Sanders supporters narrative is now "Votes don't matter" ...

[LannyDeVaney]

truly sickening.

If you live in a Red state, why vote?

If you live in a Blue state, why vote?

Bernie needs to drop out. He is hurting the party at this point.

[SunSeeker]

1. K & R

[yallerdawg]

2. If you're a Southern black...

your vote doesn't matter.

[Her Sister]

3. yeah! you need not vote

[charlyvi]

13. I share Kos' opinion on this

A real liberal revolution starts with communities of color

Despite all of Bernie Sanders’ laudable successes, he’s been hamstrung by his consistent inability to make inroads in communities of color. It was the basis of my original “demographic ceiling” thesis, which I had pegged at 30 percent. He exceeded that, but getting to 38 percent is cold comfort to those who wanted to see a real movement blossom. And the early state results bear it out: You do not build a liberal movement by bringing together white people, then hoping that people of color come along for the ride. You start with those communities of color.

1) You don’t try to impose your framing and issues on people who have different priorities. YOU may think Citizens United, income inequality, and global climate change are the biggest threats facing the country, but when your community is being gunned down in the streets and families are being torn apart by immigration authorities, everything else pales in comparison. More jobs don’t solve either of those problems.

2) You don’t become resentful of other groups when they don’t follow along. The ugliest part of this primary campaign has been the accusation that certain Democratic voters don’t matter, especially since those voters being dismissed are disproportionately brown and black. We have a long way to go toward bridging racial divides, and the last thing any movement needs is an us vs. them attitude. And, given the makeup of our modern liberal coalition, you automatically doom yourself to failure if you turn your biggest natural allies into the “others.” Leave that shit to the Republicans.

3) Everyone is on the same page from the beginning. Related to the above, I cringe every time I see a white progressive demanding that black or Latino voters explain their support for Hillary Clinton. Do you not realize how horrible that looks, and how offensive that is, that white people are demanding that people of color justify their choices? It’s beyond cringe-inducing. It’s deeply disturbing. And I realize that most people doing that aren’t coming at it from a racial standpoint, but that’s the way it’s received.

4) You will be more effective. Bottom line, no white-dominated liberal movement will succeed when 40 percent of Democrats are people of color. And people of color will be reluctant to join a movement led by little-known whites. History has made us justifiably suspicious of the Great White Savior. So building from the ground up, with full inclusion of people of color in leadership, will allow for a broad-based coalition that can have the numbers to topple the system. Because you know what, screaming at people of color about the oligarchy and corrupt Clinton really isn’t doing anyone or any movement any favors.

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/3/2/1494621/-A-real-liberal-revolution-starts-with-communities-of-color#read-more


He's right.

[stonecutter357]

4. K&R!

[yallerdawg]

5. And if you're a pledged superdelegate...

your vote doesn't count either.

[Historic NY]

6. The Ides of March is the brick wall.

[Treant]

7. It is very sad,

but I think Bernie should stay. His supporters' message is off key and divisive, but the income inequality narrative is useful on the national stage. It really is something that should be highlighted.

As the days pass and Tuesday's message sinks in, the worst part of the supporters' arguments should disappear--most notably as the supporters themselves start to disappear.

We're in the twilight of the worst of it.

[Cha]

8. Unless, of course, BS was winning all the votes.

[Politicub]

9. My vote doesn't matter, since I live in a "confederate" state

The confederacy ended long ago, but I digress. It's a convenient dog whistle. Perhaps we're the welfare queens of the progressive movement. A dog whistle from another time and place, but still used. Welfare queens - that slur that slipped so easily from the lips of Reagan and his allies.

Who are the dogs that are being called by discounting the votes overwhelmingly cast for Hillary yesterday? I can't say. Truly. I have no idea what the hell is running through the mind of these so called progressives.

If I were a Sanders supporter, I would do some soul searching. Why isn't he attracting disenfranchised minorities? It isn't for lack of information.

I can't speak for everyone, but I know there's a large segment of gay voters who stay on top of the issues. We cast thoughtful, considered votes. We know who our allies are and we stick by them. We know we are imperfect so we don't expect perfection from anyone else. We have so much at stake.

But the unmitigated gall to toss aside millions of democratic votes cast by people who took the time and used the energy to get out to the polls? I don't understand it. But do I know this. I want no part of it.

[DemonGoddess]

10. K&R!

[fleabiscuit]

11. Guess they don't want BS's 50 state strategy that he advocated during the debates. eom

[hamsterjill]

12. I've noticed this narrative, especially today.

It's self-defeating in a way

I mean, they claim there are so many of those like them. So many that support Bernie. Well when Hillary is the nominee, if they all don't vote for Hillary, then since there is so many of them (they can't have it both ways!!!) that will surely adjust the Electoral College to the Republican's advantage (as opposed to them thinking that their one, single vote has no significance whatsoever).

It is sickening. It's juvenile and it is also being used to try to silence the argument that needs to be made. That being that this is DEMOCRATIC Underground and is a discussion board for the support of the ultimate Democratic nominee.