Hey Bernie, I know why the poor don't vote for you:

In my opinion, they vote less but they vote. In my state they feel ignored and are participating this year

Why poor people still aren't voting

Less than half of those who made under $20,000 voted in 2012. Meanwhile, voter participation for people who live in households with incomes of more than $75,000 was much higher at 77%.

It's clear that the system is leaving many people out -- especially the poor.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/08/05/news/economy/poor-people-voting-rights/


Voter Turnout By Income, 2008 US Presidential Election
political participation rates by low-income Americans are alarmingly low, and our antiquated voting system contributes to this problem. The system is overly bureaucratic with unnecessarily restrictive registration procedures, which work to dissuade people from voting. Something as simple and common as moving within the same state jeopardizes voter eligibility due to registration requirements. Studies show that people of color, young people, and lower-income people move more often, leaving them more vulnerable to not being properly registered to vote.
http://www.demos.org/data-byte/voter-turnout-income-2008-us-presidential-election

don't even open until noon. Noon!.

Here in Oregon we let people vote when they wish to vote. No finding a polling place after noon, lining up and waiting to vote during some tiny widow in which your rights are available.

Why do you think Harry Reid pushed so hard to shift Nevada to Caucuses in 2008? Why didn't the Unions push back against that? Why do you think Washington Democratic Party sued the State of Washington to permit them to hold caucus instead of primary?

It's just that opposing those caucuses is very much opposing the wishes of the Democratic Party. I'd say you should be taking those complaints to the Party in those States and nationally that wants these caucuses. Nevada's is so new that Hillary has been in and won every caucus they have ever held.

states. This is true, even in states where the number of election sites are kept artificially low.
A caucus requires hours of time to show up, gather, listen to speeches, and vote. Turnout in caucus states rarely exceeds 15%. Those that turned out are not working at 2 or 3 jobs to make ends meet. They are designed to exclude large swaths of the population. This is not the fault of any modern politician. They are designed that way. Politicians who choose to use caucuses know very well that they don't need the poor, just a cadre of dedicated activists to win.
Sanders' caucus wins, and Clintons', and Obama's in 2008 all came by excluding the poor.

This isn't an auspicious start for you at DU.

Where has Bernie said he wants to raise the taxes on the working poor?

Jeeze!

A bit confused about his tax plan again?`

I mean, the only other places we here of this kind of drivel is Rush Limbaugh, Alex Jones and the GOP

Really?

Now where can you show me in his tax plan that he wants to put the tax burden on the poor?

One of the many reasons why neither Hillary or her more zealous supporters are to be trusted. Repeated mendacious propaganda taken straight out of Karl Rove's playbook.

while taxing the retirement funds of union workers and public employees. Who wouldn't want that??

I live in Texas. Medicaid wasn't expanded. I would save money by voting for Bernie. He is the only candidate being pretty transparent.

On Hillary, any woman who is willing to leave any abortion legislation up for grabs is not someone who is "there for me" or any woman for that matter. She is not strong enough on that issue. She is "we can't." So "I can't" afford to vote for her.

I hope that helps.