HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Race & Ethnicity » African American (Group) » The White Male Union Vote...

Sat Jun 27, 2015, 12:45 PM

The White Male Union Voter 2016

Start here -

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/07/are-shrinking-unions-making-workers-poorer/278048/

Here's what we know: Union membership has been nearly cut in half over the past thirty years. During that time, income inequality grew, with the top one percent of wealthiest Americans seeing especially big gains in their pre- and post-tax income. And although the economy has grown, wages have not: The portion of GDP going toward workers' pay has shrunk by almost six percentage points over the last decade.

The causal chain is so tempting: As unions get smaller, collective bargaining gets weaker, worker wages go down, and evil profiteers cackle. But is it clear that the decreasing power of unions has made it harder for employees to afford everyday life? This idea was discussed at a recent Atlantic working summit on "secure livelihoods," which focused on systemic causes of persistent income inequality; what does the research say?


We had a newcomer to the group explain to us that one of the candidates has to not speak to the issues of minorities in order to snag the white male union voter's vote.

Now Obama won twice by getting out the black vote - with a special emphasis on black female voters from all income levels.

A democratic candidate that frames the issues in a way the speaks to us - can win without the white male union voter. They can win without the white male Republican Southern voter.

So that being the case - how far should a Democratic candidate go to woo the Shrinking White Male Union Voter? Should they not declare in writing and make part of their platform the issues and concerns of blacks? Even though we can bring you over the finish line - and HAVE BEEN CARRYING Water for the party .

36 replies, 5115 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 36 replies Author Time Post
Reply The White Male Union Voter 2016 (Original post)
JustAnotherGen Jun 2015 OP
onecaliberal Jun 2015 #1
upaloopa Jun 2015 #2
JustAnotherGen Jun 2015 #3
greatauntoftriplets Jun 2015 #4
gollygee Jun 2015 #5
JustAnotherGen Jun 2015 #6
noiretextatique Jun 2015 #7
JustAnotherGen Jun 2015 #13
lovemydog Jun 2015 #8
Starry Messenger Jun 2015 #9
Number23 Jun 2015 #10
Starry Messenger Jun 2015 #14
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2015 #18
Starry Messenger Jun 2015 #19
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2015 #20
Number23 Jun 2015 #22
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2015 #24
Cha Jul 2015 #29
Starry Messenger Jun 2015 #23
BainsBane Jul 2015 #36
Number23 Jun 2015 #21
Starry Messenger Jun 2015 #25
freshwest Jul 2015 #26
Starry Messenger Jul 2015 #27
Cha Jul 2015 #30
Act_of_Reparation Jul 2015 #32
Number23 Jul 2015 #33
BainsBane Jul 2015 #34
Number23 Jul 2015 #35
JI7 Jun 2015 #11
JustAnotherGen Jun 2015 #12
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2015 #17
freshwest Jun 2015 #15
JustAnotherGen Jun 2015 #16
ismnotwasm Jul 2015 #28
Cha Jul 2015 #31

Response to JustAnotherGen (Original post)

Sat Jun 27, 2015, 12:50 PM

1. Very good point. Not sure why they continue to go

After that demographic when it's clear they are content with voting against themselves. Republicans darn sure don't support unions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JustAnotherGen (Original post)

Sat Jun 27, 2015, 01:46 PM

2. I am a white male union worker. Member of

SEIU and a county government worker.
We are very diversified being government and social service. It is very hard to tell what the political leanings of my coworkers are because we are so diversified and we don't talk about politics much. As a union we tend to support who ever supports us and that is most likely the Dem. I don't think there is a typical white union voter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #2)

Sat Jun 27, 2015, 02:59 PM

3. Thank you upaloopa

I seriously didn't and don't believe it is a monolithic group. There is diversity there. And here I have a white male member of a union with a Clinton avatar. Kind of shakes the myth up - that only Bernie can get your demographic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #2)

Sat Jun 27, 2015, 03:25 PM

4. My nephew is a member of the IAFF (International Association of Firefighters)

He's pretty much a teabagger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JustAnotherGen (Original post)

Sat Jun 27, 2015, 04:40 PM

5. If there were ever a group of people who didn't vote as one

it would be union members. Awkward sentence but I'm leaving it.

Some are very conservative. A lot are fiscally liberal and are right up Bernie's alley. But I'm sure there will be some who think highly of HRC. It's a mixed bag.

I'm really bothered by the idea that people of color, or women, or any oppressed group, should shut up, or vote against their conscience, or tone it down, or anything because of what a group made up primarily of white men might do. I don't think that's an OK thing to even suggest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gollygee (Reply #5)

Sat Jun 27, 2015, 07:20 PM

6. I am too

And I'm glad you weighed in here and on that other thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JustAnotherGen (Original post)

Sat Jun 27, 2015, 08:10 PM

7. not very far

seriously. a good candidate will garner the votes of some white males. and the rest are a lost cause who probably would not vote for any democrat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to noiretextatique (Reply #7)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 07:11 AM

13. I think a white male union voter who is already Democratic

Will find him appeasing. The ones in middle and to the right? No chance lance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JustAnotherGen (Original post)

Sat Jun 27, 2015, 11:24 PM

8. The candidate who gets my vote will address black lives matter.

The police shootings, disproportionate levels of unemployment, disparity in the prison and justice system, unequal public education depending on where one lives. We must address these as a nation. Things won't improve much if they aren't addressed.

I would like to see O'Malley address it. I would like to see Hillary address it. I don't know if Bernie will address but if he doesn't he probably won't get my vote.

As justice Blackmun said:

In order to get beyond racism, we must first take account of race. There is no other way. And in order to treat some persons equally, we must treat them differently.

http://www.azquotes.com/author/1460-Harry_A_Blackmun

Just my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JustAnotherGen (Original post)

Sat Jun 27, 2015, 11:38 PM

9. Speaking as a white female union member

I would find any campaign that only attempted to speak to white male labor totally alienating.

The enobled white male union worker, with sweat under his hardhat, has had plenty of chances to vote for candidates who speak to his issues, and still hasn't. Even Elizabeth Warren polls the best among white males with higher incomes, and not blue collar earners.

(While it is true that union members tend to vote more Democratically, I suspect this bump comes from the fact that higher levels of African-Americans tend to be unionized than whites.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #9)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 02:45 AM

10. I just saw your post in the other thread where you identified yourself as a "white socialist union

member" so I was hoping you'd respond to this OP.

The enobled white male union worker, with sweat under his hardhat, has had plenty of chances to vote for candidates who speak to his issues, and still hasn't.

So JAG's point is even more relevant. Why are people -- Democrats with strong economic messages -- telling minorities to chill out and wait in order to appeal to these folks when they've made it pretty freaking obvious that's they're never going to get their support?

Black folks know we don't have a choice. So we may be annoyed, pissed, frustrated as all hell with the Democrats but we know that the alternative is UNTHINKABLE. After voting Dem, I think the next largest black voting block is non-voters. And don't even get me started on them.

Can I ask you a question? As a "white socialist union member" are you also a Bernie supporter? You are a regular in this forum so you already know that it won't make a bit of difference either way. I'm really just curious but you don't have to answer if you don't want to.

It just seems that the Bernie campaign have decided that folks like you are more important (susceptible?) to his message than people like me. Beyond thinking whether this is a winning strategy or not, I'm just wondering if it's worth it in terms of the numbers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #10)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 08:33 AM

14. Good questions!

Actually, I am supporting Hillary at this time. I know she can be polarizing and has negatives. I was a strong Obama primary supporter in 2008, so I'm familiar with the problems she and her campaign had there. However, I think her numbers against the Republicans at this time could bring us something as rare as a unicorn--a term for a Democrat after a two term Democratic President.

Also, her numbers with important constituency groups like people of color and women (and people who are both!) can't be ignored. Bernie is a great guy, but his support is an inch wide, imo. He isn't speaking to me if he's leaving my political allies off the bus.

I am also puzzled by the DU claim that there are two groups out there just waiting for some economic messiah to come out to vote--non-voters and the white union voter. We already know who votes for Democrats. And African American women have the highest progressive voting record of the last several elections cycles. I've seen some DUers claim that there is some difference between the "progressive voter" and voting people of color, which is a) not at all true and b) racist. There is no proof at all that non-voters and conservative white union members are suddenly going to have the light-bulb switch on in large enough numbers to matter.

I have some theories--some people claiming this are white and/or were until recently, pretty well off. They weren't hit very hard by right-wing policies until they became outright semi-fascist on economics to the point where the comfortable income tier finally felt the pain the rest of us have been feeling for decades.

The other issues like racism, misogyny, homophobia, etc. don't really touch their lives, so even though they vaguely know those things are out there, but they don't know how those issues can also lead to a lack of dignity and also be really economically detrimental.

To them, the alternative isn't really unthinkable, because it won't make a difference to their wallet at this point. There are even people who think that if the Republicans win again, people will suddenly revolt and we will have some kind of spontaneous revolution because the pain will be so great. Well fuck that, buddy! If Republicans get control of the USSC, you can kiss several progressive reforms *goodbye*. This week should have proved to anyone how seriously important the Supremes are at this point. If there are people who don't give a shit about that, then what is left that they find important?

And you are right, it isn't worth it in terms of the numbers, let alone morally. I hate capitalism too, but it isn't going away just because this group of self-appointed cool kids just discovered that it isn't working for them anymore. Take a number! BainsBane has been writing about this, and her posts have been on point. If your message doesn't appeal to the wide mass of people who have been on the shit end of that stick for generations, then what are you fighting for?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #14)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 02:31 PM

18. Chris Hayes calls it the revolt of the upper middle class...

I suspect HRC will win all the demographics in the primaries despite hopeful assertions to the contrary but there are two demographics where Bernie will do better than other demographics: those in the highest income and highest education brackets; i.e. as income and education goes up support for HRC goes down...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #18)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 02:48 PM

19. I agree with Hayes

A poster here told me as much, about the failure of the midterms: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10246481#post4 If there are millions more like that, they've kind of declared war on the rest of us due to their own disappointed economic expectations. I don't think that's going to be a winning message.

I know some labor sectors are also kind of in love with Bernie right now, and a lot of my socialist pals on FB find him to be catnip too. But some people are using blinders about the high quality and numbers of Hillary's supporters. Instead of dismissing that as "name recognition" (!) they should look at the real basis of that support.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #19)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 03:29 PM

20. Going back to 1976 there has always been a schism between traditional and non traditional Democrats

Going back to at least 1976 there has always been a schism between traditional Democrats and non-traditional Democrats with people of color siding with the traditional Democrat in every race.

Every race has had its non traditional candidate and in some instances some non traditional candidates were more non traditional than others. In 76 it was Mo Udall and Jerry Brown though he was a late entrant, In 84 it was Gary Hart and Jesse Jackson, in 88 it was Jesse Jackson, in 92 it was Paul Tsongas and Jerry Brown, in 00 it was Bill Bradley, in 04 it was Howard Dean, in 08 It was ???

Although Bernie's politics is very different than those other gentlemen he inherits their supporters... They didn't get very far...Only Hart posed a serious threat to the traditional candidate, Mondale, and he was incredibly charismatic, polled well against Reagan, and had Jesse Jackson in the race who siphoned off African American voters who were likely going to vote for Walter Mondale...

Barack Obama won the nomination because he was able to marry upper income white support to African American support and even that support did not come automatically. He had to defeat Hillary in homogeneous Iowa to prove to African American Democrats he had the crossover appeal to prevail in a general election. If Hillary could have even mitigated her losses among African American Democratic primary voters she would have won the nomination.

Conclusion- African American and Latino Democrats gravitate to the "establishment" candidate. That's an empirical observation and not a normative one.

I expect Bernie to be competitive in homogeneous IA and NH. I don't expect him to be competitive in the heterogeneous states...


___________

I am a huge fan of Bain's Bain but I'm not convinced capitalism is dead or worth junking...Of course, laissez faire capitalism is...I eschew labels but I subscribe to John Lennon's definition of socialism , "if socialism mean the government should pay for granny to have her teeth fixed then I'm a socialist."


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #20)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 05:45 PM

22. "African American and Latino Democrats gravitate to the "establishment" candidate."

I would say that's probably true. And it's for one reason -- we want the Democrat in the race to win. Our issues are too important to howl at the moon the way these white libertarians -- left and right -- do. We need someone that will get in there. Giving us 60% of what we want is better than taking us 80% in the wrong direction which is what the Repubs would do.

Although I really did like Howard Dean.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #22)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 06:08 PM

24. A half a loaf is better than none...

My buddy is a physical therapist who lives just outside of Las Vegas and is tuned into the whole gambling culture...Gamblers divide gamblers into two groups; the smart gamblers and the squares. The smart gamblers are conservative bettors who will risk $100.00 to win $125.00 because that's still a nice return and the squares will bet $100.00 in the hope of the long shot winning so they can get $1,000.00 but the long shot loses much more often than he wins and they end up losing their $100.00

A tip... The only game in Vegas where the House is only slightly instead of massively favored is Blackjack... As long as you always hold at 16 you should be able to play a long time without going bust unless you are massively unlucky.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #22)

Mon Jul 6, 2015, 05:41 AM

29. Smart and I love you all for it!

"Our issues are too important to howl at the moon the way these white libertarians -- left and right.."
My issues are, too!

Thank you, 23~

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #20)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 05:50 PM

23. Thanks for the background, that makes sense.

I didn't really watch primaries until 2004, it didn't make sense to me to get invested before The Main Event, but I've become more of a political junkie as I get older. If we had a parliamentary system, most people kludged together in the Democratic Party would probably fragment into different parties. I don't know if that would be better, or worse. Sometimes I feel there is value in just knowing that voters pick one side or another.

I liked BaneBain's point about respecting allies and coalitions, listening to the needs of the subaltern groups instead of treating them like political enemies. It's the process I try to work in too, I was happy to see a kindred spirit.

(Re: socialism--at this point in life I'd be happy with things like the government getting granny's teeth fixed, preserving our civil rights advances like minority voting, fair housing, police reform, getting the country back on track for reproductive justice, reversing Taft-Hartley, stemming RTW and preserving collective bargaining, and if we could stop selling our cool stuff to corporations, I would die happy. I'm sure there is more, but that's my bucket list.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #18)

Mon Jul 6, 2015, 08:19 PM

36. I've had that same sense

from observing online discussions. I've caught some flack for it, but I'm termed it the great and noble struggle of the 10 percent vs. the 1 percent. Interesting to see Chris Hayes sees something similar.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #14)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 05:42 PM

21. I learned a long time ago that there are lots of people on DU that love to sing the "I'm a liberal"

song as loud and often as possible until the second social issues come up. Then they turn not so liberal, if you know what I'm saying.

And it's extremely alarming to me how many of these people here first flocked to Elizabeth Warren and then Sanders. I'm not entirely sure what it means, to be honest, but it gives me the heebies and the jeebies and makes me wonder how a man with his history of socially conscious work can have such NON socially conscious followers. But this is what happens when as you pointed out so perfectly, folks who were doing just fine economically now find themselves getting pinched. And they will brook no discussion of any other matter -- economics trumps all in their opinion and God help anyone that tries to say otherwise.

To them, the alternative isn't really unthinkable, because it won't make a difference to their wallet at this point. There are even people who think that if the Republicans win again, people will suddenly revolt and we will have some kind of spontaneous revolution because the pain will be so great.

Yep, we've all seen these idiots. They lead to one DUer coining them the "anarchist left" which I find appropriate except I find nothing "left" about them. You don't give a shit about racism, you couldn't care less about discrimination against gays, you think economics and the issues that personally affect YOU are the only things that matter, and you find the American populace so abhorrent that you think a Republican administration would be just the thing to bring about your glorious revolution and "scare" people straight apparently oblivious to the fact that lots of people will perish in the process.

Like you said, this week should let people know how important the SC is. Anyone that can see what's happened this week and think that a Republican in the White House won't be so bad or will spur some revolution is someone almost as dangerous as they are stupid. And for black people, our needs are too important to align with people like this. Not that they want us to, anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #21)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 06:18 PM

25. It's so stupid and cruel.

"Anyone that can see what's happened this week and think that a Republican in the White House won't be so bad or will spur some revolution is someone almost as dangerous as they are stupid. And for black people, our needs are too important to align with people like this. Not that they want us to, anyway."

I have to bite my tongue a lot on the board, since I have been racking up hides this year, but holy deep-fried Jesus. There are parts of this country that look like war zones because of the damage the Republicans did in just 8 years. Structural damage that might never go away occurred. Climate change and bad energy policies left over from the Bush years are doing even more damage, and it's all happening in neighborhoods that are where the people of color live. Calling these issues identity politics, and averring that somehow these benefits that will go to the white upper middle class via a magical political candidate smacks of trickle-down, to me anyway.

If 8 more years of damage occur, and the Repubs stack the USSC with lifetime appointments--I honestly don't know what life will be like here any more. It could kill organized labor, and standards of living for blue collar workers will slip down to bare subsistence. We'd have *more* racism and bigotry, put into law, which will kill democracy for millions of people. I hate to sound like a Mad Max alarmist, but people acting like this place just runs on autopilot and good will prevail need to look at history. Democratic and advanced countries have had ultra-right take overs in recentish history, and the people who get it in the shorts the worst right away are the people these loons think will rise up and do the heavy lifting. Um, no.

President Obama did what he could with who he had to work with--the Repubs wouldn't pass his jobs bills, the Progressive Caucus had a wonderful progressive budget that was in opposition to the Ryan budget--it would have been nice to flip Congress to give this administration people who he could work with. Anyone who held their breath in the midterms and didn't vote is not my friend, or the friend of my friends.

I feel like I am starting to rant, sorry about that! I had a lot to get off my chest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #25)

Sun Jul 5, 2015, 05:13 PM

26. +1. Is all I have to give to this excellent thread and your words. I have left Socialism© where

Last edited Sun Jul 5, 2015, 10:37 PM - Edit history (1)

I live because they are voting against good Democrats who support our demographics that are seldom talked about on DU. They think the GOP is going to get people so ticked off they will turn Socialist©.

That's not what history shows as generally the strong men take over in the midst of chaos and the rich reorganize society to get even richer. This is the source of generational wealth and poverty. And those who are resisting this are called bootlickers and other names, when isn't it about the cause of the people and not just the brand name?

The result here is demoralizing voters, the attack on women and POC candidates who don't exist in the Socialist brand name, and appear to hate Democrats just as much as Libertarians do. Now we have a GOP majority in the legislature who are enforcing their ideology while some very good young and old Democrats are fighting back but getting beaten up by both 'sides.' When I see the results IRL, both sides appear to have merged and the rightists win.

And we have a very entrenched, radical right wing in my state that all of us should be fighting together. It's hurting people, by those who should be our allies, but don't see what we do to help real people. Instead they aim for is not going to happen soon if ever.

But people live in the present. They can die now and will have no future. We can't wait.

JMHO.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #26)

Sun Jul 5, 2015, 07:40 PM

27. In the film "Roger and Me", Michael Moore

devoted a lot of time showing that offshoring and the decline of unionism left people in such despair that there was a realignment in white blue collar workers toward the Christian Right. This was part of the creation of the White Male Voter, and the Reagan revolution.

Even now, with some cautious economic improvement, this voter is entrenched in reactionary voting patterns. Saying that these folks are going to jump back into the New Deal coalition is to ignore a lot of material developments since then. A lot of money has gone into convincing these voters that their interests are aligned with the wealthy, and that's how they vote.

There are a lot of ultra-leftists who think the Republicans are a nebulous opponent and that it is actually liberals, unions, people of color, etc. who are the ones really stopping progress in this country by, in their estimation, trying to wrest concessions from capitalism. Honestly, that makes them sound a lot like Republicans to me, even though they come from another angle of ideology.

We are going to need a huge coalition to keep striking back at the ultra-right, which still wields a lot of power. A Socialist who eschews working with Democrats and the traditional Democratic coalition is just a hobbyist, in my estimation. It's easy to stick your nose in the air if your bacon isn't in the fire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #21)

Mon Jul 6, 2015, 05:44 AM

30. "I learned a long time ago that there are lots of people on DU that love to sing the "I'm a liberal"

song as loud and often as possible until the second social issues come up. Then they turn not so liberal, if you know what I'm saying."

It's mind-boggling.. libertarian?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #21)

Mon Jul 6, 2015, 08:31 AM

32. Sub-cultures are inherently self-radicalizing...

...in the sense that measures to gauge one's social standing within the group are baked right into the formula. So, what you get in places like DU is precisely what you describe: people running their mouths, because that is all that is really required for one to increase or maintain their social status within the clique.

This type of social organization doesn't lend itself to introspection, much less critical self-analysis. And what I've found is that some people here, while decent and well-meaning, are really no more intellectually responsible than their counterparts on the right. They're the lesser of two evils, for sure, but I suffer no compunction to feel happy about that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Act_of_Reparation (Reply #32)

Mon Jul 6, 2015, 06:13 PM

33. I co-sign every word of this post. Every single word.

And what I've found is that some people here, while decent and well-meaning, are really no more intellectually responsible than their counterparts on the right. They're the lesser of two evils, for sure, but I suffer no compunction to feel happy about that.

Amen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #10)

Mon Jul 6, 2015, 07:38 PM

34. My opinion is that their own disenchantment with the party

has at least in part to do with its explicit appeal to women and people of color. When people say Sanders doesn't need to address communities of color, they aren't worrying about the white male union vote but rather themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #34)

Mon Jul 6, 2015, 08:05 PM

35. Absolutely agree. Which makes ActofReparations' point that they are the flip side of their cousins

on the right that much more accurate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JustAnotherGen (Original post)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 04:56 AM

11. i think Jim Webb would probably do well among that group

and that's because i don't think they are voting on economic issues as much as culture/social issues. you can see this in his recent words on the confederacy and his attacks on Kerry's war protests. it's about a culture .

that's why they voted for Reagan. they liked him because his welfare queen and attack on gays appealed to them.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #11)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 07:09 AM

12. ITA

Adding though - his journalism background will help him in manipulating them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #11)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 02:10 PM

17. In order to get the nomination he would have to take positions that would alienate him ...

In order to get the nomination he would have to take positions that would alienate him from working class whites.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JustAnotherGen (Original post)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 10:53 AM

15. K&R for taking on a tough subject, JAG. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #15)

Sun Jun 28, 2015, 12:49 PM

16. Thanks fresh

Someone gave up on DU last night - I don't blame him.

I just wonder (not specific to AA group or members) how many others have given up.

I just want to have an honest discussion and put the obvious out there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JustAnotherGen (Original post)

Mon Jul 6, 2015, 01:30 AM

28. So many white males lean libertarian

With a half-assed idea of what that actually would mean for the country. Libertarians are free-market, anti-Union and anti-regulation fuckwads who may vote for Dems or Rebublicans depending --on their mood I guess.

So I think what you're saying--and I agree wholeheartedly--is this; For the white male Union voter with well defined goals to succeed in obtaining those goals, it is crucial to obtain Black votes for the Democratic Party. They will also need the Latino vote. And the vote of women. In other words, stop tossing Black people under the bus in the name of "economic justice" and understand they couldn't even hold on to their own economic justice-- I would go as far to say as a result of treating minority or disenfranchised voters concerns and social injustice problems as secondary-- despite significant activism in these groups -- and we see the result of this. Loss of power, loss of influence. This is a side effect of racism that isn't talked about nearly enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JustAnotherGen (Original post)

Mon Jul 6, 2015, 06:04 AM

31. The African American Voters have been carrying so much Water for Democratic Candidates, Gen!

And, I appreciate and love them for it! The candidate who doesn't get this should definitely not be the nominee for POTUS.. Jim Webb is actively making an ass out of himself over it..

Mr. NFTG @Kennymack1971 Follow

Uh huh: "Jim Webb: Democrats Need "White, Working People," Can't Rely On Black Votes After Obama http://ln.is/breakingnewsusa.com/ivcEi … via @breakingnewsusa

5:02 AM - 1 Feb 2015

16 Retweets 2 favorites

http://theobamadiary.com/2015/02/01/a-tweet-or-two-225/

Yeah, Webb .. wouldn't want to be the person that the Black community would vote for, too.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1136191

A post from MADem.. in that same thread..

‘I think they could do better with white, working people and I think this last election showed that,’ Webb said, referencing the 2014 midterms where Republicans took control of the Senate and added more power in the House. ‘The Democratic Party could do very well to return to its Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Andrew Jackson roots where the focus of the party was making sure that all people who lack a voice in the corridors of power could have one through the elected represented.'”

Webb went on to say, “You are not going to have a situation again where you have 96% of the African American vote turning out for one presidential candidate
.”

As MADem said.. "Yep...there's a dogwhistle element going on there, it does seem...."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1136206

The Dem Nominee will want President Obama campaigning with them and for them.. ie the Obama Coalition and it's going to be a beautiful thing.

Thank you for your crucial OP, Gen~

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread