When your pep club rally only attracts white folks.

climate we live in right now.

Instead of being used as targets or as political punching bags, by talking heads who really, really don't care about them, as they are now.

Well, at least it wasn't something like $1000 a plate dinner.

But not this one, right?

...especially since Sanders has charged $1000 at events too.

Who mentioned Clinton????

I'd cower behind implication too... it's very convenient.

He only cares about "the people."

Sanders doesn't accept money from Super PACs, but he does accept donations from ordinary citizens.

And tickets for the Lincoln Park fundraising event were as low as $50

https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20150817/lincoln-park/hundreds-wait-line-for-bernie-sanders-meet-and-greet-lincoln-park

https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20150818/lincoln-park/bernie-sanders-calls-on-chicagos-youngest-alderman-fire-up-crowd

it's expected you will benefit from it.

My God when will this zombie die?

I should have guessed by your avatar!....btw.....you are talking to a brick wall.....facts just clog up the issues!

Please research and find out which other serious presidential candidates (limiting it to post-1900 would be fine) have directly addressed a crowd, any crowd, in South Carolina, and declared opposition to anything like 'institutional racism,' or directly, openly linked racism to extreme 'justice system' disparities directed against African Americans.

Think he'd do it in Mississippi or Alabama? I have no doubt.

You have a photo of Hillary Clinton as your avatar pic. I assume, therefore, that you are a supporter of Hillary Clinton's candidacy for the Democratic nomination. If I assume wrongly, I apologize.

I ask you this - would Hillary Clinton denounce institutional racism to a mostly 'white' crowd in South Carolina? If you think the answer is 'yes,' then you really don't know your candidate.

Finally, if you really do support Hillary Clinton, describing a political speech given by her main primary opponent as a 'pep club rally' only helps suggest that her supporters are petty jerks. If that's one of your personal goals, then, of course, you have succeeded. The more you do things like that, the pettier her supporters appear to those who are exposed to your commentary.

However, if you actually want to contribute to a perspective that her supporters are generally decent people, even when they criticize their candidate's opponents, you should either:

1) Stop posting, look around for posts by relatively polite supporters of your candidate, and learn to emulate their styles, or

2) Stop posting altogether, which may help the candidate you support by improving the general image of the quality of her supporters.

I mean this not as a personal attack, but purely as a suggestion, based on 45 years of learning an awful lot of stuff the hard way, that language explicitly intended to belittle a person, presumably on behalf of another person, makes the 'on behalf of' person look bad, by association.

crowd who did have black people there and she got great applause. Than Bernie followed with his message and he also addressed the BLM issues.

What really surprised me was the applause he got when talking about that issue. This crowd was not anti-black.

The title say he had a rowdy crowd - better term for what I saw would be cheering crowd. Between the applause, cheering and standing ovations - it was a very good crowd.

Interesting after standing up to talk for more than an hour he and his wife made their way through the crowd until almost everyone was gone from the arena.

He could be attracting smug people.

Has Bernie's past actions on behalf of civil rights matched up with his rhetoric? I believe his past history of being a strong supporter of civil rights is what REALLY matters and is more predictive of what he will do in the future.

I will let you and I hope all of the DU folks on this thread to ponder same.

There are none so blind as those who will not see

rally, which would have been proportional representation.

He's not resonating, at least not yet. It's not a joke or a "David Duke" reference to say as much.

And who's blind....? Not the reporter--he got a fairly accurate approximation of the ethnicity of the crowd.

and not the candidate either. And apparently it wasn't the white folks who attended as well.

Kind of hard to do though when it's dinners with billionaires and invitation only "chats".

It seems that POC are assumed to be in HRC's pocket for voting...I thought that was the big complaint...don't take POC for granted...looks like that is exactly what her campaign and supporters are doing.

We're supposed to all be in this together. But no, lets keep pulling each other apart.

She doesn't assume that she can spout a laundry list, get cheers for impossible goals, and expect people to vote for her.

Right now, though, the polls are with her on that score--and not just slightly.

Also, her campaign stops are small groups, where she listens and takes questions. It's not a boiler plate stump speech where she says the same thing at every event.

They aren't "dinners with billionaires" but keep characterizing it that way if it makes you feel better to misstate the way she is running her effort. You shouldn't confuse a campaign event with a fundraiser--anyone with experience knows the difference.

You don't have to shop falsehoods to justify your dislike--it weakens your argument.


In any event, it's a long way to Tipperary...and it's a long way to November 2016.

more black supporters. Bernie isn't very well known nationally so this doesn't surprise me one bit. Let's all take a deep breath and think this thing through.

You got all that out of an AP news article. Amazing.

Most corporate media outlets are on 'do everything possible to subtly inject negative language into articles about Bernie Sanders' mode. Their bosses know the business of manipulating public opinion quite well...

Never mind that a serious candidate for the Presidency of the United States, who happens to be rather pale-skinned, addressed a crowd of mostly 'white' people in South Carolina and explicitly declared his opposition to institutionalized racism and the associated extreme disparities it generates though the 'justice' system.

In a world of fact-based reporting, that should be a major splash headline.

They act like Sanders is someone who is faking any concern for equal rights. Like he's got some sordid past that he's trying to make up for and convince everyone he's "changed".
When the reality is, he's been steady on his stands his whole career.
If I were him, i wouldnt do anything different than speak my mind on the issues. I'll lose some respect for him if he starts pandering

Mrs Clinton is as usual dogged by scandals of her own doing, a history (sorry - herstory) of conservative and corporate votes and quotes, refusal to answer questions or speak unscripted, and refusal to take a stand on any controversial issues. Calling Sanders a racist, and anyone who prefers his politics to hers as sexist, is all they've got

"About two dozen members of the South Carolina Gay and Lesbian Pride Movement held a protest outside the Township Auditorium in Columbia, South Carolina yesterday as “ex-gay” Reverend Donnie McClurkin took to the stage in an appearance that generated controversy last week after Obama refused to drop the singer from is three-day “Embrace the Change” gospel tour."
http://www.towleroad.com/2007/10/gay-group-prote/

Protesters who were barred from attending the event, by the way.

"Tonight there was a small vigil of about 15 or 20 gays and lesbians, who stood quietly across the street as people filed into a big auditorium here for the last of three campaign-sponsored concerts (and the only one to feature Mr. McClurkin). The whole controversy might have been forgotten in the swell of gospel sound except Mr. McClurkin turned the final half hour of the three-hour concert into a revival meeting about the lightning rod he has become for the Obama campaign.

He approached the subject gingerly at first. Then, just when the concert had seemed to reach its pitch and about to end, Mr. McClurkin returned to it with a full-blown plea: “Don’t call me a bigot or anti-gay when I have suffered the same feelings,” he cried.

“God delivered me from homosexuality,” he added.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/29/obamas-gospel-concert-tour/?_r=0


It is interesting that DU was so eager to support those openly bigoted events for the sake of Obama. But Bernie gets dinged for nothing at all.
This shit is going to make it hard for me to trust the voters of this Party in the future. It's ugly, the contrast between 08 and today. In 08 it was just perfectly fine to hold rallies intentionally pandering to anti gay sentiments. That is the standard this site and this Party accepted.
Let me know when Bernie does anything even close to hiring famous hate speakers. McClurkin had called gay people vampires and child killers and that was fine and dandy with almost all of DU.
Double standards suck.

yeah, I am still a bit bitter about 2008 in that regard.

Obama changed, though, and we wouldn't have equal marriage now if not for the SCOTUS justices he appointed.

But I remember the absolute rage at the time.

crappy, pandering things to win that State's electoral votes and I am saying that because he did. Bernie has done no such thing. So Obama organized an outreach to bigots in SC. It is what he did. It was wrong, he did it to win and he never said he was sorry about it.
Facts are facts. You are not willing to deal in facts. You want to use a different rule book for Bernie. Obama pandered to bigoted voters in SC. Bernie has done no such thing. That's just the way it is.

Of course, your condescending dismissive attitude speaks very loudly.

I decided people need to see a clip of Obama's rally in South Carolina. History is history, the things one does remain done:

It described an instance of politicians using local prejudices, the nature of which the politicians almost certainly find offensive, to generate local support. This is a common political tactic, especially in national-scope elections. He pointed out that he is pleased that a particular candidate does not appear to be employing such tactics.

You responded by personally attacking her/him, stating that she/he cannot admit that the candidate he spoke of positively in that specific sense 'has problems,' without any evidence to support that assertion, and then explicitly told the poster that she/he was 'going to lose.' Not that the political candidate she/he expressed support for would suffer a specific political defeat.

Why? It appears to me (and if I'm wrong, I apologize) that you are a supporter of Hillary Clinton's bid for the Democratic party's nomination for the candidacy of the President of the United States. If this is true, the only thing you accomplish by such petty, misdirected personal attacks is to make one of your candidate's supporters (you) appear petty, vindictive, and rude. Simply put, your post did nothing but help to marginally reduce the candidate's probability of success. The more posts supporters of your chosen candidate make of a similar nature, the more potential voters that candidate loses.

If the personal gratification you experience through insulting people is of greater value to you than the success of your preferred candidate, then the impression you contribute to that your candidate's supporters are petty and vindictive is, in fact, accurate.

You know full well the difference between what he really said and what you implied ...

It is time for you to go ... I haven't space in my life for such duplicitous persons ....

So with the exception of adding more dead people's names the speech wasn't pandering to any group or a shift in message. If there was anything other than carrying his basic message to people in a state where he is poorly known, it wasn't apparent.

Of course people who are working hard to oppose Sanders, and the campaign to paint him as disconnected to blacks will turn 'some' blacks attended to -no!- blacks attended. That's the way partisan spin works.

Prima faciae, it appeared that those blacks in attendance were positively moved by Sanders speech.

Moreover Sanders showed no behaviors that are associated with social dominance over anyone (say like finger stabbing motions at people chests, or paternalistically telling people what they need to do).

and event security.

He wasn't standing next to or beside anyone.

And the crowd was mostly white.

If you watched, you'd have noticed he did approach people on the floor, got within hugging distance even of black people.

But that's ok. I understand you've got needs and you have to deal with them.

One size does not fit all. What worked in 1970 doesn't work now. Issues in Madison and issues in Charleston are not the same. He's not dealing with with people where they are. He's not going to them; he's expecting them to come to him.

Bernie's outdrawing the clown car including Hillary but the headlines reports on the race of people attending... They think they found a weakness and they'll try to exploit it until it becomes a reality... "Bernie Sanders can't connect with black people".

The US media and it's owners are scared shitless that this election is getting away from them and out of all of their investigating and research on Sanders this is what they come up with?

The truth is black people won't be voting clown car and there's nothing written in stone that they'll show up for Hillary Clinton either.. Even if they decided to stay home this election, who could blame them?

you try to compare grapes and raisins??? When and if Hillary does hold a rally-then side by side comparisons are appropriate

I'll wait for the debates for the side by side comparison... Anyway my point was the media, I guess I hit a nerve.....

Sanders has. She has townhalls. Except for probably her opening Rally announcement in NYC

....than Sanders has at all of his rallies combined.

She's LISTENING to people, not barking at them.

Unfortunately Wall Street and the global corporations have her ear..They're her real constituents. ..... That's why she's reluctant to get involved in any discussion about breaking up too big to fail banks, the TPP, Keystone etc..

Clinton MO over the years. But what are the odds George? I'd much rather support a candidate that has a populist history...I'm not much of a gambler...

As it stands Hillary would've made a good moderate Republican candidate before the GOP went off the deep end and chased out all of their moderates.. How cool would that be.. Even if she beat Sanders in a general election the worst we could end up with would be Hillary.. Definitely not my choice but beats the clown car anyway...

...implying that he knows Hillary Clinton will fight JUST as hard as him!!!

He's used that expression over and over again in his stump speeches.

I don't doubt Hillary will be very strong on that front, as will be Bernie. My preference for Bernie centers on his willingness to fight hard for economic justice, and that has a strong racial justice dimension implicit to it. Hillary would be light years better than any Republican running for President on economic issues, but I have far more confidence in Bernie on that front.

Dont do that this is a POLITICAL board

Make sense?

Silly boy.

I agree with every word of your post, especially how Hillary (or for that matter any dem) would be light years better than the rightwing assholes.

As to this racial justice stuff, it isnt enough for a white politician, this includes both Bernie and Hillary, to cite credentials or their history of support, they have to show they understand what it really is about, today!

Neither of them have that figured out yet, but at least they are both willing to try and figure it out.

especially this:
"Neither of them have that figured out yet, but at least they are both willing to try and figure it out."

during the two terms of the nation's first (truly, in the most specific immediate sense) African-American president, who, presumably, should have considerable personal experience with mistreatment of people with dark skin, the severe problems resulting from ethnic discrimination against dark-skinned people have intensified, not diminished.

Just a thought...

Thank you.

Hillary is a known quantity. Bernie much less so. But he will make gains if he keeps talking about issues of interest to them.

But these facts are not well known. His campaign has to get them out to people. And Bernie is doing the right thing now, by talking about current events relevant to the black community. He just has to keep on doing it.

I wanted him to say to the people that interrupted him "I was doing sit-ins with Martin Luther King Jr before you were even conceived."
Bernie shouldn't have to prove his bonafides with regards to race. He just needs to remind people of them.

[IMG][/IMG] @ this race-bait. Just because a bunch of whites showed up at his rally doesn't mean he lacks black supporters. Enough of this bullcrap narrative.

Liberal Media My Ass

.. is just the sort that needs to hear this message.

Still, it would be nice to see more diversity.

and other people of color (want, need, desire) DEMAND the end of institutional (and social) racism.

Why is it so hard to believe that people who are not of color can see any and all kinds of racism and want it to end? That people lacking melanin can't see that any racism diminishes not just those who are the focus of racism, but everyone else, too, including those who practice racism?

I'm sure the answer to why more POC didn't show up at Bernie's rallies are far more complicated the media would have us believe.

But Bernie is preaching the end of racism to white crowds in a state with a long history of racism and they are flocking to see him. This is the first time I've seen something like this in more years than I can remember. And it spells hope to me.

only a few DUers believe this garbage narrative.

But yes I agree with your post, I am sure, contrary to what some think; many whites would like to see racism end just as much as Blacks, Latinos, Asians, etc.

but the one in Greenville was not raucous. I was there.

hey, it's not like they don't cover Trump a lot, and Mobile has a substantial black population. What % of Trump's audience was white? i don't seem to recall that being reported.