It can be argued that a person who makes a concerted effort to try and understand the shit minorities have to go through better could spread that information or impulse to those around them, but I dunno how reliable that could be. The best kind of supporting from afar might be donations to causes, maybe.
Politico: How Bernie Sanders Exposed the Democrats Racial Rift
- Thread starter dramatis
- Start date
- Status
It can be argued that a person who makes a concerted effort to try and understand the shit minorities have to go through better could spread that information or impulse to those around them, but I dunno how reliable that could be. The best kind of supporting from afar might be donations to causes, maybe.
He doesn't have them on lockdown though. According to the polling he's losing young african-americans and coming out 60-40 with young hispanics. His youth support among whites is like 80-20 though, which masks these facts.
Frozenprince
Banned
The margins were single digits. And he lost the LGBT vote.
AntraxSuicide
Banned
She addresses social and racial issues more directly, and was on that a lot earlier than Sanders was. He tends to believe (in the same school of thought as Booker T. Washington, to name one writer) that economic struggle is the only real struggle. That black people will be treated better if they have wealth to match white people.
The problem is that this isn't really true, and we generally don't believe this anymore. I think gay men actually make more money on average than straight men, for instance, but no one would argue that being gay is a privilege in our society. For people of color, wealth doesn't stop racism (take the black athlete who got the cops called on him when he walked up to a jewelry store to buy stuff; he's immensely wealthy and famous, and it didn't matter).
There are issues that are straight-up down to racism in our society, and those won't be fixed by economics or many of Sanders' programs. I think one black mother said about his free college plan (paraphrased) that it doesn't really matter when the police have killed your son at 14. Free college isn't going to save his life, or any other young person of color.
Sanders has plans for this stuff, I think (I haven't checked extensively, but he rarely stumps for it), but he's been terrible about staying on message with this stuff. I think it was Minnesota or Wisconsin where he held a black town hall, to specifically talk about black issues, and he dropped the line, "In a lot of places, people are being oppressed. Sometimes those people are black, or Hispanic. Sometimes they're white." He's not exactly wrong, but it comes off like an All Lives Matter deflection, and black people have a reasonable reaction to that since the history of our country is built on denying them these services for their race.
It's an interesting predicament. But the obvious solution that nobody wants to really deal with or admit is that if you want to understand what needs attention, what really needs a change, people have to be in it. There is no such thing as caring passionately about a situation that you refuse to be a part of. Imagine if all of these bleeding heart white liberals had the courage of their convictions and stopped moving their businesses and families out of neighborhoods and actually fought for them. That's the kind of person that could tell me shit.
Millennials are actually the largest voting-age cohort among blacks and hispanics: http://www.pewhispanic.org/2016/04/20/the-nations-latino-population-is-defined-by-its-youth/
http://www.npr.org/2016/03/28/47216...e-sanders-isnt-just-winning-with-white-people
From March... but 51/48 among black people under 30, and a bit more than what you said for young Hispanic people.
Though she doesn't actively discuss this anecdote, it was out there in this campaign cycle http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/28/us/politics/how-hillary-clinton-went-undercover-to-examine-race-in-education.html
edit: This helped explain a LOT to me about why school funding is targeted by the GOP - in many places (or in upper class areas in cities) they're literally not using the public school systems.
Tallshortman
Member
Honestly one of the interesting dynamics that emerged from this primary is the difference between how older and young black folks view the crime bill Bill signed in the 90's. Something that's glossed over is that both overall minorities and separately black people as well had higher percentage support for the bill at the time than white people.
Like some people my age like to demonize that shit like it targeted specifically at locking up black youth but that was not the intent at the time yet it's hard to defend now given some of the effects of that bill.
People skip over the fact that it was in response to not just out of control violence in urban areas but also other large scale gun violence among other groups that had nothing to do with inner city violence. It included the assault weapon ban which I'm sure most liberals would agree was a good thing. A lot more than old white people wanted them to get "tough on crime". The vast amount of the no votes for the bill were republicans and more than two thirds of the congressional black caucus voted for it.
Like some people my age like to demonize that shit like it targeted specifically at locking up black youth but that was not the intent at the time yet it's hard to defend now given some of the effects of that bill.
People skip over the fact that it was in response to not just out of control violence in urban areas but also other large scale gun violence among other groups that had nothing to do with inner city violence. It included the assault weapon ban which I'm sure most liberals would agree was a good thing. A lot more than old white people wanted them to get "tough on crime". The vast amount of the no votes for the bill were republicans and more than two thirds of the congressional black caucus voted for it.
Assuming you're referring to this part?
Just talking about voting eligible youth. Not ages of actual voters.
That's part of the huge problem for Democrats I'm talking about.
I'm on my phone tho so maybe I skipped over something?
Ok I'll take that criticism. He won them but doesn't have them on lockdown.
Still doesn't address the main thing I mentioned where Democrats ignoring that is going to potentially bite them on the ass. Or at least indicates a hurdle for the future that they should be paying attention to.
The below is not based at you! I just wanted to quote your post as it links with mine.
Obviously US politics are different to where I am from. We have a system called MMP where you choose a local candidate and a party to vote for separately.
Generally speaking the local candidates chosen come from one of the two main parties. So I always vote for the left leaning candidate of the two even if there's maybe one from a smaller party who is more likely to represent my beliefs, as the chances of them winning are nearly zilch. This is being pragmatic in my mind. People who voted Sanders could be pragmatic and vote for Clinton. She may not be exactly who you want but she's going to be closer to your values than someone like Trump. You can obviously vote third party but as above, I don't bother because they aren't likely to win.
Now the key difference is with my party vote, I can choose a party to vote for and base this on their party policies. For this, I choose a more left wing party and providing this party gets 5% they get into parliament and get representation. However, again if this wasn't viable (for example some single issue party which is maybe a protest vote) I don't squander my vote, I go for the party who may not be ideal but is better than an alternative.
These are just my personal beliefs, I like being pragamatic and I know change can be slow but personally. I am not trying to convince anyone but I just want to give another perspective.
Frozenprince
Banned
And that was no accident. It was a carefully orchestrated and targeted ad and media propaganda campaign to convince urban black voters to support it, despite the overwhelming evidence that it would effect them disproportionately that the lawmakers had available to them.
The demonization of crack and crack users, being one example (though that's more late 80's).
I was just responding to the notion that the size of the minority youth population is dwarfed by that of their elders.
If you're saying that minority youth are less likely to vote than their elders, then I'd think you are probably right given the tendencies of younger voters as a whole.
Frozenprince
Banned
Young people have never voted. It's why these "revolutions" die at the doorstep, if they even make it that far.
I never said the youth population is less than the elder population of Hispanics. That's obviously not true. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
I am very specifically referring to younger voters.
Yeah, that's certainly a historical trend. It's why I'm skeptical of the lasting viability of the Sanders "movement."
Gotcha.
Frozenprince
Banned
Even ignoring the youth vote is better than outright telling them "Yeah by the way you're a lesser people and get the fuck out of my country/into the ghetto's to make room for real americans to have the middle class back".
This article sounds pretty self serving. If anything Bernie shows there is a lot of angry people. If this anger is not address or challenged it will just continue to the next cycle.
It's why beating Trump is not the only solution. The source(s) of this anger needs to be confronted.
It's why beating Trump is not the only solution. The source(s) of this anger needs to be confronted.
Frozenprince
Banned
The source of that anger is the fact that racism is on both sides of the spectrum yet only one every gets talked about.
I'm done.
Cindi Mayweather
Member
The funny thing about Bernie and the black vote is that we have a long storied history with socialism already in many organizations dating to the 60's. Of course he didn't take advantage of this. Instead of going full gun he went in half cocked and was unwilling to cast the blame on a capitalist system that acts as a predator towards those most vulnerable. All talk, no teeth.
Bernie and his campaign bungled it for the most part. I don't think Bernie is hostile towards us, but he really failed to reach in our direction at ALL it felt. And from what few attempts he did make, a lot of them were bungled, like Cornell West. Lord have mercy what a terrible person to recruit to make inroads with black folk
There's also been this lingering thing with him not liking Obama much. No one has to LIKE the sitting President, but I expected some sort of explanation as to why he was willing to distance himself from him in that way, wanted to primary him in 2012 and was comfortable with his campaign (and loud mouthed supporters) saying that the last 8 years were: "More of the Same" or "Status Quo" when that shit couldn't be further from the truth. I love that the article addressed this for a brief moment too:
I have seen things get better for both my family and many close to me; but you are stomping around talking about how electing Hillary who plans to continue those policies and that momentum as being 'stagnant' and 'status quo'? Miss me with that bullshit.
But even then, he could have done a lot better. Hillary has a long history full of ups and downs with the AA community, so she wasn't unbeatable by any means; I just feel that Bernie and his campaign bungled it. I have a feel of Clinton even if its just through time alone; Bernie is less familiar so he really needed to spend more time making himself known in better ways than he did. I don't think the killer mike thing was bad. It was fine IMO, but it should have started much earlier, and it should have gotten BETTER from there, instead of nosediving into "The south is so conservative" and Cornell West....
Like talking to a brick wall over here man.... Jesus..
There's also been this lingering thing with him not liking Obama much. No one has to LIKE the sitting President, but I expected some sort of explanation as to why he was willing to distance himself from him in that way, wanted to primary him in 2012 and was comfortable with his campaign (and loud mouthed supporters) saying that the last 8 years were: "More of the Same" or "Status Quo" when that shit couldn't be further from the truth. I love that the article addressed this for a brief moment too:
I have seen things get better for both my family and many close to me; but you are stomping around talking about how electing Hillary who plans to continue those policies and that momentum as being 'stagnant' and 'status quo'? Miss me with that bullshit.
But even then, he could have done a lot better. Hillary has a long history full of ups and downs with the AA community, so she wasn't unbeatable by any means; I just feel that Bernie and his campaign bungled it. I have a feel of Clinton even if its just through time alone; Bernie is less familiar so he really needed to spend more time making himself known in better ways than he did. I don't think the killer mike thing was bad. It was fine IMO, but it should have started much earlier, and it should have gotten BETTER from there, instead of nosediving into "The south is so conservative" and Cornell West....
Like talking to a brick wall over here man.... Jesus..
Really didn't keep up at all with candidates . But, I have heard how Bernie was going to make college free and how that will help the low enconmic minorties including back.
Being a minority who was educated 14 years after high school I know that bill actually helps middle and higher class than so called poor people.
We already have financial aid which can be 100% free tuition for economic qualified people. It's the people in upper middle and middle who don't qualify for financial aid and have to put the money out. Interestingly that is the young white college kid age group that supports Bernie
Being a minority who was educated 14 years after high school I know that bill actually helps middle and higher class than so called poor people.
We already have financial aid which can be 100% free tuition for economic qualified people. It's the people in upper middle and middle who don't qualify for financial aid and have to put the money out. Interestingly that is the young white college kid age group that supports Bernie
SolicitorPirate
Member
This thread is basically the life of every minority progressive: whole lot of white liberals insisting their progressive but refusing to actually listen to us when we point out racism.
cartoon_soldier
Member
The article is pretty accurate. The Bernie voters who now refuse to back Clinton are by and large those who don't have to worry about Racism. They will be fine under Trump, and refusing to acknowledge what a Trump Presidency would mean for minorities shows they don't care about progressive ideals.
But the rift isn't that big. There is this false belief that all of Bernie's support was liberals when in truth a lot of his support came from conservative Democrats too who were just voting against Clinton/Obama or were single issue voters.
This shows that Sanders holdouts are not these liberal zealots but people who at times want more conservative policies than Obama. Sanders on fact consistently won that demographic.
But the rift isn't that big. There is this false belief that all of Bernie's support was liberals when in truth a lot of his support came from conservative Democrats too who were just voting against Clinton/Obama or were single issue voters.
This shows that Sanders holdouts are not these liberal zealots but people who at times want more conservative policies than Obama. Sanders on fact consistently won that demographic.
Except that Bernie was the only candidate to take BLM seriously. Yes I'm aware they had to protest him to get his attention, name a candidate that gave them attention without being protested? He even hired one of them on his campaign staff.
I don't believe for a second that Hillary gives a rats ass about police mistreatment of minorities, or how the justice system screws over minorities. It's at least plausible to me that Bernie actually cares.
Maybe I'm wrong, but that is the perception I get from the two candidates. Especially with Bill going around saying what he's said.
The issue is that Sanders actions point more toward acting like he wanted BLM to kinda stop bothering him over changing his message to include them.
He still stumped days after days after days on income inequality to EVERYONE like it would have made any difference for the people impacted by police brutality while Clinton actually went to the communities to have a conversation with them instead of just lecturing them from a podium.
cartoon_soldier
Member
You are still just proving the articles point.
The article is pretty accurate. The Bernie voters who now refuse to back Clinton are by and large those who don't have to worry about Racism. They will be fine under Trump, and refusing to acknowledge what a Trump Presidency would mean for minorities shows they don't care about progressive ideals.
But the rift isn't that big. There is this false belief that all of Bernie's support was liberals when in truth a lot of his support came from conservative Democrats too who were just voting against Clinton/Obama or were single issue voters.
This shows that Sanders holdouts are not these liberal zealots but people who at times want more conservative policies than Obama. Sanders on fact consistently won that demographic.
Progressive =/= Liberal. Bernie's movement is supposedly a progressive one, not necessarily a liberal one.
cartoon_soldier
Member
True from a purely academic sense, not really in reality since Democrats have used progressive term for decades.
Skellig Gra
Member
I always find it interesting how minorities seem to lean liberal yet liberals do fuck all to help them. Granted conservatives are worse but you'd think they'd try to band together to form a 3rd coalitin at some point.
The problem is that so much is based on local taxation.
<+)O Robido O(+>
Member
Man I don't get it either.
That's SC exits though from the look of it, I was talking nationally.
Why is Bernie viewed more likable by young blacks and Hispanics than Hillary if he is so out of touch?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/191465/millennials-sanders-dislike-election-process.aspx
http://www.gallup.com/poll/191465/millennials-sanders-dislike-election-process.aspx
I attempted to explain this in another thread
Bernie is part of the problem with the liberal side of things where they do a thing here or there and go "we're cool now, right?"
Thank you, that kind of cuts to the point much better than the way I was saying it.
Because the average US minority does not want the Republicans to win under any circumstances. To many minorities in the US the Republicans are the source for most of their problems and continue to be so with every victory. Even when the Democrats don't do anything, it's better than the Republicans making laws and rules to hurt minorities and take their slowly gained progress backwards. Forming a 3rd coalition and giving the Republicans a win isn't an option.
FPTP voting system makes it nearly impossible for a third party to do anything but split the vote for one of the major two parties. If minorities banded together to form some kind of new party, it would just let the Republicans win all the time.
So it's a choice between a party that sometimes helps and sometimes doesn't versus a party that will laugh as you get gunned down by police.
If only it meant that people didn't vote for people they liked but for the agenda they prefer getting acted on...
And as predicable behavior goes, the actual question about the racial rift within the party is skirted once again and hidden safely behind Bernie's lack of marketability. An entire article composed just so that people can ignore what the article is actually about. This isn't about what Bernie can get his head around, but what white liberals do to connect with the rest of the liberal populous.
I'll requote the most important passage I found in the article
navel-gazing is so much more fun.
What's a brick wall about it? I think beating Trump won't resolve all issues. The article seems to suggest that people are racist unless they vote for Hillary which is a false conclusion.
If anything I see far more anger among the youth than older generations. The article essentially says at the end that not voting for some one you don'the like is somehow the definition of privilege. Having actually lived in Palestine, I've seen this type of smear where one is an antisemite if they have legitimate complaints abut Israel. I find the argument that everyone is sexist/racist/privilege to be a very dangerous precedent to silence concerns that might be valid.
At least Hillary might select Elizabeth Warren which help bridge some sort of divide. However, either way I fear that the next election cycle and the one after that will have people who are more bigoted but better at crafting the message. That I'm really scared of.
That makes sense.
Psychoward
Banned
Didn't read the article and to be frank probably won't. I voted for Bernie in the primaries and am voting for Hillary come November and I finally had my epiphany moment why so many Hilldawg fans were frustrated this past year.
A rich white girl I go to school with was professing how she voted for Bernie but Hillary needs to win her over and this was my response.
It's just, to be frank as a straight white male myself she doesn't stand much to lose with a Trump presidency, but other people that aren't either of us do and holding out their vote because Hillary isn't progressive enough for them is mind boggling. The other option is somehow more progressive? Do you think abstaining is going to send a message?
A rich white girl I go to school with was professing how she voted for Bernie but Hillary needs to win her over and this was my response.
It's just, to be frank as a straight white male myself she doesn't stand much to lose with a Trump presidency, but other people that aren't either of us do and holding out their vote because Hillary isn't progressive enough for them is mind boggling. The other option is somehow more progressive? Do you think abstaining is going to send a message?
That is not what the article suggests.
It's thesis is that the makeup of the coalitions built by Sanders and Clinton demonstrate a fundamental racial divide within the party that has existed for some time. The framing of the campaign as a conflict between progressive and centrist/establishment/whatever wings of the Party belies that fact.
OrangeGrayBlue
Member
The divide, to me, seems much more age-related than race related. Might be different in the south, but here in CA it seems decisively age-based.
DorkLord54
Member
America's FPTP system discourages third-parties from forming, so minority voters have to make due with the party who actually believes that they deserve the same rights and privileges as everyone else.
Also, while I was a Bernie person m'self, I saw some FB memes relating to AAs and the Civil Rights Movement that were stupid. This is a prime one:
This, of course, ignores the fact that she came from a Rockefeller Republican family, and that should would abandon the Republicans once the Southern Strategy came into full swing under Nixon in 1968. It also ignores another fact, little less important, but, y-ya know, it should be mentioned: SHE WAS IN HER TEENS DURING MOST OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT! Not to mention even when she was campaigning for Goldwater (who at this point was already the Republican nominee, and, despite how some Dems want to frame it, was far less vile than Trump), she was a huge civil rights supporter after King spoke at her church in '62.
And then there is that especially vile and insipid one that basically says "Waaah! Why aren't black people smart enough to realise they should be voting for Bernie! Waaah!" If someone could find that one so I know it's real, that'd be great. And it's sad to see people I grew up with who are super liberal post stuff like that because we grew up in an area that's ~30% black, and our high school was similar.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll