PDA

View Full Version : Bernie Sanders and Black Voters



IMPress Polly
02-21-2016, 03:25 PM
This is just a brief commentary on the outcome of the Nevada Caucus yesterday, based both on the official results and exit polling data.

Yes, we all know by now that Hillary Clinton won a clear victory in Nevada yesterday, but I want to point out that that doesn't mean the Democratic nominating contest is over. In connection to that fact, here are some crucial things we know about the demographic breakdown of yesterday's vote in Nevada:

The first and foremost thing I want to highlight is that among millennial voters -- people my age and younger -- Bernie won all demographic groups: both men and women, both white voters and voters of color alike, and by wide margins at that. There is a clear class divide to which way voters overall tend to go, but the generational divide is the even bigger, more principal one. This is something that Hillary Clinton and her supporters should pay careful attention to because it shows that theirs is definitely NOT the path of the future and that the next generation demands populist candidates. This will be the last election where millennial voters are not the majority of Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters, so pay attention to that, Clinton people!

Bernie was also able to pick up votes even among older Latinos by calling for a complete halt to the deportation of undocumented immigrants (save for those guilty of violent crimes, of course) until such time as a comprehensive form of immigration reform can be passed, thus positioning himself as the polar opposite of leading Republican Donald Trump on the main issue that the latter is running on. By adopting and highlighting this bold position, Bernie was able to win not just the votes of younger Latinos, but also the overall Latino vote by a margin of 8 points last night! Absent these gains among Latino voters, Sanders wouldn't have fared as well as he did last night in Nevada.

However, the above said, last night's results also highlighted a crucial problem that remains for the Bernie Sanders campaign: he was unable to even come close to winning the balance of older black voters. Now black voters of the millennial generation (we might say the Black Lives Matter generation) displayed a different opinion, favoring Sanders overall. However, their elders did not follow suit. There are many theories floating around as to why, and it saddens me that the candidate himself seems to have given up on this group in his victory speech, saying that it was now on to Super Tuesday even though South Carolina is the next contest on the calendar. I want to stress that Bernie NEEDS these voters to win the Democratic Party's nomination! Or at least he needs substantially more of them anyway. But here I want to point out something that seems glaringly obvious to me about this whole situation: these people CAN be won over to the Bernie camp. How? We must recognize this generational divide among black people: while overall, the younger generation, having grown up not remembering things like the peace and prosperity of the 1990s or the Cold War or the high crime rates of the 1970s and '80s, see issues like criminal justice reform and economic reform as the top priorities, where their elders still view gang violence in America's major urban centers as the issue of principal concern, much as they have for the last 30 years or 40 years or so. Therefore, for many older black voters, the fact that Hillary Clinton stakes out a stronger position in favor of gun control is a decisive factor in choosing who to vote for. If Bernie were to but recant his support for legal immunity for gun manufacturers and distributors (which he really should do anyway!), I think he could make major gains among older black voters, and therefore with the overall African American community. This is the only path to victory for him. That's how I see it. I really hope his other supporters will pressure him on this issue.

But even if Bernie does ultimately go down to defeat, his campaign won't have been in vain. Not only has his campaign successfully compelled Hillary to adopt a range of new, left-leaning policy positions on issues ranging from health care to taxation of the super-rich and more, it has also exposed a major weakness that Hillary Clinton's campaign has: a clear inability to appeal to the millennial generation and drive them to the polls. That will be crucial knowledge for her to have in choosing who her running mate will be if she wins the nomination! The stiffer the competition she receives from Bernie Sanders, the more likely it is that she'll wind up picking a populist running mate like Elizabeth Warren to compensate for apparent shortcomings in her current appeal and unite the party rather than another generic communitarian like Julian Castro. (And trust me, with Trump as the Republican nominee, it's not like the Democratic nominee will have any trouble wrapping up the Latino vote anyway.)

Just some thoughts.

Common
02-21-2016, 03:55 PM
I agree with everything you said Polly and I read alot of that on blogs, the problem for sanders is this. The babyboomers is still the largest voting demographic and the 50s crowd behind them, that and the DNC doing everything they can to stymy sanders hes got a real rough way to go.

They havent gotten to the heavy minority states yet either and they will go hillary. Of course this is all supposition on my part but I think its fairly accurate.

Matty
02-21-2016, 04:05 PM
14171

JVV
02-21-2016, 04:05 PM
If the GOP nominates Rubio, I figure Hillary has to tap Castro.

If the GOP had a Hispanic nominee up against the unlikable, untrustworthy Hillary? That could hurt.


Hopefully Hillary's emails will explode sooner rather than later so that Bernie still has time to win the nomination.



But now a moment of extreme frustration at Nevada and their low turnout. Bernie supporters in Nevada knew how much they were needed. They had to know that they could singlehandedly accelerate or douse Bernie's momentum. And they didn't show up. Nevada had a responsibility as the third primary/caucus. And Sanders' supporters had a responsibility to help the nation break out of the great sucking hole we are slipping into. And too many stayed home.

Mac-7
02-21-2016, 04:36 PM
This is just a brief commentary on the outcome of the Nevada Caucus yesterday, based both on the official results and exit polling data.

Yes, we all know by now that Hillary Clinton won a clear victory in Nevada yesterday, but I want to point out that that doesn't mean the Democratic nominating contest is over. In connection to that fact, here are some crucial things we know about the demographic breakdown of yesterday's vote in Nevada:

The first and foremost thing I want to highlight is that among millennial voters -- people my age and younger -- Bernie won all demographic groups: both men and women, both white voters and voters of color alike, and by wide margins at that. There is a clear class divide to which way voters overall tend to go, but the generational divide is the even bigger, more principal one. This is something that Hillary Clinton and her supporters should pay careful attention to because it shows that theirs is definitely NOT the path of the future and that the next generation demands populist candidates. This will be the last election where millennial voters are not the majority of Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters, so pay attention to that, Clinton people!

Bernie was also able to pick up votes even among older Latinos by calling for a complete halt to the deportation of undocumented immigrants (save for those guilty of violent crimes, of course) until such time as a comprehensive form of immigration reform can be passed, thus positioning himself as the polar opposite of leading Republican Donald Trump on the main issue that the latter is running on. By adopting and highlighting this bold position, Bernie was able to win not just the votes of younger Latinos, but also the overall Latino vote by a margin of 8 points last night! Absent these gains among Latino voters, Sanders wouldn't have fared as well as he did last night in Nevada.

However, the above said, last night's results also highlighted a crucial problem that remains for the Bernie Sanders campaign: he was unable to even come close to winning the balance of older black voters. Now black voters of the millennial generation (we might say the Black Lives Matter generation) displayed a different opinion, favoring Sanders overall. However, their elders did not follow suit. There are many theories floating around as to why, and it saddens me that the candidate himself seems to have given up on this group in his victory speech, saying that it was now on to Super Tuesday even though South Carolina is the next contest on the calendar. I want to stress that Bernie NEEDS these voters to win the Democratic Party's nomination! Or at least he needs substantially more of them anyway. But here I want to point out something that seems glaringly obvious to me about this whole situation: these people CAN be won over to the Bernie camp. How? We must recognize this generational divide among black people: while overall, the younger generation, having grown up not remembering things like the peace and prosperity of the 1990s or the Cold War or the high crime rates of the 1970s and '80s, see issues like criminal justice reform and economic reform as the top priorities, where their elders still view gang violence in America's major urban centers as the issue of principal concern, much as they have for the last 30 years or 40 years or so. Therefore, for many older black voters, the fact that Hillary Clinton stakes out a stronger position in favor of gun control is a decisive factor in choosing who to vote for. If Bernie were to but recant his support for legal immunity for gun manufacturers and distributors (which he really should do anyway!), I think he could make major gains among older black voters, and therefore with the overall African American community. This is the only path to victory for him. That's how I see it. I really hope his other supporters will pressure him on this issue.

But even if Bernie does ultimately go down to defeat, his campaign won't have been in vain. Not only has his campaign successfully compelled Hillary to adopt a range of new, left-leaning policy positions on issues ranging from health care to taxation of the super-rich and more, it has also exposed a major weakness that Hillary Clinton's campaign has: a clear inability to appeal to the millennial generation and drive them to the polls. That will be crucial knowledge for her to have in choosing who her running mate will be if she wins the nomination! The stiffer the competition she receives from Bernie Sanders, the more likely it is that she'll wind up picking a populist running mate like Elizabeth Warren to compensate for apparent shortcomings in her current appeal and unite the party rather than another generic communitarian like Julian Castro. (And trust me, with Trump as the Republican nominee, it's not like the Democratic nominee will have any trouble wrapping up the Latino vote anyway.)

Just some thoughts.

Those are your brief comments?

Anyway, Hillary's advantage with black voters appears to be solid and possibly too much for Bernie to overcome

Peter1469
02-21-2016, 04:41 PM
Just like the old days..., whatever Master says....

Green Arrow
02-21-2016, 04:54 PM
One thing that frustrates me about black voters is at a recent town hall, Bernie was giving his usual message that is right on target on the issues that affect EVERYONE, and the black voters at the town hall were mad because he didn't address specifically black issues.

I'm sorry, but he's trying to be president of everyone, not just black people, and the issues he talks about DO affect black voters. Some people just need to get over themselves.

Mister D
02-21-2016, 05:08 PM
If true, it's interesting that millennial blacks favored Bernie. It's also interesting that progressives remain steadfastly oblivious to their inconsistency when it comes to a candidate's racial appeal. They'll discuss Bernie's appeal to blacks and browns coldly and analytically but discuss Trump's supposed appeal to whites with a mixture of revulsion and distrust in addition to giving the impression that there is something intrinsically wrong with any such appeal.

donttread
02-21-2016, 06:03 PM
This is just a brief commentary on the outcome of the Nevada Caucus yesterday, based both on the official results and exit polling data.

Yes, we all know by now that Hillary Clinton won a clear victory in Nevada yesterday, but I want to point out that that doesn't mean the Democratic nominating contest is over. In connection to that fact, here are some crucial things we know about the demographic breakdown of yesterday's vote in Nevada:

The first and foremost thing I want to highlight is that among millennial voters -- people my age and younger -- Bernie won all demographic groups: both men and women, both white voters and voters of color alike, and by wide margins at that. There is a clear class divide to which way voters overall tend to go, but the generational divide is the even bigger, more principal one. This is something that Hillary Clinton and her supporters should pay careful attention to because it shows that theirs is definitely NOT the path of the future and that the next generation demands populist candidates. This will be the last election where millennial voters are not the majority of Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters, so pay attention to that, Clinton people!

Bernie was also able to pick up votes even among older Latinos by calling for a complete halt to the deportation of undocumented immigrants (save for those guilty of violent crimes, of course) until such time as a comprehensive form of immigration reform can be passed, thus positioning himself as the polar opposite of leading Republican Donald Trump on the main issue that the latter is running on. By adopting and highlighting this bold position, Bernie was able to win not just the votes of younger Latinos, but also the overall Latino vote by a margin of 8 points last night! Absent these gains among Latino voters, Sanders wouldn't have fared as well as he did last night in Nevada.

However, the above said, last night's results also highlighted a crucial problem that remains for the Bernie Sanders campaign: he was unable to even come close to winning the balance of older black voters. Now black voters of the millennial generation (we might say the Black Lives Matter generation) displayed a different opinion, favoring Sanders overall. However, their elders did not follow suit. There are many theories floating around as to why, and it saddens me that the candidate himself seems to have given up on this group in his victory speech, saying that it was now on to Super Tuesday even though South Carolina is the next contest on the calendar. I want to stress that Bernie NEEDS these voters to win the Democratic Party's nomination! Or at least he needs substantially more of them anyway. But here I want to point out something that seems glaringly obvious to me about this whole situation: these people CAN be won over to the Bernie camp. How? We must recognize this generational divide among black people: while overall, the younger generation, having grown up not remembering things like the peace and prosperity of the 1990s or the Cold War or the high crime rates of the 1970s and '80s, see issues like criminal justice reform and economic reform as the top priorities, where their elders still view gang violence in America's major urban centers as the issue of principal concern, much as they have for the last 30 years or 40 years or so. Therefore, for many older black voters, the fact that Hillary Clinton stakes out a stronger position in favor of gun control is a decisive factor in choosing who to vote for. If Bernie were to but recant his support for legal immunity for gun manufacturers and distributors (which he really should do anyway!), I think he could make major gains among older black voters, and therefore with the overall African American community. This is the only path to victory for him. That's how I see it. I really hope his other supporters will pressure him on this issue.

But even if Bernie does ultimately go down to defeat, his campaign won't have been in vain. Not only has his campaign successfully compelled Hillary to adopt a range of new, left-leaning policy positions on issues ranging from health care to taxation of the super-rich and more, it has also exposed a major weakness that Hillary Clinton's campaign has: a clear inability to appeal to the millennial generation and drive them to the polls. That will be crucial knowledge for her to have in choosing who her running mate will be if she wins the nomination! The stiffer the competition she receives from Bernie Sanders, the more likely it is that she'll wind up picking a populist running mate like Elizabeth Warren to compensate for apparent shortcomings in her current appeal and unite the party rather than another generic communitarian like Julian Castro. (And trust me, with Trump as the Republican nominee, it's not like the Democratic nominee will have any trouble wrapping up the Latino vote anyway.)

Just some thoughts.

I respect Bernie but you can't just stop deporting illegal aliens . Nor is there enough money to fund half of his plans. Having said that I think you are quite wrong about something :"Doesn't mean the democratic nominating contest is over" C'mon Polly it was over before it started , not because Bernie couldn't compete, but because the DNC won't let him.

Green Arrow
02-21-2016, 06:17 PM
I respect Bernie but you can't just stop deporting illegal aliens . Nor is there enough money to fund half of his plans.

But there is enough money to deport 11 million people (and counting)?

Mac-7
02-21-2016, 08:58 PM
But there is enough money to deport 11 million people (and counting)?

Build the fence/wall, stop the invasion and we'll discuss how may illegals have to go

Till then the goal remains 100%

Cigar
02-21-2016, 09:27 PM
:f_cheers: It's great hearing what all the experts think ...

But I have a better suggestion, maybe it would be of more value if you documented all of your experience and expertise and publish it for all to Read and Learn from your specialty. After all, look at the success you've had in executing everything you've learned, you have to be proud of those wonderful Presidential Candidates.

Hopefully you have this ready by next February and call it, The GOP Autopsy, Version II

I'm looking forward to the Book Signing Tour. :grin:

Cigar
02-21-2016, 09:40 PM
One thing that frustrates me about black voters is at a recent town hall, Bernie was giving his usual message that is right on target on the issues that affect EVERYONE, and the black voters at the town hall were mad because he didn't address specifically black issues.

I'm sorry, but he's trying to be president of everyone, not just black people, and the issues he talks about DO affect black voters. Some people just need to get over themselves.

You know what, I believe what you're saying is true, except you're doing the same thing everyone else is. You "assume" EVERYONE is MAD, and you "assume" EVERYONE expects the President to do anything special for Black People. I'm Black neither I nor anyone Black that I know expects that, so who did you interview? Did you interview anyone, or did you come to this assumption by observation or few people you've seen on TV?

The African American vote in the Democratic party has the same power as the Evangelical vote in the Republican party. It's the core constituency that you have to win at least a sizable share to compete. The fact that Bernie misunderstood this and had no prominent elected African American Democrat stand up for him speaks volumes about his political naivete.

You cannot have a REVOLUTION without a COALITION.

Cigar
02-21-2016, 09:45 PM
Muted Response to Sanders at South Carolina ChurchWEST COLUMBIA, S.C. — The problem began as soon as Bernie Sanders walked into the dining room of the revered, and predominantly black, Brookland Baptist Church. Instead of flocking to him, as people do at his large college rallies, many of church’s 780 members looked up for a moment, then quietly went back to eating their Sunday feast — unmoved as Mr. Sanders, the Democratic senator from Vermont, tried to work the room.

He made remarks at a microphone next to a buffet table offering chicken, collard greens and dinner rolls. The line at the table kept moving as Mr. Sanders and Benjamin T. Jealous, a former N.A.A.C.P. president, spoke. The Brookland Baptist congregation proved to be a tough crowd.

“We have in America today a broken criminal justice system,” Mr. Sanders said, pausing briefly after this line from his stump speech, which is usually met with applause. Here it garnered very little.

His visit underscored Mr. Sanders’s difficulty in strengthening his support among black voters in South Carolina, who make up more than half of registered Democrats heading into the state primary this Saturday. While some applauded politely as he offered now-familiar lines about racial discrimination, the loudest claps came when he talked about President Obama.

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/02/21/muted-response-to-sanders-at-south-carolina-church/

Green Arrow
02-21-2016, 09:48 PM
You know what, I believe what you're saying is true, except you're doing the same thing everyone else is. You "assume" EVERYONE is MAD, and you "assume" EVERYONE expects the President to do anything special for Black People. I'm Black neither I nor anyone Black that I know expects that, so who did you interview? Did you interview anyone, or did you come to this assumption by observation or few people you've seen on TV?

The African American vote in the Democratic party has the same power as the Evangelical vote in the Republican party. It's the core constituency that you have to win at least a sizable share to compete. The fact that Bernie misunderstood this and had no prominent elected African American Democrat stand up for him speaks volumes about his political naivete.

You cannot have a REVOLUTION without a COALITION.

Rep. Keith Ellison isn't a prominent elected African American?

What is it about Bernie Sanders that turns you off, exactly?

Cigar
02-21-2016, 09:55 PM
Rep. Keith Ellison isn't a prominent elected African American?

What is it about Bernie Sanders that turns you off, exactly?

See, once again you make assumptions that are wrong. If you search many of the Threads on Bernie you'll see I'm more for Bernie than Clinton. I've just giving you a little perspective from an actual Black Person who has a 50 year life span of actually being Black . So you just might want to take my opinions over the Black experts on this forum.

Green Arrow
02-21-2016, 10:06 PM
See, once again you make assumptions that are wrong. If you search many of the Threads on Bernie you'll see I'm more for Bernie than Clinton. I've just giving you a little perspective from an actual Black Person who has a 50 year life span of actually being Black . So you just might want to take my opinions over the Black experts on this forum.

I'm trying to take your opinions seriously, that's why I asked you for your opinion. Maybe I should have phrased the question better.

What, in your opinion, is the problem black voters have with Bernie Sanders?

Cigar
02-21-2016, 10:17 PM
I'm trying to take your opinions seriously, that's why I asked you for your opinion. Maybe I should have phrased the question better.

What, in your opinion, is the problem black voters have with Bernie Sanders?

Based on the Black People I personally know and how I personally feel about Bernie, most Black People don't really know Bernie. Most Black People know the Clinton's. I don't see it as a dislike, I see it the same way I see Trump. Stop telling me what you're going to do, because I know that's BS. Start telling me "how" you're going to get it done.

I ... unlike most Conservatives, is not against Compromise. I personally have no problem with Conservatives getting some of the things they want, so long as Liberals can do the same. Traditionally, that's how Government worked.

Chris
02-21-2016, 10:19 PM
Muted Response to Sanders at South Carolina ChurchWEST COLUMBIA, S.C. — The problem began as soon as Bernie Sanders walked into the dining room of the revered, and predominantly black, Brookland Baptist Church. Instead of flocking to him, as people do at his large college rallies, many of church’s 780 members looked up for a moment, then quietly went back to eating their Sunday feast — unmoved as Mr. Sanders, the Democratic senator from Vermont, tried to work the room.

He made remarks at a microphone next to a buffet table offering chicken, collard greens and dinner rolls. The line at the table kept moving as Mr. Sanders and Benjamin T. Jealous, a former N.A.A.C.P. president, spoke. The Brookland Baptist congregation proved to be a tough crowd.

“We have in America today a broken criminal justice system,” Mr. Sanders said, pausing briefly after this line from his stump speech, which is usually met with applause. Here it garnered very little.

His visit underscored Mr. Sanders’s difficulty in strengthening his support among black voters in South Carolina, who make up more than half of registered Democrats heading into the state primary this Saturday. While some applauded politely as he offered now-familiar lines about racial discrimination, the loudest claps came when he talked about President Obama.

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/02/21/muted-response-to-sanders-at-south-carolina-church/


So why does Sander's message, which seems to resonate with his usual crowd of followers, not resonate with blacks? Following some news on the SC campaigns there was emphasis on how from the Civil Rights movement the Clintons being well connected with the well knowns in black community while Sanders knew some lesser lights, but surely this cannot account for his failure to appeal to blacks at that church.

Green Arrow
02-21-2016, 10:25 PM
Based on the Black People I personally know and how I personally feel about Bernie, most Black People don't really know Bernie. Most Black People know the Clinton's. I don't see it as a dislike, I see it the same way I see Trump. Stop telling me what you're going to do, because I know that's BS. Start telling me "how" you're going to get it done.

I ... unlike most Conservatives, is not against Compromise. I personally have no problem with Conservatives getting some of the things they want, so long as Liberals can do the same. Traditionally, that's how Government worked.

That's fair. Thank you for the insight.

Cigar
02-21-2016, 10:26 PM
So why does Sander's message, which seems to resonate with his usual crowd of followers, not resonate with blacks? Following some news on the SC campaigns there was emphasis on how from the Civil Rights movement the Clintons being well connected with the well knowns in black community while Sanders knew some lesser lights, but surely this cannot account for his failure to appeal to blacks at that church.

:huh: I'm Black and it resonates with me.

But maybe it's because Black People have a different view of political history than Bernie and his followers. Personally I don't have different Voting Issues than White Liberals. But I hear White People telling me how I think and how I view the world all the time, which is kinda odd, because they don't really know.

Chris
02-21-2016, 10:37 PM
:huh: I'm Black and it resonates with me.

But maybe it's because Black People have a different view of political history than Bernie and his followers. Personally I don't have different Voting Issues than White Liberals. But I hear White People telling me how I think and how I view the world all the time, which is kinda odd, because they don't really know.

But it didn't with those in that church. The political history is probably vastly different. People tend to speak in generalities, liberals are this, conservatives want that, libertarians argue the other thing. People won't know unless you tell them, but they won't listen unless you listen too, simple discourse ethics, right? Anyway, I can't imagine what it's like to be black anymore than I can imagine what it's like to be a woman. Anyway, it's late and I'm not saying anything much.

Cigar
02-21-2016, 10:58 PM
But it didn't with those in that church. The political history is probably vastly different. People tend to speak in generalities, liberals are this, conservatives want that, libertarians argue the other thing. People won't know unless you tell them, but they won't listen unless you listen too, simple discourse ethics, right? Anyway, I can't imagine what it's like to be black anymore than I can imagine what it's like to be a woman. Anyway, it's late and I'm not saying anything much.

Those People in that Church don't represent the 74 Million Blacks in America ... I'd bet if Bernie came to a Church in Chicago it would be different.

Fagan_the_Pagan
02-21-2016, 11:28 PM
Based on the Black People I personally know and how I personally feel about Bernie, most Black People don't really know Bernie. Most Black People know the Clinton's. I don't see it as a dislike, I see it the same way I see Trump. Stop telling me what you're going to do, because I know that's BS. Start telling me "how" you're going to get it done.
It's true, currently the "how" is lacking, or hazy, and that is definitely a shortcoming of the Sanders Campaign. It was addressed in an article by The Atlantic, and I have written to the campaign myself to suggest that they be more upfront on this particular point. Of course, my personal voice holds zero weight, so unless people start asking for it vocally in larger numbers, who knows how soon that will come.

I am a Bernie supporter, so I would really like to see his political revolution succeed. Speaking out on "how" it will happen can only help to mobilize his supporters, and help it happen.

Tahuyaman
02-21-2016, 11:48 PM
Just like the old days..., whatever Master says....
that's funny. I wish I would have thought of that one.

Mac-7
02-22-2016, 03:33 AM
It's true, currently the "how" is lacking, or hazy, and that is definitely a shortcoming of the Sanders Campaign. It was addressed in an article by The Atlantic, and I have written to the campaign myself to suggest that they be more upfront on this particular point. Of course, my personal voice holds zero weight, so unless people start asking for it vocally in larger numbers, who knows how soon that will come.

I am a Bernie supporter, so I would really like to see his political revolution succeed. Speaking out on "how" it will happen can only help to mobilize his supporters, and help it happen.

I was watching Fox last night and they were interviewing some bernie sanders supporters

one stuck in my mind.

He was a proud socialist just like bernie.

and for me that was very depressing and a little scary for the future of this country.

Leonthecat
02-22-2016, 03:58 AM
I was watching Fox last night and they were interviewing some bernie sanders supporters

one stuck in my mind.

He was a proud socialist just like bernie.

and for me that was very depressing and a little scary for the future of this country.
Weren't FDR and Truman Democratic socialists too?
Wasn't that in the past?
Aren't their socialist programs actively serving our nation right now?
Why should the future be any different?
Why are you so scared?
Is it because Bernie is a Jew? Is that why he scares you so much?

IMPress Polly
02-22-2016, 06:54 AM
Green Arrow wrote:
One thing that frustrates me about black voters is at a recent town hall, Bernie was giving his usual message that is right on target on the issues that affect EVERYONE, and the black voters at the town hall were mad because he didn't address specifically black issues.

I'm sorry, but he's trying to be president of everyone, not just black people, and the issues he talks about DO affect black voters. Some people just need to get over themselves.

This reflects too much of what I see on my social media accounts from other Bernie Sanders supporters. I'm seeing terms like "negro peons" being floated around by many white Bernie supporters, and I would advise against going this route. As Madeline Albright learned a couple weeks ago, attempting to guilt people into supporting your candidate tends to backfire.

Attempting to be the president of all the people can and must include an address of social oppression. Although radical economic reform is the crux of the Sanders campaign, social issues still matter to people, and that's especially true when it's life and death matters we're talking about, like police violence or gang violence. As I pointed out in the OP, the fact that Bernie did manage to win the Latino vote in Nevada on Saturday was in no small part due to his stance opposing deportations, not just his economic message. You know, good-paying, union-scale American jobs don't matter much if you're not allowed to remain in America or to enjoy equal legal rights like minimum wage protections.

I say these things because frankly my own support for Sanders is what one might call fairly selfless considering that there's really not much he plans on doing for me. Were I focused on voting for who would best serve my own personal interests, I'd definitely be voting for Hillary Clinton. She's the only candidate who has come out with an education policy plan that actually supports teachers, for example, which is why my union and the rest of the teacher's unions are supporting her. In terms of my gender interests, while both Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are solid feminists, there is truth to what the Planned Parenthood people have said about this: that, between these two, Clinton stands out for having not just voted for the interests of women consistently after being presented with a choice, but for having actively initiated legislation to that end. Bernie's minimum wage and jobs plans wouldn't affect me as a salaried, full-time worker. Likewise I'm already through college, so that free tuition thing is a little late coming for me. And I already have a pretty solid health care plan with my current employer for that matter, though free would of course be a better price tag. The main thing I'd benefit from personally in Bernie's platform then is simply his proposal to lower interest rates on student debt, as I'm still paying that and will be for many years to come. However, Hillary Clinton has a similar plan to reduce interest rates on student debt. You see what I'm saying? This is why most women (especially older women with established careers like myself) and most teachers favor Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders. It's not identity politics in their crudest form, i.e. "women favor Clinton because she's a woman". No. It's substance. My willingness to vote for Sanders over Clinton is largely ideological and selfless. It's primarily out of concern for the interests of my students, who are underemployed and need to be able to afford a college education in the immediate future. How many people vote that selflessly though?

My point is that if you want people to vote for you across the board, then you have to speak for their interests across the board. The question I sought to raise in the OP wasn't WHETHER this should be done, but HOW it might be done.

Chris
02-22-2016, 08:37 AM
Those People in that Church don't represent the 74 Million Blacks in America ... I'd bet if Bernie came to a Church in Chicago it would be different.

I guess I misunderstood why you were posting that. So the reason his message didn't resonate is regional, Southerner vs Yankee.

Chris
02-22-2016, 08:42 AM
This reflects too much of what I see on my social media accounts from other Bernie Sanders supporters. I'm seeing terms like "negro peons" being floated around by many white Bernie supporters, and I would advise against going this route. As Madeline Albright learned a couple weeks ago, attempting to guilt people into supporting your candidate tends to backfire.

Attempting to be the president of all the people can and must include an address of social oppression. Although radical economic reform is the crux of the Sanders campaign, social issues still matter to people, and that's especially true when it's life and death matters we're talking about, like police violence or gang violence. As I pointed out in the OP, the fact that Bernie did manage to win the Latino vote in Nevada on Saturday was in no small part due to his stance opposing deportations, not just his economic message. You know, good-paying, union-scale American jobs don't matter much if you're not allowed to remain in America or to enjoy equal legal rights like minimum wage protections.

I say these things because frankly my own support for Sanders is what one might call fairly selfless considering that there's really not much he plans on doing for me. Were I focused on voting for who would best serve my own personal interests, I'd definitely be voting for Hillary Clinton. She's the only candidate who has come out with an education policy plan that actually supports teachers, for example, which is why my union and the rest of the teacher's unions are supporting her. In terms of my gender interests, while both Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are solid feminists, there is truth to what the Planned Parenthood people have said about this: that, between these two, Clinton stands out for having not just voted for the interests of women consistently after being presented with a choice, but for having actively initiated legislation to that end. Bernie's minimum wage and jobs plans wouldn't affect me as a salaried, full-time worker. Likewise I'm already through college, so that free tuition thing is a little late coming for me. And I already have a pretty solid health care plan with my current employer for that matter, though free would of course be a better price tag. The main thing I'd benefit from personally in Bernie's platform then is simply his proposal to lower interest rates on student debt, as I'm still paying that and will be for many years to come. However, Hillary Clinton has a similar plan to reduce interest rates on student debt. You see what I'm saying? This is why most women (especially older women with established careers like myself) and most teachers favor Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders. It's not identity politics in their crudest form, i.e. "women favor Clinton because she's a woman". No. It's substance. My willingness to vote for Sanders over Clinton is largely ideological and selfless. It's primarily out of concern for the interests of my students, who are underemployed and need to be able to afford a college education in the immediate future. How many people vote that selflessly though?

My point is that if you want people to vote for you across the board, then you have to speak for their interests across the board. The question I sought to raise in the OP wasn't WHETHER this should be done, but HOW it might be done.


Attempting to be the president of all the people can and must include an address of social oppression.

No doubt that framing of everything in terms of oppression resonates with liberal progressives, just not conservatives and libertarians who frame things, value things differently. How can you be anything for all people when you represent only one view?

Then again, does Hillary represent anyone? Perhaps the liars club.

PolWatch
02-22-2016, 09:45 AM
I guess I misunderstood why you were posting that. So the reason his message didn't resonate is regional, Southerner vs Yankee.

Black or white...region matters. Southern voters of all colors tend to be more conservatively religious.

IMPress Polly
02-22-2016, 12:21 PM
That's true PolWatch, and probably another reason why more center-left Democrats like Clinton tend to fare better there than serious leftist ones.

Chris
02-22-2016, 12:23 PM
That's true PolWatch, and probably another reason why more center-left Democrats like Clinton tend to fare better there than serious leftist ones.

And who happen to be 0.1%ers who say they fight for the little guy.

Cigar
02-22-2016, 02:47 PM
I guess I misunderstood why you were posting that. So the reason his message didn't resonate is regional, Southerner vs Yankee.

Possibly ... I'm neither a Southerner nor Yankee.

Mac-7
02-22-2016, 02:51 PM
Weren't FDR and Truman Democratic socialists too?
Wasn't that in the past?
Aren't their socialist programs actively serving our nation right now?
Why should the future be any different?
Why are you so scared?
Is it because Bernie is a Jew? Is that why he scares you so much?

I'm not convinced that any socialist program dreamed up by past democrat or republican presidents was the best possible answer to problems facing society.

when government makes promises to take care of people devoid of personal responsibility it promotes irresponsibility.

And did you pull the Jewish card out of your ass?

That is totally off the wall.

Chris
02-22-2016, 02:54 PM
Possibly ... I'm neither a Southerner nor Yankee.

Chicago area, that's Yankee.

Tahuyaman
02-22-2016, 03:27 PM
One thing that frustrates me about black voters is at a recent town hall, Bernie was giving his usual message that is right on target on the issues that affect EVERYONE, and the black voters at the town hall were mad because he didn't address specifically black issues.

I'm sorry, but he's trying to be president of everyone, not just black people, and the issues he talks about DO affect black voters. Some people just need to get over themselves.

I agree with your comments, but if Sanders should win the nomination, blacks will vote for him in the same numbers they vote for any Democrat.

Leonthecat
02-22-2016, 04:33 PM
I'm not convinced that any socialist program dreamed up by past democrat or republican presidents was the best possible answer to problems facing society.

when government makes promises to take care of people devoid of personal responsibility it promotes irresponsibility.

And did you pull the Jewish card out of your ass?

That is totally off the wall.
Something must have made you frightened of Bernie. If it's not his Jewishness, is it that he is from Vermont and New York??
Fact is we live in a socialist country that has had a long history of successful socialist programs.
Does social security retirement frighten you? Are you scared of medicare? How about social disability programs? Does that have you quaking under the covers at night?
Why are you so scared?

Tahuyaman
02-22-2016, 05:08 PM
Black or white...region matters. Southern voters of all colors tend to be more conservatively religious.

what does "conservatively religious" mean anyway? I'm trying to figure out what a conservatively religious person actually is.


Are you saying that southerners tend to be more religious AND conservative than people of other regions?

Green Arrow
02-22-2016, 06:21 PM
Something must have made you frightened of Bernie. If it's not his Jewishness, is it that he is from Vermont and New York??
Fact is we live in a socialist country that has had a long history of successful socialist programs.
Does social security retirement frighten you? Are you scared of medicare? How about social disability programs? Does that have you quaking under the covers at night?
Why are you so scared?

We do not live in a socialist country and we do not have a long history of successful socialist programs. Medicare/Medicaid are about the only socialist programs we have in the U.S. Social Security is mildly​ socialist.

maineman
02-22-2016, 06:25 PM
what does "conservatively religious" mean anyway? I'm trying to figure out what a conservatively religious person actually is.


Are you saying that southerners tend to be more religious AND conservative than people of other regions?

many of the denominations that tend to flourish in the south are, for example, very much opposed to gay marriage. Many of the denominations that tend to flourish in the northeast, on the other hand, are not.

Tahuyaman
02-22-2016, 06:37 PM
many of the denominations that tend to flourish in the south are, for example, very much opposed to gay marriage. Many of the denominations that tend to flourish in the northeast, on the other hand, are not.

so, "conservatively religious" translates to opposition to gay marriage? How about agnostics and atheists who oppose gay marriage?

maineman
02-22-2016, 06:44 PM
so, "conservatively religious" translates to opposition to gay marriage? How about agnostics and atheists who oppose gay marriage?

gay marriage is but one difference between southern and northeastern Christians. And those others who oppose gay marriage obviously do so from something other than a faith perspective. and agnostics and atheists would certainly not be considered "religious", so your question is doubly confusing.

Tahuyaman
02-22-2016, 06:45 PM
gay marriage is but one difference between southern and northeastern Christians. And those others who oppose gay marriage obviously do so from something other than a faith perspective.

still, the term "conservatively religious" is just nonsensical.

maineman
02-22-2016, 06:47 PM
still, the term "conservatively religious" is just nonsensical.

I think that the southern evangelical Christian voter is a reliably conservative voter as well. It's not nonsensical in the least.

Green Arrow
02-22-2016, 06:49 PM
gay marriage is but one difference between southern and northeastern Christians. And those others who oppose gay marriage obviously do so from something other than a faith perspective. and agnostics and atheists would certainly not be considered "religious", so your question is doubly confusing.

I don't know what you're talking about. Virtually every denomination we had in liberal California opposed gay marriage. Opposition to gay marriage in Christian churches has nothing to do with where the denomination is located and everything to do with how the denomination approaches the Bible.

del
02-22-2016, 06:50 PM
california isn't in the northeast

there really aren't many fundamentalist churches in the northeast

Green Arrow
02-22-2016, 06:50 PM
california isn't in the northeast

It's also not in the South.

maineman
02-22-2016, 06:52 PM
I don't know what you're talking about. Virtually every denomination we had in liberal California opposed gay marriage. Opposition to gay marriage in Christian churches has nothing to do with where the denomination is located and everything to do with how the denomination approaches the Bible.

and I suppose you are unaware of the geographic distribution of all the Christian denominations in America? There are not many congregational or UCC churches in the south. There are not many southern baptists in the northeast. But I'm sure you knew that.

del
02-22-2016, 06:53 PM
It's also not in the South.

and if he'd mentioned california in his post, you'd have a point.

overall, the northeast is very liberal religiously

Tahuyaman
02-22-2016, 06:54 PM
I think that the southern evangelical Christian voter is a reliably conservative voter as well. It's not nonsensical in the least.


So you are saying that they are conservative AND religious?

maineman
02-22-2016, 06:55 PM
So you are saying that they are conservative AND religious?

in the south, the two go hand in hand. Whereas in the northeast, it is, for many Christians, their faith that drives their liberalism.

Tahuyaman
02-22-2016, 06:56 PM
There's no such thing as "conservatively religious", just as there's no such thing as " liberally religious".

There are religious people who are conservative and others who are liberal.

Tahuyaman
02-22-2016, 06:57 PM
in the south, the two go hand in hand. Whereas in the northeast, it is, for many Christians, their faith that drives their liberalism.

Are you a fan of stereo-typing people based on geography?

del
02-22-2016, 06:58 PM
There's no such thing as "conservatively religious", just as there's no such thing as " liberally religious".

There are religious people who are conservative and others who are liberal.

there are liberal religions and conservative religions.

this isn't exactly a news flash

maineman
02-22-2016, 06:59 PM
There's no such thing as "conservatively religious", just as there's no such thing as " liberally religious".

There are religious people who are conservative and others who are liberal.

as stated, those who are conservatively religious, tend to congregate in specific denominations.... just as liberals do... and most UCC members that I know, for example, are liberal in their politics BECAUSE of their faith. But there are not many conservatives at UCC churches in the northeast - or anywhere else, for that matter.

Mister D
02-22-2016, 07:01 PM
as stated, those who are conservatively religious, tend to congregate in specific denominations.... just as liberals do... and most UCC members that I know, for example, are liberal in their politics BECAUSE of their faith. But there are not many conservatives at UCC churches in the northeast - or anywhere else, for that matter.

If that's true it's only true of Protestants in the US.

maineman
02-22-2016, 07:02 PM
Are you a fan of stereo-typing people based on geography?

fan? I can read the directory of churches in various cities in the north and south as well as you can. Well... if the truth be known, I can probably do it much better, but you get the point. There are a lot more churches in conservative theology protestant denominations in the south than there are in the northeast. That's not stereotyping, it is stating fact.

maineman
02-22-2016, 07:03 PM
If that's true it's only true of Protestants in the US.

I don't lump all protestants together.... either in the US, or anywhere else.

Peter1469
02-22-2016, 07:04 PM
I think that the southern evangelical Christian voter is a reliably conservative voter as well. It's not nonsensical in the least.

Many of the religious denominations shifted towards liberal politics over the last couple of decades.

Mister D
02-22-2016, 07:05 PM
I don't lump all protestants together.... either in the US, or anywhere else.

Well, yea, you split them into conservative and liberal. :wink:

Mister D
02-22-2016, 07:05 PM
Many of the religious denominations shifted towards liberal politics over the last couple of decades.

They are among those in rapid decline. Funny that.

maineman
02-22-2016, 07:05 PM
Many of the religious denominations shifted towards liberal politics over the last couple of decades.

in the south? southern baptists now support a woman's right to chose and gay marriage?

maineman
02-22-2016, 07:07 PM
Well, yea, you split them into conservative and liberal. :wink:

and splitting them is not synonymous with lumping them all together.

duh

Green Arrow
02-22-2016, 07:07 PM
and I suppose you are unaware of the geographic distribution of all the Christian denominations in America? There are not many congregational or UCC churches in the south. There are not many southern baptists in the northeast. But I'm sure you knew that.

There aren't many non-Catholic adherents in general in the Northeast, it's primarily Catholic. But yes, considering Southern Baptists are called Southern Baptists I'm sure there are more of them in the South than anywhere else in the US. But there are more Baptists in general in the Northeast than there are Congregationalists and (I'm assuming by UCC you're referring to) Church of Christ.

According to Pew, 3% of Northeasterners (http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/region/northeast/) are Baptist, versus only 1% who are Church of Christ and less than 1% who are Congregationalist.

*EDIT* Interestingly enough, Pew also shows more Church of Christ in the South than in the Northeast, 2% in the South to just 1% in the Northeast. The percentage is still under 1% for Congregationalists in the South, but Baptist shoots up to 17%.

maineman
02-22-2016, 07:10 PM
There aren't many non-Catholic adherents in general in the Northeast, it's primarily Catholic. But yes, considering Southern Baptists are called Southern Baptists I'm sure there are more of them in the South than anywhere else in the US. But there are more Baptists in general in the Northeast than there are Congregationalists and (I'm assuming by UCC you're referring to) Church of Christ.

According to Pew, 3% of Northeasterners (http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/region/northeast/) are Baptist, versus only 1% who are Church of Christ and less than 1% who are Congregationalist.

you should be careful to distinguish between the Church of Christ - very conservative, and the UNITED Church of Christ - very liberal.

Mister D
02-22-2016, 07:11 PM
and splitting them is not synonymous with lumping them all together.

duh

Um...didn't I just say that? lol Here you are saying you don't lump Protestants together and I make a light-hearted joke about your separation of Christians into political camps. You old bastards get nastier every week. Lighten the fuck up, fellas.

Mister D
02-22-2016, 07:12 PM
Are we talking about theology or politics?

maineman
02-22-2016, 07:12 PM
your own link shows that mainline and black protestant denominations make up 20% of the faithful whereas evangelical denominations make up only 13% and together, protestants outnumber catholics.

maineman
02-22-2016, 07:13 PM
Are we talking about theology or politics?

for many, their theology informs their politics.

Green Arrow
02-22-2016, 07:16 PM
you should be careful to distinguish between the Church of Christ - very conservative, and the UNITED Church of Christ - very liberal.

Yeah, United Church of Christ is even more of a minority in both places than Church of Christ. 1% in the Northeast and less than 1% in the South. Negligible difference.

Pew also shows members of the UCC in the Northeast (http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/region/northeast/religious-denomination/united-church-of-christ/) by education: 39% with high school diploma or less, 15% with some college, 21% in college, and 25% with a postgraduate degree.

97% white too. Church attendance is pretty low, only 33% attend once a week.

Green Arrow
02-22-2016, 07:17 PM
your own link shows that mainline and black protestant denominations make up 20% of the faithful whereas evangelical denominations make up only 13% and together, protestants outnumber catholics.

Barely. What is your point?

Mister D
02-22-2016, 07:18 PM
for many, their theology informs their politics.

Really? I'm a very conservative Christian as far as theology is concerned but my religious conservatism is not easily reconciled with my rather hard right and traditionalist political and social views. Particularly my racialism and rejection of universalism.

maineman
02-22-2016, 07:18 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainline_Protestant

maineman
02-22-2016, 07:19 PM
Really? I'm a very conservative Christian as far as theology is concerned but my religious conservatism is not easily reconciled with my rather hard right and traditionalist political and social views. Particularly my racialism and rejection of universalism.

notice how I said, "for many" and not "for everybody"?

cute little linguistic trick, eh?

del
02-22-2016, 07:21 PM
Yeah, United Church of Christ is even more of a minority in both places than Church of Christ. 1% in the Northeast and less than 1% in the South. Negligible difference.

Pew also shows members of the UCC in the Northeast (http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/region/northeast/religious-denomination/united-church-of-christ/) by education: 39% with high school diploma or less, 15% with some college, 21% in college, and 25% with a postgraduate degree.

97% white too. Church attendance is pretty low, only 33% attend once a week.


that's 9% more than attend catholic church on a weekly basis, but i don't see what bearing it has on whether a particular denomination is liberal or conservative.

Green Arrow
02-22-2016, 07:28 PM
that's 9% more than attend catholic church on a weekly basis, but i don't see what bearing it has on whether a particular denomination is liberal or conservative.

It doesn't, just some facts I found interesting and decided to post.

del
02-22-2016, 07:30 PM
It doesn't, just some facts I found interesting and decided to post.

cool

i found it interesting that catholicism is declining at such a rapid rate.

i also found it interesting that those identifying as having no religion is increasing at almost the same rate.

Mister D
02-22-2016, 07:32 PM
notice how I said, "for many" and not "for everybody"?

cute little linguistic trick, eh?

No, it's just an ugly way of trying to make up for a lack of a point. You see, I was really saying absolutely nothing.Yeah, I guess you weren't maine. lol

Green Arrow
02-22-2016, 07:34 PM
cool

i found it interesting that catholicism is declining at such a rapid rate.

i also found it interesting that those identifying as having no religion is increasing at almost the same rate.

I can't recall correctly but either last year or the year before I read that the overall non-religious rate in the U.S. has gone up to something like 20%. The Pew link I posted, if you go back to their general page on Religion in America, has 22.8% unaffiliated with 3.1% of those being atheist and 4% being agnostic. The biggest portion of unaffiliateds are "nothing in particular" (15.8%) with 8.8% of those considering religion not important and 6.9% considering religion important.

Kind of interesting. I wonder what's caused the sharp uptick in non-affiliation (and atheism/agnosticism in particular) and the decline in general religion and Catholicism in particular?

del
02-22-2016, 08:02 PM
I can't recall correctly but either last year or the year before I read that the overall non-religious rate in the U.S. has gone up to something like 20%. The Pew link I posted, if you go back to their general page on Religion in America, has 22.8% unaffiliated with 3.1% of those being atheist and 4% being agnostic. The biggest portion of unaffiliateds are "nothing in particular" (15.8%) with 8.8% of those considering religion not important and 6.9% considering religion important.

Kind of interesting. I wonder what's caused the sharp uptick in non-affiliation (and atheism/agnosticism in particular) and the decline in general religion and Catholicism in particular?


in the case of catholicism, i would think that part of the reason is the sex scandals, followed closely by the church's positions on birth control, abortion and female clergy.

in general, i wouldn't be surprised if the secularization (for lack of a better term) of sundays is part of the reason.

granted, i grew up in a state with blue laws, but it used to be that there really wasn't much else to do on sunday but go to church. people, outside of hospital workers, generally didn't work that day.

now, between work commitments, youth sports and the ability to shop on sundays, i think a lot of people just deprioritized church.

then again, it could be satan.

Tahuyaman
02-22-2016, 08:31 PM
I don't lump all protestants together.... either in the US, or anywhere else.

you stereotype people based on georgraphy or religious faith.

maineman
02-22-2016, 08:34 PM
you stereotype people based on georgraphy or religious faith.

I know that there are a lot more conservative evangelical Christians in the south than in the northeast. I know there are a lot more liberal mainline protestants in the northeast than there are in the south. That's not stereotyping anyone. It is merely stating realities.

IMPress Polly
02-23-2016, 11:37 AM
del wrote:
and if he'd mentioned california in his post, you'd have a point.

overall, the northeast is very liberal religiously

In my experience as a Vermonter, the truth is that we're just simply not very religious at all. We alternate with Oregon for the status of least religious state, according to the statistics. But even among those who consider themselves Christians, few are what we might call serious about it. Trump's lack of basic fluency in the Bible and its essence is actually a pretty good glimpse of how serious the average Christian here is about their faith: not very.

I mean as far as the liberal branches of Christianity go (Unitarianism and so forth), some of those were indeed founded in this part of the country, but even here they're practiced by few people. Catholicism is the most common Christian denomination in my state, and that's not the most liberal brand thereof. It's just that 1) only like 54% of Vermonters identify as Christians, as compared with I believe 78% of Americans overall, and 2) most of the Catholics here are basically non-practicing ones. Basically everyone here though has accepted marriage equality at this point regardless of whether they're technically Christians or not.