Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 01:07 PM Jul 2015

A Sanders supporter on Netroots Nation

The Sanders supporter is the author of the article.
I'm leading with this sentence because it struck me as the most powerful point.

It was a remarkable display of cognitive dissonance when Sanders said the country needed a democratic revolution, as he looked out at one staring him in the face and ignored it.


While I myself am not a Sanders supporter, as a Democrat I believe we all have an interest in listening to and understanding concerns of broad-based constituencies. A strong Sanders candidacy can be good for the party and the country, but it is up to Sanders supporters to make it strong, to use it to expand the political dialog rather than narrow it.


I approach this incident as a fan of Bernie Sanders. But when he had the opportunity to rewrite his own narrative and broaden his own base, he failed.

The last few weeks have been good for Sanders—big crowds, solid fundraising numbers. His candidacy has already made an impact on the race and, presumably, on Hillary Clinton. It was exciting: He was speaking the truth about inequality and Wall Street, as he always had, and his numbers were climbing toward 20 percent nationally and within striking distance in New Hampshire and Iowa.

But anyone paying attention also knows that there has been a thread of doubt in his rise: Could Sanders ever make headway beyond Iowa and New Hampshire? Does he have what it takes to capture the hearts of black and brown voters who are such a significant part of the Democratic coalition?

With the protest, Sanders was presented an opportunity on a silver platter: He could overcome his perceived negatives and grow his base. All he would have had to do was act with a little humility.

But instead, he talked over the protesters, got defensive about his racial-justice bona fides, and stuck to his script. Essentially, he appeared to be arguing that economics and class trump all. For an audience mourning the death of Sandra Bland, a woman who was arrested at a traffic stop on the way to her new job before mysteriously dying in police custody, the jobs program Sanders suggested just didn’t seem like a sufficient answer. . . .

But there was also a tactical error—a mistake in the basic craft of politics: the failure to read the room. It was hard to watch him refuse to respond to people shouting and calling out for their lives. (When Vice President Joe Biden was interrupted by pro-immigration protesters at the prior Netroots Nation, he paused, applauded them, and answered their concerns.) It was a remarkable display of cognitive dissonance when Sanders said the country needed a democratic revolution, as he looked out at one staring him in the face and ignored it

http://www.thenation.com/article/bernie-sanders-blew-a-huge-opportunity-at-netroots-nation/

I have issues with Sanders use of the word revolution to discuss his candidacy for president, but it is particularly ironic in the face of the closest thing we have to revolution in this country at the movement, Black Lives Matters. It is not a Koch brothers plot or Clintonian conspiracy. BLM is not enamored of Clinton. #earnthisdamnvoteorlose shows that African Americans are demanding ALL the candidates, including Clinton, earn their votes. The one who will be most successful will be the one who takes that call seriously. You want to argue that Sanders doesn't have to, he will lose and in the process you do great discredit to white progressivism. None of us benefit from that.
54 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A Sanders supporter on Netroots Nation (Original Post) BainsBane Jul 2015 OP
K & R SunSeeker Jul 2015 #1
there aren't many people left here ibegurpard Jul 2015 #2
There are at least 3 OPs on the first page of GD-P arguing against it, each with supporting comments stevenleser Jul 2015 #3
of course you don't ibegurpard Jul 2015 #4
RIght, of course I don't, because your contention is wrong. nt stevenleser Jul 2015 #6
No of course you don't ibegurpard Jul 2015 #7
Then there is the fact BainsBane Jul 2015 #19
the jury system on here is trashed ibegurpard Jul 2015 #20
Very well written, and very perceptive. George II Jul 2015 #5
Although my vote would not have gone to Bernie...I was very excited about his entrance to the race Sheepshank Jul 2015 #8
Why would you have thought that? ibegurpard Jul 2015 #12
KnR sheshe2 Jul 2015 #9
'A democratic revolution' never ends because the opposition to democracy never does. Good OP. n/t freshwest Jul 2015 #10
He did miss reacting in the best possible scenario artislife Jul 2015 #11
I agree with you ibegurpard Jul 2015 #13
I smile a little everytime I see your name on this site~ artislife Jul 2015 #14
ha ibegurpard Jul 2015 #15
I haven't been here long!! nt artislife Jul 2015 #16
Sounds like a poser to me. Bernie supporters refer to him as Bernie. That just my opinion. nt Snotcicles Jul 2015 #17
It is possible to support Sanders BainsBane Jul 2015 #21
It was just my opinion thats all. nt Snotcicles Jul 2015 #22
Wow - what a great post, BainsBane! calimary Jul 2015 #18
Compare Bernie and Martin to candidate Bill Clinton speaking to an ACT UP heckler. Bluenorthwest Jul 2015 #23
The pertinent issue is, I submit, not what you or I think of the reactions BainsBane Jul 2015 #24
Nice deflection. This is your thread, not their thread you are not them. Nor is the author of the Bluenorthwest Jul 2015 #26
It's not a deflection BainsBane Jul 2015 #28
Hillary isn't running against the President or her husband..... virtualobserver Jul 2015 #31
Is that how you see this OP? BainsBane Jul 2015 #35
the sad thing is that this event is being replayed over and over in OP's virtualobserver Jul 2015 #37
The only reason this event has become about Bernie Sanders BainsBane Jul 2015 #38
On the day that I see you post an article that is critical of Hillary..... virtualobserver Jul 2015 #41
Why should I post a negative article about Clinton? BainsBane Jul 2015 #42
he has " growing up in the Bronx" humility......there is a kind of delayed reaction. virtualobserver Jul 2015 #43
Oh, you mean humble origins BainsBane Jul 2015 #44
well no, what I mean is that the instantaneous reaction might seem defensive..... virtualobserver Jul 2015 #45
Since you want to elaborate BainsBane Jul 2015 #46
Ok, well I'll give you my "defend Bernie at all costs" defense. virtualobserver Jul 2015 #47
Bernie has super pacs BainsBane Jul 2015 #48
Bernie wants nothing to do with them..... virtualobserver Jul 2015 #49
No, I know a jetsetting capitalist BainsBane Jul 2015 #50
The article that you referenced is for a PAC, not a SuperPAC virtualobserver Jul 2015 #51
Compared to Sanders, at least Clinton did not the heckler to "shutup". Thinkingabout Jul 2015 #36
K&R ismnotwasm Jul 2015 #25
He didn't handle NN well but he has handled it well since gotj90 Jul 2015 #27
I'm glad to hear it BainsBane Jul 2015 #29
In the position of some, in spite of any of his actions, Bernie's just not good enough. appalachiablue Jul 2015 #30
He is an underdog BainsBane Jul 2015 #32
I disagree with both statements. If I may ask, how many PoC are in your family appalachiablue Jul 2015 #33
No, but what does that have to do BainsBane Jul 2015 #34
Some people, especially here are open to mentioning their heritage, experiences and views lately appalachiablue Jul 2015 #39
The underdog issue is a function of his standing in the polls BainsBane Jul 2015 #40
k&r Starry Messenger Jul 2015 #52
I have been wondering for the longest Jamaal510 Jul 2015 #53
I take it to mean BainsBane Jul 2015 #54
 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
3. There are at least 3 OPs on the first page of GD-P arguing against it, each with supporting comments
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 02:17 PM
Jul 2015

Not sure I agree that there aren't many people left arguing against it.

ibegurpard

(16,685 posts)
7. No of course you don't
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 02:28 PM
Jul 2015

Because you're not one of the people on DU who I believe to be actually sincere about this. The OP I will take at their word .

BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
19. Then there is the fact
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 04:23 PM
Jul 2015

Some AA members have gotten hides for expressing their frustrations about reactions to BLM.

ibegurpard

(16,685 posts)
20. the jury system on here is trashed
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 04:26 PM
Jul 2015

I've alerted on racist bullshit that was allowed to stand and actually got put on an alert timeout because of one of them.

George II

(67,782 posts)
5. Very well written, and very perceptive.
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 02:20 PM
Jul 2015

Some of his followers say that the good thing about him is he hasn't changed in 40 years. To me and many others the bad thing about him is that he hasn't changed in 40 years.

As noted, he had a great opportunity to connect with the black community and their concerns. But he didn't, he just proceeded almost smugly, almost like he was saying "I've been doing this since the 1960s, and you should respect that and me because of it, no questions asked".

Remember how Joe Biden chided Giuliani, saying that his sentences are all "a noun, a verb, and 911"?

Unfortunately its looking like the cornerstone of Sanders' racial-justice stance is "I marched with MLK". Others may not see it that way, but it's certainly the way I see it.

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
8. Although my vote would not have gone to Bernie...I was very excited about his entrance to the race
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 02:51 PM
Jul 2015

I honestly thought that he would push the constituency far enough left that the sting to the RW establishment would be poignant. That they would feel the sting of being so very very wrong in how they read the population.

I was hoping that Senators and his fellow Congressmen would be able to see that the country is hungry and indeed ready to make a huge tilt to the left and start making their own fist bumping remarks.

I thought his entering the race was more about the gravitational pull of Democratic policy.

I thought......many more things which do not seem to have panned out. I suppose there is still some time.

ibegurpard

(16,685 posts)
12. Why would you have thought that?
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 03:13 PM
Jul 2015

There is a huge constituency of people including many DEMOCRATS who don't believe Hillary Clinton will be the champion for them she says she will be. I'm glad the protest by Black Lives Matter happened. It put the issue of racism squarely in the face of people who don't take it seriously...particularly now with the death of Sandra Bland. All of the candidates agree. And misguided supporters are gradually realizing it as well. But if your assumption is that people just wanted to put pressure on Clinton to take a leftward tack and actually believe she will follow through then you gravely underestimate dissatisfaction with many in the Democratic rank and file. I can't speak to whether people of color will believe Sanders speaking out on racial issues.

 

artislife

(9,497 posts)
11. He did miss reacting in the best possible scenario
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 03:10 PM
Jul 2015

The real test, is if he still reacts the same way.


I doubt it.


He has seen the big picture on so many other issues, I have faith in his mental curiousity and his mental capablities. Not to mention that he cares about people and what effects them.


Again, I came in wanting him in the White House, so my bias is showing.

 

artislife

(9,497 posts)
14. I smile a little everytime I see your name on this site~
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 03:16 PM
Jul 2015

Not just for the site name, but your posts.
















BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
21. It is possible to support Sanders
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 04:30 PM
Jul 2015

and care about issues as well. One need not subsume all criticism and critical thinking to vote for someone. Voting is an action, not an ideology. Individual politicians aren't ideologies either.

calimary

(81,261 posts)
18. Wow - what a great post, BainsBane!
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 04:21 PM
Jul 2015

Last edited Thu Jul 23, 2015, 05:18 PM - Edit history (2)

That link made a tremendously important point. BLM has a major case to make. And we all better pay attention to it, especially those of us who've neglected or haven't been keeping track.

I cannot imagine, for the life of me, what it's like for ANY black woman who's a mother. I cannot imagine, as a white woman, what it's like to kiss your kid goodbye every morning (for school or job or whatever) and worry, all day, about whether he's gonna come home safely that night. To LIVE with that, every day and every night and every moment until that kid comes back through the front door again, walking in on his own two feet. Or, since Sandra Bland, to worry about whether her DAUGHTER is gonna come home safely that night, too. It's not just about her SON's life and safety and survival anymore. It's a nightmare beyond imagining.

But EVERY black mother lives that gnawing agony, every day. THAT, to me, is what the BLM movement means. It's just that basic.

Editing to add photo. This PHOTO is what BlackLivesMatter means to me. More women mourning. More MOTHERS mourning. More needless senseless loss. And forever-heartbreak. And it happens in the black community FAR, FAR, FAR more than in any other community.

[img][/img]

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
23. Compare Bernie and Martin to candidate Bill Clinton speaking to an ACT UP heckler.
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 06:02 PM
Jul 2015

Video and some transcript at the other link. This is what I'm used to seeing. Can someone tell me how Bernie and Martin compare to that?
I will add that Bill did the things he said he was going to do. I will also add emphatically that Bill's reaction is the sort most common when engaging in such tactics. How do Martin and Bernie compare as candidates being heckled by aggressive activists? I think it is an extremely valid point to make. Both of those guys, they did well. I have in fact seem people go to jail for interrupting a political speech. But this Bill heckling, this is fairly typical....



http://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/28/us/1992-campaign-verbatim-heckler-stirs-clinton-anger-excerpts-exchange.html


At this link you can read about the activist, Bob Rafsky including his obituary from Feb of 1993, less than one year after he interrupted Bill.
http://www.actupny.org/divatv/netcasts/rafsky_reads.html

We have history. We should use it.

BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
24. The pertinent issue is, I submit, not what you or I think of the reactions
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 06:09 PM
Jul 2015

compared to Clinton's, but how supporters of Black Lives Matter viewed it. Also the reaction itself would have been nothing more than a minor misstep if some of his supporters had not taken to social media to try to discredit BLM.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
26. Nice deflection. This is your thread, not their thread you are not them. Nor is the author of the
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 06:23 PM
Jul 2015

piece in the OP you posted. Not only that, but neither of you have done nor seen much of this sort of politics. Yet you both make the assertion that these candidates failed miserably. I offer you an example of another candidate, going after other very righteous disruptive activists in a very different manner. When Bill did that I was in ACT UP. What did we think of that? When I see what happened this weekend, I compare it to what I have seen in the past. You can't take the part of speaking for others and then when asked to discuss your assertions saying 'the others are not here to speak to that'. It's cheesy.

I totally support what Black Lives Matter did. I just don't think reality supports this framing that either of those candidates had some untoward reaction.
If they did so badly, what do you and the OP guy think of Obama, ejecting a trans woman doing immigration activism by interrupting a speech by Obama last month? I mean, he had her ejected and said 'Shame, shame on you'....
If Bernie fucked up so badly, then is 'Shame on you' not far worse, really? Or is there some contextual mitigation when emergency political actions are involved?


Double standard stink, they smell. Got to judge Obama, Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley by the same standards. It is not 'different because Bill and Obama yelled at LGBT'. It's just not. There is one standard.
Which of the 4 had the worst reaction? Which the best?
We have history. We should use it.

BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
28. It's not a deflection
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 06:33 PM
Jul 2015

1) I don't watch TV. I didn't watch the Sanders and O'Malley reactions so I can't compare it to Clinton.
2) I think there is far too much of white folks telling black people what's acceptable and what isn't. I'm not even going to try to do that because you feel it expedient. I can't possibly put myself in their position because I don't know what it's like to live in constant fear for my life simply because of the color of my skin. I don't what it was like to live with AIDs during the early 90s either. I don't have any of that experience, and I will not pretend I do.
3) Your reaction totally misses a key point, which is the truly awful onslaught that occurred over social media after the Netroots event. Nothing makes that look good, and that is a central contact a lot of black folks have with the Sanders campaign. So you go right on and tell them they don't have a right to be pissed off because it's a "double standard." That should really help.
4) There are lots of ways to spin things to make Sanders look good, but it won't win him any black votes. That is the key, if he means to be a serious candidate. After his comments about MSNBC programming, I am starting to wonder if he means to be. It seems awfully small for a presidential contender.

 

virtualobserver

(8,760 posts)
31. Hillary isn't running against the President or her husband.....
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 06:45 PM
Jul 2015

That is the standard......attack Hillary's opponents.

 

virtualobserver

(8,760 posts)
37. the sad thing is that this event is being replayed over and over in OP's
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 07:36 PM
Jul 2015

Bernie gets it, and he got it immediately. He has clearly refocused his campaign.

The people in this country whether they are black, white, latino, LGBT....they will decide how they feel about Bernie, Hillary or O'Malley.

A single moment on stage is just that.

You are a Hillary supporter. You say that BLM is not enamored of Clinton...fair enough, but you do not post articles critical of Hillary in terms of BLM. Your focus is on Sanders.

That is why I see this as an attack.





BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
38. The only reason this event has become about Bernie Sanders
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 07:43 PM
Jul 2015

is because his supporters decided to make it about him and themselves.

Absolutely individual voters will decide which candidate they support. They don't necessarily have to figure Bernie into that decision, but they will decide who to cast their votes for.

I have observed that anything but uncritical adoration of Sanders is viewed as an attack around here. Even other Sanders supporters are castigated for not being reverential enough. One thing I will not do is defend actions or positions by Hillary Clinton that I don't share, and I have spoken out against them. Despite that, I have never had another Clinton supporter tell me I wasn't supportive enough or a real supporter, as I have seen Sanders supporters do to one another.

 

virtualobserver

(8,760 posts)
41. On the day that I see you post an article that is critical of Hillary.....
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 08:09 PM
Jul 2015

I will change my viewpoint.


you say "anything but uncritical adoration of Sanders is viewed as an attack"

come on. this is a political campaign. some of us are not neutral.

There are things that we love about our chosen candidates, and we defend them.
I believe strongly in Bernie's fundamental decency and consistency and in his humility.
Everyone that I've ever read who knows Hillary (at least those who aren't RW nutjobs)
say that she is a wonderful person to be with, to work for and to work with.

I prefer Bernie's priorities, and Hillary is too carefully scripted for me.




BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
42. Why should I post a negative article about Clinton?
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 08:24 PM
Jul 2015

When 20,000 have already been posted? What I won't do is defend something like her past statements on welfare reform or the Iraq War vote. If she gets heckled by BLM, I will not be throwing them under the bus, that much you can be sure.

I have to disagree with you about Bernie being humble, but I do like some of his positions, though not others, like his opposition to key gun control bills. You know the problem with Netroots is that Bernie didn't want to go off script. He has got his set speech and doesn't want to divert from it. Anyway, I respect your choice completely. I just am making a different one.

 

virtualobserver

(8,760 posts)
45. well no, what I mean is that the instantaneous reaction might seem defensive.....
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 08:35 PM
Jul 2015

and might not appear to be humble.....but in reality he is both introspective and humble.

BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
46. Since you want to elaborate
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 08:40 PM
Jul 2015

I'll tell you a couple of things I've seen lately that concern me. 1) his promise not to take donations from Super Pacs, which he can't do anyway. It's an empty promise that depends on voters not knowing campaign finance. You see the pledge cited as a reason for supporting him.

3) It bothers me that he refers to his candidacy as a revolution. He claims to be a socialist. From what I've read about his background, he is familiar with Marx. He ha\\s to know something about the history of social movements. A revolution is not voting for a president to serve atop the capitalist state, with an exploitative economic system he knows he cannot undo. That description of revolution strikes me as grandiose, the opposite of humble.

I do see him as a populist, for good and bad. That, however, is a far cry from a revolutionary.

 

virtualobserver

(8,760 posts)
47. Ok, well I'll give you my "defend Bernie at all costs" defense.
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 09:19 PM
Jul 2015

SuperPACS - His promise is not that he won't take donations from SuperPACS , what he says is that he doesn't want to have a SuperPAC.......and that he doesn't want for a SuperPAC to support him.

Hillary has a SuperPAC, which she has every right to do, and she actively raises money for it.

Bernie wants to prove that you can win without one. So it isn't an empty promise, it is kind of the point of the campaign. If he does not win, then he will have proved that he can't win that way...but he will prove something

Revolution- He isn't a Marxist. He calls himself a Democratic Socialist. His model is Scandinavian style social democracy. Revolution is in the eye of the beholder....you might not view his proposals as revolutionary, but the Koch brothers and the U.S Chamber of Commerce certainly would. The term revolution is not intended to be pretentious, it serves as an inspirational focal point which also telegraphs the difficulty of the endeavor.

BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
48. Bernie has super pacs
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 10:00 PM
Jul 2015

Or rather super pacs have been formed to support him. Super PACS are separate entities. There are several. Two names I know of are Bet on Bernie 2016 and Billionaires for Bernie.

I expect you're right about the big money guys as viewing him as revolutionary. They get all upset because Obama doesn't say nice enough things about them, even though they've made tons of money under him.
Still, I know he has read Marx and I haven't seen him disavow Marxism. That's the first I'm hearing of it. Not Mind you, being a Marxist isn't a bad thing as far a I'm concerned. Not that he espouses Marxist ideas. I'm just saying I don't like to see revolution appropriated that way.

 

virtualobserver

(8,760 posts)
49. Bernie wants nothing to do with them.....
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 10:28 PM
Jul 2015

One of them looks really scam shady (Bet on Bernie) ......Billionaires for Bernie looks a little more substantial, but Bernie wants nothing to do with it either. I could start a SuperPAC today and call it Hobos for Hil and it wouldn't mean anything.


Super PACS are separate entities. But Hillary is raising money for hers and her friends are on the boards.


BTW, I've never seen Hillary disavow Marxism either.

As for President Obama, they like his economy just fine.......they just can't admit it publicly.


BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
50. No, I know a jetsetting capitalist
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 10:56 PM
Jul 2015

who works in mergers and acquisitions for private equity. He says Wall Street hates Obama.

Bernie announced he doesn't wanted millionaires contributing "unlimited amounts of money" to Super PACs. That was his precise statement. He didn't say don't donate any money, but "unlimited amounts." There is no such thing as unlimited amounts of money, just as there is no legal way for a candidate to accept donations directly from a Super PAC. We have nothing to go on but his word on that.

We do know, however, that there is a PAC run by his field director that was recently fined for violating campaign finance reporting requirements.


Documents obtained by the Vermont Press Bureau show that the Progressive Voters of America Leadership PAC, a so-called leadership committee that current and former members of Congress are allowed to create, paid about $8,000 in administrative fines in May. The FEC levies fines when a committee fails to file required reports or files them late.

The fines are expected to be made public by the FEC next week.

The Burlington-based committee’s treasurer, Phil Fiermonte, a longtime Sanders aide and currently the field director for Sanders’ presidential campaign, received a letter from the FEC in December warning that the committee may have failed to file required financial reports.

http://www.timesargus.com/article/20150704/NEWS03/707049936


I'm not seeing how he's above it all. The fact is the system is rotten to the core, and that isn't about whether Bernie's or Clinton's money is cleaner. It's about a system that creates a direct cash nexus between candidates and big money. Electing Bernie won't fix that. It requires a change in SCOTUS or the constitution.
 

virtualobserver

(8,760 posts)
51. The article that you referenced is for a PAC, not a SuperPAC
Fri Jul 24, 2015, 01:23 AM
Jul 2015

Bernie believes in PACS which have limits on the donation size.

I'm never going to convince you that Bernie is pure on this issue.

If Bernie can win by turning the unlimited donations into the SuperPACS of other candidates into a liability in this campaign, then he will have credibility on this issue. It does require a change in SCOTUS or the constitution and Bernie has said that a commitment on this issue would be used as a litmus test

gotj90

(45 posts)
27. He didn't handle NN well but he has handled it well since
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 06:26 PM
Jul 2015

He's not getting credit for that in many places. People just keep bringing up NN and saying he needs to do better. He has. Plus he has a good Civil Rights record. As long as he keeps BLM in focus throughout the campaign, what more can he do? Or is it that he can never do better and this attack which started with the "lack of diversity" at his announcement will just keep going? And I hate to bring it up but at least he was there unlike Hillary. I think all of our candidates can do better on BLM.

BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
29. I'm glad to hear it
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 06:36 PM
Jul 2015

I wish some of his supporters who continue to denounce BLM would take his lead.

appalachiablue

(41,131 posts)
30. In the position of some, in spite of any of his actions, Bernie's just not good enough.
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 06:42 PM
Jul 2015



Senator Sanders meets US Capitol and federal contract workers at the Rally yesterday on Capitol Hill to raise the minimum wage to a living wage, $15. The majority of the employees are minority, black and Latino employees.

Many people who walked down Constitution Ave. to Rally at the US Capitol building work there, cooking and serving meals to Congressmen and Senators for $10.10 an hour. Others are clerks, cashiers, cleaners ad landscapers for govt. offices and buildings yet since they cannot make ends meet many have to take a second job, the case all over the US, the wealthiest country in world history.

Martin O'Malley supports a living wage of $15. Hillary Clinton hasn't committed to an increase to $15 because there are different economic environments, and what happens in L.A. and New York may not be suitable for other places she told Buzz feed News last week. Then there's Scott Walker who has removed the term 'living wage' from the state budget of Wisconsin.

BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
34. No, but what does that have to do
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 07:02 PM
Jul 2015

with the fact he is an underdog? You disagree with the fact he is an underdog with an uphill battle? Okay. Seems an objective point to me as demonstrated by polling data, but if you don't want to see it that way, no skin off my nose.

appalachiablue

(41,131 posts)
39. Some people, especially here are open to mentioning their heritage, experiences and views lately
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 07:46 PM
Jul 2015

with so many conversations about escalating racist attacks and violence against blacks which is why I asked. For two months or more Sanders has been tagged as being insensitive to race, PoC and immigration based on his state of residence, his race, then his early crowds and more, in spite of his lifelong and continued activism for blacks and other groups, and comments and views he's shared about Ferguson, BLM and how he thinks issues can be dealt with, all on record and noted here.

I've never heard of Sanders being viewed as not concerned enough with black people and 'out of date' because he's an underdog. If underdogs are racially indifferent that would include many like Bradley, Jerry Brown, Kucinich and Jesse Jackson who certainly was 'an underdog with an uphill battle'. On that, only two national level figures on the left supported Jackson for president in 1988, Bernie Sanders and Jim Hightower of Texas.

BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
40. The underdog issue is a function of his standing in the polls
Thu Jul 23, 2015, 07:59 PM
Jul 2015

All of those other candidates were also underdogs, and none of them won. Underdogs have to work to catch up. That was my point in your response to his never being good enough for some people.

The other issues have to do with concerns raised by members of the AA community, and now the issue is heated up more than ever after some of his supporters took to social media to discredit Black Lives Matters after Netroots Nation.

I keep hearing about "life long activism" but I haven't seen evidence of it. I hear about marches 50 years ago and supporting Jesse Jackson. How is that life long activism? How does that speak to concerns of AA today? That isn't my place to decide. That is for those voters to determine. You aren't supporting him because of his stand on civil rights in the 1960s, I would guess. You are supporting him because of what he says about America NOW that has relevance to you. African Americans expect the same. In fact, they are demanding it, not just of Bernie but all the candidates. #earnthisdamnvoteorlose Some AAs have decided to use the power of their voting block in the Democratic party for their own communities, and I say good for them.

Jamaal510

(10,893 posts)
53. I have been wondering for the longest
Fri Jul 24, 2015, 01:52 AM
Jul 2015

what he means by "revolution". Does he just mean getting out the vote? If he means revolutions like the violent ones from the past, who would be on the front lines doing the fighting? Those revolutions historically don't turn out well for either side involved (to say the least) and tend to lead to social regression. This is another criticism I have of BS (aside from him not touching on non-economic issues as much). When he talks about his vision, he does so passionately, but much of it is vague.

BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
54. I take it to mean
Fri Jul 24, 2015, 01:55 AM
Jul 2015

voting for him is akin to revolution. He can't mean actual social revolution (meaning to over turn a social order by force) when he is running for political office. That wouldn't make sense. I find it a cynical use of the word.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»A Sanders supporter on Ne...