2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSamKnause
(13,091 posts)riversedge
(70,182 posts)Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)highprincipleswork
(3,111 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)highprincipleswork
(3,111 posts)dchill
(38,465 posts)But they feel none.
6chars
(3,967 posts)Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)laruemtt
(3,992 posts)vote against their own best interests
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)How would you know what their best interests are?
choie
(4,107 posts)if they're voting for Clinton, they're voting against their interests.
monicaangela
(1,508 posts)their best interest could be that they really want to see a Clinton vs. Trump race because they know in their state Trump will beat Clinton.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)I certainly don't. Why would I have any problem thinking the same thing about any Democrat of modest means preferring an establishment corprocrat over a democratic socialist?
SMC22307
(8,090 posts)economy, income, health, education, you name it. Why they don't want better is what baffles me. Or maybe they do want better, and are still clinging to the Clintons to deliver.
onpatrol98
(1,989 posts)CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)Congratulations to Hillary Clinton.
choie
(4,107 posts)n/t
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)I do think he is a more deceptive politician.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)Hillary is serial liar and flip flopper. That is a fact.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)mythology
(9,527 posts)Politicians promise things all the time they can't deliver. Sanders is no different.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)He is setting a broad progressive agenda that will require time and determination to fulfill.
As far as being "underfunded" that is mostly bullshit. We can find the money to pay for any of his objectives if we choose to.
PyaarRevolution
(814 posts)Surely we can find a paltry amount compared to that for Medicare for All and tuition free college.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)That is realistic!
onpatrol98
(1,989 posts)I don't think she's more honest. But, I do hear a lot of ... "I don't think he can do what he says he can do" from people. So, when I think of it from that perspective, that he comes across as someone offering what he can't provide or produce. If you're not familiar with Bernie Sanders, then that may come across as dishonest. Or, at least it did to some people I've spoken with. He didn't have a lot of name recognition in the state beyond socialist senator from Vermont. I don't believe he came to the state. So, I think he'd already made up his mind to post a loss here and move on to another one with more potential for his candidacy.
Next, he's labeled as a great civil rights activist for African Americans. Bernie didn't do that labeling for himself. He's been very honest, in my opinion, about his participation many years ago. But, some of his supporters have given quite a different impression. To listen to some of them, you'd believe our children should be memorizing his name along with Martin Luther King, Frederick Douglas, John Lewis and others for February Black History Month programs. But, in a state like Mississippi, great civil rights activists are known and respected. He simply wasn't known like that. So, when his supporters pushed him like that...it seemed dishonest. It seemed like something he should clarify one way or the other. It didn't mean he didn't play an active role. It just wasn't as active as the ones I mentioned. It also didn't mean the role he played wasn't important and to be respected. It just simply wasn't the same. Who would carry more clout in Mississippi? Bernie Sanders or John Lewis? John Lewis. If you suggest John Lewis is supporting Hillary Clinton for any reason beyond the fact that he prefers her policies, you're not looking to have a very long conversation with many AA voters in Mississippi.
When he knocked Hillary Clinton for supporting a bill her husband signed, but neglected to mentioned he also voted for the bill (along with the congressional black caucus). That didn't seem very forthcoming. If you're not forthcoming...well, it seems dishonest.
When you ask Bernie Sanders a question about his foreign policy advisers and policies and he takes the time to remind you Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraq war and he didn't, it doesn't come across well. Because we already know that. This is a question about his direction for the country. This seems like deflection, quite frankly. Deflection is seldom seen as honest. Hillary deflects quite a bit also.
Finally, I don't think Bernie Sanders has been vetted. Hillary Clinton's dirty laundry...and I do believe it stinks...but its primarily known. There really hasn't been an effort to tell the American people more about Bernie Sanders. To even find out about bills he's sponsored or supported, you basically have to hunt the information down yourself. I don't mind. But, it all adds up to this...
I don't think Mississippi had a very good introduction to Bernie Sanders.
Joe the Revelator
(14,915 posts)scscholar
(2,902 posts)highprincipleswork
(3,111 posts)kath
(10,565 posts)Clearly they have not been paying attention to her lies, flip-flops, bad policy positions.
the states where she has been winning by big margins are not exactly highly ranked in terms of quality of schools and level of educational attainment. Oklahoma was an outlier in that regard - crap schools, not very high average educational level, but they thankfully went for Bernie!
Response to kath (Reply #14)
Post removed
kath
(10,565 posts)giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)Everything you assumed is wrong.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)dsc
(52,155 posts)and a poster calls them stupid and I am the problem.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)...to be wrong.
TM99
(8,352 posts)in the percentage of the population to have a high school diploma or GED.
They also have the lowest median family income, one of the worst health indices, number one in obesity, second highest unemployment rate, ranked number one with a population below the poverty line, and ranked number one in infant mortality.
On any general day here at DU, we hear this and attacks against all there for being a red state (actually the most conservative in the union!) and voting GOP.
But after each of these similar southern states have voted for Clinton, they have suddenly morphed into stunning victories and all about race.
I am willing to bet that the turnout will be as bad as the other red southern states which means that no matter how high a percentage were AA voters, the numbers will be abysmal. And that will continue to bode ill for Clinton in a possible GE run.
dsc
(52,155 posts)though time will tell, but I bet it will be more than the 6,000 or so that voted in ME, and I don't hear any crying from your side on that.
TM99
(8,352 posts)because I certainly am aware of how low the turnout was in ME.
Overall Democratic turnout is way down. That bodes very poorly for either candidate but especially so for Clinton with her high negativities and loss of the youth and independent voters with her shenanigans.
onpatrol98
(1,989 posts)As much as I want to respond in more detail to this post, I simply cannot... beyond to say the following...
I'm not suffering from a low median family income. In fact, I have a job I love very much. I'm healthy. I'm not obese. I do not live below the poverty line. And, thankfully, my children are all alive and well. Finally, I received my PhD in Mississippi from a well respected institution of higher learning attended by students who came here, not simply from other states (yours included--no matter which state you live in), but from around the world.
As easy as it would be to simply suggest, Clinton won here because we're poor, fat, broke, and stupid, let's leave room for the possibility that after hearing both candidates on any number of occasions, we simply chose one over the other. It happens, every election cycle. Perhaps, if Sanders had come to Mississippi...he would have had a greater impact. We'll never know.
I simply can't add anything else...I just don't know what else I could say.
TM99
(8,352 posts)You are a highly educated female that makes good money.
Her neoliberalism works very well for you. It does not the 28% of us that are lost in a world of violence and abject poverty.
Additionally, you are the exception there, not the rule.
So, in the 1st post...we voted for Clinton in Mississippi because we're broke and uneducated. But, now in the second post, I supposedly voted for Clinton because I'm educated and make a lot of money.
I have no idea what neo-liberalism means. And, that's okay. I don't want to know. It takes way too much energy to be this upset over simply choosing one candidate over another one in the same political party...when their messages are more similar than different.
I wish them well in their next states. As for violence and abject poverty...I think either candidate will work to make a difference where they can.
However, I think both DU and Bernie Sanders would have been in a better situation if people like Bravenak would have been listened too last summer.
TM99
(8,352 posts)that one can make a general statement and a specific one with no contradiction? Your circumstance are hardly like those of the bulk of the people in your state.
Bravenak has admitted to being one who loves to see conflict stirred up. I put her on ignore months ago for very good reason.
You best look up what neoliberalism is as it is the root political and economic philosophy of the Clintons.
onpatrol98
(1,989 posts)Well, I don't want conflict. Mississippi is full of problems and people with problems. But, Mississippi is also full of good people like any state. I simply wanted you to consider that before you reduced us to a bunch of stats for not supporting Sanders. Michigan went for Sanders tonight. I just want to think that and that alone. They went for Sanders. I don't have to think poorly of their people or pull out a set of less than desirable stats to simply note that fact. I can stop right there.
Looking up neo-liberalism won't help me or anyone I know. Clinton is a politician, just like Bernie. And, they must be more alike than different because its the party she's been in for years, and the party Bernie has caucused with for years.
One circumstance that I share with all of the people of my state is that I am a Mississippian. When I travel, people don't know any of those details about me that I took the time to share with you. For some, when they hear I'm from Mississippi, a superiority complex kicks in, no matter their own circumstances. It's a strange prejudice. Some people do it so often, I don't think they even stop to realize the odd hostility of it.
I've learned a lot from people on DU. People who come from a lot of different backgrounds. I don't want to bicker with you. I just wanted to share that we're more than a bunch of numbers. Being reduced to a bunch of stats, especially when they don't even accurately define you as an individual, isn't a good feeling.
Number23
(24,544 posts)And you know my family situation. I ain't poor, fat or stupid either.
For some people, putting everybody in boxes is more important than anything. And these same folks wonder why so few want to join their revolution.
For all of the hooping and hollering and insulting everyone under the sun that's not participating in the glorious revolution, Clinton's delegate lead has actually expanded and she got 70% of the black vote in Michigan. But we don't know what we're talking about. Yeah.
onpatrol98
(1,989 posts)To be honest, for people who dislike Hillary Clinton so much...their strategies for acquiring the presidency seem rather similar. In 2008, Clinton thought she could get there without African American voters. I think Bernie Sanders initial strategy was the same in this election. I think his quick pivot out of the south highlights that strategy as well. For all of his strategists talk of we're heading to states "more favorable" to our campaign, I think it's actually pretty straight forward. It may work, who knows?
It may be that you can win the primary by insulting or avoiding black voters while spending more time and effort in states that offer a less diverse electorate. But, I'm not thinking that's a wise general election strategy. In fact, putting together a general election strategy may be a problem both Clinton and Sanders have to worry about when one of them gets to the general. How do you bring back together an electorate that's splintered so much during the primary AND gain enthusiasm? Who knew it would be tougher to heal after this election than the 2008 campaign.
Number23
(24,544 posts)They are actually rejoicing that women, that minorities, that gay Americans aren't really feeling their candidate and that it's independents and Republicans that have put him where he is primarily.
They seem to be perfectly fine with the way things are. Really says all that needs to be said.
Loudestlib
(980 posts)You took a post about low-information voters and you're saying they have to be black?
dsc
(52,155 posts)but of course the person didn't mean blacks, no of course not.
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)That you went "there" right out of the gate tells us all about just how you think.
Which explains the well deserved hide.
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)grossproffit
(5,591 posts)Shadowflash
(1,536 posts)Response to itsrobert (Original post)
Post removed
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Land of Enchantment
(1,217 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)or vice-versa.
Clinton swept Mississippi. These results are unsurprising. A little baffling to me, but hey what the hell.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)Response to itsrobert (Original post)
Cheese Sandwich This message was self-deleted by its author.
panader0
(25,816 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)That's simply surreal. I understand (kinda) the reasons for voting for Clinton. I get that Bernie is too far left for may Democrats and that one of her few consistent loyalties has been to black Americans.
But I can't help but think anyone who actually thinks she's more honest than Bernie either just awoke from a 30-year nap...or is a complete ignoramus. It's rather like not believing in evolution, despite overwhelming evidence.
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)you probably DON'T want it.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)Vote2016
(1,198 posts)Lone_Wolf
(1,603 posts)There's a correlation