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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

rjsquirrel

(4,762 posts)
12. "They"
Fri Jun 17, 2016, 06:12 AM
Jun 2016

refers to Sanders diehards. It was clear to me.


And yes Hillary won working-class voters. The only explanations I've heard from Sanders folks for that are: 1) voters are stupid and 2) the system was rigged.

Both explanations are patently the things losing campaigns say to convince a few followers to stay loyal. The first is the classic "false consciousness" argument (read your Marx); it gives lie to the whole pretense to be defending "democracy."

The second is a truism if you believe you are fighting the "establishment," in which case in a general sense yes, "the system" is what you set out to change, but that doesn't mean you were "cheated." No system tolerates its own destruction. The rules exist to prevent insurgencies and you knew that going in. If you believe you were actively cheated out of a win you otherwise would have had, then you have to actually prove it. Otherwise it's conspiracy theory, and frankly no method of outright intentional fraud produces winning margins of millions of votes. Far too many people would need to be in on it for it to be safe. Let alone effective.

Option 3 is that you ran a hell of an insurgent campaign but came up short because smart voters decided smashing "the establishment" (which you've avoided out of ideological purity for decades) in favor of pie in the sky promises that were obviously not achievable was actually a bad idea. The failure to recognize and correct for your supporters' aggressiveness and blindness to their own privilege was also a problem. People of color and women saw that clearly. Actual voters don't like being called stupid. They vote against you just for saying so.

Sucks to be a revolutionary. Name the last time America voted in a leftist "revolution," however.

The country is center left to center right depending on era and national mood. The democratic party is center left. Susan Sarandon and Cornell West represent fringe marginal views. Most Americans think those people are nuts. Embracing the far left is bad strategy. Embracing loony public figures who can't even articulate your platform without sounding silly too.

Bernie should have moved toward the center if he really wanted to win. But that would have cost him his hard left ideological support. So the problem with leftist revolutionary sorts is that they prize ideological purity over pragmatism (more so even than the far right) and it looks silly to most people old enough to have been through an election cycle or two.

Also you cannot build a movement around the charisma of one candidate. Let alone a grumpy one.

Poiitics 101.

Hillary supporters are the working class bravenak Jun 2016 #1
Hillary supporters live in REALITY, a notion far removed from some of the "revolutionaries." RBInMaine Jun 2016 #3
So true bravenak Jun 2016 #34
So true! Noably, ONLY 15% TOTAL Dems told Bloomberg Hortensis Jun 2016 #6
Most of those that hated her always hated her bravenak Jun 2016 #35
Yes, and it's really about them, not her. Hortensis Jun 2016 #36
People need a villain bravenak Jun 2016 #40
Want. They need not to indulge Hortensis Jun 2016 #41
The worst one will get very quiet for a long time bravenak Jun 2016 #42
Some are just cynically malicious. Hortensis Jun 2016 #43
Oops. I do believe we just saw a classic example of a Freudian slip Android3.14 Jun 2016 #8
"They" rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #12
Yes, her supporters do live in a bubble. TheCowsCameHome Jun 2016 #17
You have a much kinder assessment of Bernie & his fans than I do. baldguy Jun 2016 #2
... hobbit709 Jun 2016 #4
Sen. Sanders has good positions on some issues but "Bernie" the candidate was a strange brew. ucrdem Jun 2016 #5
Closing another factory here in Indiana. seabeckind Jun 2016 #7
That's ''Progress.'' Octafish Jun 2016 #13
Here is a question ismnotwasm Jun 2016 #18
Much of the factory closings seabeckind Jun 2016 #26
RBInMaine, can you please... joshcryer Jun 2016 #9
Yeah, this shit is getting really smelly. Fuddnik Jun 2016 #10
wow, really? Else You Are Mad Jun 2016 #11
What he said. n/t seabeckind Jun 2016 #27
Sanders was never a threat and so had a free ride with no attacks Gothmog Jun 2016 #14
Exactly!! nt eastwestdem Jun 2016 #44
+1, I don't see how Sanders is progressing anything practical and not admitting Clinton won is bad uponit7771 Jun 2016 #15
You DINOS say the strangest things Doctor_J Jun 2016 #16
I am a "Democrat in Name Only"? ismnotwasm Jun 2016 #19
Haven't you heard GulfCoast66 Jun 2016 #32
More of this devisive bullshit. blackspade Jun 2016 #20
Some people actually ENJOY being preached to every Sunday. randome Jun 2016 #21
Brockettes tap tap tap tapping the script away MaeScott Jun 2016 #22
What kind of "progress" will Hillary make with... Herman4747 Jun 2016 #23
a lot of stuff was never "doable" DonCoquixote Jun 2016 #29
Why so bitter? GeorgeGist Jun 2016 #24
2. (of a group, person, or idea) favoring or implementing social reform or new, liberal ideas. krawhitham Jun 2016 #25
Oh, god in heaven, not another one !!! pangaia Jun 2016 #28
Another goddamned "supporters" thread. nt VulgarPoet Jun 2016 #30
Why do you post the very same things over and over and over QC Jun 2016 #31
... MattSh Jun 2016 #33
Is this a progressive / liberal stance HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #37
Some of us might take incrementalism, if it was in the right direction, and by the way, it doesn't JCanete Jun 2016 #38
The denial that you are a moderate republican coyote Jun 2016 #39
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Die-hard Bernie-ites are ...»Reply #12