Burying the White Working Class
(snip)
At least that’s what the Democratic Party wants you to believe.
(snip)
Instead of acknowledging the size and importance of this part of the electorate, Democratic Party elites have simply constructed a new narrative to suit their interests — a narrative that was on display after West Virginia. Following Sanders’s win a significant chunk of the punditocracy came to the conclusion, mostly by abusing the hell out of exit polls, that a vote for the Jewish socialist was actually a vote for white supremacy.
After decades of being told white workers would never support socialism because they’re racist, we’re now told that they support the socialist candidate because they are racist. Yes, this is where liberals are in the year 2016.
How did we get here? How did we get to the point at which universalist, social-democratic politics — the antithesis of Reagan’s welfare queen and the very set of policies we’ve long been told white workers would never support out of racist spite — have become the last gasp of white supremacy? Where a working-class program — that would disproportionately help women and people of color — is the new white flight?
(snip)
This kind of “inclusion” politics — the chance at climbing one of a tiny handful of rickety ladders to the top — is the only economic program the Democratic Party mainstream is selling to those not already in the upper tiers. Sure, this politics is better than nothing. But as Ralph Miliband put it, “access to positions of power by members of the subordinate classes does not change the fact of domination: it only changes its personnel.”
(snip)
But even with such “dangerous” and “unrealistic” expectations why do elite liberals seem to focus so particularly on white wage-earners?
Part of the explanation is that unlike with the white working class, many of the hardships workers of color face fit neatly within an acceptable liberal narrative about what’s wrong with our society: racism. And when racism can be blamed, capitalism can be exonerated.
Liberals can delude themselves into believing that it is nothing more than the accumulation of individual prejudices stashed away in the minds of powerful white people that has destroyed black and brown communities in Detroit, Ferguson, and Chicago’s South Side.
(snip)
Class stratification, capital flight, and the war against organized labor are thus sidestepped completely. The liberal elite is spared from having to question the fundamental injustices of capitalism.
Unfortunately, the miseries, hardships, and exploitation of white workers don’t fit into an easy capital-friendly framework. Liberals then have two options: blame the individual moral failings of white workers or call into question the very nature of capitalism itself.
Guess which one they choose. More and more, liberals just point and scream: “racist.” Certainly, many members of the white working class reject the Obama/Clinton program of inclusion and meritocracy for reactionary reasons (and vote Republican), many more are pretty lukewarm about it. When polled, they support far more egalitarian policies like the kind associated with the Sanders campaign. But when it comes down to it, few of them show up on election day.
(snip)
It’s obvious that this kind of popular politics will never be built if segments of the working class — much less a majority of it — are written off. So when I hear liberal pundits saying that white workers are morally compromised beyond hope or on the way to irrelevance, I tend to get a little suspicious.
But when those same pundits claim — despite all evidence to the contrary — that most of these workers are more invested in cultivating racism than their own material and social emancipation, I think it’s time to stop listening to them altogether.
Because they’re not just wrong anymore. They’re on the wrong side.
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/05/white-workers-bernie-sanders-clinton-primary-racism/
I believe this to be an excellent analysis.
= new reply since forum marked as read
...you know, from Hillary! Boom! 
But he has been attacked, called racist, non-religious, communist, sexist, jewish, not jewish, dreamer, insider, gun-nut, pro- "Bad" Catholic Church, pro-militia, freeloader, tax-evader, anti-worker, anti-immigrant...they even paid for fake bots to spam media and social networks against him. The idea that he has not been attacked is crazy, the media has only insulted him when they are on. Hillary has pulled many of the same dirty tricks she did against Obama. The claim that Hillary has been attacked non-stop is a lie. She was seen as a victim in the Clinton years, she was along side Bush as a patriot in the NY days, then as Sec of State they did mount an attack...but it was over one set of things and it only helped her because she was not running for office and they are so out of touch on the right that they just do the same thing over and over. This time the attacks against her are going to hit harder and people will actually care more what is being said. The republicans are going to latch on to all of the dirty things her camp has done this election to steal it (they have dropped a few hints already).
Also to disregard the polls saying he would do better, because you think he will get hit hard is pretty much getting rid of the only data to go with an opinion...you can say they polls may not mean much, but they could also mean far more, and he could stand up to the attacks as he is standing up for us and not just saying if you don't vote for me they are going to beat you up. At this point the HRC camp is basically running a protection racket as the campaign strategy.
1. Nationals polls have reflected the same trends since last fall and while I agree they can change between now and November, that kind of consistent trend does say same something in regards to the strengths of the candidates.
2. Bernie is a unique individual but I believe he is on the forefront of change in Congress as well. One must consider our dysfunctional electoral and campaign finance systems which shaped our current Congress. There are reams of articles written about how too many Congresspeople must spend most of their time raising money for their next elections mostly from the wealthy rather than serving the people that elected them. Before the 1990s it was literally unthinkable that any political party in Congress would threaten to shut down the government, this was a stark testament as to where their loyalties lay.
Our two party system together with the corporate media conglomerates is set up for the Democrats or Republicans to dominate all national elections, as both parties don't have to be concerned about some third party thinking outside the box seriously challenging their power, and as fundraising for the next election has become the prime directive, they have become increasingly disconnected from the people.
The result has been a long trend of entropy for both parties.
As a consequence, the percentage of U.S. adults identifying as Democrats is now at the lowest point in the past 27 years, down from the prior low of 30% in 2014. Gallup's shift from in-person to telephone interviewing in 1988 complicates the ability to directly compare party identification data collected between the two methods. However, Gallup data from 1951-1987 collected in person never found a yearly average Democratic identification less than 37%, making it safe to conclude that the current 29% is also the low point in Gallup polling history.
The percentage of Republicans is now just one point above its recent low of 25% in 2013. Before 1988, there were several years when the average percentage of Republican identifiers in Gallup polls was lower than 25%.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/188096/democratic-republican-identification-near-historical-lows.aspx
To a large degree Bernie and Trump have upset this apple cart and thus Bernie; should he get the nomination will be in the best position to stop Trump from coming to the White House except for maybe on a tour.
You should probably be aware that those are code words used by racists. Or perhaps you already do know that. 
including mine. Both Maine and Vermont each gave Barack Obama nearly 60% of the vote that year. I was among the 60%; rejecting Hillary for some of the same reasons I have this time.
Here is the primary map from 2008. Purple states are Obama's and gold are Clinton's. Some of the purple states are the same ones that Bernie won, but I don't recall the 'too weird and too white' (or worse-- 'racist' state) narrative being used on President Obama's wins. Btw- can someone please explain to me how a state being mostly white somehow makes all the inhabitants of it more racist than other, more diverse states? I've never seen anyone come right out and say it, but that sentiment has certainly been implied over and over and over. I would just like to know why...
Map from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2008
As I said, I'm certain you're not ever going to see it, because, well, you've got 
next to your name (Are you aware of which Clinton is running? I guess it doesn't matter.)
And spare me the hand-wringy, gosh-o-golly soliloquy about "How far we have to go." I've been to this rodeo before, and I don't buy it. In 2008, Clinton said some gnarly shit, did some nasty nasty tricks.And this primary, the only difference is her opponent is Jewish instead of black.
As a consequence, the percentage of U.S. adults identifying as Democrats is now at the lowest point in the past 27 years, down from the prior low of 30% in 2014. Gallup's shift from in-person to telephone interviewing in 1988 complicates the ability to directly compare party identification data collected between the two methods. However, Gallup data from 1951-1987 collected in person never found a yearly average Democratic identification less than 37%, making it safe to conclude that the current 29% is also the low point in Gallup polling history.
The percentage of Republicans is now just one point above its recent low of 25% in 2013. Before 1988, there were several years when the average percentage of Republican identifiers in Gallup polls was lower than 25%.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/188096/democratic-republican-identification-near-historical-lows.aspx
But don't tell that to Debbie Wasserman Schultz; her strategy of alienating Independents and fostering a closed system for the Democratic Party will only lead to more erosion and entropy.
