...

It’s about the only thing that can guarantee a second Trump term

...I'm trying to remember if there was ever an election decided against someone for their stance on reparations.

But I can't. Not because I've looked for it, but because I really don't buy into the boogaboo about it, and I'm too bored to read through reams of the rest of the crazy on the internet.


It's funny how some use republican objections, even rabid right-wing droolery, to argue against the electability of our Democratic candidates. It's unimpressive, I'll say that about it.

It does not have popular support. I don’t think you can even win a Democratic primary on that position. It is not a mainstream view.

...probably of interest to someone in our Democratic primaries.

It would be nice to see our nominee stand unequivocally behind proposals overwhelmingly favored by potential African-American voters, even if the broader public can't yet accommodate them along with their own interests.

So the choice is no-reparations and a Democrat or no reparations and Trump. Either way, the outcome is the same on that issue.

...so you can get to the general.

Hope that's not too inconvenient.

Just for what it's worth.

In fact he was endorsed by the very "universal populist issues" promoting Senator, Bernie Sanders.

Why do you think that Senator Sanders agreed to back a politician that had wealthy donors, if indeed they are anathema to voters?

First, even the candidates who take big money don't campaign on how wonderful it is that they take big money, so that's different from campaigning on supporting reparations.

Second, voters expect that most candidates take big money. They accept it, even if they don't like it. In fact, in most races, there is no "no rich donor" option on the ballot (at least from the two major parties), so there is no real opportunity to vote any differently on this.

No worries.

and an end to endless wars around the world?

These are to one extent or another, much more popular among the public than reparations. And they're arguably more radical.

Last edited Thu Mar 14, 2019, 04:22 PM - Edit history (1)

...she says as much here.

Last edited Fri Mar 15, 2019, 08:42 AM - Edit history (2)

by defintion. You do realize that these ideas aren't 'radical' for Democrats, but in fact, establishment Democratic ideas, yes?

Black voters are the reliable base of the Democratic party, and as history shows, no one will get the nomination who doesn't get that support.

"Universal issues" has, unfortunately for some candidates, become another word for issues that more money can fix, only those that affect white straight men directly.

Having a higher wage and affordable health care doesn't protect an unarmed black man from being shot by police, does it? A higher minimum wage and access to affordable health care won't allow a trans woman to find a bathroom, or protect her from being evicted by a bigoted landlord, neither will it help the teenager who is pregnant and can't get an abortion without her abusive father's permission, nor will it help the rape survivor get justice in our court system, nor will it stop the school to prison pipeline.

What are dismissed as "identity politics" by some are life and death issues for others who don't happen to be straight white men.

Still don't want to pay for the long-term impacts of history enslaving generations of African-Americans and stealing their ancestors from their homeland where they were Kings and Queens.

Just, amazing.....

No, its not. It's YOUR reality and that speaks volumes for one that calls themselves a Democrat. Ummm.....

Just one poll.

...but it can be demagogued in ways which deliberately avoid discussion of specifics.

There's very little chance whatever poll you produce will address a specific proposal by any of these candidates - not a generic question of payments to individuals, for example, but something along the lines of what Kamala Harris presented today as one idea of what form reparations might take.

But I have no doubt you can continue indefinitely and succeed in generating opposition to Kamala Harris by portraying her support as isolated and singular among candidates and voters; and two, as some kind of actual transfer of dollars to individuals, which is not part of ANYONE's stated vision.

Instead of this effort to spread doom about Kamala Harris' stated support of some kind of targeted limited support for communities still suffering from the vestiges of Jim Crow, a fair effort and productive effort would only address what these candidates actually represent, NOT what the republican meme or mantra of the day might be.

I'd think that's what I'd find at DU, instead of this effort of yours to dissuade support for Sen. Harris here based on your incorrect and inflammatory representations.

This is about what "All Voters" think over African-American voters. Cute dodge....except one that easily see straight though....

We want to win elections, not glorify our purity

are Glorifying? In what aspect?

It's Not Our J.O.B. to do work for F.R.E.E. -- anymore. (See What The African-Americans Descendants of Slaves mean). Meanwhile, we have other things to do as the point has been made (and yours too, is seen QUITE CLEAR -- and its beyond interesting). Tootles.

That you couldn’t prove your point

and I'd guess many others here do as well...Stop with the race-based broad brushing.

This comment was fine with many UNTIL WE CALLED IT OUT. Yet, you reflect to "race-based broad brushing". Interesting....

Number one: Talking about a large demographic on DU, as if "they "weren't there", is extremely rude, be they 'Caucasians', Asians, African Americans or any other group

Number two: PoC don't like being stereotyped by white people -- Guess what? White people don't like being stereotyped either -- No one does, so maybe we should go with that "do unto others" thing -- It seems to work best in a diverse group.

The comment went unchallenged until WE CALLED IT OUT. Facts....are important. Spin, is...well, just spin.

Last edited Fri Mar 15, 2019, 03:41 PM - Edit history (1)

I don't "spin". I don't need to.

in what way are you proposing to pay for the long-term impacts of history enslaving generations of African-Americans and stealing their ancestors from their homeland where they were Kings and Queens? I understand you are very offend for Caucasians everywhere, but your post seems to indicate you are on board for reparations or at least some form of paying for the long-term impacts mentioned above and I wonder what that looks like.

was (rightfully) given to Native Americans.

Giving to historic black institutions would be one way, but there could be others as well.

exist because the Tribes that own them are sovereign nations. Since the US is actively in breach of several of the treaties that delineate that sovereignty I'm not finding much giving there. Unless you want to talk about the voluntary giving of money that goes on in them every day. Still not a very good model of reparations for black people.

at least to the extent it is now.

By and large, the states didn't want the casinos, and Native Americans had to fight for their establishment on the basis
of that sovereignty.

One of the things granted the NA casinos, unheard of in the rest of the gaming industry, is Tax Free status.

has been absolutely deplorable about keeping treaties with Native Americans you get no argument from me. Do you really think not taxing a sovereign nation is giving them something? Were it me I wouldn't find such to be particularly benevolent.

Okay, they were kind of theirs in the first place. But the U.S. gave the tribal lands recognition and security.

Hmmm, maybe the U.S. should give one of the Dakotas to the descendants of slaves. What do we need with two Dakotas anyway?

that the riff on the Dakotas is provided as humor.

However, speaking of whose offended, what offends YOU is the gull of African-Americans who are Descendants of Slaves whom never received their 40 Acres and a Mule (To be specific, that would have been LAND and an Animal to manage the what would have likely been farming land in the 1800's) to fix their mouths and DEMAND where is the compensation (which can be in a variety of ways in today's times as 40 Acres and a Mule is out of fashion in the 21st Century) for what was owed from YEARS of unpaid labor, beatings, rapes, murders, separation of families plus so much more.

Well, we fixed out mouth to say it. So did Kamala Harris, Presidential Candidate. Anyone that has an issue with that frankly, needs to deal with it among themselves. Tootles.

I think that to the average person who knows what it is at all, they assume it is a cash payment (as it was in 1988 for the victims of Japanese internment), and I think there are some legitimate hesitations about that (i.e. about how you determine who gets them, about whether it actually is the best way to help the AA community in the long term, and about the total costs). Something like what Harris describes here and Warren has described elsewhere are not necessarily that, and would I think be more palatable to a greater percentage of the white population... if you can get them to listen beyond the headline.

Thank you!

More than half of millennials support reparations for dependents of slaves (1). This is the largest generation and they have the potential to be the biggest voting bloc in American history.

According to a recent Harris poll, the top three issues for Gen Z are mass shootings, racial equality, and treatment of immigrants (2).

Gen Z and millennials together comprise 37 percent of the electorate (2).

Reparations and equality could be issues, out of others such as healthcare, that get these diverse and liberal generations to the polls.

References
(1) - https://apnews.com/b183a022831d4748963fc8807c204b08
(2) - https://www.axios.com/exclusive-poll-young-americans-embracing-socialism-b051907a-87a8-4f61-9e6e-0db75f7edc4a.html

First link:
Overall, 68 percent of Americans say that reparations should not be paid to descendants of slaves, according to the poll.
Forty percent of millennials were in favor of reparations. 49 percent of the millennials questioned who said reparations should not be paid to slave descendants.

The second link doesn't even address the question.

But the point is that there is not popular support in the US for reparations.

This country was built with back-breaking labor by the enslaved. This went on for decades after we became a nation. And after emancipation, the system was rigged against them enjoying the rights and privileges of citizenship. Much of the system stayed in place, and has reverberated through generations of African-Americans.

If we don't correct this injustice now, when will it be time? In 10 years? 50 years? Never?

The longer we wait, the more expensive reparations become. If American had kept its promises after emancipation, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I would like to see the population polled once they have a better understanding of the forms of reparations. I don't believe most people know what it is. It's like polling for Obamacare, where the majority (used) to say they were against it, versus calling out each benefit that the ACA provides. Not surprisingly, the ACA is more popular than thought because of the explanation,.

Bringing this back around, the Green New Deal comprehends the urgency of reparations and ties them to economic prosperity that will benefit everyone.

It's a good question. But I also worry about anything that could help re-elect Trump, and so keep in mind the adage about not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. And I agree with the sentiment behind your statement, "I would like to see the population polled once they have a better understanding of the forms of reparations" which picks up from what I was saying in Post 58. But is there enough time to educate people before the next election, while we're essentially already in the campaign itself? It might have been better to start this conversation two years ago. Which means--to answer the question posed about when it will be time--it might be better to start addressing it in earnest in 2021... with a Dem in the WH?

It's one of the many things I like about her!

She's going to have it tough against Beto, though. All the Dem candidates will.

I think the country leans heavily toward life without parole. I don't think people see it as a deal breaker either way.

little more toward Kamala than the others right now.

...true, they weren't tried for it, but