Trump won't stop until he insults every minority, Hillary until she exploits every minority.

[morningfog]

[malthaussen]

1. You mean there are some left?

On both points.

-- Mal

[Thinkingabout]

2. Hillary is exploiting every minority, link showing she exploiting minorities.

[morningfog]

3. Her twitter feed.

[Thinkingabout]

7. link

[JonLeibowitz]

11. https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton. You're welcome. n/t

[grasswire]

4. abuela? qwanzaa?

[Thinkingabout]

6. More information needed

[morningfog]

9. Pay more attention and think about it.

[Thinkingabout]

15. Hey, what is with the personal attack?

[morningfog]

21. Not personal. Totally objective.

[Thinkingabout]

23. Bye

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. I empathize with you. We should be nicer to one another./nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

51. Apparently, ...

attempting to connect with (even with wrong-headed, attempts) is exploitation.

[Thinkingabout]

57. Only if Hillary does this.

[1StrongBlackMan]

61. Because ...

no one noticed the hiring of Ms. Sanders ... or, the use of Dr. West ... or, the use of Killer Mike, all for the sole purpose of "gaining entre" into the African-American community/electorate.

[Thinkingabout]

62. Or Bernice King, or .......

[1StrongBlackMan]

63. Okay ... At the risk of pissing off a segment of DU, AGAIN ....

How is white liberals trotting out Black faces to promote the/a white liberal's position, that is a clear minority position among Black folks ... any different from, when white conservatives trot out EJ Jackson or Thomas Sowell to promote the white conservative's message of Black pathology; a clear minority position among Black folks?

[Thinkingabout]

64. It isn't SBM, it is exploiting the situation, there is much more than this.

I would have thought when the CRA was passed surely this many years later this would have gone away, it hasn't and in the past few years it has gotten much worse. I am sick and tired of the hate, as someone said if you can teach hate you can teach love.

[morningfog]

12. Rosa Parks? Make up products for women?

Ads focusing on her genetalia as a qualification?

[Thinkingabout]

17. Is this what you have?

[Buzz Clik]

18. Suggest you check the definition of "exploit".

It does not mean what you think it means.

[Thinkingabout]

22. I got it, like exploit the name of MLK.

[cheapdate]

32. How can anyone run as a Democrat for president of the United States

and not talk about Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.?

Easily one of the most important figures in all of American History, but in your view "exploitation" to talk about?

"Those who hope to persuade a nation to exert itself need to remind their country of what it can take pride in as well as what it should be ashamed of. They must tell inspiring stories about episodes and figures in the nation's past -- episodes and figures to which the country should remain true. Nations rely on artists and intellectuals to create images of, and to tell stories about, the national past. Competition for political leadership is in part a competition between differing stories about a nation's self-identity, and between differing symbols of it's greatness." - Richard Rorty. Achieving Our Country. 1997

It would remarkable if a Democratic candidate did NOT talk about MLK.

[Thinkingabout]

33. Or try to convince others you have gotten the endorsement of John Lewis

When a photo of Sanders celebrated the anniversary of the march on Edmund Pettus Bridge, problem with this one John Lewis is alive and has endorsed Hillary Clinton.

[NuclearDem]

5. ...Bernie until he subject verb billionaire class.

[MeNMyVolt]

8. Quite malodorous. Keeping with your handle, no?

How about something a little less smelly.

[morningfog]

10. You are right. They both stink.

[rjsquirrel]

13. Yeah cuz Hillary

Is pretty much just like Trump.


Lol whut?

[JoePhilly]

14. Just another slow day at the outrage factory.

[Buzz Clik]

16. ... and Bernie until he promises the world to every minoirity.

[rhett o rick]

19. Sen Sanders wants to help those living in poverty and you would disparage him for it.

He wants a fair shake for the 99% but that doesn't sit well with the super wealthy and those that worship them.

[Buzz Clik]

20. I like Sanders. A lot. It is the DU hyteria surrounding him I find laughable.

You guys act like he has given the clothes off his back and has dedicated his life to serving the needy. He is a politician, a career politician, and he has all the baggage that comes with it.

[rhett o rick]

25. Every fracking day I see the distruction that has been put upon us by the Establishment

that answers to the big money. I would hope that all Democrats would be against the big money in politics that has given us 16,000,000 children living in poverty. I see it every day. But some Democrats are ok with that, are ok with the fact that we have the highest infant mortality rate of all modern countries. Ok with the fact that we are shipping jobs to China. Sen Sanders isn't the messiah but he is fighting for us in the 99%. H. Clinton is interested in her own personal fortune which makes her a member of the 1% and I guess that's why you like her. She is tough and has the power of the billionaires behind her and that must give you some comfort the 99% be damned. People are dying because of poverty and inadequate health care. But for some the profits for Wall Street come first. Your billionaires may buy the WH for Clinton and make her super duper wealthy but we will continue to fight against the corruption of our government by big money to the end. Every day I see suffering that is caused because the big money politicians give our money to Goldman-Sachs and not the poor.

[Buzz Clik]

29. Bernie Sanders is a member of the US Senate -- the political establishment.

He is running for president of the US -- the epitome of the political establishment.

Give the "establishment" bullshit a rest.

I like him and support his ideas, but this kind of crap is really hard to take.

[rhett o rick]

39. You pretend you don't know what is meant by the "Establishment".

The big money control of our government is what I am fighting. All Democrats should be on board.

This is war. This is a class war and the 1% billionaires are not about to help those 50 million Americans living in poverty. Why would you chose their side?

[BainsBane]

36. Tell us what he is going to do about any of that?

Rhetoric means nothing. You act like all you have to do is vote for one member of the political elite and the nature of capitalism and the capitalist state is transformed. Despite the fact that your candidate's only proposal to deal with that is a $15 minimum wage, which contrasts with Clinton's $12 indexed proposal. Yet the world is transformed by voting for one man, whereas voting for another candidate is supposedly empowering billionaires.
We've heard that rhetoric for months now. The problem is the policy and details do not support the campaign sloganeering. You clearly believe it, but show no interest in how such a transformation would be brought about.

You yourself insisted to me that funding foodstamps--the same foodstamps supported by every DLC politician-- was enough to deal with poverty. That does nothing to address inequality and doesn't even question the structure of an economic and social system that results in politicians promising free education to the middle to upper-middle class while feeling compelled to do nothing to address the inequality in K-12 that guarantees generations of poor will never be able to take advantage of "free education," funded by union pension funds and teacher retirement plans. But what is important, you insist, is that those who do manage to take advantage of taxpayer funded education not have to work to contribute to their own education. There is no attempt through that policy to deal with poverty, and Sanders still has not offered any proposal to deal with the rampant inequality in k-12.

This tired rhetoric of yours that a vote for Clinton is somehow a vote for the wealthy is ridiculous and not at all borne out by the policies of the two candidates or the composition of their support base. Sanders draws a great deal of support from those who average 2x or more the national median income and Clinton from those who are far less fortunate. Yet the poor and people of color are tools of the wealthy whereas the upper middle class are the only ones who truly care about poverty, we are told--except of course that concern doesn't extend to actually listening to the poor and acknowledging they know anything about their own interests. Meanwhile, one millionaire after another who supports Bernie is trotted out as having the answer.

I myself have had it with the meme of the 99 percent because it is increasingly used by those with financial means to insult and demean the poor and disadvantaged. The upper 10-20 percent know nothing about what it's like to live in poverty and have far more in common with the 1 percent they claim to hate. It's been clear to me for sometime that the rhetoric belies an agenda that is about restoring the white bourgeoisie back to what they see as their rightful place atop the capitalist world order. The days of old they long for witnessed no shortage of poverty and disenfranchisement, but the people who mattered benefited.

People can give lip service to caring about poverty, but when they systematically treat others as inferior and refuse to even acknowledge those Americans have any legitimate concerns in making their own political choices, the rhetoric rings hollow; many see it for the empty sloganeering it is.

[rhett o rick]

40. The Oligarchy makes money off of the 99%. They don't pay taxes but use

the facilities that we pay for. Poverty levels increase as their profits increase. Yet some Democrats support them because apparently they need the leadership of strong, tough authoritarians. Of course at the expense of the 99%, yet they don't care.

It's a class war and the oligarchy doesn't give a crap about those living in poverty.

[uponit7771]

42. This response doesn't answer the question of what he's going to do about that?

Love Sanders like a play cousin but it's been 6 months and basically no answer to the question of the gerrymandered senate that he'll face and is willing to crash the US economy of really stupid shit...

We've seen how the left has treated the last dem president who has faced the gerrymandered congress, ... just asking how is Sanders going to do any better with people who don't answer to those who vote them in office?

tia

[rhett o rick]

43. The difference between Sen Sanders and H. Clinton is that Sanders wants to help the

99% and HRC only wants to help the 99% as long as the 1% (which includes herself) isn't negatively affected.

[uponit7771]

46. I don't believe any of the demonizing rhetoric about HRC, she's a good person like the rest of the..

... Dem candidates...

Wall Street isn't going to get any easy ride from her either, might be easier than Sanders but they're not going to be jumping in the streets

This response doesn't address what Sanders is going to do different with a GOP gerrymandered congress that doesn't answer to people who vote for them?

tia

[rhett o rick]

48. She won't even pretend that she will hold Wall Street accountable for their crimes.

They made her wealthy and you think she would not reward them.

[1StrongBlackMan]

53. And, in my estimation, and as you said, empty sloganeering ...

As I asked earlier; but, never quite, get an answer ...

:

so I'll frame the question this way ... Let's assume (the unlikely instance where) a President Sanders can get the $15.00 Minimum Wage, and Universal Healthcare, and Free College, and all of his proposed tax increases, and even, (though he hasn't proposed this) 100% public funding of elections ... the super-wealthy (the oligarchs) wiil STILL will be super-wealthy (powerful); and, the middle and low end of the working class will STILL be poor and powerless (in relation to the 1%) ... Right?

[1StrongBlackMan]

52. But only after it trickles down to them. eom.

[NCTraveler]

26. Proof that a certain group of supporters...

Are starting to see things aren't going well.

[NurseJackie]

28. Time is running out.

[Buzz Clik]

31. Ha! You've seen the "latest polls" right? Bernie is surging, HRC sagging?

[rhett o rick]

41. Gloat while you can, you do have the billionaires on your side but sooner or later

the People will kick the corrupt big money politicians out of our government. I remember a time when all Democrats were against big money in politics, but I guess when the big money in on your side your principles go out the window.

You may celebrate if your billionaires buy the WH and ignore the climbing poverty rates, but the People will prevail over the Oligarchy.

[Buzz Clik]

44. My title was verbatim the title provided by a DU Sanders supporter today.

And yesterday.

[rhett o rick]

45. Do you support HRC's stand on limiting the min wage to lower that a living wage?

Do you agree with her that fracking for oil profits is more important than clean drinking water for the peasants? Tell me which issues you actually agree with her on. Maybe the job killing TPP or arctic drilling. I know you support her decision to invade Iraq.

[Buzz Clik]

49. I will bow to your economic expertise about minimum wage.

$12 an hour is a huge improvement.

Fracking: I disagree with your depiction of reality about the process. HRC thinks that fracking is a reasonable alternative to all other fossil fuels -- she is correct. I just read that Sanders wants to ban fracking now; he's lost his mind.

TPP: No opinion. I don't pretend to have expertise where I don't.

Arctic drilling: I'm totally opposed. So is Clinton.

Invade Iraq: I was totally opposed.

My primary is months away. My revulsion at the behavior of Sanders's supporters started months ago. Not all of them, but a big number.

[rhett o rick]

50. The min wage should be over $20 if it kept pace with inflation. Except for a single adult

living alone the living wage is $20 and higher depending on how many dependents live in the home. I think that $12 is a poor place to start negotiations. $15 isn't even enough. And it's not my expertise, the data is available to you also. But I guess the rationale is that the poor should be grateful for whatever they get.

I suggest you do some research on the dangers to our aquifers from the hundreds of chemicals being pumped into the ground. Many are known to cause cancer and many chemicals are not even identified. And how about earthquakes? http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/oklahoma-earthquakes-linked-fracking-study
I guess that poison in our water supplies and earthquakes are a small price to pay for higher oil company profits.

You don't have to be an expert to have an opinion on job killing "Free Trade" agreements. Use a little logic. Big corporations wrote it and their motives are to make more money. Past examples have shown this to be to the detriment of the 99%. Look who favors the TPP? Big Corps, Republicans, etc. And look at who opposes, unions, doctors without borders, most progressives. Why is it hard to choose a side?

Clinton said she has reservations about Arctic drilling. Not very convincing but I hope so.

The mistake she made with her vote to support Republicans with their lies to invade Iraq is unforgivable. The damage is terrible beyond belief. It is enough to disqualify her from being president.

When people tell me that they are revolted by the behavior of a candidate's supporters, I think they are narrowly focused to enable themselves to rationalize why they support their own choice. The People (99%) are headed off a cliff. We've already probably gone beyond the point of no return. And yet some defend the status quo which will lead to ever more misery for the People. Don't kid yourself, if HRC wins she will do nothing to negatively impact her friends at Goldman-Sachs and Wall Street.

[Buzz Clik]

65. I admire your deep, deep expertise on every subject there is! Seriously! But about this:

I suggest you do some research on the dangers to our aquifers from the hundreds of chemicals being pumped into the ground. Many are known to cause cancer and many chemicals are not even identified. And how about earthquakes? http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/oklahoma-earthquakes-linked-fracking-study
I guess that poison in our water supplies and earthquakes are a small price to pay for higher oil company profits.

Good suggestion, but that really is what I do, and you're wrong (This is the problem with people assuming they are the smartest person in the room.)

My suggestion to you is to do you own research, for a year or two (it will take longer than that to cover all the published scientific research, but it will be a start). Then, you will be within reach of having a glimmer of understanding of the issue. See, you can't get that knowledge from reading bullshit on the Internet. For example, your misunderstanding of the cause of earthquakes (and referencing MSNBC) speaks to that. Fracking does not cause earthquakes. Period. It's not up to me to school you on this, because you'll arrogantly reference some other unreliable site to support your incorrect notions.

Stick to your area of expertise, rhett, which is more limited than you think.

[rhett o rick]

66. What I notice is that you guys never want to actually discuss issues and when pressed you resort

to name calling and ridicule. It must be nice to choose your candidate on superficial things. You know deep down that she won't help the 99% at least if it costs her wealthy friends a dime.

[Buzz Clik]

67. No, rhett, I called you out very specifically on your bullshit. Accept it.

This was not about a candidate; this was about you pretending to know something you don't and then deriding me in my area of expertise.

But, enough about you (not a particularly deep subject), let's get back to candidates: I am leaning toward Bernie, but only by a hair. His scorecard on environmental knowledge is mixed at best, but I am leaning toward him anyway.

[rhett o rick]

68. Amazing how you can rationalize calling me names in lieu of debating the issues.

I am not an expert and don't claim to be. But instead of showing me where I am wrong, you choose to try to shut me up with ridicule. I have been begging for a debate on the issues by those that don't agree but you came about as close as I have ever gotten.

I see 16,000,000 children living in poverty with another 16,000,000 living in low income homes. I believe this is because we've allowed the big money to control our government and their wealth has been growing rapidly. I believe if we elect a candidate that is beholden to the big money we will continue to see the wealth increase for the big money and more and more poverty. Sen Sanders will have a very hard time trying to fix our problems but it's a start in the correct direction.

[Buzz Clik]

69. Ok. We'll call this a bad start

I need to leave now, but later I will address your ideas later today.

[rhett o rick]

70. Here is a post on problems they are having in Oklahoma due to fracking. nm

[artislife]

30. Is it wrong, that I cannot wait for Chinese New Year????nt

[seabeyond]

34. That is a pretty disgusting title. Clinton is a Democrat, she has stood for minorities her

entire life. Truly, an offensive and disgusting statement, even for a Sanders supporter that is pissed he lags so far behind.

[morningfog]

35. I'm not pissed sanders lags. I'm thrilled he's this close.

D

[BainsBane]

37. I remember Seattle and Netroots

And so do many voters of color.

Voters of color and women voters are fully capable of making their own political choices. That they don't prioritize the interests of the white, especially male, bourgeoisie above their own does not make them "exploited" by a politician, who like every Democratic candidate listens to and seeks to address the concerns of people of color and women. They are not "minorities" but in fact the majority.

How dare Latinos vote for a candidate with a consistent record of supporting comprehensive immigration reform? If they weren't so "exploited," they would vote for the candidate who voted with the GOP on immigration reform, the Minutemen, and on the border fence on three occasions (but against it on others). https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/27110/bernie-sanders/40/immigration#.VoCkShUrLWI

If only Clinton made clear that her priority was on the white male voter, then she wouldn't be "exploiting" people of color, who, we are told, only fails to support Sanders because they are suffering from "stockholm syndrome," "uninformed," "low-information voters," or now "exploited."

[chillfactor]

38. purely personal attack on Hillary...

you should be ashamed of yourself!

[rhett o rick]

47. Those that can ignore her vote that helped Bush and the republicons kill half a million Iraqis, are

the ones that should be ashamed.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

54. It's par for the course but we HRC supporters are exemplars to the world and therefore it is...

It's par for the course but we HRC supporters are exemplars to the world and therefore it is incumbent upon us to rise above them.

[upaloopa]

55. Bernie who can't get the support of any minority

[irisblue]

59. Alert results

Bernie who can't get the support of any minority
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=952701

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is oot, rude and insensitive, plenty of minorities on DU support Bernie. We need to stop with this kind of rhetoric, using minorities as pawns is beneath du.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Dec 28, 2015, 11:48 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: silly alert LEAVE
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It's one person's opinion. Free speech ya know
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Truth is not required of political rhetoric.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Waste of a jury's time-someone's got a very thin skin
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

[treestar]

56. Hillary is not exploiting any minority

Any attempt she makes to try for their votes is condemned as if she should not do it - yet Bernie can try to get votes and that's OK. Loss of objectivity is total.

[Starry Messenger]

58. Bernie until he loses the primaries.

[LanternWaste]

60. That's a rather creative, though unsupported allegation regarding Clinton.

That's a rather creative, though unsupported allegation regarding Clinton.

[Walk away]

71. And Bernie won't stop until he ignores every minority!