Home country: USA
Member since: Wed Aug 28, 2013, 11:14 PM
Number of posts: 520
Home country: USA
Member since: Wed Aug 28, 2013, 11:14 PM
Number of posts: 520
I\'m a Democrat.
All numbers are among registered voters:
Hillary Clinton's favorability is 44% as opposed to 49% unfavorable, only 1% of voters and 0% of Democrats answered that they have never heard of her. She leads Jeb Bush 51-46, Donald Trump 57-38, and Scott Walker 54-43 in general election matchups. Her strongest groups in the Democratic primary are women (67%), seniors, (67%), and non-whites (62%).
Bernie Sanders favorability is 24% as opposed to 23% unfavorable, but 38% of voters and 42% of Democrats answered that they have never heard of him. He leads Jeb Bush 48-47, Donald Trump 59-38, and Scott Walker 48-42 in general election matchups. His strongest groups in the Democratic primary are Democratic-leaning independents (31%), liberals (28%), and whites (28%).
As a Sanders supporter, I think this poll is similar to past polls for the Democratic primaries, but is way more favorable when it comes to the general election. I think enough people are getting to know Bernie enough to say they would prefer him to a Republican because they prefer Democrats in general.
I want to be careful about this next point, so I'm just going to start by laying out the numbers. 47% of non-whites have never heard of Bernie, and 48% of women, and these are two of Hillary's strongest groups in the primary. If Bernie is going to win the nomination he can't do it with those two groups voting for Hillary by a 6-1 margin, and he can't close the gap if people don't know who he is. This also makes it clear that he needs to make his case to women and minorities and not just expect them to vote for him. Lots of people who know who he is still support Hillary instead, and he's going to have to persuade some of those people if he's going to win.
To Hillary supporters: your candidate is in very good shape. You have every right to be happy about that.
Posted by DemocraticWing | Sun Jul 26, 2015, 12:20 PM (17 replies)
Equality Act Endorsed By Clinton, Sanders, O'Malley. Cosponsored by 195 Democrats in House & Senate.
Yet no Republican members of Congress or Presidential candidate have come out in support of the Equality Act so far. Any question as to which party that LGBTQ people should be voting for? The next time you run into a Log Cabin Republican, make them remember who had our backs when it counted!
Posted by DemocraticWing | Thu Jul 23, 2015, 04:08 PM (1 replies)
I would like to point out that before anybody in the party wonders why Black Lives Matter sees fit to protest Democratic candidates, I will remind you that our party is not exactly purged of racism. And I'm not even talking about having a "blind spot" on racism, I'm talking about elected Democratic officials in Kentucky having said outright racist things about how they "can't win with a black guy leading the ticket" and a few who still say the n-word. There's a reason Hillary Clinton won Kentucky by 41 points in the 2008 primary, and it's not just because of overwhelming affection for the Clintons. They didn't like her opponent. Of course these types aren't just racist: the Rowan County Clerk that's been in the news for refusing to perform same-sex marriages is an elected Democrat.
I bring this up because we seem to be missing a point about how not directly addressing racial justice issues is a problem for our candidates. While supporters might trust any of our candidates to have personal convictions on equality that we agree with, not putting it front and center can be seen as a deliberate attempt to pacify the socially conservative/economically populist white Democrats. They will tolerate national politicians moving left on social issues only if they keep mostly quiet about it, so back home they can keep the message of economic populism while playing up how different they are on everything else. A Kentucky Democrat is likely to put "Pro-Gun, Pro-Marriage, Pro-Life" in their TV ads, and they definitely support the Law and Order/War on Drugs politics that serves to perpetuate systemic racism.
These people are relics of the past, and Obama proved in 2008 and 2012 that Democrats can win by uniting white liberals with minorities. We don't really need the racists anymore, and our party shouldn't pander to them either explicitly or covertly. Doing so indicates that we take minority votes for granted, and will take actions only to pick up racist whites even while loyal minority voters are in crisis. Black Lives Matters is worried that our candidates are taking them for granted again, and the rhetoric used by some Sanders supporters on Twitter (and on DU) has certainly played into that thought. We can't afford to take black votes for granted anymore, it's time to be the full-throated advocates for minorities that we all know deep down that we should be.
And if the racist, social conservative dinosaurs remaining in the party decide to leave, we'll just move on without them. It's just the right thing to do.
Posted by DemocraticWing | Thu Jul 23, 2015, 12:36 AM (11 replies)
Democrats in Congress plan to introduce broad legislation this week to protect LGBT people from discrimination — including in housing, workplaces, schools, and public accommodations. In effect, the Equality Act would extend the same raft of rights to LGBT Americans that are currently afforded to other protected groups, including people of color, under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Let's get this done! It's well past time for equality for all, regardless of bigot's cries of "religious liberty" as they try to keep us in the past.
Posted by DemocraticWing | Tue Jul 21, 2015, 10:09 AM (2 replies)
I was supportive of trans activist Jennicet Gutierrez's interruption of President Obama last month, because I think it's important to speak truth to power when power needs to hear it. In that case, detention and abuse of trans immigrants is a major problem for which President Obama bears responsibility for that issue. ICE made some reforms in response to the protests, but many LGBTQ activists have not found them to be far enough. Jennicet's protest was criticized on this board and throughout the mainstream media as a rude attack on an "ally" of the community, or at the very least a poorly used tactic. I disagree with that because the LGBTQ community has a long history of direct action when it is needed, and because the Obama administration's actions regarding the detention of trans immigrants are morally wrong and can no longer be ignored. That does not take away from his other accomplishments, but it is a truth that must be accepted.
This brings me to Black Lives Matter. I support Bernie Sanders for President, but I also support the Black Lives Matter protest of his and Martin O'Malley's appearance at Netroots Nation. My first impression was a bit of frustration that they attacked the candidate that I feel is most committed to social justice in this Presidential election, but I remembered the protests of President Obama over the years and realized perhaps even a strong advocate can have weak spots that need to be improved. And that's definitely what has unfolded, everybody from his harshest critics to Sen. Sanders himself have seem to acknowledge that he needs to take a more vocal and active role in addressing racial inequality. He perhaps even needs to do more. I would not tell people of color who to vote for or what to do, but I certainly hope they listen to his message, because I know he agrees with them on every major demand. His problem is one of not prioritizing it enough, and I hope there is improvement.
What bothers me however is the difference between the reactions towards these two protests. Many of those who castigated Jennicet have shown more willingness to support the Black Lives Matters protests of Bernie Sanders. Why exactly is that? The arguments that it is offensive to tell black people who they can and cannot protests or demand more of should apply to Jennicet's protest as well. The President told a trans woman of color to sit down and be quiet, got angry her for deigning to protest him after eating his food, and then had her removed without any discussion of the issue she came to raise. This was, at best, a similarly disrespectful response that the candidates at Netroots Nation had to Black Lives Matter.
I'm going to be somewhat blunt: many of the strongest critics of Senator Sanders on this board are passionate defenders of President Obama and Hillary Clinton. That is great, I'm glad you are so in favor of two of our best Democratic politicians. But many of you did not have any love for Jennicet protesting somebody on their side, seeing it as rude or attacking the wrong enemy. Even when a queer person like myself pointed out that Jennicet had a good reason to protest, it was still dismissed with a list of President Obama's accomplishments on LGBT issues. This is exactly the same as what some Sen. Sanders supporters (who I think are probably doing Bernie a disservice, considering the response) have done after the Black Lives Matters protests.
It should be acceptable for a black person to protest Bernie Sanders despite his commitment to racial justice. It should be acceptable for a queer person to protest Barack Obama despite his commitment to LGBTQ equality. I don't understand why somebody thinks one of those is acceptable and not the other.
Posted by DemocraticWing | Tue Jul 21, 2015, 09:41 AM (2 replies)
I would not like to have this post seen as a pro-Bernie post. I support him, but there will be criticism of him in this post, as there will be of the rest of our Presidential candidates. This is about something more important than who is the Democratic nominee for President in 2016.
Our country is in crisis. The crisis is not one problem that can be slain like a dragon, it is deep, complex, and has many different manifestations. Young people--my generation--are pushing for change in a way not seen since the 1960s. Direct actions, protests, even the occasional riot: this is the screaming of those pushed to the brink, left unheard and ignored by both friends and foes. The LGBTQ rights movement scored a major victory last month, but we have so much left to do; every day a queer person is fired for being themselves, every week a queer child is made homeless, every month a trans person is murdered. Feminism is having a brilliant moment in the spotlight, but not without backlash, as misogyny has reared its head in the form of online harassment and the so-called Men's Rights Movement. Poverty and income inequality are front and center in our political debates today, but Occupy has been suppressed and it's hard to tell who will work for the 99% and who just wants our votes. Hispanics have organized to show the country that all of them, legal or not, are Americans and deserve to be treated with respect; yet they still face racism, the terror of deportation, and inflammatory rhetoric from the leaders of the conservative movement.
And perhaps most importantly, although I hesitate to elevate one social movement over another, young black people in America are organizing to fight racism and racial injustice. A young black man is more likely to go to jail than to college. Too many black children are living in poverty and attending crumbling schools. The police will shoot a black person, will beat a black person, will imprison a black person regardless of their guilt. We talk about the failures of the criminal justice system, but even reforming that won't help the people killed by the cops in the middle of the street before they ever appear in court. The demands of Black Lives Matter are simple: stop letting the police kill black people without punishment, stop making the police a paramilitary force set to terrorize the streets, stop looking for new ways to imprison black people, and start investing in education and jobs instead of police and prisons. Those are important, and must be supported wholeheartedly by anybody claiming the labels liberal or progressive. Black lives matter. There's no need to qualify that, I don't think anybody seriously believes that by saying black lives matter a person doesn't believe other lives are important. Of course the lives of all people matter, but our colorblindness blinds us in ways we don't even know, and we can generalize all we want but it doesn't stop or even alert us to the killing of black people.
Black lives matter.
The failures of white progressives on this matter are, at this point, a matter of historical record. There are decades of evidence that can be used against us. We are guilty. The justice and due process denied to so many black people in our country is still upheld by black men and women who believe in those ideals, and they do it better than us. While our systems oppress them, while Darren Wilson walks free for murder but young black men spend their prime in jail for having a little weed, while we tell them to wait just a little longer because more money in the pocket will make them forget racism, after all this, black people are still only demanding that our structures treat them fair and equally and that we listen to their concerns. Social justice is not a distraction, it is not a subcategory of economic justice, and it is not something we can take lightly. We must all fight for it. The oppressed must fight for it out of necessity, but everybody else must fight for it to clear our names. Our guilt and our complicity in a racist system is damning and we all know it, and the only way to pay for our sins is to work to undo the damage we have done.
I have good news for white progressives however. Our fight for economic justice will continue, and it will be stronger than ever before. Because when we realize that economic justice and social justice go hand in hand, side by side, we will change the world. All the forces of activism and change can work for all kinds of justice for all people, united in solidarity, as we fight those who would divide us and have us fight amongst ourselves. Because it is important for minority communities that there are good paying jobs and good educational opportunities, but it is vitally important they we include the fights for social justice as just as important. It is wrong for racism to kill young black people in the street, it is wrong for racism to throw more black people in jail. It is also wrong for the 1% to own more than the rest of America, and wrong for poverty to persist while the rich live in opulence. These two struggles are not opposed, they are connected, and they must be fought for with equally persistent force and vigor.
Bernie Sanders is a candidate which I believe stands in support of what Black Lives Matter demands be done. He has consistently reiterated his opposition to mass incarceration, militarization of police, police brutality, the inequalities found in the criminal justice system, and systemic racism. Yet Black Lives Matter, and perhaps most of the black community, worry that he believes these issues to be less important than his themes about economic justice. It is time for Bernie to address this completely and comprehensively: he should meet with activists and lay out his agenda for combating racism and the problems facing the black community. It will take more than a few lines in a speech, he must make the whole speech, and tell the whole story. Bernie Sanders was a SNCC organizer in the 1960s, I don't believe he is unfamiliar with the passion and need for action that accompanies a social justice movement. He must not rest on his laurels, he (and those of us who support him) must prove that he cares and will actually do something about racial injustice.
I think Hillary Clinton must have her feet held to the fire if she is going to be the standard-bearer for liberals and progressives in 2016. I support another candidate, but if Hillary is our nominee, we must get her elected President. This does not mean we cannot exempt her from criticism either as a candidate or as President. She has evolved on many issues, and indeed her messaging in this campaign is among the most progressive she has ever sounded. But a history of triangulation and centrism worries many people on the left, on issues relating to both social and economic justice. It is disingenuous to frame the Hillary vs. Bernie fight as one of social vs. economic justice priorities, because I don't think it can really be said that Hillary has a more solid ground on social justice issues than Bernie. Black Lives Matter will protest her too: they worry that Democrats in general are taking them for granted, not just the two candidates that they managed to confront yesterday.
Martin O'Malley will have to answer tough questions in this campaign about his role in creating the situation in Baltimore that led to the death of Freddie Gray, and there are legitimate concerns that he has some centrist economic positions. To make any progress in this campaign, he must appeal to liberals and activists, but he has not won over many yet. His supporters on this board have done a good job of portraying a positive image of him, but they are small in number and his polling numbers are not strong. The situation is even worse for Lincoln Chafee, who is essentially an unknown candidate. If Chafee is neutral, Jim Webb has probably descended into a bad territory; there is no place for a Confederate sympathizer as the Democratic nominee in 2016.
Our candidates are not perfect, and they will never be perfect as either a candidate or President. I was a strong Obama supporter in 2008, and was proud to vote for his re-election in 2012: but there have been times when I disagreed with him, and I've been more than willing to say so. This post is one time when I will say that despite Bernie Sanders being my preferred candidate in 2016, I think he has done a poor job of reflecting the importance of social justice issues. If he does not do better, his campaign will fail: you can't win the Democratic nomination without any support from minorities. I also think the rest of the candidates have struggled to do this, and some of them have major faults on economic issues. Whichever one is the nominee, I will support them, donate to them, and vote for them in the General Election. But I will never hesitate to voice concern when they do not live up to the standards we expect them to, and I'm sure they will fall short. This also does not mean I will support them less: nobody is perfect, and a politician that is flawed can still be a great leader who commands respect.
We must all be united in our struggles against social and economic injustices. As we come to a decision on our standard-bearer in 2016 over the next year, let us remember the importance of all issues and how vital it is that we work together.
Posted by DemocraticWing | Sun Jul 19, 2015, 11:05 AM (4 replies)
Other relevant facts to consider:
Clinton lead 62-14 in May, Sanders has cut the lead by 13 points since then.
Clinton trails Walker by 4 in North Carolina, Sanders trails by 8. Webb, O'Malley, and Chafee aren't even close. Walker is the GOP's strongest candidate, but they seem enamored by losers like Trump. If the Republicans nominate Trump, I don't think electability would be much of a concern for any of the 5 declared Democratic candidates.
41% of Democrats are "Not sure" if they have a favorable opinion of Bernie, and 27% don't know who they vote for between Walker and Sanders. These numbers suggest Bernie still has a lower name recognition: he needs more Democrats to know who he is if he's going to poll better in General Election match-ups; it remains to be seen if higher name recognition will close the gap in the primary. Iowa and New Hampshire suggests that it will.
A plurality of African American Democrats answered "Not Sure" when asked their opinion of Sanders, as did a plurality of Democrats classified as Others. Clinton has much stronger leads with groups where pluralities don't have an opinion on Sanders yet (60 points with African Americans, 42 points with Others, 49 with Women). Sanders is strongest with men (Clinton leads by 17), Whites (Clinton leads with 21), Voters aged 18-45 (Clinton leads by 24), and voters who are Very Liberal (Clinton leads by 30).
My takeaway as a Sanders supporter is that Bernie has a long way to go, but I'm happy to see he's up across the board. He continues to have less name recognition than Hillary, and not as many people have made their mind up about him. Hopefully his campaign and the debates will change that.
Posted by DemocraticWing | Wed Jul 8, 2015, 04:38 PM (48 replies)
I think polygamy is an issue that is totally unrelated to same-sex marriage. I'm a gay man, and that's an innate trait I was born with. I have seen no evidence that polygamists are a class of people defined by their genetics.
Expanding marriage to more than two people is not only something that has been tried before within our cultural history, but it had a pretty negative series of results. It opens up different questions, and expanding the definition of two-person partnerships to no longer discriminate against gay people is very, very different than expanding the definition of marriage to mean more than two people. It has different effects, the arguments both for and against come from different places, and in general the two just can't be equated.
I'm fine with polygamists making their argument both here and elsewhere, but random people (most of whom are straight) have to consider the meaning of the words they use when they say that polygamy should be legal now that same-sex marriage is. That is tying the two together in a way that plays right into the arguments the right used against LGBTQ people for the last decade. It's intellectually dubious (as were the arguments when made in opposition to marriage equality) and comes from a place of insensitivity, if not outright bigotry.
Posted by DemocraticWing | Sun Jul 5, 2015, 03:17 PM (41 replies)
LGBT Activists Slam Martin O’Malley for Backing Limited LGBT Protections
Read more at: http://queernationny.org/post/122873197471/media-release-for-immediate-release-june-30-2015
Posted by DemocraticWing | Sat Jul 4, 2015, 12:52 AM (11 replies)
Today I'm proud to be an American. I'm proud that, for the first time in my life, I feel like my government recognizes me as an equal citizen with the same rights as heterosexuals. I'm so thankful for every person who fought this fight, and really can't say how proud I am of the resilience and tenacity that my fellow LGBT people have shown throughout this whole fight. WE F'ING WON!!!
With all that said, many areas and people are far behind the times. They may take out their homophobia by discriminating against us in terms of employment, housing, or public accommodations. I could get married today, but I could also get kicked out the restaurant where I go to lunch, fired from my job this afternoon, and evicted from my apartment tonight. All because I'm gay. We need a comprehensive equality bill, giving all civil rights and protects to all members of the LGBT community, even more comprehensive than ENDA. No loopholes, no conscience clauses, or any other way to allow bigots to do any more harm.
Today is a day for celebrations though. I am so happy that this morning I hugged my boyfriend and cried. Happy Pride everybody, we have so much to be proud of this year.
Posted by DemocraticWing | Fri Jun 26, 2015, 01:03 PM (1 replies)