nothing" voters is just idiotic.

*Regardless, the amount of people who will be voting for Bernie in the primaries and not Hillary in the general is minuscule. Hillary supporters so worried about this really addresses their paranoia, especially when the Republicans are dealing with Donald Trump. Really shows how much of a scar of the curb stomping that was the 1980s did to the party populace.

Just a quick reminder - most black Democrat's voted for the various crime bills in the 80's and 90's, including the increase in the Drug War, because that's what their community wanted. Their children were getting hooked on drugs, dying, and destroying the neighborhoods that they had built. It wasn't until it became obvious later on in the 90's and early 00's that the Drug War had become an excuse to jail black American's that the younger parts of the black community turned on it.

You can question whether it was good policy or not from the jump, but be fair here - there was a crime issue, and the Congressional Black Caucus wasn't exactly standing up against Bill.

While technically true, there was always a bit of a divide between more mainstream blacks and the further left blacks. But yes, many blacks did support the drug war.

 

[Funky Papa]

Casting a contrary vote is one thing. Not voting is another, which is specifically what's being discussed here. You don't have to be convinced that Hillary is better than Bernie, but if you have a good argument about how, at worst, even if you dislike everything about her, the marginal utility for at least a few million people still isn't going to be better under Hillary than under Trump than...I am real interested in hearing that argument

I get it if you don't want to vote because you're fed up. But the act of not voting does not, in any way, actually advance the causes that a person cares about. It doesn't send a message. It isn't "boycott" in any way.

I agree. But the fact remains: it's up to a candidate to make themself electable.

Because there will be piggeaded voters that won't vote for them out of spite, but also tons of ones that won't do it because they don't find them sincere or running a viable platform.

 

[Merc_]

Assuming he is in fact black, I would classify him as someone who is as black as Clarence Thomas. Any poor minority aka not part of the 1%, that cannot see why a republican winning is a bad idea is extremely naive or privileged.

Yo, this is a pretty fucked up thing to say. I don't agree with him choosing not to vote if Bernie doesn't win, but it doesn't suddenly make him a damn Uncle Tom. Hillary has said and done shit in the past concerning black folks that gives him every right to dislike her enough to make him hesitant. I honestly don't really like her myself so I get where his feelings are coming from.

Still, I hope you change your mind, Inuhanyou. As much as you may dislike her, she's still vastly better than what would result from a Trump presidency.

 

[Aaronology]

What is it about her record that makes you dislike her so much?

Inuhanyou largely ignores her voting record and harks back to her votes on the Iraq War and Patriot Act. Those are fair concerns that raises questions to her judgement, but they don't entirely define her as a politician any more than Bernie's former stances on gun reform do him. Anyone attempting a modicum of objectivity regarding Clinton would have to admit her positions largely mirror Sanders' on the vast majority of issues they stand for. Instead, what we have are posters who demonize Clinton to the point of absurdity, who appear to legitimately believe she is opposed to health care reform or that she is practically a Republican.

I think you're going to be disappointed if you expect some sort of reasonable discussion to spring from that.

 

[Spica]

Fist bump. In solidarity, friend.

Thank you

 

[Feep]

People keep saying this but this isn't true. There is a reason why the Republican party is obsessed with getting the "low turnout voters." If parties energize their base up and the general public enough they will do so enough to turn some heads and get them to the voting booth. There is nothing controversial about this at all. It is one thing to "not vote no matter what" and another to "not vote because the candidate doesn't appeal to me." The former really doesn't matter, but is much more rare than most people think, the latter can do a lot to sway political parties if they are smart enough. The Democrats currently perform the best with the highest turnout in the nation which also leads to a more left wing electorate. The vast majority of disenfranchised voters lean left. It is the Democrats fault that they don't chase this populace. Contrary to what I see people say on here, elections don't work by reelecting people from the same political party and thus that party will continue to toward policy that is more concrete in terms of ideology, but more so by having a consistent voting base that demands things of a certain type of ideology. Again it is the Democrats fault that they don't realize this, instead of going after the disenfranchised populace they decide to say they dislike Obama and grab a gun while trying to chase the right leaning populace in states where people overwhelmingly voted to raise the minimum wage and legalize pot. That's being delusional to a tee if you ask me.

I'm voting Bernie and will be voting Hillary in the general. But the hostility toward "Bernie or nothing" voters is just idiotic.

This line of thinking largely falls apart, however, when you consider that the Democratic party is *putting forth a candidate that could excite the base*, but that candidate isn't being chosen.

Not going to vote would theoretically send a message to the Democratic party that we're not excited about their candidates, except the party would have *literally just said it didn't want the exciting candidate*. Assuming Clinton gets the nod over Bernie, what exactly is the party leadership here supposed to do? The people *just said they didn't want Bernie*.

 

[Nuu]

I agree. But the fact remains: it's up to a candidate to make themself electable.

Because there will be piggeaded voters that won't vote for them out of spite, but also tons of ones that won't do it because they don't find them sincere or running a viable platform.

Yep. It is the politicians job have to have voters come to them, not voters to come to the politician.

Inuhanyou largely ignores her voting record and harks back to her votes on the Iraq War and Patriot Act. Those are fair concerns that raises questions to her judgement, but they don't entirely define her as a politician any more than Bernie's former stances on gun reform do him. Anyone attempting a modicum of objectivity regarding Clinton would have to admit her positions largely mirror Sanders' on the vast majority of issues they stand for. Instead, what we have are posters who demonize Clinton to the point of absurdity, who appear to legitimately believe she is opposed to health care reform or that she is practically a Republican.

I think you're going to be disappointed if you expect some sort of reasonable discussion to spring from that.

To be fair, it isn't like Clinton fans are being the most reasonable either as they overplay the amount of racism and conspiracy theories in Bernie's camp, and significantly overestimate the amount of difference having Hillary over Sanders in the White House, and severely downplay the electability of Sanders over people like Donald Trump.

 

[Nuu]

This line of thinking largely falls apart, however, when you consider that the Democratic party is *putting forth a candidate that could excite the base*, but that candidate isn't being chosen.

Not going to vote would theoretically send a message to the Democratic party that we're not excited about their candidates, except the party would have *literally just said it didn't want the exciting candidate*. Assuming Clinton gets the nod over Bernie, what exactly is the party leadership here supposed to do? The people *just said they didn't want Bernie*.

These people in general don't want a Democrat. These people don't want a Republican either. Most of these people we are referring to likely haven't watched a single Democratic or Republican debate. If you want to get these people to vote you have to mobilize them with a ground game similar to what Obama did in 2008, similar to what Bernie is talking about and is attempting to do, similar to what the Republicans did in the late '70s and in the '80s. Now is Bernie the solution to this? Who knows. But it is the Democratic parties job to to communicate with those voters about their ideology, have those voters accept their ideology, and have those voters go to the voting booth. This is how politics work. Instead Democrats seem to not be very interested in expanding their voter pool, as they wait for demographic changes to happen *which as history has shown us can rapidly change at any time* while the Republicans get more and more entrenched in the legislative branch.

 

[Kathian]

Guys clearly no non-Whites vote Republican (except the secret Whites) and so theres no real point to any of these threads or discussions. Demographics means we can sit back and allow the mass ethnic groups in the US and the reasonable non-racist Whites pass the Dems into the White House unimpeded.

Why we have these fancy 'debates' I have no idea. Just look in the mirror, then you'll know how to vote!

 

[Inuhanyou]

What is it about her record that makes you dislike her so much?

Do you have to ask about that?

Firstly, i'd recommend you listen to this short story by Elizabeth's Warren on one of Hillary's misdeeds, and something i personally feel encapsulates a lot of the frustration sentiment around people who aren't big fans of Hillary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12mJ-U76nfg

As for a list of things i personally don't like about her history and record.

1. She voted for the patriot act twice.


2. She voted for the iraq war.


3. She was for the TPP, publicly supporting it as Secretary of State many times before she claimed to be against it.

4. She was for the keystone pipeline before she was against it.

5. She wants to attack assad and the rebels, like the Iraqi strategy that lead us into a quagmire with nothing to show for that.

6. She supported efficient universal healthcare before she was against it.

7. She supported more prisons while taking money from CCP(Corrections Corp of America) and GEO Group.

8. She is against government whistleblowers calling for open transparency in the
government.

9. Currently has multiple SuperPacs, which are out-raising literally everyone else just by nature of having shadow money invested into them.

9. She has huge investments in hedge funds, both personally and in the family and her record on trying to curb wall street abuses is pathetic, and Robert Reich has called her out on it.

http://www.inquisitr.com/2709907/17...dorse-bernie-sanders-wall-street-reform-plan/

Basically all of her money in this election is from the biggest corporations and Wall Street banks in the entire country(Goldman Sachs, Citi, JP Morgan ect), even many multinationals, and she's actually taken far more than anyone else in political donations from those corporate interests, even the individual GOP candidates.

Its been apparently clear to me for a long time that our government(not just in Washington) is perpetuating a rigged economy, and its not just the GOP who are apart of that process, even though it would take an idiot to not see them as inherently dangerous.

Its everywhere. Hell, Howard Dean just joined a private insurance lobbying firm that Newt Gingrich has long been apart of, even though he was supposed to be a champion for single payer back during his run.

Its just crazy how nobody is seeing that this corrupt collusion between big money and government isn't making the citizen's lives any better, its making it worse. And Hillary is at the forefront of all that.

And now that i've laid out my reasoning, is it any real secret why there are those who dislike her, much less would not want to contribute to her campaign by voting for her?

Maybe i'd vote for Jill Stein? That's a contribution.

Let me be very clear about it. I'd never let the perfect be the enemy of the good. That's why i support Bernie. In many instances, he's made bad votes too, and gone against my views, and and said things that i really disagreed with as well.

But he's the only one out the any of these candidates, hell out of most of the congress or government, who is really putting a spotlight on the issues that really need to be addressed, and does so with enough conviction based on most of his previous history, to show that he really cares about fixing these issues.

He's gotten close enough, despite the opposition, to shed a spotlight on a lot of the serious topics, and i'd like to continue to see him advocate and push for basic social justice in the highest seat available.

 

[Aaronology]

"If you stay at home and don't vote for the candidate of my liking, it will be your fault when [awful person I despise] gets elected"

What about making a deeper analysis and realize that maybe the candidate of your liking is at fault of not being convincing enough in the first place?

A person can do what ever it is they like with their vote, and if she or he wants to sit it out because Bernie doesn't get the nom that is perfectly their prerogative. But they shouldn't dare call themselves a Progressive if they're willing to throw the cause back decades for petty, selfish reasons. And don't expect me to believe you actually give a shit about minorities/LGBT/women either. Just as Clinton's base voted for Obama most people who support Sanders would vote for Clinton in the general. The minority who wouldn't have absolutely no credibility in my eyes. These people were never allies; they were self indulgent posers.

 

[Feep]

These people in general don't want a Democrat. These people don't want a Republican either. Most of these people we are referring to likely haven't watched a single Democratic or Republican debate. If you want to get these people to vote you have to mobilize them with a ground game similar to what Obama did in 2008, similar to what Bernie is talking about and is attempting to do, similar to what the Republicans did in the late '70s and in the '80s. Now is Bernie the solution to this? Who knows. But it is the Democratic parties job to to communicate with those voters about their ideology, have those voters accept their ideology, and have those voters go to the voting booth. This is how politics work. Instead Democrats seem to not be very interested in expanding their voter pool, as they wait for demographic changes to happen *which as history has shown us can rapidly change at any time* while the Republicans get more and more entrenched in the legislative branch.

Expanding the number of people in your voter pool is common sense; if the Democrats don't effectively do this, it's because they're *bad* at it, not because they don't see it as valuable.

However, this doesn't change the fact that not voting isn't sending that message to the Democratic Party. It's not a directed message. People don't vote for a wide variety of reasons...they aren't excited by a Democrat, they aren't excited by a Republican, they think both parties are effectively the same, they were sick that day, they forgot, whatever. It's unclear. If you're really interested in sending a message, you can call or write your local/state level Democrats, become engaged in the political process, volunteer for your candidate of choice, donate to said candidate, whatever. These are all positive, constructive things that send a message far better than a "no vote" ever could, and they don't have the potential downside of wrecking the country as a result.

 

[Inuhanyou]

Yo, this is a pretty fucked up thing to say. I don't agree with him choosing not to vote if Bernie doesn't win, but it doesn't suddenly make him a damn Uncle Tom. Hillary has said and done shit in the past concerning black folks that gives him every right to dislike her enough to make him hesitant. I honestly don't really like her myself so I get where his feelings are coming from.

Still, I hope you change your mind, Inuhanyou. As much as you may dislike her, she's still vastly better than what would result from a Trump presidency.

Thank you for atleast being reasonable on the subject.

I don't think i'm being unreasonable when i say, a lot of people just want a candidate who will genuinely represent their interests, to look out for them. And, its a shame that many people can't see that the voter turnout is so low, because we have not had one of those types of people for a long time, not really.

I don't think Hillary is that person based on the extensive research i've done into her.

Hell, maybe she isn't the coming of the antichrist like many in the GOP freaks out about, and she'd be a perfectly competent Obama lite who would not set the USA to explode. But she certainly is not an advocate for real change, even slowly, and that's what i think the US really needs at this point in time with all this bullshit we're dealing with.

But again, i'm glad your atleast being reasonable on the subject. Hey, its 300 days till the general, who knows what'll happen, and what i personally decide to do in the end really depends on how the situation progresses in the meantime.