2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumA Stunning statistic
Clinton winning black voters 84-16, bigger margin than Obama in 2008, when he won 78-19 . . .
But beyond the primary math, it raises a kind of conceptual issue about Sanders's political theory: Given the centrality of African-American voters to the Democratic Party, it's hard to envision a left-wing political revolution taking place in the United States that they have so little enthusiasm for
http://www.vox.com/2016/2/27/11127754/south-carolina-democratic-primary-results-black-margin
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Did anyone see that coming? I didn't.
SHRED
(28,136 posts)I guess they approve of high incarceration rates via Hillary's private prison corporation donation bundlers.
brush
(53,922 posts)Last edited Sun Feb 28, 2016, 02:00 AM - Edit history (2)
Insulting posts like this drives AA votes away.
It's simple, not rocket science.
But maybe it is rocket science to some because they keep doing it.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)in general, it's not being on their side.
The problem is, both right and left extremists KNOW THEY ARE RIGHT. They are the ones with the answer. Extreme righteousness and intolerance of other viewpoints are prime characteristics of this type of person, and they identify them on this forum.
Extremists also, notably, always believe we are on a precipice and will fall if THEY don't save us. Another identifier.
And they don't, apparently cannot, care about anyone else's answers -- that others think they have answers too is just taken as proof of the problem to be dealt with. Dismissed without wasting valuable time needed to save us from ourselves. A third identifier.
Sans Bernie, le deluge. They're scared.
And we're irritated, but that's infinitely better than what they're going through.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)That is an important concept many don't get.
yardwork
(61,712 posts)giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)That's why they keep saying "don't you know what's good for you". They just can't grasp anything that doesn't fall into their line of thinking.
Stuckinthebush
(10,847 posts)Great observation. Extremism of any stripe doesn't understand difference of opinion.
brush
(53,922 posts)This post is blatantly patronizing towards South Carolina AAs who voted for Clinton.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)is the key to understanding, at least for me.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)yardwork
(61,712 posts)You just called everybody who votes for Hillary a low information voter. In the context of the OP, you called all the African Americans who vote for Hillary low information voters.
Explain to me if you can how that kind of "outreach" is gathering support for your candidate.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)recognition of it's money-greased tentacles suffocating our democracy. Lots of low information posters here, as well.
I have never heard anyone say they support Oligarchy/some call it Corporatism which seems to be acceptable to many, but it is far worse. What is my one vote and $27 worth to them? Nothing. So, I choose to give both to the anti-Oligarch candidate...the only one.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)spyker29
(89 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)His entire campaign is in panic-mode now. I think the donations are going to dry-up in the coming weeks and he'll be out of the race very soon.
yardwork
(61,712 posts)African Americans in the middle and upper-income brackets are not going to support a Socialist for president, no matter how wonderful a person he might be.
They know - better than anybody - what it means to be marginalized and dismissed for attributes beyond one's control. They have spent their lives working hard to succeed in their careers, protect their children as best they can from racism, and give their children even better chances than they had. They are practical, pragmatic, quiet fighters. They deal with things on a daily basis that the average white person can't even imagine, and they just keep going. They don't have time for drama and lost causes.
That's my opinion.
brush
(53,922 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)BainsBane
(53,074 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)The first indication that something was gravely amiss on November 2nd, 2004, was the inexplicable discrepancies between exit polls and actual vote counts. Polls in thirty states weren't just off the mark -- they deviated to an extent that cannot be accounted for by their margin of error. In all but four states, the discrepancy favored President Bush.(16)
BainsBane
(53,074 posts)Where voters don't vote as you demand is "stolen" is about as anti-democratic as it gets.
You disputed exit polls based on the fact the numbers were cited in Vox, an ad hominem. Now you use an allegation that the 2004 election was stolen to undermine the voices and rights of S Carolina voters in 2016. I find it unfortunate that some who claim to be progressive display such contempt for the rights of the majority. Add to that the complete disregard for evidence, and we are left with sour grapes.
S Carolinans didn't vote as you insisted they should. Deal with it. I really am not interested in hearing about how the votes of Americans are illegitimate if the fail to obey the self-entitled. Sanders voters are no more equal than any other American.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Stunning indeed!
http://www.enr-scvotes.org/SC/59277/160640/en/summary.html
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)I imagine it was just as much a foregone conclusion in SC as in the media. So unless there were other issues of import on the ballot, who would feel obliged to turn out apart from Bernie supporters? And apparently they didn't.
SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)Which Hillary are they voting for?
PonyUp
(1,680 posts)Codeine
(25,586 posts)The one who just drank your milkshake.
Barack_America
(28,876 posts)Nominate Sanders and Blacks stay home during the General.
Nominate Clinton and youth and Liberals drop out.
All the while, the GOP is turning out record numbers in every state.
BainsBane
(53,074 posts)that liberals and youth will not vote if Clinton is the nominee. A substantially greater percentage of Democrats say they'd be happy with Clinton than Republicans say they'd be happy with Trump.
When people feel they have to resort to threats to promote their candidate, they've already lost.
Barack_America
(28,876 posts)The youth in particular do not show up to vote for their second choice, they barely show up for their first.
And while some Liberals may hold their noses one more time, I didn't even mention the trouble Hillary has with independents versus Trump. You don't win without them either.
I've seen the head to head matchups. They're not so good for Hillary vs. Trump.
BainsBane
(53,074 posts)I suggest you look at 538. Hillary has higher net favorable so than Sanders. That is despite hundreds of millions spent by the GOP to make it otherwise. Imagine how his numbers would drop if the GOP went after him?
brush
(53,922 posts)Last edited Sun Feb 28, 2016, 03:21 AM - Edit history (2)
all with ground organizations working to get supporters to the polls.
Not rocket science.
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)SheilaT
(23,156 posts)is why do people vote against their own self interest?
BainsBane
(53,074 posts)Is why you would assume you determine the self interest of others?
I think what you mean is why wont don't vote in your interests rather than their own.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)strikes me as the very definition of voting against one's own self interest.
Ron Green
(9,823 posts)Democratic Party, which is now moribund anyway. The necessary numbers are found among independents and non-affiliated voters, as well as Democrats who understand what has to happen.
BainsBane
(53,074 posts)The Democratic Party is not moribund. It is supported by growing demographics. That a segment of the white electorate is disenchanted with the party does not make it dead. It simply reveals anger over the decline of uncontested privilege.
brush
(53,922 posts)It simply reveals anger over the decline of uncontested privilege.
Keep going.
ladjf
(17,320 posts)of political disaster for your theory to be proven.
Broward
(1,976 posts)of most Americans is dead. The Party now represents the elite. The Clintons are as responsible for this shift as anyone. It's a shame that more people don't see it for what it is.
yodermon
(6,143 posts)Why can't Hillary turn out Democratic rank & file voters? Doesn't bode well for November.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Funny thing, many more came out for Obama in both the primary and the GE. Put that in your pipe.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)It seems the Hillary supporters are all about the race. That's mostly what I see. They don't really want to dig into the issues, where she says she stands now and where she stood a while ago.
Just like Trump supporters, all she needs to say is that she'll make things better, because . . . . never how she'll do it, just that she's a "can do" kind of a gal.
Behind the scenes she was arguing for all those policies that got all those AAs into prison. But no one seems to notice or care about that, just that she's "Hillary!" and that seems to be enough.
Personally, I'll stick with the real deal, the guy who actually walked the walk with MLK and with the American people all his life. I don't seem to be able to fall for the slick, greasy talkers.
monicaangela
(1,508 posts)Thomas Frank, the author of the best-selling book What's The Matter with Kansas, is an exasperated Democrat. He believes that the voters' preference for emotional engagement over reasonable argument has allowed the Republican Party to blind them to their own real interests.
The Republicans have learnt how to stoke up resentment against the patronising liberal elite, all those do-gooders who assume they know what poor people ought to be thinking.
Right-wing politics has become a vehicle for channelling this popular anger against intellectual snobs. The result is that many of America's poorest citizens have a deep emotional attachment to a party that serves the interests of its richest.
In a turn of events, during this primary Clinton has taken a page directly from the republican play book. She has described Bernie Sanders as someone who lives in a predominantly white state that does not understand minorities. And it appears to be working. Language persuades many voters to vote one way or another. Dog whistle code is another factor.
Many say Bernie Sanders hasn't learned how to address African Americans and doesn't understand the issues that have an effect upon them, but that is part of the game. The fact of the matter is, the same issues that have an effect on the AA community have an effect on the rest of the country as well. Politicians are very good at dividing in order to conquer. Also too, we must remember the African American community is not a monolith, maybe a community with no other choice than the democratic party, but not a monolith and during this primary election we are going to see that first hand. Many African Americans in blue states have different ideas and priorities than those in red states...Stay tuned, this isn't over yet.
dsc
(52,169 posts)Many say Bernie Sanders hasn't learned how to address African Americans and doesn't understand the issues that have an effect upon them, but that is part of the game. The fact of the matter is, the same issues that have an effect on the AA community have an effect on the rest of the country as well. Politicians are very good at dividing in order to conquer. Also too, we must remember the African American community is not a monolith, maybe a community with no other choice than the democratic party, but not a monolith and during this primary election we are going to see that first hand. Many African Americans in blue states have different ideas and priorities than those in red states...Stay tuned, this isn't over yet.
Sandra Bland and Treyvon Martin weren't struggling economically. Bland was literally traveling to her new job when she was arrested while Treyvon was killed in the gated community in which one of his parents (his father I think) lived. We shouldn't be surprised if for many African Americans that state of affairs is job one, while economics is job 2 or 3 or even lower.
monicaangela
(1,508 posts)and that everything he talks about comes down to one thing. That isn't true, and stop for a minute and think about it.
During the Feb. 11 Democratic presidential debate, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont said the African-American and Latino communities were especially impacted by the Wall Street financial crisis that began in 2007.
"Turns out that the African-American community and Latino community were hit especially hard," Sanders said at the debate in response to a question on race relations, Politifact reports. "As I understand it, the African-American community lost half of their wealth as a result of the Wall Street collapse."
Is Sanders correct?
According to data from a 2013 National Association of Real Estate Brokers (NAREB) commissioned report and the Pew Research Center, Sanders' claim appears to be factual.
African Americans have lost over half of their wealth since the beginning of the recession through falling homeownership rates and loss of jobs, the NAREB report states.
Since 2007, nearly 8 percent of African Americans and Latinos have lost their homes to foreclosure compared to 4.5 percent of non-Hispanic whites at similar income levels, the report continues. The disparity ratio shows that African Americans are more than 70 percent more likely to have been foreclosed upon than non-Hispanic whites.
The Pew Research Center noted in a 2011 report that the housing market crisis and the recession that followed took a far greater toll on the wealth of minorities than whites."
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/sanders-african-americans-lost-half-their-wealth-due-wall-street-collapseS
So, as you see, you can't take two unfortunate individuals that have been victims of the system and juxtapose them as if they represent the entire community. I'm sure Oprah Winfrey isn't suffering either, so does that mean all the people living on the street, being incarcerated often times unjustifiably, being profiled and shot down in the streets by police officers that are suppose to be in their communities to protect and serve them aren't suffering because they have been victims of the system for much too long, and that system runs on finance. Just look at how the entire town of Ferguson was preying on their African American population in order to fine them so the system could continue to run.
You have to look further than the fact that one person who's father was living in a gated community and another that was on her way to get a job constitutes economic success. A person who is starting a new job doesn't indicate that person is financially secure, many times it indicates the person is on his/her way to becoming a bit more secure than they have been.
dsc
(52,169 posts)the simple fact is black people know, from decades of experience, that no amount of money will insulate them from the effects of racism. You mention Oprah, a few years ago she was famously forbidden entry to a private entry store due to her race. If even Oprah isn't immune from the effects of racism then surely the likes of black doctors and lawyers aren't either.
DemocraticWing
(1,290 posts)If black voters have little enthusiasm for left-wing politics, there's not a whole hell of a lot Sanders can do about it. He's not going to win the votes of people who view socialism in a poor light, or the votes of those who prefer moderate politicians.
monicaangela
(1,508 posts)is often a factor when it comes to voting. Many people in the AA community aren't familiar with Bernie Sanders but believe they are familiar with HC. They believe therefore they can trust a known entity more than someone they are unfamiliar with. Many people don't have the time or take the time to compare the contrast between the candidates. That is now and always has been a problem.