Bernie Faces Southern Revolt (Southern Dems Write Letter To Bernie, Demand He Stop Minimizing Them)
Source: Politico
NEW YORK — An influential group of Democrats is piling on Bernie Sanders for portraying Hillary Clinton's Southern victories as a product of a conservative region that is out of step with the rest of the country’s thinking.
When asked about his delegate deficit against Clinton, Sanders has on several recent occasions tried to explain away her lead as the result of wide margins of victory in deep red Southern states that rarely vote for Democrats in general elections. Those dismissals have irritated Southern Democratic Party leaders who insist their region is a growth opportunity for the national party, especially in the age of Donald Trump. And some are acutely sensitive to the racial dimension of Sanders’ remarks, since Clinton’s victories in the Deep South have been powered by her landslide margins among African-American voters.
In a stern, roughly 800-word letter sent Wednesday via post to Sanders’ Burlington, Vermont, headquarters, a high-profile group that includes the Democratic Party chairs of South Carolina, Louisiana, Florida, Georgia, and Mississippi expresses its concern about his characterizations of the South, which they contend “minimize the importance of the voices of a core constituency for our party”: African-Americans.
“We commend you on running a spirited campaign that has energized and mobilized a new generation of voters, but we are concerned about the way you and your campaign have characterized the South,” write South Carolina Democratic Party Chairman Jaime Harrison, Louisiana Democratic Party Chairwoman Karen Carter Peterson, Florida Democratic Party Chairwoman Allison Tant, Democratic Party of Georgia Chairman DuBose Porter, Mississippi Democratic Party Chairman Rickey Cole, former South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges, and former Democratic National Committee Chairman Don Fowler, each of whom now supports Clinton.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/bernie-sanders-south-black-voters-222220
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)
Wibly
(613 posts)This is Hillary Team spin.
Roy Rolling
(6,917 posts)There is no southern revolt. Some of those state party leaders are the ones who have overseen the demise of progressive legislation because of their impotence. They are in the tank for Hillary, not for southern democrats. They suck at electing progressives.
Most Bernie supporters are mature enough to understand Sanders is not a racist insulting us poor, underprivileged southerners. But nice try anyway, Hillary campaign, to deftly make that accusation in whispers, while publicly whining on TV how mean people are to your candidate.
liberal N proud
(60,334 posts)Even after losing Ohio, he kept saying she only won in the South.
He has a Southern problem.
Human101948
(3,457 posts)They should concentrate on winning something...anything.
liberal N proud
(60,334 posts)Human101948
(3,457 posts)I think she may be the only Democrat that can elicit more venom than President Barack Hussein Obama.
dchill
(38,485 posts)Republicans hate her, so do most Dems. Serious lack of enthusiasm if she's the nominee. Word.
dchill
(38,485 posts)Crabby Abbey
(66 posts)
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)
csziggy
(34,136 posts)The Vermont senator’s eagerness to write off voters in the South exposes a key weakness in his campaign.
Vann R. Newkirk II Apr 15, 2016 Politics
Just what does the South matter to national politics? Of course, as a Southerner I am not entirely equipped to answer that question without bias, but according to the Census, the South is the largest region in the country, with a population almost equivalent to that of the Northeast and Midwest combined. Depending on definitions, the Deep South has over 100 electoral college votes––a number that swells if other former Confederate states like Florida and Virginia are admitted––and its national electing power is reflected by rich delegate counts in primary races.
Evidently, Senator Bernie Sanders wishes that the region had a little less electoral power. During Thursday’s debate with Hillary Clinton, he repeated a point that has recently gained prominence in his own remarks and the echoes of his surrogates: That an early front-loading of primaries in the South “distorts reality” and that the South is not a vital part of the Democrats’ national coalition. With that sentiment comes a bit of a deeper implication. The minority voters of the South might not be a part of his plans moving forward.
“Look, let me acknowledge what is absolutely true: Secretary Clinton cleaned our clock in the Deep South, no question about it,” Sanders said. “That is the most conservative part of this great country. That's the fact. But you know what, we're out of the Deep South now. And we're moving up.” The suggestions here––some that have been made by the campaign for weeks––are that Democratic primary voters in the South are more conservative and thus more pro-Clinton, and that the region’s red states are of less importance to the general election than traditional liberal bastions or swing states. Some of Clinton’s biggest wins came early in southern states like South Carolina, and Super Tuesday featured seven out of 11 races below the Mason-Dixon line, a placement that Sanders believes unfairly granted Clinton momentum. He has cited a string of recent victories in western states as a proof-of-concept moving forward.
The implications of each of these claims deserve scrutiny. Is the South really the most conservative part of the country? At least for the purposes of the Democratic primary––which is the race at hand––that claim is not clearly true. In the southern states of South Carolina, Alabama, Georgia, and Texas, between 20 to 27 percent of Democratic primary voters in exit polls identified as “very liberal,” with a range of 54 to 59 percent identifying as liberal in total. This profile does not look much different than the major––and decidedly non-southern––states of Ohio and Michigan, where 22 and 23 percent of Democratic voters were “very liberal” and 59 and 57 percent identified as liberal. Polls in New York suggest that about 24 percent of likely Democratic primary voters are “very liberal.” A recent poll in the great liberal bastion of California suggests similar numbers to New York, with about a quarter of Democratic voters aligning as very liberal and around 60 percent identifying as liberal.
More: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/sanders-race-south/478506/
Underlining added by me to emphasize the Sanders quote.
That last paragraph I quoted says it all - even though Senator Sanders and many DUers don't want to believe that Democrats in the South are just as liberal as in the rest of the country.
Loudestlib
(980 posts)Good luck trying to win the GE with southern states. n/t
LeFleur1
(1,197 posts)When attacked and belittled people are going to fight back. Saunders should have reined in his supporters early on, and not taken the advice of the right wing leaning campaign 'volunteers' by joining in when it looked like an easy attack. Discussing true differences in votes, and in plans is a good thing. Making up stuff, using innuendo to discredit something credible, voicing insults, and attacking for the sake of the attack is not.
rateyes
(17,438 posts)DuBose Porter does not speak for me.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)And then Bernie can take his bigotry back to Vermont.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)And take your "cry wolf" allegations of false "bigotry" back to Free Republic.
Even without the election fraud, in Georgia, Clintonism is what caused Georgia to vote Republican in the first place. They aren't even thinking of voting Democratic with Clinton corruption still in power.
Response to w4rma (Reply #24)
Post removed
apcalc
(4,465 posts)Say....history is not your strong point is it?
w4rma
(31,700 posts)And the South stopped voting for Democrats because of it.
thucythucy
(8,049 posts)stopped voting Democratic after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was signed by a Democratic president.
That has far more to do with how Southern whites as a class have voted these past decades than NAFTA and "Clintonism."
Ever hear of Nixon's "Southern strategy"? The swing towards Republicans began long before 1992.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)Neoliberals focus on identity politics, but they screw over everybody that isn't super-wealthy on economics. Only a uniting FDR/progressive agenda can reclaim the South for Democrats.
thucythucy
(8,049 posts)that imprisoned tens of thousands of US citizens without trial, refused to desegregate federally funded public housing and WPA programs, refused to speak out against lynching, and excerpted people with disabilities from labor laws? That progressive agenda?
You're looking at the past through the rose colored glasses of a false nostalgia. Were FDR alive and governing today, you'd no doubt be excoriating him as a sell-out triangulating member of the one percent.
The irony is that it was to keep white southern Democrats in the New Deal coalition that FDR repeatedly sold out the civil rights movement of the time. It was "the Solid South" until the Civil Rights Act of 1964, an act that FDR refused even to consider proposing, much less signing.
Make no mistake, I'm an admirer of FDR. But he was at least as flawed as any of the Democratic candidates running for high office today. That is to say, he was a practical politician, concerned more with results than with ideological litmus tests, contemporary progressive nostalgia notwithstanding.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)to make to remain in power, during that era.
thucythucy
(8,049 posts)These weren't "minor concessions" to the people affected: people of color, people with disabilities, Japanese American citizens imprisoned for years, their lives shattered, their property confiscated or sold off at a tremendous loss with no hint of due process.
I'm not "trying to cast negativity"--I'm reporting historical facts. I find it astounding that you're willing to write off FDR's flaws as "minor concessions" while excoriating contemporary politicians for much the same behavior.
FDR was a great president. But he was also a flawed man and a practical politician. I don't see him as all that different from Democrats today, and I see today's Democratic Party as far more inclusive, and a good deal more progressive, than the Democratic Party of 1932. Which is why, again, many white southerners have abandoned the party in favor of the GOP's racist, homophobic, anti-disability rights, anti-women's rights agenda. THAT, and not anything the Clintons ever did, is why "the Solid South" went into the GOP column.
apcalc
(4,465 posts)For Democrats because of Richard Nixon and his " Southern Strategy" which started in the 60's.
This successful strategy turned the tide in the South, and long time Democrats became Republicans because of racist attitudes.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)Neoliberals focus on identity politics, but they screw over everybody that isn't super-wealthy on economics. Only a uniting FDR/progressive agenda can reclaim the South for Democrats.
thucythucy
(8,049 posts)GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)Because they call him racist? Huh... interesting take
berniepdx420
(1,784 posts)
rateyes
(17,438 posts)still will not have gone blue.
Wibly
(613 posts)Ridiculous claim.
Who is paying you?
Bohemianwriter
(978 posts)The bigotry accusations is without merit and nothing but sour wind.
berniepdx420
(1,784 posts)
?w=620
dchill
(38,485 posts)certainot
(9,090 posts)Dawgs
(14,755 posts)By at least 20 to 1.
Many of us are just fine with him and his opinion.
LiberalFighter
(50,912 posts)Not everyone makes a point of advertising their support in public.
You forget that Clinton won Georgia by more than a 2-1 margin.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)I see bumper stickers all over the place for Bernie. I've seen no more than 5 for Hillary, Trump, or Cruz.
True that not everyone shows their support in public, but many Hillary supporters here had no problem showing support for Obama. And, that says something, whether you like it or not.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)We often see only that which validates our biases. Anecdotal evidence is like that-- full of our desire to see through subjective lenses to better obscure uncomfortable truths from our awareness. A most irrational position--- and that too stays something, regardless of whether you like it or not...
iandhr
(6,852 posts)#feelthefacts
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)
retrowire
(10,345 posts)Any negative opinions of the south = negative opinions of blacks.
I'm from the south, am white and totally believe that the south is mostly conservative, and that's all races. This is not a smear against AA's to say the south is, for the most part, conservative.
so... yeah
potone
(1,701 posts)It is extraordinarily disingenuous, if not outright mendacious, to claim that recognition of the fact that the South is predominantly conservative and votes for Republicans in the GE is somehow a sign of bigotry.
What is ironic about this claim is the fact that the South voted Democratic until it was the Democrats, not the Republicans, that ended up supporting the Voting Rights Act and other civil rights bills. As Lyndon Johnson knew and said, that was the end of the South for Democratic candidates.
By the way, retrowire, are you in North Carolina? For some reason I had that impression.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)potone
(1,701 posts)I live in Oregon now, but I did my graduate studies at UNC-Chapel Hill, so I spent years there. It is my impression that things have gotten significantly worse since I left in 1992. The state legislature was useless then, and cutting funds for the University, but there was not the onslaught on all fronts that is going on there now. You have my sympathy. It is very hard to be a liberal in the South, and I imagine it must be harder still if you are a native of the state. Hang in there! We will survive this election somehow.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I pretend your race-card was relevant in this too if I had no rational counter to the OP.
So... yeah-- indeed.
ciaobaby
(1,000 posts)This is one of many reasons Hillary will have a hard time "uniting" the party in the general.
This and all the pro Hillary propaganda dished out daily on MSNBC.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)
Hillary and team went after Bernie and his supporters as sexist and racist. But Bernie pointing out the south is conservative and AA's are loyal to the Clintons is somehow offensive, or a "slam".
Get Real.
zazen
(2,978 posts)And our corporatist mainstream state Dems don't speak for me.
On edit: 10 generations.
Duval
(4,280 posts)The "Third-Way" Corporate Dems do not speak for me.
riversedge
(70,205 posts)
blackspade
(10,056 posts)
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)
noretreatnosurrender
(1,890 posts)the Democratic establishment doesn't support Bernie. 
scottie55
(1,400 posts)Neither Does The Corporate Media
Leontius
(2,270 posts)Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)The majority of Democratic Party members do not support him.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)And I can tell you that as the elections have shown, Senator Sanders is hardly their first Democratic choice, and he knows it.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)Come November, they can get their revenge by voting for Trump instead of Bernie. That'll show 'em!
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)entire region, the whole South, the 'Deep South' and not so Deep. All of it, legal to discriminate against LGBT and many Southern States are currently and constantly seeking to expand that discrimination.
In NC 5 Democrats voted for that hateful law and yet you hold them up as heroes and examples to follow? Disgusting and not acceptable.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)Here:
And some are acutely sensitive to the racial dimension of Sanders’ remarks, since Clinton’s victories in the Deep South have been powered by her landslide margins among African-American voters.
Yesss!!! 
TowneshipRebellion
(92 posts)Speak for yourself. The empty can makes the loudest sound.
think
(11,641 posts)DWS helped get Allison Tant appointed as the Democratic Florida Chair. They have been working hard to run former Republicans as Democrats like Charlie Crist and Patrick Murphy over long term progressive candidates.
Yes. Allison Tant is on that list...
This could be a bombshell from The Political Hurricane blog:
Allison Tant, the insider's pick to be Democratic Party chair, was a lobbyist in 2000 for ChoicePoint, the parent company of a database firm hired by the state of Florida to purge its voter rolls of felons, many of whom happened to be Democrats and minorities.
Reached by phone, Tant tells us she didn't actually lobby for the subsidiary involved in the felon-purge work, called DBT. Instead, she said, she lobbied for ChoicePoint, a data-mining company. The company sought to ensure that the financial-services industry had adequate identity-theft protections in place so that the personal data was misused, she said.
Even though she didn't work for DBT (another lobbyist handled that line of work, she said) the mere association with the company can be politically toxic in some liberal circles.
Thousands, if not tens of thousands, of lawful voters might have been unfairly removed and blocked from voting in an election that George W. Bush won by just 537 votes. The voter purge has been part of Democratic lore ever since.
~Snip~
Tant withdrew from representing ChoicePoint in late January of 2001 -- about two months after the famed recount was halted by the Supreme Court in the Bush v. Gore decision.
One of Bush's lawyers: Barry Richard, a Democrat and longtime Obama supporter, who's married to Tant...
http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2012/12/bill-nelson-dws-pick-to-lead-fl-dems-lobbied-for-firm-tied-to-notorious-2000-voter-purge.html
~Snip~
Among those criticizing it is Pam Keith, a 46-year-old black attorney who previous served in the U.S. Navy and has lived in Palm Beach County for the past four years. She’s also a candidate for the Democratic nomination of Senate next year, but is a decided underdog in the early going in that contest. Jupiter Congressman Patrick Murphy entered the contest in March and has been fundraising heavily since then. Congressman Alan Grayson has been teasing the political establishment for months that he’ll join Murphy, but has yet to do so.
~Snip~
When asked for an example to back up those charges, she says that the party’s stance on protecting voting rights fits the bill. Currently, she claims, party leaders are actively working “to make sure the voters don’t who the candidates are,” a dichotomy she labels “inconsistent”.
“When you put out press releases, and you continue to make it sound like there’s only one candidate in the race, that is that sort of paternalistic kind of thinking,” she says.
When asked if she believes the Florida Democratic Party led by Chair Allison Tant is rallying around Murphy for the Senate nomination now, Keith said,”That’s beyond evident.”...
Read more:
http://floridapolitics.com/archives/185205-pam-keith-sounds-off-on-paternalistic-florida-democratic-party-leadership
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)and the color of your skin has NOTHING to do with it, so get over yourself.
Geronimoe
(1,539 posts)defending Hillary calling them Super Predators or telling them to heel.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)country is boycotting the State. That's not really blue behavior, that's Republican behavior. It's not one of them, it's five of them, every last one an eager Hillary endorser.
The South needs to deal with that bigotry thing. Every single State in the South allows discrimination against LGBT and constantly legislates more of it. This routine of carrying on as if these States are Super liberal is disgusting.
I am NOT going to support anti gay politics no matter who the anti gay politician happens to be. Not going to happen. Those of you who do support such persons do not have my respect, you have my contempt. Vote them out. Change those laws, then strut around and tell me how precious and progressive you are. Sick of this. Bigots are conservatives. NC just passed bigoted, horrible law. Again. And you are here claiming they are a Blue State? Damn.
jalan48
(13,864 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)So. Just to be clear. No state sanders wins matters, they're all meaningless, and always because they're 'too white." Okay. But it's dismissive and racist to point out that southern states elect democrats about as often as they elect Whigs?
Hah!
Elect some Democrats. Tell the Florida party to stop supporting Republicans. Then I'll worry about it.
beastie boy
(9,328 posts)Any state that Bernie loses is either dismissed because the Democrats there don't count, or it is controlled by the secret army of the Hillary supporting establishment. Nowhere does he lose because the Democrats just don't like him enough.
I wouldn't be surprised if a version of this rationale will be used by the Bernie campaign to try flipping unpledged delegates.
BlueMTexpat
(15,369 posts)We have a winner. 
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Should I care what a bunch of conservative Democrats think about Bernie?
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)What other DEMOCRATS are you dismissing in crowning the DEMOCRATIC nominee?
frylock
(34,825 posts)At least they get to fucking vote when it matters. Don't mind me. I only live in the 8th largest economy on the planet and the most diverse state in the nation.
TowneshipRebellion
(92 posts)is in total agreement with you. These types of attacks are disheartening and cheapen the cries of abuse from real racism and neglect. I have no respect for people who hide behind shrill and empty cries of discrimination where none exists because of political expediency.
northernsouthern
(1,511 posts)Was it this one?
Yeah, they know what he was saying, stop trying to make this in to more than it is.
Feeling the Bern
(3,839 posts)Yeah, southern Blue Dog Democrats have a lot to be proud of.
Southerners don't like it, work to change your legacy and get the racists out of the party and out of your governments.
rateyes
(17,438 posts)This GA Democrat wholeheartedly agree. Jim Marshall is no longer a US Rep. because true Dems like me finally woke up and refused to vote for him. If we are gonna be represented by a Republican then let it be one that's truthful about it.
Hillary doesn't have a prayer in hell of winning GA.
UMTerp01
(1,048 posts)On too many occasions he and many of his stans dismissed southern votes, yet celebrated wins in those liberal bastions of Oklahoma, Nebraska, Utah, etc. Give me a break. He's getting what he deserves on this one. Even with her losses you never heard Hillary disparage the region. She congratulated the Senator on his wins and moved on.
Response to UMTerp01 (Reply #37)
Duval This message was self-deleted by its author.
litlbilly
(2,227 posts)Most of your posts are just like this one. total nonsense
Duval
(4,280 posts)I want to see his remarks about the South. On the other hand, conservative Dems ARE out of step with the rest of the country.
And enough about this "African Americans are only for Hillary" meme. There are some high profile African Americans for Bernie and as they hear his message there will be more.
See, many southern AA are not pleased with Bill's crime bill that ended up putting many of them in jail with long sentences for minor offenses. And then, the private prison industry that Hillary pushed for and got.
I am sure Bernie will be glad to reiterate his remarks, but I think they all may be on his web site.
floriduck
(2,262 posts)I've asked her repeatedly if she's a paid troll but never gotten an answer. I suggest Bernie supporters put her on ignore.
BlueMTexpat
(15,369 posts)you are now on my own list. CaliDem is no paid troll in any way whatsoever and it is very trollish to state such a thing just because she is not in thrall to Bernie.
certainot
(9,090 posts)while inundated by rw radio, with nary a protest, while whole real protests are yelled over
we've got 90 major universities supporting 268 limbaugh stations that are tryng to defund those very same universities.
how stupid is that?
herding cats
(19,564 posts)These aren't the ones in the south voting in the Republicans, they are Democrats. Disrespecting them does nothing to strengthen the Democratic Party in the south, and thus nothing to ever bring forth change there.
If you're going to ignore our southern Democrats, then don't bother complaining when they lose elections. Because, that's the very same damn thing the DNC, which so many here love to hate, has been doing to them for too long.
Be the change you want to see. In actions and in words!
scottie55
(1,400 posts)Saying some areas are more conservative than others is not disrespect.
It is the truth.
What, you can't handle the truth?
This list is of a bunch of cry babies wanting attention.
It has little to do with anything Senator Sanders said.
herding cats
(19,564 posts)I was addressing the people here who were broad brush trashing the southern Dems.
Read my words, please? Don't preach to me about something I never said.
herding cats
(19,564 posts)I didn't deserve it, it didn't apply to my words in any way, not to mention it was unnecessarily inflamatory. I get that's what some are used to here now, but it's hollow bullshit when brandished about like you used it just now.
Be the change you want to see. In actions and in words. We can do this if we act as a team and not a bunch of reactionary jerks. We're all in this together. All of us. Ok?
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)call that liberal goodness. Fuck that.
herding cats
(19,564 posts)Yeah, politicians do stupid shit to stay elected in their local district.
2010 meant the Republicans owned redistricting via gerrymandering. We won't see the congress again until 2020, if we're lucky. Clue: 10 year census.
That's politics in our system. I don't like it either, but hollow Internet outrage by people who have zero idea how it works is doing way more harm than good.
Do something real, and lasting. Focus on how the system works and then work within it to effect change. Otherwise, historically, all that's being done is we're making a bigger mess to be exploited by the next election cycle. That's a fact. Look it up.
NRaleighLiberal
(60,014 posts)
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)I heard what Sanders said and I don't think I was the only one who heard what was said. Discount the south all you want, does not change the fact this is the United States and not Untied States.
liberal N proud
(60,334 posts)
ananda
(28,859 posts)We've been taken over by Goldwater Republicans.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)
Cassiopeia
(2,603 posts)BlueMTexpat
(15,369 posts)
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)"It may be hard for your viewers to remember how difficult it was for people to talk about HIV/AIDS back in the 1980s and because of both president and Mrs. Reagan — in particular Mrs. Reagan — we started a national conversation, when before nobody would talk about it, nobody wanted to do anything about it, and that too is something I really appreciate with her very effective low-key advocacy. It penetrated the public conscience and people began to say, hey, we have to do something about this too." Hillary Rodham Clinton, March 2016
Why Ronald Reagan’s legacy should be vilified, not sanctified
1987: 41,027 persons are dead and 71,176 persons diagnosed with AIDS in the U.S.
After years of negligent silence, President Ronald Reagan finally uses the word “AIDS” in public.
He sided with his Education Secretary William Bennett and other conservatives who said the Government should not provide sex education information. (They are still saying it!)
On April 2, 1987, Reagan said: “How that information is used must be up to schools and parents, not government. But let’s be honest with ourselves, AIDS information can not be what some call ‘value neutral.’ After all, when it comes to preventing AIDS, don’t medicine and morality teach the same lessons.”
http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2011/02/why-ronald-reagans-legacy-should-be-vilified-not-sanctified/
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)Paladin
(28,255 posts)He and his arrogant supporters are doing a fine job of it, by themselves.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)INCREDIBLY FUCKING ARROGANT.
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)Huh.
Is that why they keep electing DINOs that hurt their own interests?
Bradical79
(4,490 posts)I mostly agree with a his assessment, but it's not smart to state it outright to the public. It's also important to try and use it as motivation to change people's minds of issues, see if your message can be tweaked to better communicate why they should vote for you, or if something more fundamental needs to change. The mainstream Democratic party minimizing people as unimportant because of unfavorable numbers is one of the reasons the party is in so much trouble in the first place.
TexasBushwhacker
(20,185 posts)I live in Texas. My only vote that could help a democratic candidate was in the PRIMARY because Texas is still going to be red for a few more decades. So while I appreciate that Bernie made a couple of stops here in Texas, I didn't expect him to spend a lot of money and energy campaigning here and he didn't. It's not an issue of disrespect. With limited funds, it just makes more sense to spend those funds campaigning in states where he could win the primary AND win in the GE.
