General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDear Bernie, we cannot overcome our economic challenges without overcoming racism and sexism
Last edited Mon Jun 22, 2015, 02:52 PM - Edit history (1)
The only working class Americans that vote overwhelmingly for Republicans are White working class Americans. White racism is the biggest roadblock to a progressive nation. They won't support any progressive policies if it benefits non-Whites equally.
Over the past four years, the shift in party identification has occurred almost entirely among white voters. The Republican Party now has a 12-point advantage over Democrats among non-Hispanic white voters: 52% identify with or lean toward the Republican Party while 40% identify with the Democratic Party or lean Democratic. In 2008, the balance of party identification among whites was almost evenly divided (46% Republican vs. 44% Democrat). The Democratic Partys advantage among blacks and Hispanics, by comparison, has remained largely unchanged.
http://www.people-press.org/2012/08/23/a-closer-look-at-the-parties-in-2012/
--On Edit--
After reading the responses to my OP, let me offer an example. Bernie wants to make college free by imposing a transaction tax on high frequency trades. All that the opposition has to do to defeat this bill would be to say this: "Do you want your tax dollars paying for undocumented workers to go to college?" That's all that they have to say and that bill is defeated.
Want single payer? Here's the ad: "Do you want your tax dollars paying for the healthcare of people who don't work?" Defeated.
On and on, and on. Until you address the problems of race in this country, you cannot advance a progressive agenda. It simply won't happen.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)Too many years spent representing Vermont.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)Fix that, and the anger goes away.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)won't magically make racism go away.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)smokey nj
(43,853 posts)Voted NO on ending preferential treatment by race in college admissions.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)about not pandering to different audiences.
But his record is of representing a state that is one of the whitest in the country.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)What else would you have him do?
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)the minority people he may be encountering now, such as in his visit to Nevada. And not just assume that anything other than a one-size-fits-all speech is "pandering."
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Bernie on reproductive rights: http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Bernie_Sanders_Abortion.htm
Bernie on police brutality:
Bernie on immigration reform:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/19/politics/bernie-sanders-immigration/
\Bernie on pay equity: https://twitter.com/sensanders/status/578276686845906944
He is saying plenty if people want to actually listen.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)They don't want to listen. It's easier to claim he is using racist dog-whistles in order to cover the deficits in their own candidate.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)madokie
(51,076 posts)When Bernie wins this he'll not only have the republiCONs fighting him he'll also have the Hillary wing of the democratic party against him. Same as President Obama has had to deal with for the last 6 and 1/2 years.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)It is pathetic, but it is not surprising.
HERVEPA
(6,107 posts)That seems to be the action implied. Just incredibly dumb by people who know nothing about the man, other than that he is running against Their hero.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)For the life of me, I cannot understand the to-the-death commitment some have made to HRC. She's the quintessential status quo insider, friend/enabler of the tenth-percent, and a proven hawk on foreign policy issues. She is no friend of the people and if elected will govern appreciably to the right of Obama, who is already center-right. Corporatism and War Forever, Wherever will march along as they have for the last 14 years.
Saying she is better than any repuke boils down to this - "Shut up and eat your quarter-pound shit sandwich or we will give you a half-pound shit sandwich." I want a different menu.
I just do not get it.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)nemesis. So you invent one who is everything you are afraid of and who Bernie will save you from. And you label it Hillary because she is convenient.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)I don't have to label anything other than what it is. Her chosen close associations with the scum of the earth like Rupert Murdoch, the Saudi Government, Lloyd Blankfein, jamie Dimon and, worst of all, the war criminal Henry Kissinger, whom she described in print as a "defender of human rights", speak eloquently for themselves. You are judged by the company you voluntarily keep
Henry Kissinger is responsible for the needless deaths of millions of people. Calling him a "defender of human rights" IN PRINT presumptively disqualifies her from being within a light year of the presidency, and a light year is 5.5 trillion miles.
Feel free to rebut with linked facts anything I have said.
Response to upaloopa (Reply #70)
Post removed
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)Basically it is this. Hillary wants to partner with people to make their lives better meaning we have a roll to play too.
Bernie represents a savior to people who need one to do for them what they think they can't do for themselves and that is to kill the boogie men who are ruining their lives. Hillary stands in for the boogie man. It could be anyone really but she is in the way of your savior pulling your ass out of the fire.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Cosmic Kitten
(3,498 posts)Way to turn reality inside out
Hillary pleads to people to make HER
their "champion", to "save them" from
endless war, Wall st predators, and a
collapsing ecosystem...
each the fruit of polices she supports
Bernie rallies the public to change the
status quo, to stop the rapacious oligarchs
of Wall St through a mass movement
of millions of voters... and he's playing "saviour"
St Hillary, "Champion" of the downtrodden!
Save us Hillary!
Be our Champion!
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Blue is green
Madness is wisdom
War is peace
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)while simultaneously forgetting exactly which campaign in was in 2008 that used racists dog whistles in an attempt to be the nominee.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)about that. As if.
Robbins
(5,066 posts)I haven't forgotten the campagin she ran against Obama.
The obama is secret muslim talk may have been started by her campagin.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)That is baloney! That secret Muslim thing was started by Republicans and most people know it.
Robbins
(5,066 posts)mark penn was running the campagin.
Clinton campagin was saying to people obama may have been a drug dealer.
The secret muslim thing came on during the primarys.
With clintons supporters now saying bernie doesn't care about immigrants,minorities,and women i don't put anything past them.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)I was an Obama supporter and was outraged/disgusted by the blatant dog-whistling of HRC's campaign.
On which she was repeatedly called by Keith Olbermann, among others.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)as well as the secret Muslim thing. It sure as hell wasn't the Clintons. But, you keep on repeating that right wing BS if it makes you feel better.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)but it's straight out of the Mark Penn playbook. Not that I have a problem with those kinds of tactics, I've argued for some time that we need to play dirtier politics...I have a problem with their (Penn and Hillary's) aim. I don't care how badly you want to win a primary, you don't engage in firing on your own or "frag" fellow Democrats. Penn is Democratic-fratricidal scum and the Clintons both have both employed his weaselly, backstabbing tactics.
I didn't need another reason to swear to never support a Clinton campaign...but they gave me one anyways. I will never support your candidate...she is everything wrong with America and with the contemporary Democratic party.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)them enough or appropriately, then he isnt.
It isnt up to me, a white guy, it is up to them, and many of them are saying that.
But he isnt blind to it anymore than you or I are as white Americans, as we take SOOOOOOOOOOOO much for granted, all white Americans do. So are we blind to it? No, but that isnt saying much.
What makes Hillary different from a mainstream Democratic opponent to Bernie is the obvious, she is a Woman and member of a minority.
While Women may be the majority of living Americans, they are certainly a minority as to social and economic justice.
If a Black person tells you there is an issue, there is an issue.
I am not lecturing you, I am just using your post to respond to the entire conversation.
zazen
(2,978 posts)I personally would like to move away from gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, race, age, and disability status as the defining characteristic of a candidate.
But if you're going to claim Hillary has some superior understanding of discrimination because she's a female, you can't ignore Bernie's Judaism.
I'm a radical feminist who would prefer a more economically progressive candidate like Bernie, because he's plenty sensitive on issues of gender and race as well, but I'll vote for the Dem primary winner, regardless.
But this suggestion that Sanders is blind to racial and women's issues is just silly.
Hillary would do better to argue outright for the corporate ideology with which she largely agrees instead of run away from 30 years of her ideology. It'll win her more votes in the general election, anyway.
randys1
(16,286 posts)Or do you disagree?
Easily fixable too, I want him to win so I want him to address this
I'm not seeing or hearing black people saying that
randys1
(16,286 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)I believe the LGBT community when they say Sanders isn't addressing their issues. They know more than I do.
randys1
(16,286 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)truebrit71
(20,805 posts)Find a new axe to grind will ya'?
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)It's sickening because here you have a guy that has spent his whole life fighting for justice and equality, including people's right to a decent job and a paycheck.
And the Democratic Party machine, the Clinton machine, is running every dirty play in the book to paint him as racially insensitive or ignorant.
This is sickening tactic.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)scored well with focus groups, so they've rolled out that strategy to their foot soldiers.
But really - what else have they got? Bernie mops the floor with Hillary when it comes to economic issues, and on social justice issues Bernie is easily as good or better - but a candidate's stance on social issues is much more subjective to interpret, so there is an opportunity there to mislead the electorate.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)I would expect nothing less from Hillary's campaign.
You're right they don't have anything else. They can't win on issues so they spread lies. Sometimes with a question mark on the end for plausible deniability.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)that they will say anything to get elected and forget it all ten seconds after the ballots have been counted. Standard Operational Bullshit.
randys1
(16,286 posts)Do you believe it is ONLY coming from Hillary's camp?
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)with that view.
And to the extent that it is true that Bernie's crowds are mostly white, I think it's because that's who is aware of him right now.
I guess he's not particularly well known among black people, for example.
And the political messaging that you see is intended to make sure it stays that way.
That message is an attempt to inoculate against Bernie's popularity spreading to other people who don't know much about him yet.
So they inoculate by implying he has some kind of "race problem" even though it's not true.
randys1
(16,286 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Your black friends are concerned Bernie Sanders is not ____ enough.
Cool. Bernie has been fighting for racial justice for a long time.
Not only that but people should have a right to decent jobs and a livable income.
I think the political agenda is driving most of the "Fear of Bernie" concerns. The Clinton campaign are being sleazy and trying to define their opponent in a negative way to inoculate against the spread of BernieMania
As I've heard before, DU is not a representative sample of anything.
randys1
(16,286 posts)Personally I want him to win and I think he has to address this to do that.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)I edited my previous comment and I'm going to edit it again in a minute.
What would you like Bernie Sanders to do or say that would help with this "situation"?
randys1
(16,286 posts)a priority in his campaign.
So whether it is true or not , that is their perception.
Not up to me to say what he should do, I dont know, I am not Black.
I live a privileged white life as do ALL white Americans.
But asking the question, as you are doing, is a start, good for you
frylock
(34,825 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)need from him.
I have heard many comments about his unwillingness to be very open about their issues, NOW in the campaign.
And again, I support him and WANT him to win so I WANT him to fix this, what does fix mean?
Ask the African American community
frylock
(34,825 posts)how do I get in touch with them?
randys1
(16,286 posts)And you are behaving childishly now so we are done.
frylock
(34,825 posts)as we're constantly reminded, DU is a bubble, and does not reflect the views of The Real World. Now, evidently since a few posters (all of whom appear to be supporters of Clinton, coincidentally) are extremely concerned that, despite all evidence to the contrary, Sen Sanders doesn't care about issues that effect minorities, immigrants, women, or LGBT. And I'm supposed to believe that they speak for those entire communities?
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Then you are not listening. I hear from Black people all the time. I have gay friends who say the same thing.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)claiming they have a racial problem and stuff like that.
Orrex
(63,203 posts)After all, is there any region of the US that's more diverse than Vermont?
Oh, wait a minute...
TheKentuckian
(25,023 posts)This is straight bullshit designed to sew some fake division from a politician that would champion doing the most for most black people and most critically to bully Sanders off message.
The problem...you know the real problem is not about Bernie Sanders being insensitive, blind, or unfocused on the needs of the disadvantaged across our broken society but the opposite that he actually would actually help rather than another cruel trickster leading the sheep to the slaughter in our great national extraction racket.
No, what we have here is nasty as swiftboating that makes a fucking mockery of pretty much a fifty year track record of relentless works and consistent effort on behalf of the people on the bottom of the shitpile in this country using the people with the most to gain and the most to lose from the track we are on as human shields to attack this man at what is one of his many strengths not some phony fatal flaw.
The whole game is to silence the message about the issues from the same old status quo posse voices as it ever was.
Purple bandaid like political tactics it seems like to me.
ismnotwasm
(41,976 posts)His supporters now, are freaking me out.
Robbins
(5,066 posts)You actual look at Bernie Sanders' history and record. then try saying he doesn't care about minorities and civil rights.
Minorities get screwed over by top 1% too.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)mmonk
(52,589 posts)both economic and social injustice that includes racial and ethnic scapegoating. Stop with you sh*t or there is no way I will entertain voting for your candidate, the same one that played the dog whistles in 2008 when the campaign turned south with her behind.
EOM
BumRushDaShow
(128,872 posts)why people keep dodging the question about his messaging?
The DU knee-jerk reaction to this question is almost always that this is some sort of "Hillary conspiracy". That's complete bullshit. The critique is trying to address the lack of substance beyond tossed-out Democratic platform planks regarding issues important to blacks and other minorities by this candidate. The special circumstances experienced by people of color need to be included and there needs to be acknowledgment that "economic equality" is never going to fix those special circumstances. When billionaire Oprah Winfrey is treated no different from a black homeless woman in Los Angeles or other urban area in terms of being denied service, how is "economic" disparity relevant?
There is no "dog-whistle" about asking this question but certainly the responses to the question continue to be dog-whistles about "winning over 'working class'" (in some cases even stating "working class whites" , which basically is code talk to say "fuck-you POC, we need whites to win".
The old saying - If you're white, you're alright. If you're black, step back.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)POC should instead be grateful for everything he has done on their behalf.
What a bunch of ingrates.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)with evidence. Thanks in advance.
BumRushDaShow
(128,872 posts)including a huge one from bigtree, and the only responses have been -
1.) Look at what he did 50 years ago
2.) You are a Hillary shill!!111!1!!!
These questions were asked of Obama when he ran twice, and there are threads and threads about what Cornel West and Tavis Smiley had to say about Obama not addressing poverty, etc. For example this -
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025442878
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022246619
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021774693
So would like to know what Bernie has planned to address some of the issues being faced by people of color, including getting legislation through an intransigent and essentially insane Congress?
Number23
(24,544 posts)narrow supporters who seem thrilled with the very narrow demographics of his support and seem to be doing everything in their power to keep it that way.
I rec'd this OP because of this incredibly simple and devastatingly accurate comment within it:
White racism is the biggest roadblock to a progressive nation.
This is particularly true when the issues of race and class have been so intertwined as they have been throughout American history. The notion of white supremacy (racism) upon which this country was founded is what's led to the social and economic disenfranchisement of many minorities. And this didn't stop during the Civil Rights Movement or Obama's election -- the disenfranchisement of minorities continues TODAY, unabated and and in some cases, out in the open without even an attempt to be covert.
The idea that racism is the biggest roadblock to progress in a country founded on white supremacy should not be shocking to anyone especially those that love to scream about how liberal they are. But the hostility shown towards minorities for even discussing this and the knee jerk sidestepping here that this topic must be some "Hillary conspiracy" or "manufactured" does nothing but illustrate that this issue IS a blind spot for many white liberals and it appears that Sanders -- despite his great record on race issues -- may not be immune to it either, judging by some of his more recent comments. The determination some have to shut people up from even DISCUSSING this issue proves that beyond all doubt, imo.
BumRushDaShow
(128,872 posts)I think that until people realize that there is a hierarchy in terms of "economics" that is "built into the system" (and when I mean "system", I don't mean the "1%" thing because black 1%ers are treated as badly as black 99%ers so it's obviously not wealth that is establishing the anomalous differences - it's the system of "racism-white supremacy" , and deal with the fact that minorities are the "last hired and the first fired", and are considered on a different plane than the majority population, then maybe we will get somewhere. It ain't gonna happen overnight. It'll take decades...
TheFarseer
(9,322 posts)What would you have Bernie do to help people of color? What has Hillary or Obama done that helped? At least OBama is black so that makes perfect sense. I see a lot of lip service coming from Hillary and Obama and not much in the way of tangible help. Do some people just value being recognized more than I do? I would find the lip service combined with no actual help highly insulting by this point. Or maybe this is all a line planted by Hillary operatives to convince us Bernies candidacy is hopeless but I'm just grasping at straws trying to understand this.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Starting with an overhaul of the justice system.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)Candidates talk about the issues that are important to them. His voting record is good, but by not taking about these issues during the campaign (racism but also women's issues like reproductive rights) people might start to think that those issues aren't as important to him.
I like Sanders but I do wish he'd talk about this stuff more. it isn't lip service. It's stating that they are important and will be way up on his radar when elected. As far as reproductive rights issues go, I don't just want someone who won't do anything bad. My expectations are higher than that. I really would love for him to push the reproductive rights issue. Make it a big deal.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)mmonk
(52,589 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Indeed.
WDIM
(1,662 posts)When our leaders are taking bribes i mean campaign donations from the multi-national racist and sexist mega corporations, the racist and sexist aristocracy, and our leaders having close ties to racist and sexist governments around the world.
If these issues were important to you Hillary you would be renouncing ties to Saudi Arabia. To oil companies like Shell oil. You would renounce trade deals made with countries who exploit their citizens like Columbia.
You would break ties with the racist and sexist Wall-Street banksters that are financing your campaign. You would depend on a cross section of the average citizens to get you elected and not attempt to buy the election with money gotten from a racist and sexist group of elitist 1 percenters.
bigtree
(85,987 posts)...I'd address this to the other candidates, as well.
Hopefully, we'll hear more on this point in their campaign dialogue.
CanadaexPat
(496 posts)gollygee
(22,336 posts)whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)but obviously we must work on racism simutaneously. Just because Bernie focuses on economics doesn't mean he's ignoring our social challenges. IMO Hillary's pandering to get elected.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)People of color will have a greater level of poverty because racism is what causes them to have less money.
He votes well but he isn't talking about these issues. What you call "pandering" is also called "getting votes" and will win her the election.
Do you want Clinton to win the election because Sanders doesn't want to say explicitly how big of an issue racism is, and how important the right to safe and available abortions is? She will win and this will be the reason.
It's frankly pissing me off. He has always voted very well on these issues. All he has to do is talk about this stuff. It's pissing me off that he is going to lose because he can't let people know that the issues that are important to them are also important to him, and that he'll actively work on those issues if elected. He just has to talk about it.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)and when he does everything he says will be believable because that's how he rolls. If you feel he's not said enough specifically about race relations, know that his "omissions" are not from insensitivity, but from his philosophy that economic and social justice are inextricably linked. I'm sure he's hearing the critique and will adjust his message accordingly.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)Linked means that they're both important and related. That doesn't explain why he isn't talking about it.
I hope you're right! I know that he can win. He just has to be clear and explicit about what is important to him and what his priorities are. People know what he cares about by what he talks about, and conversely are going to assume the things he doesn't talk about are things he doesn't care much about, or at least doesn't prioritize.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)The links are there.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Bernie has been addressing those issues since before the days Hillary R Clinton was a Goldwater Girl.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)can NOT be improved upon.
Response to 99Forever (Reply #57)
Corruption Inc This message was self-deleted by its author.
Trajan
(19,089 posts)It's like little Karl Rove's, scurrying about in DU, conducting cute little sorties and bombing raids to besmirch a good man ...
How sweet ....
boston bean
(36,221 posts)Or maybe they just think that your post is race-baiting, as I have been accused of..
Instead, they might take the time to listen and learn where Bernie could improve... But that's not likely... many do believe the increasing size of their wallet decreases bigotry...
Even when history and politics of this country continually show that to not be true.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)No power = no civil rights.
You cannot separate the two issues. They cannot be decoupled. They are not diametrically opposed. They are not mutually exclusive.
You cannot support or ignore the economics of the 1% and pretend they don't affect civil rights. Right now all the money is going to the top 1% and African Americans are having voting rights stripped away from them. This is how the 1% AKA the oligarchy keep power. By buying politicians and stripping power from minorities and poor people AND the middle class.
Whichever group controls the $ controls the politicians. Whichever group controls the politicians controls the reins of power.
Having said that, Bernie talks about both issues regularity, and has done so consistently for decades. Don't blame Bernie because you refuse to listen or acknowledge.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)And when the populace has been reduced to the status of slaves to the 1% all the rights you want can be enshrined as pretty words on paper and it will make no difference. Because you will no longer have the ability, money, mechanisms, or power to exercise or enforce a single one of them. The Soviet Union's constitution enshrined loads of unenforceable rights.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)I can take both of my grand daughters to the mall, one is Black and one is white. Both of them will have no less than 300.00 on them at the Mall and grandma will be following with a fistful of credit cards. One of them gets constantly followed around. Which one do you think that is? They have plenty of economic justice by the way because I make sure of it.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)It isn't about who has the most money in their pocket. It's about which group controls the politicians.
It's about the forest, not the trees.
TheKentuckian
(25,023 posts)That means policy. That means law enforcement. That means the prisons and jails. That means the courtrooms. That means who can live where. That means what general educational opportunities you will have. That means the folks you have as company for good and ill.
That is just a starter. We are talking as you stated POWER.
And bullshit that it doesn't matter because it sure the fuck does, it just doesn't matter as much as does for the white man of similar station. Nobody can try to tell me that my just over broke ass isn't better off than a brother at McDonald's because yeah he is much more likely to get scooped into the system too often never to fully escape again.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)who cannot realize that blindingly obvious and simple fact. I really expect more from people who identify as left. I probably shouldn't have.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)And suddenly when he runs against Hillary, the most progressive member of the senate suddenly becomes ignorant on race and gender issues.
Funny how I never saw these threads before. One would almost think a certain group is cynically exlploiting race and gender issues to attack our most progressive candidate.
The mask has slipped.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)and notion of entitlement ("It's her/our turn now" seen here has been a genuine surprise to me. Identity politics uber alles, even policy.
Bernie has been the most stalwart champion of every cause the left gives a damn about for years and years. Now I guess he's a little better than the Chimp, Cheney, Jebbie or Santorum, but not much more, in the eyes of some. Hope that they are singing the same tune if she's elected and they see their jobs outsourced, Social Security dismantled, and the War Machine perpetually on the march. She is to the RIGHT of Obama, who is ALREADY center-right. Exhibit A: TPP.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)... that supposedly he ignores!
I think there's a hidden reason for this line of critique. Hillary's campaign are trying to FORCE him to stop talking about these economic issues that she's in effect being paid not to talk about herself, so that the campaign just goes back to being only about social issues the way the Third Way/DLC, etc. corporate wing of the Democratic Party wants!
For those that don't think he will talk about these issues, here's a challenge! Try calling in to Thom Hartmann's show on Friday mornings during Bernie's segment on there when he's on. Ask a question that you feel he's not talking about. Then get back to us if he "avoids" this issue, when asked a question about it.
There's a reason that he's on shows like this and HRC is not! It's because she's not prepared to answer any question that might come to her in such situations like that.
polly7
(20,582 posts)but I've read everything on your candidates, their positions and what's been said about them here and you are exactly right!, imho.
"I think there's a hidden reason for this line of critique. Hillary's campaign are trying to FORCE him to stop talking about these economic issues that she's in effect being paid not to talk about herself, so that the campaign just goes back to being only about social issues the way the Third Way/DLC, etc. corporate wing of the Democratic Party wants!"
It's pretty obvious, looking in.
Dirty, dirty politics.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)He should continue to ignore all other issues important to 85% of the Democratic Party. It only makes Hillary more Presidential.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)But some candidates that choose to ignore these economic issues that 90% of AMERICANS (not just Democrats) want to hear about want to figure out a way to level out the playing field without having to talk about economic issues in away that offends their corporate owners.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)When Bernie starts supporting women, minorities, and the LGBT community instead of his one track focus on his hatred of billionaires and banks, he will probably be supported by more than his current 12% nationally.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Your statement is deliberately disingenuous; it bends the truth until it snaps.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Trajan
(19,089 posts)It's as if there were a concerted effort to demean and degrade the good senator, using the most specious arguments ...
Something stinks ...
CTBlueboy
(154 posts)HRC supporters really want to talk about racism really ?
2008 was just 7 years ago plenty African American haven't forgiven and will never forget.
Her campaign and her surrogates had subtle racist things to say about the current president
Oh by the way
Remember the leakeed audio of B.O at a LA fundraiser during the 08 campaing trying to explain why he had hard time working class work in Pennsylvania. He wa caught saying " And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or.....
HRC repsonse to that quote - I was taken aback by the demeaning remarks Senator Obama made about people in small-town America," she said on Saturday. "His remarks are elitist and out of touch." Clinton campaigners in North Carolina handed out stickers saying: "I'm not bitter."
Romulox
(25,960 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)So much THIS. The tenth-percenters love HRC - Blankfein has said as much - and it ain't because she is going to challenge the status quo in ANY way. The thought of Liz Warren or Bernie Sanders makes them load their pants in fear.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)... if it were Bernie that were empowered to use it with a more progressive Senate and House and the Republicans not being able to filibuster "trade bills" (that he would load up with stuff that progressives like the way the corporate donors are loading up TPP and other trade bills with power grabbing crap for themselves now).
Maybe she can persuade them that she should come AGAINST TPA today so that if she and Republicans lose to Bernie, he won't be enabled by the TPA to facilitate the revolution against corporate rule that they are so fearful of!
ozone_man
(4,825 posts)lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)always been his position, not only when Obama was preaching the Sermon of God in the Mix but all the way back when Bill Clinton stuck us with DOMA, which Bernie did not vote for, Biden did, Progressive All Star Paul Wellstone voted for it. Not Bernie.
And I offer that if a person argued against the high frequency trade tax by asking 'Do you want your tax dollars paying for undocumented persons to go to school' my answer would be 'I don't do high frequency trades so I would not pay that tax, this bill would not provide college for undocumented workers but I would happily support a bill that did in fact tax me to give free education to anyone who showed up'.
I don't see that as much of a hard argument. How many people do you know, OP, who would pay lots of high frequency trading fees?
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)which is how most of our employer-funded retirement plans are structured today. Public and teacher retirement funds in particular are among the biggest traders on Wall Street. They are non-profit, but they still trade high volume.
MineralMan
(146,287 posts)This is the wrong approach to take. Both he and Clinton are strong in those areas.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)There is no reason or basis to question HRC on non-economic social justice issues. There is a mountain of reasons to question her commitment to the systemic reform that is so badly needed in the economy, or even basic reforms like re-instituting Glass-Steagall. There the distance between Bernie (and O'Malley) and HRC is a gaping chasm.
And don't get me started on foreign policy.
mike_c
(36,281 posts)eom
daredtowork
(3,732 posts)I have seen no evidence Bernie doesn't plan to address racism and sexism. Yet his platform is a direct challenge to the Southern Strategy and will allow women and people of color to make ongoing challenges to racism and sexism via their economic independence.
What has Hillary got? Are you suggesting that just the fact Hillary IS a woman overcomes racism and sexism? Or are you making the curious negative aregument that because Hillary plans to shun socialism, ergo she must be doing something positive for women and people of color? Or is it because Hillary is not Bernie- that means she magically achieved something? Good grief - she's a wealthy white woman who hobnobs with the Wall Street power elite. Just what is she going to do to address your concerns?
What a lame strawman OP.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)"Yet his platform is a direct challenge to the Southern Strategy and will allow women and people of color to make ongoing challenges to racism and sexism via their economic independence."
People of Color in this forum have said over and over that economic independence will not stop racism nor will it help overcome racism. Shouldn't you be listening to them since they know what they are talking about?
daredtowork
(3,732 posts)Economic independence is not the only factor in racism, but whatever your academic theory du jour, over the long term economic indepence helps. Money can be used to escape abusive husbands, quit demeaning jobs, donate to and influence local political campaigns, send a child to college, buy a house, etc.
Complaining that economics wouldn't have stopped a particular instance of police brutality or comparing how a poor white man gets invited to the party is a very narriw way to look at it. Yes, this is blatant evidence of racism Dylan Roof wanted to kill people because they were black. But why stop your analysis there? Where does the racism come from? How is it perpetuated? If you go with some psychological theory like "horror of the other", how do you ever address it? If you look into the roots of the stereotypes in play, many come from economic injustice. Perhaps repairing some of that injustice can, over time, make a dent in some of those stereotypes.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Politics can address institutional issues by passing laws, but no individual can change the backward mindsets of people who are invested in them. RFK couldn't have done it if he had lived, and he was about as close to a political jesus as there ever was in this country. Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights and Voring Rights acts but those couldn't change attitudes.
People who want to be racists can only be convinced that they are wrong or to reassess their attitudes. What you are asking for is ridiculous and impossible. A president or other politician can lead by example - RFK and LBJ certainly did, as did Jimmy Carter, but you cannot control the minds of stubborn fools who resist the moral imperative of racial, and gender, equality. Tribal beliefs are very stubborn things. The Sunnis and the Shi'a have kept their blood feud going for a thousand years.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)... and I think you are misrepresenting the concerns of many POC here. Even he understood that America's economic condition and the condition of POC and other similar ills like sexism are intertwined, and that in the spirit of working together in a way that you unite everyone except the oppressors, you need to speak largely to not only tackle the problems of racism, but the problems brought on by economic oppression as well, which we are all victim of now by the 1%, and by doing it this way we will gain the support of more Americans who are all affected by this horrendous wealth divide and the horrible economy it has created. He knew even then, that working to solve all of these problems was the only way to provide a lasting solution to both economic problems as well as those of the civil rights that are being abused for so many now.
From his Southern Leadership Conference Presidential Address in 1967:
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/628.html
...
The problem indicates that our emphasis must be twofold. We must create full employment or we must create incomes. People must be made consumers by one method or the other. Once they are placed in this position we need to be concerned that the potential of the individual is not wasted. New forms of work that enhance the social good will have to be devised for those for whom traditional jobs are not available. In 1879 Henry George anticipated this state of affairs when he wrote in Progress and Poverty:
The fact is that the work which improves the condition of mankind, the work which extends knowledge and increases power and enriches literature and elevates thought, is not done to secure a living. It is not the work of slaves driven to their tasks either by the task, by the taskmaster, or by animal necessity. It is the work of men who somehow find a form of work that brings a security for its own sake and a state of society where want is abolished.
Work of this sort could be enormously increased, and we are likely to find that the problems of housing and education, instead of preceding the elimination of poverty, will themselves be affected if poverty is first abolished. The poor transformed into purchasers will do a great deal on their own to alter housing decay. Negroes who have a double disability will have a greater effect on discrimination when they have the additional weapon of cash to use in their struggle.
Beyond these advantages, a host of positive psychological changes inevitably will result from widespread economic security. The dignity of the individual will flourish when the decisions concerning his life are in his own hands, when he has the means to seek self-improvement. Personal conflicts among husbands, wives and children will diminish when the unjust measurement of human worth on the scale of dollars is eliminated.
Now our country can do this. John Kenneth Galbraith said that a guaranteed annual income could be done for about twenty billion dollars a year. And I say to you today, that if our nation can spend thirty-five billion dollars a year to fight an unjust, evil war in Vietnam, and twenty billion dollars to put a man on the moon, it can spend billions of dollars to put God's children on their own two feet right here on earth.
...
I want to say to you as I move to my conclusion, as we talk about Where do we go from here, that we honestly face the fact that the movement must address itself to the question of restructuring the whole of American society. There are forty million poor people here. And one day we must ask the question, Why are there forty million poor people in America? And when you begin to ask that question, you are raising questions about the economic system, about a broader distribution of wealth. When you ask that question, you begin to question the capitalistic economy. And I'm simply saying that more and more, we've got to begin to ask questions about the whole society. We are called upon to help the discouraged beggars in life's marketplace. But one day we must come to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring. It means that questions must be raised. You see, my friends, when you deal with this, you begin to ask the question, Who owns the oil? You begin to ask the question, Who owns the iron ore? You begin to ask the question, Why is it that people have to pay water bills in a world that is two-thirds water? These are questions that must be asked.
Now, don't think that you have me in a bind today. I'm not talking about communism.
What I'm saying to you this morning is that communism forgets that life is individual. Capitalism forgets that life is social, and the kingdom of brotherhood is found neither in the thesis of communism nor the antithesis of capitalism but in a higher synthesis. It is found in a higher synthesis that combines the truths of both. Now, when I say question the whole society, it means ultimately coming to see that the problem of racism, the problem of exploitation, and the problem of war are all tied together. These are the triple evils that are interrelated.
...
Bernie sees this! MLK saw this! I just wish others here would too. And yet others here that appear to be potentially owned by those that don't want to see these truths too and talk about them.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)making economic justice one of his topmost priorities. He was in Memphis to support striking garbage workers who were demanding a decent wage when he was assassinated. He took economic justice so seriously it played a big part in killing him.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Report1212
(661 posts)Meaning he was working for civil rights before any of us, you dont realy need to explain this
Yavin4
(35,437 posts)of civil rights. I'm saying that he does not understand that the race issue is the main obstacle to a progressive agenda, not the 1%.
Report1212
(661 posts)Corporations intentionally hire minority lobbyists and use race as a shield all the time. I should know, they did it to me when I worked in DC. Sometimes they want to use it to distract from the 1%
TheKentuckian
(25,023 posts)institutions in the first place and who maintains and profits from them now?
You think slavery and the native genocide weren't driven in large part by economics and the aquisition of power?
Some folks have created a wholly distorted lens to the point a person in this thread asserted that Oprah has the same access to goods and services as a homeless woman because she is black which is fucking astoundingly absurd and willfully delusional. No, being a billionaire doesn't end racism for Oprah and about nobody has claimed they would but yeah it makes a substantial quality of life difference whether well off blacks get full value of their station.
Same as a homeless black person? Fucking kRaZy talk from somebody who doesn't know what the fuck they are talking about.
Get this Oprah being followed in some boutique is not a comparable to trying to live in the street and fuck no they don't have equal access to goods and services that is farcical on its face except from the jaundiced point of view that both the rich and the poor are equally restricted from sleeping under bridges.
betterdemsonly
(1,967 posts)and fewer people are voting, the fact that they have lost so many white working class, actually confirms the need for a candidate that focuses on economic justice rather than just getting some minorities and women ceos.
Also black fortunes in America have actually declined under 8 years of centrists rule and their lack of concern for the 99% Most blacks aren't wealthy.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)do you see anyone else you trust on both issues?
Response to Yavin4 (Original post)
Romulox This message was self-deleted by its author.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)Hillary is using her newfound awareness of the issues of social justice the same way the GOP used the religious right beginning in the 1980s.