Seriously, enough of this "Dixie" meme.

[Garrett78]

It doesn't matter that Louisiana has more Republicans than Democrats when we're talking about a Democratic primary. Which state's Democratic electorate do you think is more representative of the overall/nationwide Democratic electorate, Louisiana or Nebraska? What about North Carolina or Kansas? Mississippi or Minnesota? Florida or Maine?

Do you really think the Democratic electorate in, say, Georgia is drastically different from the Democratic electorate in, say, Illinois?

Over time, it's likely that it will be Sanders who accumulates most of his delegates in red or purple states (OK, NE, KS, CO, etc.). And Clinton who accumulates more delegates in blue states. So, this "Clinton is relying on red/southern/Dixie/confederate states" meme (and that victories in red state primaries somehow translates to a general election loss) really ought to be put to rest. It's out of touch with reality and demonstrates a failure to grasp demographics.

[pkdu]

1. Well said. Its insulting and demeaning , and by the way , not what Sanders is saying nt

[That Guy 888]

2. "Do you really think the Democratic electorate in, say, Georgia is drastically different..."

Do you really think the Democratic electorate in, say, Georgia is drastically different from the Democratic electorate in, say, Illinois?

I live in TX. I can't tell you how often I've heard some variation on "well it's the south, they won't accept a real liberal, a former Republican who swears s/he will be a good Bluedog is the best you can hope for." Or "you have to be to the right of the rest of the Democratic Party." So I can't tell you how happy I am to hear that that's no longer true!

Unless of course this post is

[Garrett78]

11. I guess I'm not clear on your point.

Rather, I'm not clear on how your post is a response to my post.

[azurnoir]

3. I live in Mn and yes the Dem electorate is different than the Dem electorate in Georgia

Hillary's victories come in states where the Democratic and republican parties are split almost exclusively along racial lines - few white Dem's, in states where the Dem party actually is diverse she tends to lose or not do anywhere as well

[Garrett78]

8. Different, yes. More representative, no.

While Minnesota has been getting more diverse over the years, it is still not representative of the overall Democratic electorate. Now, Georgia isn't perfectly reflective either, but it's certainly more representative. When we're talking about the Democratic electorate, Georgia is more representative of solidly blue states such as IL, PA and MD.

By the way, there are as many (or more) Democrats in Georgia as there are Republicans. Turnout and voter registration are a problem, though, which is why Georgia continues to be solidly red. An article about this: http://www.politifact.com/georgia/statements/2012/sep/10/mike-berlon/which-party-has-more-supporters/

[azurnoir]

30. my point is though it was even no Hillary bubble in the area's that are the most racially diverse

Yes I aware of the turnout and voter registration problems also from what I understand gerrymandering is also a problem, my understanding and I'll admit it may be flawed the parties are divided along racial lines with the Democratic party being most PoC and the Republican being mostly white. In St Paul it is so solidly Blue that 2 Democrats ran against each other for Mayor - no Republican candidates

[Garrett78]

31. I'm not entirely sure what you just said.

But, yes, there are far more PoC in the Democratic Party than in the Republican Party. And Clinton is winning those states with greater diversity, those states that more closely mirror the overall Democratic electorate (unlike Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Minnesota, etc.).

[azurnoir]

34. what I am saying is that in MN Bernie drew the vote from PoC equally with whites

[Garrett78]

38. There are very few PoC in Minnesota.

I don't know what the racial breakdown of support for each candidate was in Minnesota, but it wouldn't tell us much anyway. Because the sample size is too small to be meaningful.

[azurnoir]

40. But the PoC are concentrated in the Twin Cities - no Hillary bubble there either

Bernie took every district evenly

[Garrett78]

52. Again...

I haven't seen the breakdown of how Minnesota's PoC voted in the MN primary, but the sample size would be tiny and not reflective of what to expect in the country as a whole.

[Mnpaul]

59. And the Twin Cities are even more diverse

We have a Somali community and a Hmong community in addition to the rest.

[azurnoir]

65. yes we do I think my block in St Paul is an example

of the 13 houses on my block it goes something like this

2 white families
2 mixed families
1 Native American family
3 Hmong families
4 Black families 1 of which is Somali
1 Hispanic family

[brush]

42. Lot's of African-Americans, Mexican-Americans, Asian-Americans and other POCs . . .

in Minnesota now (who btw, make up a good part of the dem electorate)?

[aspirant]

4. Dixieland

"Oh, I wish I was in Dixie, hurray, hurray in Dixieland I'll make my stand to lie and die in Dixie"

[ConsiderThis_2016]

5. Strom Thurmond

Hillary has the fundi vote, it's why she plays the bible belt. It "Is" what it "Is".

[Garrett78]

6. Do you think it's Thurmond-types voting in the Democratic primaries?

As I tried to make clear, we're not talking about the entire state of South Carolina or Georgia when we're talking about the Democratic primaries in those states. Of course those states are, overall, red states. But even in open primaries, I don't think there are a lot of Republicans voting in Democratic primaries.

To suggest that the Democratic electorate in Georgia is reflective of the overall electorate in Georgia is ridiculous.

[yardwork]

18. i think that a number of posters here don't understand how primaries work.

It's disappointing.

[Garrett78]

27. That does seem to be an issue.

It seems many don't really grasp demographics and their impact, proportional allocation and just plain basic math. For instance, Sanders could win 3 of the 4 states that are voting this weekend and still not win more of the weekend's delegates--when you grasp that, you can begin to understand why Hillary Clinton's Got This.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. There was a thread yesterday that suggested southerners should be treated as 3/5 of a person.

If you send me a private message I will supply you with a link.

[JustAnotherGen]

67. Send it to me!

Thanks!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

71. Done.

[treestar]

7. It is astoundingly stupid and amazingly insulting

Agreed. The heavily AA Democrats of the South have a say too. It's sickening to see people trying to spin them as not counting.

[JaneyVee]

9. They never say it when its Bernie who wins a red state.

[noamnety]

10. I think a lot of it was a reactionary response

to some Clinton talking points claiming that Bernie's stronger than expected showing right off the start was because he was winning "the wrong kind of states."

[Garrett78]

13. There's no wrong kind, but...

...the states Clinton is winning and is likely to continue winning are more diverse (in terms of the Democratic electorate in those states) and more representative of the overall Democratic electorate.

When all is said and done, it'll be Sanders who racked up most of his delegates in less diverse states, in more red and purple states, which makes the Clinton-Dixie meme all the more silly. Yes, thus far, Clinton has racked up most of her delegates in red states, but that's because most of the voting so far has taken place in red states. But the Democratic electorate in those red states are not representative of their state's overall electorate.

[yardwork]

12. Perhaps people could post a list of states that do count.

I'm curious to hear which states are considered worthy of "counting."

We've been told that the "Deep South" doesn't count. Massachusetts doesn't count either, apparently.

[Garrett78]

20. Clinton is winning states that she lost in '08.

States that Obama won in the '08 primary are states that people are calling Dixie/Confederate/Red (nevermind that we're talking about the Democratic electorate and not the overall electorate in those states) and arguing that winning those states somehow translates to losing in November. Or that winning those states somehow translates to losing solidly blue states that have not yet held their primaries.

Clinton beat Obama in '08 in some crucial swing states (FL, OH and PA), yet Obama won those crucial swing states in the general election.

[GreatGazoo]

14. The Clinton campaign is a bandwagon style campaign

Sanders is running a populist campaign. A band wagon campaign looks constantly at race, gender and wide labels. A populist campaign looks at income and issues.

There are essentially two types of advertising: brand and offer. When you see an ad that doesn't talk about price or ask you to buy something, that is generally a brand ad. Something like "It's not just a car, it's a BMW" Compare that to GEICO -- "you can save $X and here is a phone number" -- that is offer.

So in advertising terms, Clinton is still running a brand campaign while Sanders is running offer. Brand ads tend not to embrace transparency. They try to play to the strength of name recognition and ad nauseum repetition. In the era of transparency they are increasingly less effective. Sanders ads score much better than Clinton's in part because they engender more trust by being specific and transparent.

If we must look at demographics, here is more detail:

I’ve seen lots of claims that Sanders is only winning because of white men; among every other demographic, he loses. That simply isn’t true. In Vermont and New Hampshire, he beat Clinton among all women voters. In Oklahoma, as I said, he nearly tied Clinton among women voters. In Nevada, he nearly tied her among Latino voters (though the experts are still debating that one). In Massachusetts, as I said, he got 41% of non-white voters. We don’t have any exit polls for Colorado and Minnesota (at least not on CNN’s website, which is the one I’ve been using), but given the size of his victories there, I would be surprised if Sanders didn’t win or tie with Clinton among non-white voters and perhaps women voters.

IV. The issue of race and demographics in the campaign is fascinating. There’s absolutely no question that Clinton has a commanding lead among African American voters. She’s won that part of the electorate in every single contest thus far.

But here’s where things get interesting. Back in the fall, when the issue of the gender gap between Clinton and Sanders supporters was raised, Matt Bruenig very shrewdly pointed out that the real divide there was as much one of generation as it was one of gender: younger women voters were supporting Sanders, older women voters were supporting Clinton. A lot of the subsequent polling and primary results have confirmed his premonition.

I wonder if we’re not about to see something similar—if not quite as dramatic—with non-white voters. The cross-cutting factor here is not only age—Bruenig has also shown that younger black voters are trending toward Bernie (see the graph at the bottom of this post), and even in South Carolina, Sanders did much better with younger black voters than he did with older black voters—but also region.

http://coreyrobin.com/2016/03/02/super-tuesday-march-theses/

[Arazi]

16. This is an outstanding post!!

[Zorra]

21. Bernie won the Latino vote in Nevada:

William C. Velásquez Institute

Who Won the Nevada Latino Vote?
Latinos Reached a Record Share of Nevada Democratic Caucuses

(Los Angeles, Feb 22) After hearing about disputes between the Sanders and Clinton over the Edison Entry Poll Survey results on the Latino vote in the Feb 20 Primary Caucuses WCVI undertook a review of the publicly disclosed data.

WCVI concludes that the survey results are statistically consistent with the margin of victory of Hillary Clinton on Feb 20. The main dispute among pundits and between campaigns has been the assertion that it is statistically impossible for Hillary Clinton to narrowly lose the Latino vote (45% to 53% with Latinos representing 19% of the voters) and narrowly lose Whites (47% to 49% with Whites representing 59% of the voters) and still win the election by 5.3%.

However WCVI concludes the Clinton margin of victory is adequately explained by the large margin of victory Secretary Clinton won among African American voters (77% to 23% with AA's representing 13% of the voters).

Simply put there is no relevant statistical inconsistency between Edison's Entry Poll results for Latinos, Whites, and Blacks and the overall election results. Based on this fact WCVI concludes that there is no statistical basis to question the Latino vote breakdown between Secretary Clinton and Senator Sanders.

http://myemail.constantcontact.com/Who-Won-the-Nevada-Latino-Vote-.html?soid=1114208817960&aid=TUzlNNKZYHc

Sanders Wins Nevada Latinos, Study Shows

https://berniesanders.com/press-release/sanders-wins-nevada-latinos-study-shows/

[DemocratSinceBirth]

39. The "who won the Latino vote" in Nevada is hotly contested

The "who won the Latino vote" in Nevada is hotly contested and in light of the fact he lost the Latino vote in Texas over 2-1:


http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/01/us/elections/texas-democrat-poll.html


and is losing the Latino vote 57%-28% nationally:


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/24/nevada-aside-donald-trump-and-bernie-sanders-trail-among


it seems the research indicates it's unlikely he did win the Latino vote in Nevada.

See you in the Sunshine State: home to many Latinos.

[okasha]

79. Sanders' share of the Hispanic vote

dropped by about ten percent after the Dolores Huerta incident in Nevada. Univsion picked it up, and it was all over Facebook. You cannot abuse people of color and expect them to vote for you--and like it or not, fair or not, Sanders' campaign is identified with Sanders himself.

This none-too-subtle attempt to identify Southern Black voters by some twisted illogic as "Dixie" or "Confederate" is dog-whistling at its worst.

[Lizzie Poppet]

15. Yes. Yes I do think the Deep South Democratic electorate is different from the rest of the country.

In fact, I've yet to hear a well-supported argument to the contrary. Got one?

[yardwork]

19. I grew up in the Midwest and now live in the South.

I've been a Democrat all my life. My voting patterns didn't change when I moved south.

I'm not remotely a fundy. I'm a pagan lesbian socialist who thinks Hillary has the best chance of winning the election. Care to tell me why my vote is less important here than if I lived in California?

[Lizzie Poppet]

25. Oh, I'm not disputing that there aren't plenty of full-on progressives in the South.

Moreover, I celebrate that..."may your tribe thrive and be fruitful."

But I think it's fair to say that Democrats in the Deep South trend more conservatively than elsewhere. I think voting patterns confirm that.

Genuinely not making that a criticism, either. "More conservative" doesn't mean I'm equating them with Tea Party types or even mainstream Republicans. There's a lot of broad territory between far left (like me) and center-right (like the most conservative of Democrats),and I presume there's room under the tent in the party for all of them.*

I just prefer that my side of the scale win...just like everybody else.

*That's not actually my call to make: I'm not a Democrat, I'm an independent socialist.

[yallerdawg]

33. Win like this "New England liberal"?

Or this one?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. I get your point but the Duke would have won with the current demographics.

Current demographics wouldn't have saved McGovern though.


BTW, George McGovern was a prairie populist and not a New England liberal.

[Robbins]

48. Clinton can't win general election

republicans will rush to vote against her.independents don't like her and she,her husband,and supporters have done everything
possable to demean bernie sanders supporters supporters.

She is enemy of anyone who calls themself socialist.

I live in Missouri and know my vote is useless.like entire south except for maybe florida and Virginia votes for dems is pretty much useless.

[Garrett78]

55. MO isn't a lock.

If Trump is the nominee or if a right winger runs as a 3rd party candidate and splits the vote, Clinton could win MO. As well as North Carolina, Florida, Virginia and possibly other southern states. Not to mention OH, MI, PA, etc.

[Robbins]

66. I am from MO

and very unlikely any dem wins.

very unlikely a right winger runs as 3rd party candidate.eventully they will fall in line behind trump.

[Garrett78]

69. I am, too.

Born and raised in St. Louis. Now live in Oregon. I'm not convinced a 3rd party right winger won't run. While I think it's most likely that MO will remain red, Clinton could possibly win it.

[Robbins]

75. lived most of my life in st louis

now live in kansas city.a lot of people hate clinton.

[Garrett78]

22. Demographics.

Look at the demographics of Georgia. Now, look at the demographics of Illinois, Pennsylvania, Maryland, etc.

Next, look at the demographics of Vermont, Oklahoma, Minnesota, Nebraska, etc.

[Zorra]

26. The demographics of Pennsylvania are far more similar to Minnesota

than they are to Georgia. You may want to at least your facts straight before you go about trying to discourage Bernie supporters from voting in the primaries.

PA

http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/42

MN

http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/27

GA

http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/13

[Garrett78]

29. I'm not discouraging anyone from voting.

You can cherry pick states, but I'm talking about the big picture (IL, MI, OH, PA, NY, MD, CA and other states in aggregate). The point is that where Sanders has been successful (and is more likely to be successful going forward), the demographics don't mirror the diversity found in the overall Democratic electorate.

New England states, Iowa, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Nebraska et al. are, for the most part, relatively small states (with fewer delegates) that are lacking in diversity.

My commentary isn't a reflection of what I want to have happen, nor is it in any way a suggestion that people shouldn't vote (as if my posts could influence people in that way). I just have an issue with fallacious reasoning and baseless memes. It doesn't do any good to have one's head stuck in fantasy land.

[Zorra]

43. The demographics of Ohio, California, Oregon, Washington, Wisconsin, Idaho, Montana,

Maine, Kansas, Nebraska, South and North Dakota, New Mexico, Arizona, Wyoming, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Rhode Island, West Virginia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Kentucky are also not at all similar to Georgia.

Most of these states are demographically more similar to Minnesota, with the exception that some have significantly higher populations of Asian, Latino, and Native descendants than does Minnesota.

You seem to be missing a big part of the big picture.

[Garrett78]

49. "...with the exception that..."

With the exception that some are far more diverse. Exactly. That's the point. California's Democratic electorate is very diverse. And the Democratic electorate in both OH and PA is significantly more diverse than the Democratic electorate in Vermont, New Hampshire, Minnesota, etc.

As for many of the states you mentioned, I'm not disagreeing. I've more than once mentioned that Sanders has an advantage in NE, KS, ME, the Dakotas, Wyoming, Utah, etc., etc., etc. It's Sanders and not Clinton who is going to accumulate most of his delegates in red states, which is what makes the Clinton-Dixie meme especially silly.

But in the more populous blue and purple states where there are more delegates, the demographics clearly favor Clinton. That's undeniable.

[Zorra]

68. It is a mistake to assume that all minorities have the same voting interests,

and the implication is insulting.

Diverse does not automatically translate into "votes for for Clinton".

Far from it.

[Garrett78]

81. Nationwide polling shows...

...that Clinton has the support of an overwhelmingly high percentage of African American voters. So, I'm not making any assumptions or throwing any insults.

[Zorra]

87. "Diversity" in this case does not mean "only two", although that is what the Clinton

campaign would like us to believe. The combined Asian, Hispanic, and Native American population of California is over 55%. All of our votes count, (except when corrupt individuals and groups count them http://myemail.constantcontact.com/Who-Won-the-Nevada-Latino-Vote-.html?soid=1114208817960&aid=TUzlNNKZYHc).

diversity
noun di·ver·si·ty də-ˈvər-sə-tē, dī-
Popularity: Top 1% of lookups
Simple Definition of diversity

: the quality or state of having many different forms, types, ideas, etc.

: the state of having people who are different races or who have different cultures in a group or organization

Full Definition of diversity

plural di·ver·si·ties

1
: the condition of having or being composed of differing elements : variety; especially : the inclusion of different types of people (as people of different races or cultures) in a group or organization <programs intended to promote diversity in schools>

2
: an instance of being composed of differing elements or qualities : an instance of being diverse <a diversity of
opinion>

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/diversity

We should all be equal members of one human family.

Who Won the Nevada Latino Vote?
Latinos Reached a Record Share of Nevada Democratic Caucuses

(Los Angeles, Feb 22) After hearing about disputes between the Sanders and Clinton over the Edison Entry Poll Survey results on the Latino vote in the Feb 20 Primary Caucuses WCVI undertook a review of the publicly disclosed data.

WCVI concludes that the survey results are statistically consistent with the margin of victory of Hillary Clinton on Feb 20. The main dispute among pundits and between campaigns has been the assertion that it is statistically impossible for Hillary Clinton to narrowly lose the Latino vote (45% to 53% with Latinos representing 19% of the voters) and narrowly lose Whites (47% to 49% with Whites representing 59% of the voters) and still win the election by 5.3%.

However WCVI concludes the Clinton margin of victory is adequately explained by the large margin of victory Secretary Clinton won among African American voters (77% to 23% with AA's representing 13% of the voters).

Simply put there is no relevant statistical inconsistency between Edison's Entry Poll results for Latinos, Whites, and Blacks and the overall election results. Based on this fact WCVI concludes that there is no statistical basis to question the Latino vote breakdown between Secretary Clinton and Senator Sanders.

http://myemail.constantcontact.com/Who-Won-the-Nevada-Latino-Vote-.html?soid=1114208817960&aid=TUzlNNKZYHc

[brush]

44. Do you really mean a larger percentage are African-American?

Is that the difference you're talking about because that's certainly what it sounds like/

[Lizzie Poppet]

47. That's not the difference I'm talking about, no.

That's a demographic difference between Southern states (in general) and some other states, but certainly not all. Unless I'm mistaken, I'd expect the South to be more conservative among all demographic groups, even when only considering Democrats.

[brush]

53. I don't get what do you mean by "conservative"?

If matters not in the primary if voters in the southern states that voted for Clinton are "conservative", they voted for Clinton.

And IMO to be a dem in a southern state is decidedly non-conservative relative to the rest of that state's voters.

Conservative or liberal doesn't register on the ballot that gets someone closer to the nomination.

Only the delegates count matters.

[Lizzie Poppet]

80. I meant relatively so in comparison to the Democratic Party average.

That is to say, the Democratic Party encompasses a range of political orientations in terms of "left-to-right." It skews to the left (although not nearly enough for me at present) in comparison to the entire US population, but there are certainly Democrats that are more conservative than others. That the South has a higher percentage of these Democrats seems pretty obvious to me.

[brush]

88. It's a non-issue though as long as they vote in the dem primary . . .

and produce delegates for one or the other candidate.

[Gwhittey]

17. Former NY

living in SC. 1000000% yes there is a difference down here than there is being in NY when it comes to Dem. Why do you think Hillary suddenly became a NY person to further her grab for power. Why run in a state you have 0 interest in up till the time it came to get power. Hell look at GOP people from NY that I could stand and liked. Down here many GOP people I don't like because I few a few around me and they assume I like white so think I am racist like them and start discussing their bullshit.
If you travel into NC and head to Charlotte area you see difference between the two African American com-unties because the area around Charlotte is made up of Northern Urban people that moved down here in 1990s when area was booming. Then travel in SC and the community changes to more of baptist African American community. And as my idiot next door neighbor once said "I like SC blacks because unlike those Northern ones(meaning ones that moved into Charlotte) they are not all uppity." And he is right about that but for wrong reasons. Because of assholes like him African Americans down here have to act more subdued because they have to deal with 100x more overt racism than African Americans up North general speaking. This even effects a Democrat down here. You do not admit you are a Liberal at all because it is a lot different down in South to be one than it was North. Over time you start to developed a automatic response and that can effect your views.

[Garrett78]

23. It's about demographics.

We all know (or should know) there's a great deal of racism (and white privilege denial) in the Deep South (and, frankly, everywhere else in the US). But the point is, demographically-speaking, those Deep South states have a Democratic electorate that is more representative of the overall Democratic electorate than do states such as Minnesota, Vermont, Nebraska, Oklahoma, etc.

I'm not advocating for one candidate over another. I'm simply pointing out realities, as it does no good to engage in fallacious reasoning.

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. Alas you just told me why the DNC

will split.

If you want a more both SOCIALLY AND ECONOMICALLY conservative party, you are correct.

Where do you think the voters you despise are going to go? Politics and physics abhors a vacuum.

Look at what is happening with the GOP, the same forces are at play with the DNC, just not as much in the surface. You truly believe that people in the west will forever be happy with conservative minquenquast presidential candidates that are that much more conservative, both economically and socially than they are? Why the south is more representative than the west? We have about the same population size. The same goes for the other three two regions you seem to despise as well.

[Garrett78]

61. Who is it that I "despise?"

I don't know what the hell you're talking about. I'm making the simple point that Clinton is an overwhelming favorite in states with greater diversity, which are the states with more delegates/people. In the end it'll be Sanders who accumulates a majority of his delegates in smaller states that don't reflect the demographics of the overall Democratic electorate, which is why the Clinton-Dixie meme is especially silly.

[nadinbrzezinski]

62. Sorry, she has not run in states that are far more diverse than the soth

we have yet to vote.

As I said, enjoy, the forces that are splitting the GOP are also at play with the DNC.

Popcorn anyone?

[Garrett78]

73. The south is pretty damn diverse in terms of the Democratic electorate.

So, I'm not sure what you mean by "far more diverse than the south." The less diversity a state has the more likely Sanders is to win it.

[okasha]

82. Texas is as diverse as it gets--actually minority-majority.

Wipe-out.

[Dem2]

24. Uggh, let's point out the elephant in the room.

Mississippi is 37% black.

Hew Hampshire is 2% black.

Anybody attacking Hillary for winning the southern states is, intentionally or not, simply criticizing blacks for voting for Hillary. And that is unfortunate.

[yardwork]

32. It's been quite blatant, actually.

Blacks have been told here on DU that they are uninformed or even have Stockholm Syndrome for refusing to see the light. They have been told here that supporting Hillary means that they suffer from a master-slave mentality.

Those posts were alerted on and allowed to stand. It's pretty fucked up. IMHO.

It's also really lousy politics. If the people posting these are actually supporters of Bernie Sanders and not right wing trolls, they ought to know that their tactics are backfiring and hurting their candidate.

[sufrommich]

37. There's nothing unintentional about it.nt

[BlueMTexpat]

50. I won't use the word

that describes exactly what it is or I'll get a hide.

Perhaps I still will, even for hinting at it.

[Gwhittey]

58. Sigh more

+

[DemocratSinceBirth]

84. I have a friend in NC whose daughter is black bought a race car team...

While she didn't experience overt racism it didn't go well...

[nadinbrzezinski]

60. You know the racist baiting has been done to posters HERE

like myself, I am latina, but that has been denied, and not by Bernie supporters

So when I see that I just... well, given I understand how NONE can speak for a whole minority... and yes communities have differences from region to region of the country...

So at this point this is a laughable attempt to further divide the party, Hey, keep it up, you are doing a fine job. At this point I am just going to enjoy the end of one national party, perhaps two.

[Gwhittey]

70. Further on this

So I can only criticizing white people on voting? WTF kinda racist crap is that. I don't see African American voters voting because they are a sub race of whites or even of my American Indian heritage. I see them as a group of people and they don't vote same why because their skin is black they vote based on other info that is based on numbers. Talking about a group of African American voters in South is same as talking about a group of college age people in south. Stop trying to play race card on group of people that are as a group the most progressive as they come. Reason numbers are so skewed is basically boils down to one thing. Access to the Internet. Which African Americans have a lot less access to then white groups(do to economic issues not color of skin), except in college age African Americans and Sanders is very heavily winning in that area.

[Skid Rogue]

76. sigh

By far and away the most diverse Democratic voting block down South is the AA community. It's a group that is comprised of many different economic, educational and religious backgrounds. The kids who are going to the universities, with their dreads and natural hair, who are atheists and agnostic, and who stay plugged into social media 24/7 are also, for the most part, voting for Hillary.

[Adrahil]

77. Yup. Bernie has not yet won a state with more 10% black population. NT

[Lizzie Poppet]

83. My criticism is for liberal, progressive voters who vote for the less-progressive candidate.

Conservative blacks (or Latinos or Asians or Natives or whites...it's equally applicable all around), plenty of whom are Democratic voters, certainly shouldn't be criticized for voting for the more-conservative candidate. Their vote is in line with their political beliefs.

It's more complicated for liberal Democratic primary voters. While there is no issue I can think of on which Hillary would take the liberal position and Bernie would not, there certainly is a very long list for which the opposite cannot be said. They may have more issues on which they agree than not, but Bernie's position isn't likely to ever veer from the left-hand path. Hillary's? Pick from a long-ass list of examples...

So a liberal voter has to decide if the issues on which the candidates disagree are unimportant enough to not care if Hillary has a conservative, pro-Wall-Street position on them. To me, the notion that any progressive would number economic injustice, a corrupted political process, fracking, TPP, etc. among those issues upon which they excuse a conservative policy is completely bizarre to me. I can see also valuing other issues just as highly...but Bernie doesn't differ from Hillary on those issues. At least on the basis of likely performance on the issues, a liberal not voting for Bernie makes no sense.

So yeah, I'll criticize any liberal who picks Hillary over Bernie in the primary. I see no reason to make an exception based on race (or gender, etc...).

[Dem2]

86. Priorities vary

?uuid=mnSupsSpEeW5MzHJMCE5Kg

It is nice that more Democrats consider themselves liberal now.



Primary exit polls show an even higher percent call themselves liberal (>50%.)

[Number23]

91. I love that you think there's a chance it may be unintentional.

[Orsino]

28. She will have won a lot of states, all over...

...but nothing can excuse her of the crime of also doing great here in the south.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

41. The research suggests the more homogeneous the state the better Senator Sanders does.

That is an empirical observation and not a normative one and it will manifest itself throughout the entire primary campaign.

[brush]

45. Yep! And if you're looking for homogeneity, you won't find that in the dem electorate . . .

in most states.

If that's what these people are relying on for delegates outside the south, they've got some surprises coming.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

56. These attacks are silly at best and willfully ignorant at worst.

Yep! And if you're looking for homogeneity, you won't find that in the dem electorate . . .
in most states.

All the delegate rich states at the party and general election level are all heterogeneous with some being more heterogeneous than others, including the five most delegate rich states.





Again, African Americans provided 26% of Barack Obama's vote in 2012 despite being only 12.5% of the population. And the last Democratic president to win a majority or plurality of the white vote was Lyndon Johnson in 1964.

I haven't studied the effect of the African American vote on other offices but I suspect it is beyond substantial.

Without African American votes our party would be lost.

All this aberrant nonsense about African Americans being enthralled with Hillary Clinton is not fundamentally different than Republicans arguing African Americans are living on a "Democratic plantation" because they so loyally give them their votes.

Folks are playing with fire...

[nadinbrzezinski]

46. I will not use the word that bothers you

but the US has, like Mexico, distinct cultural and political regions, This is not a meme, this is reality. Southern voters tend to be MORE CONSERVATIVE, especially socially, but also economically, It truly baffles me, given they have been victimized by globalization, but they truly believe in trickle down Triple so in the bible belt. Whether you are of Kansas, or the south, churches have an incredible effect on how people vote. This goes for both parties, m'kay, both white and minority voters, before you raise that specter. It is just the way it is.

The North East tends to be socially and economically liberal, The West (and that is divided, so the north west, to be more specific, and the line is about San Francisco) tends to be a lot more socially liberal on the coast lines as well as economically liberally. These are the majority of voters, to the frustration of inland voters, who are far more conservative and you know what, it actually has to do with the civil war and who settled where after it. The SOUTHWEST. tends to be a tad more socially conservative but economically liberal, though the conservatism is nowhere close to the South or the bible belt. It is more pragmatic. The rust belt tends to be far more down to the earth, whatever works, and have have gotten it in the chin.

There are enough differences between regions that they could be different countries.

I actually concluded that when my dad had surgery at the Cleveland Clinic and I staid there for a full month. We might as well be in different countries.

And by the way, that word you object to is used by people in that region, some as a form of derision ,some as a form of pride,. In case you wonder, the civil war in some ways never ended. Historically, we are not alone, the cracks brought by a civil war can stay afloat for hundreds of years. This I do not expect provincial people to know,

By the way, historically the primary process does not produce a candidate that represents the whole country, and the left you seem to hate is reasserting itself this year. We cannot have one conservative party and one crazy conservative party. Like physics, politics abhors a vacuum. So that left is a tad angry, even if that left is hardly organized.

Look on the bright side. you might end up with a very conservative democratic party... party realignments are nasty. And if during this one the RNC collapses, well guess what skippy. we will have a party rise from the ashes. Yup GOPers are under the fantasy they can save themselves from the forces at play. but similar forces are at play in the DNC. So myself, just getting another bowl of popcorn... it is rather entertaining.

I just smile, I have been predicting this for over a decade. So right now it is what of the many scenarios I have been mulling in my head will happen A couple are even more painful than others And if the business cycle is indeed reaching it's end (they are accelerating), it could be interesting Buckle in... this roller coaster left the station and it is just climbing up for it's first drop.

[Garrett78]

51. Regional differences exist, yes.

But, just as an example, Democrats of Atlanta are probably not drastically different in political ideology than Democrats in Chicago.

It's actually Sanders and not Clinton who is most likely to accumulate a majority of his delegates from red states with fewer delegates and less diversity. This is why the Clinton-Dixie meme is especially absurd.

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. The party will split

myself keeping an eye on how our perennial candidate does this year, Nope neither of the two major parties.

By the way, do enjoy your conservative party. And yes politically and economically people have different views but Atlanta is a bad example, given the number of transplants from the NORTH and MIDWEST.

[Garrett78]

63. I'm a Green who will vote for Stein again this year.

You're misunderstanding my point and misrepresenting my politics. As I've explained in other responses to you.

[nadinbrzezinski]

64. Ok whatever

have a good day

Trashing your thread, I tried to have a conversation but you know what? I hate race baiting. There, I named it.

[Garrett78]

72. Race baiting?

I seriously don't understand what you're talking about. Mathematical and demographic realities are just that, realities. Fallacious reasoning and denying reality doesn't do any good.

[nadinbrzezinski]

74. Well given I have personally enjoyed it here

your mileage will vary

[HassleCat]

78. Clinton supporters raised the issue.

Although not in the same way. They continually remind us that certain states are heavy with Democratic voters who are black, and that Clinton enjoys solid support from that demographic. That's very true, but it came to be that way because of our history a number of factors that produced racial politics in many southern states. It's OK to say Clinton relies on support from black voters, but not OK to describe where those voters live?

You do have a point about leaping to unwarranted conclusions about red states and what that means in the general election. Similar predictions were made when Obama was running, and they were incorrect then. I suspect Clinton will not suffer much damage by placing emphasis on black support. However, comma, this is getting into the area of racial politics, and she has to be very careful about how she does that.

[Bread and Circus]

85. Actually I think the Dixieland reference is very appropriate.

[Garrett78]

89. Thanks for your in-depth explanation as to why.

These are Democratic primaries we're talking about. With a high percentage of PoC. We're not talking about rural, white Alabama Republicans.

[Bread and Circus]

92. You win by the sword, you die by the sword.

[Garrett78]

93. Mmmkay.

I'm sure that was relevant to my OP.

[Bread and Circus]

96. Absolutely. Isn't Hillary basically winning the "conservative Dem" vote? AKA the Dixieland vote?

Am I missing something?

[Garrett78]

97. I guess IL, MI, OH, PA, MD, NY, NJ, CA and other states...

...will help answer that. Anyway, you obviously aren't willing to actually counter what I wrote in my OP, so peace out.

[Skid Rogue]

90. Honestly...

I never use the term "Dixie," because it harkens back to the Civil War, like the confederate flag. I'm a southerner, but my country, The United States, won that war. No, I don't "wish I was in Dixie." Most Democrats down here cringe at the very sound of it.

[Vote2016]

94. Do you prefer a term other than Dixie to describe the Deep South states from Virginia to Texas? It

appears to be a culturally distinct region of the country where they have a perception of Hillary that is more favorable than the rest of the country feels about her.

What term do you like for those states?

[Garrett78]

95. Did you even read my OP?

We're talking about Democratic primaries, not the overall population of Mississippi or Georgia or South Carolina. We're talking about states with a Democratic electorate more in line with the delegate-heavy blue states that Clinton is fully expected to win than are the states Sanders is winning.

Dixie and confederate connote the likes of Strom Thurmond, but that's not who's voting in the Democratic primaries.