Sen. Bernie Sanders On How Democrats Lost White Voters

[Captain Obvious]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2014/11/19/365024592/sen-bernie-sanders-on-how-democrats-lost-white-voters


Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is one of two independents in the Senate. Now, the self-described socialist says he may run for president.

Sanders is aligned with Senate Democrats, but he's spoken lately of a problem with the Democratic coalition that elected President Obama. He says working class white voters have abandoned Democrats in large numbers. The party, he says, has "not made it clear that they are prepared to stand with the working class people of this country, take on the big money interests."

[Matty]

They lost white voters because everyone is sick of the democrats and their over played race card!

[Paperback Writer]

My mate in New York did some polling prior to the election and I really think that Democrats need to look for the truth, rather than hire consultants that tell them what they want to hear. If you want a poll that will give you the results you want, it is easy enough to do simply by wording the questions to lead them to the response you desire. That is why Democrats believe that their values are prevalent and that the Republicans are hated.

If they want to truly understand they would hire people who are willing to tell them the truth. The truth, however, is messy and no one particularly likes it.

Democrats have lost "white" voters because they chose not to represent white males. It's simple really. It's why Republicans don't have a "heap" of black male voters or black female voters for that matter.

[Mac-7]

My mate in New York did some polling prior to the election and I really think that Democrats need to look for the truth, rather than hire consultants that tell them what they want to hear. If you want a poll that will give you the results you want, it is easy enough to do simply by wording the questions to lead them to the response you desire. That is why Democrats believe that their values are prevalent and that the Republicans are hated.

If they want to truly understand they would hire people who are willing to tell them the truth. The truth, however, is messy and no one particularly likes it.

Democrats have lost "white" voters because they chose not to represent white males. It's simple really. It's why Republicans don't have a "heap" of black male voters or black female voters for that matter.

Two issues highlight the rift between the democrat party and middle class white voters.

one is immigration and the other is energy.

The democrat party elitists demand alternative energy and open borders.

and both of those policies hurt the white middle class.

[Paperback Writer]

Two issues highlight the rift between the democrat party and middle class white voters.

one is immigration and the other is energy.

The democrat party elitists demand alternative energy and open borders.

and both of those policies hurt the white middle class.

You're ridiculous. White males of a certain age are not choosing Republicans cos they like you. They're angry at Democrats for choosing everyone else but them.

Keystone was great for Canada and shit for America. Anyone with half a brain would have deduced that, so I don't blame you for supporting it.

[Mac-7]

You're ridiculous. White males of a certain age are not choosing Republicans cos they like you. They're angry at Democrats for choosing everyone else but them.

Keystone was great for Canada and $#@! for America. Anyone with half a brain would have deduced that, so I don't blame you for supporting it.


They're angry at Democrats for choosing everyone else but them.

Exactly.

Obumer is choosing wine sniffing libs at Berkley for instance who hate all forms of fossil fuel.

on the other hand middle class white voters want the jobs, and the lower energy costs and the energy security that the pipeline can provide.

[del]

Exactly.

Obumer is choosing wine sniffing libs at Berkley for instance who hate off fill fuel.

on the other hand middle class white voters want the jobs, and the lower energy costs and the energy security that the pipeline can provide.

:rofl:

[PolWatch]

Hint to both parties: you are both so busy fighting each other, you forgot you work for us. Might be why so many folks hate all of ya!

[Safety]

Hint to both parties: you are both so busy fighting each other, you forgot you work for us. Might be why so many folks hate all of ya!

ding, ding, winnah!

/thread

[Mac-7]

Hint to both parties: you are both so busy fighting each other, you forgot you work for us. Might be why so many folks hate all of ya!

Republicans have not forgotten average Americans.

They support the pipeline and oppose amnesty.

[Paperback Writer]

Republicans have not forgotten average Americans.

They support the pipeline and oppose amnesty.

Most Americans do not work in the oil industry and therefore don't care if a scant handful of jobs are created from it.

The amnesty bit I agree. Even our polling on the subject shows that the majority of Americans don't want it.

[Mac-7]

Most Americans do not work in the oil industry and therefore don't care if a scant handful of jobs are created from it.



Many people do not work at all so by your logic I guess they don't care if any American works or not.

but if no one works, no tax money is collected, and the welfare checks bounce.

Then selfish libs will care if their neighbors have jobs.

[nic34]

But at present, 62% of Americans favor providing a way for immigrants who are currently living in the United States illegally to become citizens provided they meet certain requirements,

http://publicreligion.org/research/2014/06/immigration-reform-06-2014

[Mac-7]

But at present, 62% of Americans favor providing a way for immigrants who are currently living in the United States illegally to become citizens provided they meet certain requirements,

http://publicreligion.org/research/2014/06/immigration-reform-06-2014



That poll is a lie.

If approval were that high amnesty would have sailed through congress long ago.

[Paperback Writer]

But at present, 62% of Americans favor providing a way for immigrants who are currently living in the United States illegally to become citizens provided they meet certain requirements,

http://publicreligion.org/research/2014/06/immigration-reform-06-2014



Yes, but that's not "amnesty" nor is it specific. For example, we have an immigration issue caused by the EU, as well. There are those that want to deport them should we leave the EU and others want to allow them an extended period, whilst more want rigorous immigration hoops placed upon them yet still offering them a chance to stay.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30111694

Saying that you ought to do something with 40 million people is not the same as offering amnesty. To even suggest such is to a similar level of dishonesty as one who proposes that Americans wanted them deported might suggest.

[Cigar]

Step 1: DENIAL

[Paperback Writer]

Given the election results and Huffpo's exit polling of 75% I rather agree with the Rasmussen figures.


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/august_2014/voters_strongly_oppose_obama_s_amnesty_plan_for_il legal_immigrants


Most voters oppose President Obama's reported plan to unilaterally grant amnesty to several million illegal immigrants and think Congress should challenge him in court if he goes ahead with it
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 62% of Likely U.S. Voters oppose the president granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants without the approval of Congress. Just 26% are in favor of Obama's plan, while 12% are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/questions/pt_survey_questions/august_2014/questions_immigration_amnesty_august_28_29_2014).)

Only 24% think the president has the legal authority to grant amnesty to these illegal immigrants without Congress’ approval. Fifty-seven percent (57%) believe the president does not have the legal right to do so. Eighteen percent (18%) are undecided.

If the president does grant amnesty to several million illegals, 55% of voters think Congress should challenge that action in court. Thirty percent (30%) disagree, while 14% are undecided.

Fifty-five percent (55%) of voters believe that when it comes to dealing with issues the president considers important to the nation, the government should only do what the president and Congress agree on (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/june_2014/44_think_obama_less_faithful_to_u_s_constitution_t han_most_other_presidents). Thirty-five percent (35%) think Obama should take action alone if Congress does not approve the initiatives he has proposed. When it comes to his executive actions, a plurality (44%) thinks Obama has been less faithful to the U.S. Constitution than most other presidents.


Consistent with surveying for years, two-out-of-three voters (67%) think securing the border to prevent future illegal immigration should come before amnesty is granted for some illegal immigrants already in this country. Just 26% believe amnesty should come first.

[PolWatch]

This is a conservative, repub site in Alabama. It gives a view of the illegal farm worker situation that I think people should read. Because of the background, etc, I could not copy & paste any of it...please look at it. Alabama receives a lot of $$ from agriculture & the actions of its governor & legislature have created a real problem with their rush to pass the toughest anti-immigration laws.

http://www.politics205.com/govenor-robert-bentley.html

[Mac-7]

This is a conservative, repub site in Alabama. It gives a view of the illegal farm worker situation that I think people should read. Because of the background, etc, I could not copy & paste any of it...please look at it. Alabama receives a lot of $$ from agriculture & the actions of its governor & legislature have created a real problem with their rush to pass the toughest anti-immigration laws.

http://www.politics205.com/govenor-robert-bentley.html

One problem is that thanks to welfare Americans have become too lazy to work.

[PolWatch]

One problem is that thanks to welfare Americans have become too lazy to work.

It is what it is...tell that to the farmers that had to watch their crops rot in the fields. Even the farmers in Georgia were mad at us...their workers charged them more because they took the long routes around Alabama when traveling to Georgia. I have met farm workers (legal) in Georgia who told of being stopped multiple times and forced to show their papers.

[Mac-7]

It is what it is...tell that to the farmers that had to watch their crops rot in the fields. Even the farmers in Georgia were mad at us...their workers charged them more because they took the long routes around Alabama when traveling to Georgia. I have met farm workers (legal) in Georgia who told of being stopped multiple times and forced to show their papers.

Still the problem is that welfare is so generous and easy to get that lazy Americans refuse to do those jobs.

which leaves American farmers at the mercy of human traffickers and illegal aliens.

[Captain Obvious]

Still the problem is that welfare is so generous and easy to get that lazy Americans refuse to do those jobs.

which leaves American farmers at the mercy of human traffickers and illegal aliens.

I know people who turned down (my) job offers because their loss in welfare benefits would be too great.

And no, I don't advocate paying higher than market wages for unskilled labor. I do advocate thinning the welfare rolls and educating/incenting capable people to get jobs.

[Mac-7]

I know people who turned down (my) job offers because their loss in welfare benefits would be too great.

And no, I don't advocate paying higher than market wages for unskilled labor. I do advocate thinning the welfare rolls and educating/incenting capable people to get jobs.

If we reform welfare and force Americans to work it may result in a rise in wages as Americans replace illegal aliens in the work force.

and to me that is the true market value of their labor which I don't mind paying.

[Matty]

Hint to both parties: you are both so busy fighting each other, you forgot you work for us. Might be why so many folks hate all of ya!
Then put forward some one who can beat us. Otherwise stay home and don't vote!

[Bo-4]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2014/11/19/365024592/sen-bernie-sanders-on-how-democrats-lost-white-voters

I'd vote for Bernie. He's one of the very few long-timers left with integrity.

[nic34]

Yes, but that's not "amnesty" nor is it specific. For example, we have an immigration issue caused by the EU, as well. There are those that want to deport them should we leave the EU and others want to allow them an extended period, whilst more want rigorous immigration hoops placed upon them yet still offering them a chance to stay.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30111694

Saying that you ought to do something with 40 million people is not the same as offering amnesty. To even suggest such is to a similar level of dishonesty as one who proposes that Americans wanted them deported might suggest.

You are right, it is not amnesty. Never said it was. Go here and read now:

http://publicreligion.org/research/2014/06/immigration-reform-06-2014

and here:

http://publicreligion.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Final-Immigration-Survey.pdf

[PolWatch]

I know people who turned down (my) job offers because their loss in welfare benefits would be too great.

And no, I don't advocate paying higher than market wages for unskilled labor. I do advocate thinning the welfare rolls and educating/incenting capable people to get jobs.

A senator (I think a repub) proposed a program of credits to stop that from happening. It would allow people to start at low wages but not cause them to penalize their family's security by losing $$. The benefits would be reduced as their wages increased. I don't think either party thought it was a good idea...made too much sense.

[nic34]

Also it is not 40 million undocumented, more like 8 to 12 million:

https://www.numbersusa.org/numbers/illegal-immigration (http://www.thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc_17_4/tsc_17_4_elbel.shtml)

[Captain Obvious]

A senator (I think a repub) proposed a program of credits to stop that from happening. It would allow people to start at low wages but not cause them to penalize their family's security by losing $$. The benefits would be reduced as their wages increased. I don't think either party thought it was a good idea...made too much sense.

I'm guessing they feared this could cost them votes.

And this would be the conflict of interest in our "democracy".

[Mac-7]

Also it is not 40 million undocumented, more like 8 to 12 million:

https://www.numbersusa.org/numbers/illegal-immigration (http://www.thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc_17_4/tsc_17_4_elbel.shtml)

There is no accurate count of illegals.

The pro amnesty crowd lowballs the number at 11 million which is a joke.

[Common Sense]

Even the highest estimates are no where near 40 mil. 20 maybe...but probably more like 15.

[Paperback Writer]

You are right, it is not amnesty. Never said it was. Go here and read now:

http://publicreligion.org/research/2014/06/immigration-reform-06-2014

and here:

http://publicreligion.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Final-Immigration-Survey.pdf


You replied to a statement on amnesty. Regardless, the polls were in reference to Obama's plans which most Americans are not fond of.

[Mac-7]

Even the highest estimates are no where near 40 mil. 20 maybe...

but probably more like 15.

in Canada perhaps.

but this discussion is about illegals in the US.

[Paperback Writer]

Even the highest estimates are no where near 40 mil. 20 maybe...but probably more like 15.

I was going by a UN study I'd read whilst doing a piece and was flabbergasted at the high tallies. I'm certain though it is somewhere more than the government would admit and somewhat less than humanitarian organisations would suggest.

Either way, it's a fuck all lot of blokes to service.

[Mister D]

My mate in New York did some polling prior to the election and I really think that Democrats need to look for the truth, rather than hire consultants that tell them what they want to hear. If you want a poll that will give you the results you want, it is easy enough to do simply by wording the questions to lead them to the response you desire. That is why Democrats believe that their values are prevalent and that the Republicans are hated.

If they want to truly understand they would hire people who are willing to tell them the truth. The truth, however, is messy and no one particularly likes it.

Democrats have lost "white" voters because they chose not to represent white males. It's simple really. It's why Republicans don't have a "heap" of black male voters or black female voters for that matter.

Right. I'm not sure if it's a lack of awareness, partisanship, or a genuine fear of stating what's obvious even to a foreigner but some candor is desperately needed in this political climate.

[Common Sense]

I was going by a UN study I'd read whilst doing a piece and was flabbergasted at the high tallies. I'm certain though it is somewhere more than the government would admit and somewhat less than humanitarian organisations would suggest.

Either way, it's a $#@! all lot of blokes to service.

If you're into servicing blokes.

[Paperback Writer]

If you're into servicing blokes.

It seems North Americans are whilst we're having a burp at that these days.

Why is it that your lot is so dead set against learning from our mistakes? Does anyone believe at all that in 2000 they would have predicted that Labour would have lost confidence to Conservatives then Conservatives losing confidence to Ukip (or "Uhip" as they're called amongst white lads of a particular income).

Overplay the hand and you'll lose the game.

[Common Sense]

It seems North Americans are whilst we're having a burp at that these days.

Why is it that your lot is so dead set against learning from our mistakes? Does anyone believe at all that in 2000 they would have predicted that Labour would have lost confidence to Conservatives then Conservatives losing confidence to Ukip (or "Uhip" as they're called amongst white lads of a particular income).

Overplay the hand and you'll lose the game.

Except that the proposed legislation isn't increasing the number of people coming into the US. It's simply giving some who are already there a path to citizenship. People who have lived there for a decade or more and/or people who live there illegally who have children who are US citizens.

[Paperback Writer]

Except that the proposed legislation isn't increasing the number of people coming into the US. It's simply giving some who are already there a path to citizenship. People who have lived there for a decade or more and/or people who live there illegally who have children who are US citizens.

What's the point of having immigration laws if you're going to excuse people for breaking them? It's like "Cake or Death", of course they'll always choose cake.

[Mac-7]

Except that the proposed legislation isn't increasing the number of people coming into the US. It's simply giving some who are already there a path to citizenship. People who have lived there for a decade or more and/or people who live there illegally who have children who are US citizens.

And with citizenship for one illegal comes grandma, and all the other family members back in Guatemala.

[Alyosha]

Democrats lost white male voters because they assumed that white males feel guilty about being white males and would willingly accept blame for all of the bad things that happened to the Democrat's "disadvantaged" voters. Whether white males admit it or not, I'm sure some of them who have never abused a minority or thought badly of them are somewhat tired of being told that they did and revenge voted.

It's hard to be told "you're bad, bad, bad" all the time.

[Professor Peabody]

I think Bernie Sanders couldn't find his own ass with both hands, a road map, a GPS unit and a dang tour guide.