-
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.
PoliGAF 2016 |OT16| Unpresidented
- Thread starter ItWasMeantToBe19
- Start date
- Status
Brawly Likes to Brawl
Member
Saw this getting passed around on Twitter
It's a guide for tips on building a liberal grassroots movement.
It's a guide for tips on building a liberal grassroots movement.
I mean, I guess I appreciate* you writing a whole post to tell me that I'm unrepresentative and irrelevant, but if you actually think that, why would you bother responding to me at all? If Bernie will win without winning my trust, you really don't need to engage with me. If you actually want to engage with me, it might be a good idea to engage with me rather than talk about how you think I'm statistically unimportant.
Maybe you are, but it doesn't really seem like a topic you're interested in discussing based on this post!
* I do not.
shinra-bansho
Member
When you say slight margin, you presumably mean non-significant... or otherwise easily explicable due to age of voter base.
Also why do you all read so much shitty politico.
Also why do you all read so much shitty politico.
soul creator
Member
I responded because your view seems to be held by a lot of different people on the forum here (and also in other online forums), but it didn't seem to be based on any evidence except in a very general "people are talking about it!" type of way. So instead of assuming that minorities don't like Sanders, or taking it as "obvious" that minorities overall are turned off by too much class talk, or that Sanders supporters throwing minorities under the bus is a problem to be worried about, I figured "hey, there's an easier way to find out what people as a group think about various issues and candidates". So I looked up that information and put it in a hopefully easy to digest post.
And since the numbers I noticed in that poll seemed to be the opposite of the common wisdom, I thought people would be interested in knowing. Your post was a jumping off point for that, since you're obviously not the only person I've seen who is worried about minorities getting thrown under the bus.
*posts giant list of evidence showing that the seemingly common wisdom around Sanders and minorities seems to be incorrect, and in the same post asked for any other data that might show otherwise, just in case I'm wrong*
"doesn't really seem like a topic you're interested in discussing"
*shrug*
whyamihere
Banned
https://twitter.com/NPRinskeep/status/809411698713120768
"One of his first actions after being elected was to give Carrier $16.5m to lay off more workers after promising he'd keep their jobs" *video of Trump saying they'd keep their jobs* *sepia-toned video of closed plant* *sepia-toned video of people looking at bills shaking their heads*
"One of his first actions after being elected was to give Carrier $16.5m to lay off more workers after promising he'd keep their jobs" *video of Trump saying they'd keep their jobs* *sepia-toned video of closed plant* *sepia-toned video of people looking at bills shaking their heads*
Interesting - I'll have to pay more attention to Colbert and Stewart. I'm less bothered about reaching Trump voters right now than I am about motivating Dems and the potential Dem base. Even politically neutral potential voters - as long as they can be reasoned with - are people to aim for. I want to believe that people are - generally speaking - good at heart, and would be appalled if they were presented with the stacks of evidence of the moral bankruptcy of the GOP that their indifference has led to. (Grammar edit: Bloody hell, that's a tortured sentence. Sorry.
)That may be a forlorn hope, but still... Start by being hopeful, and then turn cynical?
You might consider that it's based on the fact that I am a person of color and don't trust Sanders on social justice, and that many other people I talk to feel the same way!
Frankly, providing evidence that lots of people don't agree with my concerns seems like a very weird response if you're trying to address me being worried that my concerns will be ignored.
You seem to be under the impression that my position is "many minorities do not like or trust Bernie Sanders."
It's not. My position is that I don't trust him. Obviously I like to think that I'm both representative and persuasive, but maybe I'm not!
So my read of this interaction is:
"I don't trust Bernie."
"Yeah but everybody else does. What am I missing?"
So you can see why my response is to question whether you're actually interested in why I don't trust him!
How, exactly, did you think that providing a bunch of data that shows that most people don't agree with me would open a fruitful discussion?
If you want to discuss the topic, maybe start by discussing the topic with me.
Beer Monkey
Member
This is what is going to happen everywhere. Corporate tax rates are going to be cut across the board and the windfall is going to be spent on eliminating jobs, not creating them.
This will make corporate fatcats even richer and further decimate the middle class. Ultimately as fewer people even have money to spend, the economy will completely implode, screwing everybody, but the wealthy will be comparatively fine.
whyamihere
Banned
@Olivianuzzi
The man next to me at Trump Grill ordered a vodka martini and this is how it came out.
the fuck is that
A monstrosity.
It's a further example that the Trump brand is what people who have absolutely no taste think good taste is.
Except the algorithms and tools have grown exponentially more effective. REDMAP was a clear game changer.
Veritigo_X
Member
How the fuck does a bartender not know how to make a martini, possibly the most well known mixed drink out there?
10 year old me knew more about martinis just from watching James Bond.
whyamihere
Banned
I'm so mad about that fucking "martini"
Yeah, that's actually a good sign.
whyamihere
Banned
Oh.
I mean, you're a different political party, but okay.
That's not a martini. That's someone's puke in a glass.
Doesn't the data show that you and your friends aren't representative? And knowing that, shouldn't you avoid making arguments based on the assumption that your views are representative?
I mean, I wasn't addressing your personal views -- I was responding to a broader argument that sanders influence would result in minority disapproval and be strategically damaging to the party. You can personally think sanders doesn't care, but you don't seem to be representative, so until the data starts to fall in line with your views it's basically moot to that discussion.
whyamihere
Banned
Dems making a play for GA-6
http://politics.blog.myajc.com/2016...clear-the-field-in-race-to-replace-tom-price/
http://politics.blog.myajc.com/2016...clear-the-field-in-race-to-replace-tom-price/
This seems like a pretty silly claim for a Sanders supporter to make, frankly!
I mean, if your message is that I need to actively advocate among minorities to hold the Democratic Party accountable and to abandon it if it is unwilling to stand up for social justice, and if I don't you will simply ignore my concerns, okay, message received, I guess.
Veritigo_X
Member
They endorse democrats all the time. In fact, that's all I really know them from.
So you think most black people think sanders is unwilling to stand up for social justice but like him anyway..? It seems more likely to me that many think Sanders is willing to stand up for social justice.
And supporting sanders != making arguments that assumes everyone shares my personal views. You don't see me making arguments based on the idea that my personal views are representative of whites or Texans.
No, not at all.
soul creator
Member
Fair enough. I'm also a person of color and I think Sanders-type policies would be much stronger on social/economic justice, and that many other people I talk to feel the same way! So...there's that?
And you did seem to imply that "Sanders wing of the party" was against minority issues, which is why I provided those (though limited) set of numbers about how "the Sanders wing" is actually more likely to support the progressive view on various issues.
So at least on gay rights and immigration for example, your concern about "the Sanders wing of the party" doesn't seem to be based on anything in reality. There may be some data out there that shows the "Sanders wing of the party" is hugely opposed to minority issues, which is why I repeatedly ask to see any numbers on this.
Then we can see whether that distrust is based on something that actually exists, or if it's just a vague personal feeling that causes people to interpret everything Sanders and "the Sanders wing" says in the worst possible light.
Well, I guess that depends on whether we're talking about solely your personal concerns, or if we're talking about a political strategy going forward to prevent people like Trump from taking power (which I would assume we all care about!)
If it's the latter, then all those numbers in my post seems to be relevant. I assumed that you were using your personal view as representative for why someone shouldn't take a Sanders-type approach to policy/campaigning (after all, politics is about getting more people on your side and gaining power), and that his approach would be harmful to the interests of minorities.
But I guess I was wrong. My mistake!
My mistake for lumping you in with people like this, since it seems to sound pretty similar.
Correct, that post was to show that you're not. But is the distrust based on an actual policy reason? Is it just the rhetoric that's used? Is it things like the quote from a couple weeks ago about identity politics that makes you distrust him?
Fair enough, and I am interested! So what is the distrust based on? And do you think those factors that make you distrust him would be enough for him to lose the support of a wide group of people?
And more accurately, why do you consider Clinton (I believe you were a Clinton supporter during both the primaries and the general election, if I'm not mistaken?) more trustworthy on minority issues than Sanders? Or do you distrust both of them?
It might also be helpful to define what "minority issues" means in this context. Based on that data I looked at, things like Social Security/Health care/the Economy are by far the most important issue for minorities, so if that's what he talks about a lot, why is he seen as "bad on minority issues"?
To be sure, I can totally understand the idea of not fully being onboard with Sanders because you think he isn't strong enough on certain issues (from my point of view, Sanders-type policies and views are the "compromise" that I "settle" for). What I don't get is how that would make someone trust Clinton (or the Democratic Party organization overall) more, especially given the history there.
Though, if you distrust all of them, but just preferred Clinton because she would "get things done", then at least that seems somewhat consistent!
Again, I made the mistake of assuming that you were using your personal view as representative of a larger trend (seeing what can win over large groups of people without completely compromising who you are seems like a major aspect of political discussion!), since that seems to be a common topic on this forum.
ok
Yes, let's not trust the democratic party that attempted to put an end to segregation, even when they had a bigoted Southerner as a president.
While I usually don't want to engage in these kind of discussions, Clinton was also far more vocal against racism and had participated in discussions with black districts. She was very involved in civil rights at an early age. I damn as well trust her more on this regard than say Bernie Sanders.
While I usually don't want to engage in these kind of discussions, Clinton was also far more vocal against racism and had participated in discussions with black districts. She was very involved in civil rights at an early age. I damn as well trust her more on this regard than say Bernie Sanders.
Box of Kittens
Banned
This so much. Granting that it's actually a difficult problem to appeal to all parts of a coalition, we can't just start writing off parts or taking other parts for granted. It's one of the reasons I'd like Sherrod Brown to run in 2020. I think he's well positioned to appeal to the entire coalition. Yes, he has to survive 2018 first, but I'm pretty bullish on his chances of doing so.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Do you guys think sometimes that
Things are gonna turn out ok? Im tired of "bedwetting" every time we hear about Trump sneezing. Im just gonna roll with the punches? I suppose?
Things are gonna turn out ok? Im tired of "bedwetting" every time we hear about Trump sneezing. Im just gonna roll with the punches? I suppose?
RustyNails
Member
Olive in a piss.
Box of Kittens
Banned
My only qualm is that I'd love to see him run for Governor in 2020, and I think DNC chair is a position that would hurt him more than anything with the Indiana electorate.
There is a reason Sanders voters crossed over to Trump.
There is a reason Sanders doesn't want to actually talk about "PC" and sidesteps it.
There is a reason Sanders' press secretary was denied access to events by staff because they didn't believe she actually worked for the campaign.
Sanders' strategy is fundamentally based off of appealing to white "working class" voters. (But really, white people who don't really live around nonwhite people- when you control for racial animosity the education gap vanishes w/ Trump voters.) In order to do that, issues specifically affecting minority groups are downplayed and wrapped into "economic" ones. White people like hearing that "all racial issues boil down to economics." They like affirmation that it's just a result of history, and that minorities aren't being actively held down in the modern day. They don't like being confronted with unnecessary police shootings that shatter their worldview.
In '08 Clinton tried to win the primary coming from the same angle Bernie did, focusing on white voters. She failed. However, unlike Bernie, she had a great deal of support from minority groups during the campaign due to her history with them - the choice between her and Obama wasn't cut and dry. In '16 she changed gears and ran a campaign based out of the "Obama coalition" from '08. Sanders attempted the same path Hillary did, and like her in '08, it didn't work, and he got even less of the voteshare. This is partly due to demographic changes, partly due to Clinton's history, and also partly due to history repeating - Minorities not trusting populism is nothing new.
There is a reason Sanders doesn't want to actually talk about "PC" and sidesteps it.
There is a reason Sanders' press secretary was denied access to events by staff because they didn't believe she actually worked for the campaign.
Sanders' strategy is fundamentally based off of appealing to white "working class" voters. (But really, white people who don't really live around nonwhite people- when you control for racial animosity the education gap vanishes w/ Trump voters.) In order to do that, issues specifically affecting minority groups are downplayed and wrapped into "economic" ones. White people like hearing that "all racial issues boil down to economics." They like affirmation that it's just a result of history, and that minorities aren't being actively held down in the modern day. They don't like being confronted with unnecessary police shootings that shatter their worldview.
In '08 Clinton tried to win the primary coming from the same angle Bernie did, focusing on white voters. She failed. However, unlike Bernie, she had a great deal of support from minority groups during the campaign due to her history with them - the choice between her and Obama wasn't cut and dry. In '16 she changed gears and ran a campaign based out of the "Obama coalition" from '08. Sanders attempted the same path Hillary did, and like her in '08, it didn't work, and he got even less of the voteshare. This is partly due to demographic changes, partly due to Clinton's history, and also partly due to history repeating - Minorities not trusting populism is nothing new.
(via @jbouie from Lawrence Goodwyn's abridged history of the Populist movement)
excelsiorlef
Member
No why would I ever think things are going to turn out ok? There is fuck all indicating that things are going to turn out ok.
Thinking things are going to be ok isn't rolling with the punches it's ignoring all of them hitting you right in the fucking face until you're unconscious or dead.
RustyNails
Member
Coming from my post about Obama's decision to send in Seal team 6, would anyone be interested in a 13 Days type movie that focuses on the last 2 hours of deliberations before Obama says "fuck it, send in the Seals"? I think it would make an excellent movie. Stella Stella I hope you're reading this. Its your new hollywood script.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Depends, think of gerrymandering like dikes that keep Democrats out.
However, once you get up and over it, it floods.
Of course, if you don't run candidates in those districts, it won't matter.
I'd watch the crap out of that. Honestly, I think that could be a more interesting movie than what we got. Structure it sort of like 12 Angry Men and you can't really go wrong. Hell, it'd probably have oscar written all over it.
Quick note that I appreciate this response and will try to write a more full response of my own later today.
whyamihere
Banned
You can't hashtag numbers!!!
Interesting - I'll have to pay more attention to Colbert and Stewart. I'm less bothered about reaching Trump voters right now than I am about motivating Dems and the potential Dem base. Even politically neutral potential voters - as long as they can be reasoned with - are people to aim for. I want to believe that people are - generally speaking - good at heart, and would be appalled if they were presented with the stacks of evidence of the moral bankruptcy of the GOP that their indifference has led to. (Grammar edit: Bloody hell, that's a tortured sentence. Sorry.
That may be a forlorn hope, but still... Start by being hopeful, and then turn cynical?
Yeah. I don't think Jon Stewart is coming back though, so hopefully someone will take up his mantle. Colbert's old role as well. Samantha Bee is doing a good job but her and John Oliver's format probably doesn't as much of a reach as those two back then.
RustyNails
Member
Exactly what I'm thinking. Start it with White House Correspondents Dinner where Obama is roasting the fuck out of Romney and Trump.
Mackenzie 92
Member
not to the effect that took place after the 2010 election. dems really have no shot at getting the house back until 2030
republicans are so much better at this shit than dems.
hashtag #warrenknowsbetterthantorun
Box of Kittens
Banned
I'm certainly not ready to predict that Dems will take the House in 2018 because it's way too early. I am going to say it's highly likely the Dems gain seats, and I don't buy the argument that "this time is different" because Dems don't show up in midterms, or gerrymandering, or whatever. Gerrymander is a challenge, of course, but it can't save you from a wave (not that I'm predicting a blue wave, again, it's too early to say that) because all of a sudden those R+6's get swamped. However effective their gerrymandering is, history is littered with these so-called "game changers" (e.g. the Dems data operation) that turn out to be overhyped.
shinra-bansho
Member
I mean yes, minorities, like everyone are concerned about the personal wellbeing of themselves and their families such that "the economy" and "healthcare" are important issues.
I thought it was pretty clear and self-explanatory what people mean when they say minority issues. And it seems somewhat ironic in a discussion around needing to be able to speak to those issues, to say "no, these are the real minority issues".
I thought it was pretty clear and self-explanatory what people mean when they say minority issues. And it seems somewhat ironic in a discussion around needing to be able to speak to those issues, to say "no, these are the real minority issues".
AntraxSuicide
Banned
You're making a giant mistake on reading these polls. Votes are what matter, and they're the only thing you can use to assess future voting. If you want favorability, then I'll point out that Hillary was more popular than Trump, who won. Bernie was more popular than Hillary, who won. The entire GOP field was more popular than Trump, who won. Etc...
Look at the primary's voting numbers. Hillary would not have won without her dominant minority support. Period. There's no other reading of that. Her wins in the South in particular are entirely done by black people, and places like CA and TX came from Hispanic voters. Bernie's only minority-heavy wins were from HI and AK.
And the reason you're getting pushback on this is because, specifically this year had Sanders gotten the nom, the general election would be between the candidate picked by right wing white people versus the candidate picked by left wing white people. I'd still have voted for Sanders in such a race, easily, but I certainly wouldn't be enthused by it. And you could easily argue that such massive disenfranchisement of the minority vote would have lost you more votes in Philly, Detroit, etc... anyway. Maybe Sanders could've padded that (and more) in the rural parts of those states, but all this talk of just going to the Sanders side in the future is based on the assumption that people of color will fall in line.
Fuck that. The DNC is the big tent party of all demographics, and if you can't win more than white people by a decent margin, then you aren't going to win as a Democrat.
Edit: And I understand the need for discussion of this. It's good. But one of the core tenets of being a Democrat is that (for example) when someone asks you "Can you explain why Black Lives Matter?" you need to give an answer that doesn't in any form sound like "All Lives Matter." I remember Sanders did an African-American town hall in Minnesota (I think?), and when asked about black people struggling, he said something along the lines of "in some places, it's black people. Others Hispanic people, even poor white people in some places...." and that just deflated the room. You have to be present, if that makes sense. Sanders has a wandering mind when it comes to politics, and he's always listing back home (which is fine, he's been a Vermont politician for longer than a lot of posters have been alive!). His home doesn't have to stay on message because of the demographic makeup of Vermont. So it's totally consistent that he's not super trained on this stuff in the same way a senator from New York City would be. There's not a hatred of the guy here, but I have strong doubts that he knows how to enthuse people of color specifically. You can't just say "I'm going to help everyone, and they'll get helped too" since people of color have historically been ripped off by such language starting from "All men are created equal."
I really hope Trump bombs super hard (like Dubya times a million) because in 4 years, I don't want our candidate to have to tiptoe around this point. We need to shake these people and scream, "YOUR JOB IS OBSOLETE AND YOU HAVE NO MARKETABLE SKILLS!"
Where we go from there is up for debate (retraining, UBI, some combo of both, etc...), but we need to stop coddling these babies and telling them they can all have their grandpa's job with inflated pay, full benefits, and no taxes. I want to be a Jedi Knight, but that's not happening either. They need a hard dose of reality here.
The one thing Trump is going to get shit on in 4 years that won't be his fault is when these Rust Belt people turn on him and vote Dem (as they've done a lot of, voting Bill, then Bush, then Obama, then Trump), because it's not the damn government (either party) that's getting you laid off. They have no skills! They are cotton pickers decades after the cotton gin! Telegram salesmen in 2016! You are the reason for your lack of employment in the same way a high school dropout who smokes weed all day is. The world doesn't give a damn what you want your job to be, it only offers the jobs that it needs done. It does not need your manual labor. It does need skilled technical jobs, but honestly, there aren't enough of those either.
(As an aside, this is why I'm still not a super fan of Sanders. That tweet a few days ago about bringing back manufacturing and shit is just so uninformed, it's either ignorance or malice. I'm not enthused to vote for either.)
- Status