Kid Kamikaze10
Member
Bernie couldn't handle them either. That's on him. That's a weakness. A fixable one, but in the general election, that's a killer.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Black Lives Matter shuts down a Bernie Sanders rally
- Thread starter soleil
- Start date
- Status
Bernie couldn't handle them either. That's on him. That's a weakness. A fixable one, but in the general election, that's a killer.
I really don't know what you are saying here. I'm pointing out that the O'Malley hecklers let O'Malley speak, they physically handed back the microphones after making their (far more eloquent) point and then left the stage, whereas the ones in this instance did not let Sanders speak, and did not leave the stage once they had made their point, therefore it is unfair to use the former case to say that Sanders handled this worse.
There was no way Sanders was getting back to that microphone to 'respond with compassion' without those, frankly racist, activists being removed from the stage.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
What alternate universe are you living in? Is it nice there?
What does O'Malley's history have to do with anything? Are you still fighting with figments of your imagination? No one has been bringing up his history as a reason why Bernie can't respond.
Dicktatorship
Junior Member
Oh my god I'm sorry I thought everyone would understand the joke. Obviously I was wrong, I edited the post to reflect this. It won't happen again, sorry.
Weren't you the one that said Bernie needed more security so this wouldn't happen again? Not every bit of protest is reasonable or makes sense.
Other people have pointed out to you that Bernie has responded to BLM. He's mentioned Sandra Bland multiple times and has come out with policy ideas like O'Malley did. Whether or not people choose to follow up on that is not really the problem here. But even then that misses the point. I think there's a line between asking politicians to pander to you and holding politicians accountable.
Absolutely nothing, and that's the point. Why was it so easy for O'Malley to do what he had to do to get BLM off his back, but apparently impossible for Sanders?
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
O'mally being handed the mic back and sanders not being handed the mic back sounds like a crucial distinction if true.
I said that Bernie either needs to get better at engaging the movement in the moment (because what he's doing now isn't making him look good at all), or beef up security so that this doesn't keep happening to him. Both of which are fine options.
You and I aren't on the same page. I'm talking about Netroots, where this all started.
It's ok, at least I got a laugh out of it after such a serious topic.
Ah ok, my apologies.
benicillin
Banned
You did watch the video, right? It was five or six minutes of them arguing with the event organizer who wasn't Sanders or Sanders campaign and speaking to the audience / a moment of silence, then by the time they wanted to "hold Bernie accountable" he had to leave and go to his actual event.
Aaronology
Member
You say, "Bernie should have let them finish." and it's immediately (and repeatedly, tiresomely) pointed out to you he did just that. Then you say, "Bernie should have responded with compassion!" and it's, again (and again) noted that he never had the opportunity. He wasn't allowed an opportunity to reply.
"Well, if he can't get a mic back from some protesters he's clearly too weak to be President." seems to be the new line. And at this point I'm honestly sitting here like:
Things benefitting no one or benefitting the rich seem to be the standard outcomes in American politics.
We're talking about them this morning. That has to be a win for Black Lives Matter.
But the problem is that getting more security to make him look good is not the issue. It's an unreasonable protest against a candidate who isn't really the biggest threat to black people. Legitimately, it's the republicans -- any of them. But practically, it's Hillary Clinton.A protest like this, that hurts the more progressive candidate only moves the democratic party to the right.
Someone else posted how Obama would have made some witty comments to win them over. But no; he would have just escorted them out like he usually does. And it makes sense to do that because protests aren't supposed to be convenient. What doesn't make sense, is protesting this particular candidate.
Having read a good portion of this thread and being sympathetic to the views expressed by both sides, this ultimately just seems to have been adequately summed up some pages ago:
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
not if it hurts the movement's legitimacy. all press isn't good press in this case.
You say, "Bernie should have let them finish." and it's immediately (and repeatedly, tiresomely) pointed out to you he did just that. Then you say, "Bernie should have responded with compassion!" and it's, again (and again) noted that he never had the opportunity. He wasn't allowed an opportunity to reply.
I'm sorry, but I'm not of the same mindset that Bernie HAD to leave in that moment. Bernie's not an idiot; he knows what incidents like this can do to his campaign. If Bernie had made the decision to take an extra 2 minutes to address them somehow I don't think event organizers would have snatched him off the stage for going over time, and I don't think his arena full of supporters would have left from him being a few minutes late.
I don't buy that Bernie was a slave to his circumstances here. He could have exercised more control than he did. He made the choice not to, which is his prerogative.
I imagine many white liberals don't care too much for being called white supremacists.
He apparently stayed for like 20 minutes or something. From what I read (albeit from a far right rag, Breitbart). He even apparently observed the 4 and a half minutes for Mike Brown and then spent the next 15 or so minutes talking to supporters. It's unclear to me if any of that info is accurate though. So if someone could clarify, that'd be nice. It definitely did sound like he could have adressed them if he really wanted, but at the same time, it's clear that they were not looking for a discussion.
Maybe, but it doesn't put them in very good light regardless if it makes Bernie look weak for not controlling the situation.
I don't "get" these protests. They are shitty and serve to alienate the people we need to reach. In order to truly change the culture with regards to police violence against blacks, we need to have as much of the mainstream (read: white people) on board as possible. This isn't doing it, at all.
Furthermore, as a progressive and not just as a black American, harming Sanders hurts our liberal cause. We need Bernie to do well to bring Hillary left. She is far too centrist in her past record.
Pretty much (for the primaries). However, for the general election, it's pretty much the opposite. Hillary will get the black vote by default. We aren't voting for Trump, Walker, or Bush, that's for sure. So African-Americans have become a surprisingly-weak Democratic voting block. We're definitely behind Latinos. If BLM is going to have any real influence, it'll need to be in the primary elections. The way they're going about this so far isn't going to accomplish that.
Furthermore, as a progressive and not just as a black American, harming Sanders hurts our liberal cause. We need Bernie to do well to bring Hillary left. She is far too centrist in her past record.
Pretty much (for the primaries). However, for the general election, it's pretty much the opposite. Hillary will get the black vote by default. We aren't voting for Trump, Walker, or Bush, that's for sure. So African-Americans have become a surprisingly-weak Democratic voting block. We're definitely behind Latinos. If BLM is going to have any real influence, it'll need to be in the primary elections. The way they're going about this so far isn't going to accomplish that.
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
Leaving was the best choice. This protest was about being attention whores, not to being any meaningful attention to the issue, and there was zero interest in letting Bernie speak on the matter. They just wanted attention and to make the news.
Ideally, his people would have had security in place and stopped these idiots from ruining his rally. But he didn't. His best option was to leave.
kame-sennin
Member
No, the dependence on elected officials to protect them and solve their problems is a major part of why blacks still find themselves in an oppressed position today. Politicians only codify issues of social justice after the people have resolved the situation themselves. It's only through movements that black lives will actually matter to those in power. Once that is accomplished, then and only then will it necessary to elect politicians that will enshrine those gains into law.
If you want to see Bernie Sanders addressing leaders of the black community, then here's a video from July at the Southern Christian Leadership Conference: Bernie Sanders Speech to SCLC [YouTube]
Here's a short list of his Civil Rights acheivements. (Things he's done, not just lip service.)
Here's his voting record on a whole slew of issues, many of which pertain to minorities.
Bernie has a problem with optics, mostly among people who don't know who he is - and it's understandable if you don't know who he is. But the problem is with optics, not substance. You've got these random activists who hogged the mic and wouldn't let him speak. They created an impossible situation for him. Some are saying he should've done "something", but I feel there's nothing he could have done to satisfy them. They have their minds made up. And it's weird because he's already done plenty over the past 50 years, and has been outspoken on systemic racism and the steps we should take to address it. His platform is closest to what BLM's is on their website among all the candidates. He's even mentioned them in speeches. It's bizarre. Did RFK have Civil Rights activists storming the stage during his speeches? Because that's sort of what this is like.
Here's a short list of his Civil Rights acheivements. (Things he's done, not just lip service.)
Here's his voting record on a whole slew of issues, many of which pertain to minorities.
Bernie has a problem with optics, mostly among people who don't know who he is - and it's understandable if you don't know who he is. But the problem is with optics, not substance. You've got these random activists who hogged the mic and wouldn't let him speak. They created an impossible situation for him. Some are saying he should've done "something", but I feel there's nothing he could have done to satisfy them. They have their minds made up. And it's weird because he's already done plenty over the past 50 years, and has been outspoken on systemic racism and the steps we should take to address it. His platform is closest to what BLM's is on their website among all the candidates. He's even mentioned them in speeches. It's bizarre. Did RFK have Civil Rights activists storming the stage during his speeches? Because that's sort of what this is like.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Hillary is barely having events, it's not really comparable. She's not really "campaigning" whereas Sanders, O'Malley, and the republican candidates are on the ground talking to folks.
I don't fault Sanders for leaving the stage, either at Netroots or in Seattle. No point in rewarding this type of emotional, childish behavior. That being said I do fault Sanders for allegedly cancelling meetings with BLM chapters. If that's true (I haven't seen a link posted here) then that's the bigger problem. Agitators who can't hold a conversation shouldn't be appeased, especially when they're staging something. But if you can't sit down with mature folks who act like adults then there's a problem.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
What the heck is TSU? Why isn't this linked to the actual article?
To respond that article, it's still wrong. What is the alternative? Blacks don't vote? We know the truth, they don't need the black vote. Blacks aren't stupid enough to vote for one of the right wing crazies over a democrat even if they are relatively apathetic to their cause. I think it doesn't help when people keep painting this as a one sided argument. Blacks would have to be crazy to cut off their nose to spite their face. They need EACH OTHER, this isn't a one way street. The politicians need them to care and they have to care too since they are both necessary to get this changed.
jakonovski
Member
Bernie won't learn and Democrats become Republican lite because the Bernies get smoked out by those who ostensibly agree with him.
And nobody will have a sane choice left because it's a two party system.
And nobody will have a sane choice left because it's a two party system.
What the hell, this article is just straw man after straw man. Reads like someone's delusion.
Also the racism here is palpable - as if speaking for all black people, equating these supporters to completely different events, whitesplaining, geez.
PhoenixDark
Banned
This article is a logical disaster.
Who is he referring to here? White liberals...at what point have they displayed "dreadful" behavior towards Obama as president?
And in terms of courtship, are we talking about the personal responsibility courtship of whites that these activists hate so much?
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
So, the movement is now about being as toxic and self-aggrandizing as possible without actually saying or doing anything, eh? I was willing to wave away the inane, rambling #PressRelease from earlier as a fringe element, but we're seeing a distinct Code Pink/PETA pattern emerging. How disappointing.
Kid Kamikaze10
Member
Which would have been fine, if Bernie hadn't responded badly, which has been like a million times in this thread.
And that link has been posted at least twice in this thread. Also, it was made after what happened Seattle.
It's true.
If you listen to the TWiB! podcast, Elon James White, who was present at Netroots and was one of the black bloggers/activists/writers invited to have a sit-down with Bernie after his speech, details how he was told by Bernie's people that the meeting was still on only for him to show up, wait a few minutes, and then be told that Bernie wasn't actually coming.
I imagine something similar happened here.
benicillin
Banned
It was compiled after Seattle, but these are all things that he's campaigned on and talked about in many speeches at the SCLC and others.
Yep, and here's the address to the National Urban League.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vD9z3mM7o4
Still not good enough I guess.
How can you say that? This was compile after the Seattle event.
Subpar Spatula
Banned
To be honest, nothing will be good enough. Bernie is just the most accessible candidate. Think not of this as them going after him (but in reality they are) but after candidates in general. These protestors are not getting near the big guys so their way of challenging the election and holding politicians accountable is by holding Bernie accountable. This wouldn't even be a thing if he had good security personal at his events.
Then we can assume he's fulfilled BLM requests? They'll back down off him? Are you content in saying he's doing well now and the protests should focus elsewhere until he slips up?
Of course, but good for Sanders on doing something to make his stances on the issues clear. It's obviously something he needed to do.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
And he responded so why are you still so against him? You wanted him to respond and he has. You've been arguing nonstop that he hasn't done anything and has been dismissive and uncaring to the issues. So which is it?
benicillin
Banned
Probably, since there seems to be a lot of doubt and miscommunication floating around. I wish more people would signal boost his solutions rather than complain about the protesters interrupting his speech - his new hire said it best:
Did you even read my post? I just said your boy Sanders did something good.
Did I attack him afterward?
- Status