NPR: Angry Trump and Sanders voters are upset about "creeping changes in the culture"

[ucrdem]

and a White House that is "unresponsive," from:

Political Reporters Wrestle With How To Depict What's Driving Voters
Updated February 9, 20168:23 AM ET

http://www.npr.org/2016/02/09/466108315/political-reporters-wrestle-with-how-to-depict-what-s-driving-voters

Which confirms a perception I've long held that supporters of both candidates basically dislike Barack Obama, never liked Barack Obama, and stopped liking Hilllary once she aligned herself with Barack Obama. All this is cloaked in a polite figleaf of populist economics which in Sanders' case has very little to do with socialism.

Thoughts?

[virtualobserver]

1. I stopped liking Hillary when she started using sleazy tactics and dog-whistle racism against Barack

she hasn't changed.

[ucrdem]

6. Hillary's campaign remarks never remotely approached the ferocity of Sanders' anti-TPP

rhetoric which was basically and often explicitly directed against Barack Obama, who responded only once that I can remember. And Bernie kept it up for a year.

That didn't trouble you?

[virtualobserver]

13. Disagreements over policy never bother me, only sleazy half-truths and thinly-veiled racism

That is why I liked Obama...and that is why I like Bernie.

[ucrdem]

18. Okay that sounds plausible but I was shocked by the character of Sanders' remarks.

It's basically what did it for me Bernie-wise but it wasn't exactly anything unexpected as I've been aware of him for years and that was par for the course.

[rurallib]

22. good grief. The man objected to what is really bad policy

no personal attacks.
There are many, many democrats who can not understand why Obama is so gung-ho for really bad policy.

[ucrdem]

25. Who do you think Angry Bernie was so angry at?

Come on.

[Paulie]

34. Billionaires and their puppets?

For starters.

[rurallib]

37. not sure I understand the question

Angry Bernie? was angry at really bad policy. He has been angry at TPP for a long time - from the time bits of information have been leaking out about it.
It has been subject of much discussion here for 3 years or so.

I do not know if you are speaking of a specific incident. But I can tell you I have been angry to see a president who is supposed to be a "progessive" president use his standing as a "progressive" to try to push really, really bad policy on this country.

[virtualobserver]

50. I have never seen anything that Bernie has said that was in any way offensive.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

52. You like Bernie, but his fanatics are mistreating black voters. You don't care about that?

[virtualobserver]

60. I've heard that notion pushed for months by Hillary people.

I've seen articles claiming that it is widespread.....but when I read those articles, they will have twenty quotes saying essentially what you have said...merely stating that it is happening.....then you will find one image of one tweet that in no way matched the tone of the article.

Hillary's people promoted similar ideas against Obama supporters in 2008.

I've seen this accusation many times over the past few months....and people provide "links" sometimes....but when I look at them, there is little or nothing there.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

68. Well, I don't know what to tell you, then. I'm nowhere near a Hillary supporter. More important,

I'm well informed and can think for myself.

I was leaning towards Bernie Sanders, but he has turned me off, as I've explained many times before. Anyone who knows me here at DU knows how much I hate the Clintons.

Why black people in general are never given the benefit of the doubt that we are smart voters and know what's best for us.

NO Democratic Party candidate can win the nomination without a sizable proportion of the black vote.

Whenever I hammer this point, it seems to fall on deaf ears for some on the Sanders side.

They seem to think it's an exaggeration or a joke. In fact, their arrogance grows.

Now Sanders' supporters can ridicule POC all they want, but if they were smart, they'd spend less time lecturing and deriding black and Hispanic voters, and much more time trying to connect with the Sanders campaign to get him to do better as far as convincing POC that he's their candidate.

[virtualobserver]

80. I am not questioning the fact that you are well informed.....

and I certainly wouldn't want to tell you how to think.

I can only tell you about what I see in the various candidates and what I find when I investigate accusations of improper behavior.

I disagree that Bernie needs to convince POC, even though he needs everyone's votes. The character and voting record of each candidate is out there for all to see. Bernie has to be himself, and individual voters have to decide whether they want Hillary or him.

The responsibility lies with us, not with the candidates.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

86. I think it's a two-way street. As a political scientist I would never hold the view that it's only

up to the candidate. No. We do have a responsibility as citizens to know these candidates, what they stand for, and their policy platforms. Then, make a decision based on that.

In my conversations with black voters who's heart tells them that Bernie Sanders may be the better candidate when it comes to character, record, and policy positions. However, they also want to vote strategically; that is, for the candidate who they feel can beat the Republicans.

So when Bernie supporters are seeing the direction black voters are going, why deride them? These voters are thinking strategically. They want the candidate who can WIN and not just with lofty ideas, regardless of how much they may agree with them.

They don't like Hillary Clinton much. That, to me, is clear. But they still seem to love Bill Clinton. When it comes to his record, no matter what I tell them--what about NAFTA, the Crime Bill, Glass-Stegall--it's not that they don't care; it's just that Bill Clinton was able to connect with them in a way that even Obama had problems with at the beginning.

That last point brings me to a good point regarding Sanders:

If he could somehow connect more with black voters, apart from his record, and convince black voters that he can get what he's promising done, I think he has a chance.

But, as I said earlier, black voters are STRATEGIC! This has always been true. Black voters have supported white candidates over black candidates since we could vote, so it's not about race and never has been. (Were that the case, say hello to presidents Jackson, Sharpton, Keyes, Cain...and Ben Carson who is beloved in the black community but will never command the black vote.)

When I assert that black voters are strategic, they want to be convinced that things will happen; that Republicans can be beaten. Obama has to prove himself even when faced with the fact that the vast majority of black voters were in Clinton's camp.

This has to be true also for Bernie Sanders. Like Obama, the ideals are there. The issues are there, for the most part. His record is near perfect. But can he win? And after he wins, can he get it done?

This is what Bernie Sanders' supporters are ignoring. Many are too busy ridiculing and deriding black people for their stance. Rather than listening and understand--and then trying to connect to the Sanders team to encourage more inclusivity, I'm seeing the opposite. And that's the problem.

I was once a Bernie supporter. I loathe the Clintons. I now support neither candidate.

Convince me to go back to Bernie.

[virtualobserver]

89. I understand the reason for the strategic voting......

We are all at risk, but black people even more so if one of this nuttiest republican group ever gets in office.

The results tonight are critical. A big win in New Hampshire will make it even clearer that Bernie can win the nomination.

My argument for Bernie winning the GE is that if he can beat Hillary, he can beat any of the Republicans.
In order to beat Hillary, his movement must grow dramatically. If it doesn't, he loses to her.
But if it does grow to that level, Bernie will leverage that power.

Barack winning an almost all-white state in the Iowa caucus shattered conceptions about the limitations of a black candidate. Bernie needs to do that in South Carolina to shatter conceptions about his broad appeal. We will find out there if he can connect...I hope that people will be able to see his heart.

One of the wonderful side effects of the long, drawn out race in 2008 is that every state mattered and both campaigns got incredible exposure., When Barack won, he had incredible momentum and looked very powerful. A long race is the only one that Bernie can win, so I think that this one will be similar.

I won't try to convince you to support Bernie. I think that events will convince you, one way or the other.
Given your feelings about Hillary....the only one who can talk you out of what seems to be a strategic vote is Bernie, by winning powerfully. That is her enormous Achilles heel, and it isn't just black people who are thinking in terms of a strategic vote. If her inevitability bubble is burst, she has a painful road ahead.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

90. Winning in NH tonight DOES NOT prove anything when IA and NH are lily white constituencies.

See, this is one of the problems I have with Bernie supporters.

Sanders was probably going to win IA and NH because that most represents his base.

But once he gets to more diverse settings, it'll be a test.

So no, I do not agree with you at all.

Even if he wins NH, he was expected to win that state. Not only is it homogenous, it is right next door to Vermont. That's Sanders' territory.

Again, that says nothing about the general electorate. Neither IA nor NH is representative of the Democratic party.

South Carolina, Nevada... those states are.

If he wins those two states, let's talk then.

[virtualobserver]

92. It isn't Sanders territory

Being from Vermont didn't help Dean beat Kerry.

I saw a poll in the early stages when Hillary was still ahead in NH and 56% of NH voters had never heard of Bernie. NH voters do not consider Vermonters to be native sons.

Also, it doesn't have to say anything about the general electorate. It simply has to provide momentum and publicity. It has to puncture Hillary's bubble of invincibility. That is why the margin of victory matters so much.

That does not win him SC and NV......However, it can shift the polling numbers. Bernie has to do the rest.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

93. I don't agree with you at all. I'd rather wait and see when we get to more diverse

and representative parts of the electorate before considering momentum.

[earthshine]

59. The TPP is going to be a disaster for the middle class.

Obama spent enormous political capital (alienating his base and dems in congress) to side with the republicans to pass this.

Obama has secured his position as the president of the 1%.

It was a back stab to the common people. Same for his support for H1B1 visas.

This is the legacy that Hillary will continue.

Bernie is the only choice.

[redstateblues]

75. President of the 1%? What a pant load

Tell the people that have health insurance now that didn't before. Tell the people that have jobs because he has gotten the economy back on track after the Republicans destroyed the economy. Bernie makes promises he'll never be able to keep. BSS would turn on him in six months of getting nothing passed through Congress. Obama has not been perfect for the Puritopians but he has done a good job as President considering what he was handed. Bernie would be crushed in the GE.

[earthshine]

95. It's in your pants, not mine

I expect the president to do good things. But, when he doesn't he needs to be called out.

This is just a brief list ...

- TPP
- Rahm Emanuel
- drone wars
- blatant disregard for the "professional left" -- a phrase coined by his administration
- lead from behind on gay issues (I give him gets zero credit)
- warmed-over republican health insurance -- not health "care" like what he campaigned on
- sky rocketing health insurance premiums and deductibles
- no wall street prosecutions
- new service-sector jobs that don't pay like the manufacturing one that were lost
- and most recently, he want to increase the number of H-1B visas

I voted for him twice and feel quite betrayed by Obama.

[ucrdem]

97. Did you know that GM had already outsourced to Mexico and RETURNED before NAFTA

was signed in 1994? And who do you think persuaded them to return to Michigan? It wasn't Ross Perot.

Monday, June 21, 1993 - Seattle Times Business Digest

GM To Move Auto Jobs From Mexico To Michigan

General Motors plans to move production of Chevrolet Cavalier and Pontiac Sunbird from Mexico to the United States next year.

That will create about 1,000 jobs at GM's Lansing, Mich., manufacturing complex.

An announcement from GM is expected today.

The small, front-wheel drive Cavalier is GM's best-selling car.

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19930621&slug=1707571

p.s. here's how the last Clinton presidency(92-2000) including NAFTA (1994+) actually went down, minus the RW spin:



eight straight years of job increases and NAFTA was part of the mix. Just like TPP is an important part of Obama's recovery which saw US unemployment drop below 5% just last week.

[earthshine]

98. You think that TPP is good?

So, why did Obama have to use republicans in Congress to advance this huge giveaway to the multinational corps? The dems didn't want it.

Your post is filled with such irrelevance.

Have you seen this? It's Elizabeth Warren on the TPP

I will not respond to you further.

[TwilightGardener]

2. I still basically like Obama, although less so than when he began. But certainly

glad I supported him and glad he's President, compared to the other choices. And I support Sanders now. I never liked Clinton--not then, even less so now.

[leftofcool]

3. Nailed it!

[cali]

11. You can't nail a claim without evidence.

The op provides none.

[Motown_Johnny]

4. I like Obama a lot. He got the pendulum swinging in our direction

but we now need someone who keeps it moving that way.

Hillary wanting to stop it in the center just doesn't work for me. We need to take advantage of the momentum while we have it.

[cali]

5. I think your perceptions are skewed and I think the

conflation of Bernie and Trump voters is both laughable and disgusting. Not to mention your generalization is both sweeping and without a scrap of evidence to back it up.

I can only speak for myself but I was an early and enthusiastic supporters of the President in 2007. I supported him in 20012. Have I been disappointed in some of what he's done? Sure, but that's a far cry from not liking him. I both like and respect President Obama.

My discomfort and distrust of Hillary goes back nearly 20 years. It has intensified since her IWR vote. Her campaign in 2008 disgusted me.

[ucrdem]

10. Her 2008 campaign disgusted you why?

Because if you're going to tell me her dog whistling bothered you that whistle won't hunt, see above.

[cali]

19. Because of the racist dog whistles and the relentless smearing

from her campaign.

And sorry, the dog whistle crap has been extensively documented.

Look, my fundamental problem with her is that I believe she's corrupt. And no, that doesn't come from republican memes.

[ucrdem]

21. I watched that campaign from the perspective of an Obama supporter

and it seemed to me that Bill and Hill did a little dog whistling but took hell for it. Nobody has called Sanders on his, ever.

[beam me up scottie]

28. What dog whistling? I asked you to provide evidence of this before and you never did.

Criticism of the president is not "dog whistling".

[ucrdem]

38. Remember "Stop Fast Track"? Who wanted fast track?

Tell me, who is Bernie directing his "populist" anger at exactly?







Seriously.

[beam me up scottie]

41. How is that a dog whistle? Do you even know what that is?

He's angry because of what's happened to our country, he's fighting for the working poor, those living in poverty, the marginalized and the oppressed.

Whose side are you on?

[ucrdem]

43. You didn't answer the question. nt

[beam me up scottie]

44. Yes I did, read it again. Now define 'dog whistle' and point to an example

of Bernie using one. Pictures of him fighting for workers aren't examples.

[arcane1]

79. Clearly only a racist would be against Fast Track.

Seriously, I don't know how some people are capable of turning on their computers

[beam me up scottie]

82. Right?

[arcane1]

78. Being against Fast Track is a racist dog-whistle???

Congratulations on being thoroughly discredited. At least look up the definition before throwing the term around

[cali]

39. What on earth are you talking about.

Please provide evidence and examples of Bernie EVER using dog whistles on anything

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

57. WHAT?? What did you say? Both Hillary and Bill THEMSELVES were involved with dog whistle politics.

Bill's statement about Obama prior to the SC primaries.

Hillary's many racist statements:

About MLK, Jr. only giving speeches while LBJ delivered on policy.

"Hard working white Americans" wasn't even a dog whistle; it was straight up RACIST!

Referring to Robert F. Kennedy's assassination in the same breath as Obama even while Obama faced unprecedented death threats.

Making a statement that Obama is a Christian..."as far as she knows" gave way to the Birther Movement and Muslim rumors.

Bill got on Rush Limball's show to smear Barack Obama, knowing fully well how racist those assholes are.

I could keep going and going on this, but I'll let the evidence speak for itself:

Hillary didn't play dog whistle politics referring to "hard working white people"?

Evidence: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/08/clinton-obama-not-winning_n_100763.html

and here: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/Garin_Clinton_won_the_white_vote.html

Bill Clinton didn't make racist statements about Jesse Jackson prior to the SC primary?

Evidence: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7845.html

HRC surrogates were insane with their dog whistles, too!

Geraldine Ferarro didn't claim that his race was the reason why people supported Obama, even though Hillary enjoyed overwhelming support from black voters initially?

Evidence: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/13/us/politics/13ferraro.html?_r=0

and here on Faux News, nevertheless: Geraldine Ferarro's comments:

Hillary didn't allude to the assassination of Bobby Kennedy during a time when Obama was receiving an unprecedented number of death threats?

Evidence: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/24/us/politics/24clinton.html

And this statement is precisely what turned the Kennedy family against Hillary Clinton for the nomination. Despicable!!!

They all went on Faux News to ridicule and play racial dog whistle politics, knowing that working class white Democrats weren't supporting Obama. For example, Ed Rendell praising Faux News for it's unbiased coverage:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/31/clinton-surrogate-ed-rend_n_94280.html

I have no reason to lie!

The Clintons were disgusting then and now, but many of Sanders' supporters are no better.

Neither candidate floats my boat.

[Empowerer]

7. Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner.

[casperthegm]

8. Interesting, though not accurate for me personally

I still like Obama. I disagree with him on some things, but I still support most of his policies and ideas. I could care less about who Clinton aligns herself with. What I do care about his her past record. And it's troubling; Keystone, Wall Street money, Glass Steagall, Voted for the war in Iraq (which led to the destabilization of the region and our current war), Syria no-fly zone (what could go wrong?), classified email investigation, marriage for gay couples; completely flopped per politifact, etc. That's what bothers me, not who she aligns herself.

And when you contrast that with what Bernie does stand for; reinstating Glass Steagall, no Wall Street contributions or super pacs, sincere about the environment (Keystone position stated right away), sincere about income inequality, and civil rights (marched and got arrested fighting for rights).

This should be a conversation about issues. And if it is I see a clear winner.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

9. Their analysis is tepid dreck.

Thoughts?

[Mass]

12. I supported Obama and now supports Sanders (after I supported O' Malley).

As for reporters, they have most of the time no ideas what they are talking about.

No need to see racism where racism is not.

BTW I am a woman and a feminist one, am 56, do not want to impress boys by supporting Sanders and am still waiting to know whether Madeleine Allbright thinks I should have supported McCain/Palin instead of a whole male ticket. Because, you know, “There is a special place in hell for women who don't help other women."

And if the ticket is Sanders/male VP vs Trump/Sarah Palin, should I vote Trump.

So, enough lecturing about what people should/should not do.

[Arazi]

14. I like Obama

[DefenseLawyer]

15. That's perhaps the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

But whatever gets you through the night.

[MrMickeysMom]

16. See how that works?

Alignment of anger to associate a candidate who has been working consistently to address issues that tie in with anger to candidate who is a carnival barker.

There's no thought in that comparison. It's a controlled attempt at thought, and it fails every time. People no longer fall for this horseSHIT.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

17. Obama is lovely

I like Obama. Obama campaigned for Bernie.

[Bread and Circus]

20. utter bullshit. I gave money to obama and worked my ass off for him

[ucrdem]

23. And then he let you down, right?

When he voted for the FISA bill / appointed Geitner / appointed Hillary / or something similar?

[Bread and Circus]

31. I consider him the best President since FDR

But he isn't perfect and had to operate within the frame that started with Reaganism.

So yes there were disappointments.

Do you disagree?

[jillan]

24. I love President Obama. It has nothing to do with why I support Bernie. I think Pres Obama was the

right person for this country for the last 7 years. I am so proud of what he has accomplished inspite of all the opposition. And to top it off, I am in awe of his family values. When have we ever had such a more tight-knit family in the White House?

Now I'm looking towards the next 8 years.

It has nothing to do with President Obama.

The fact that you are trying to draw some kind of connection seems a little simple.

[ScreamingMeemie]

26. Broadbrushing what you "perceive" anyone thinks is generally a bad idea.

[boston bean]

27. I agree.

[CajunBlazer]

29. Interesting: The far right and far left are both angry and like the same candidates

We are hearing more and more about voters who favor Trump and have Sanders as a backup and visa versa.

Not really surprising though: The far left and the far right have much in common.

[Warren Stupidity]

35. Um no, they like different candidates.

And universal healthcare is not "far left" it was a standard Democratic Party platform issue since Harry Truman.

The attempt to paint half of democratic voters as just like trump supporters is deeply insulting.

[NurseJackie]

36. Sounds a lot like this "horseshoe" illustration that I've seen before.

It illustrates how someone can be so far left that they're almost right ... or so far right that they're almost left. (Yet both ends deny that such a thing is possible.)

[Hortensis]

48. The far left trends "universalist" in its principles,

intolerance of and rejecting the ideologies of other groups, and seeing their principles as needing to apply to everyone.

The reactionary right is exclusionary toward those they see as "others." They want to fix the problems in their world by getting rid of "other-hood" one way or another.

These are great differences, but in virtually every other way Bernie's more extreme followers are very like the tea-partiers, many of whom now support Trump. The more committed members of oth types are extremely idealistic and righteous to the point that they are unwilling/unable to bend in order to work with other groups to achieve their goals.

But, yes, history has plenty of examples where those on the ends "hopped the U" to join the other side. No surprise when both sides despise moderates so much.

[NurseJackie]

74. The "all or nothing" mentality just floors me.

The more committed members of both types are extremely idealistic and righteous to the point that they are unwilling/unable to bend in order to work with other groups to achieve their goals.

I must confess that I fail to understand why some people appear to prefer failure (accomplishing nothing). The knowledge that they "stuck to their guns" may give them a great deal of pride, but such vanities should be little consolation for having achieved absolutely nothing.

It's a binary way of thinking. In their world view, wverything is black or white. No in-between. No grays. No room for compromise. They justify this philosophy with a short-sighted excuse (belief?) that incremental changes toward their goal/s is the equivalent of having made "no" improvement at all.

To justify their "all or nothing" philosophy, I often hear them ask things like "should we just do nothing then" ... which suggests to me that in their minds, compromising and finding common ground is the equivalent of "doing nothing".

It must be nice to have the luxury of being the one to say "all or nothing" ... being able to afford the price of doing nothing.

Can you imagine if the mayor of Flint, Michigan had the same "all or nothing" attitude? Obviously she'd prefer to have the ENTIRE city's water pipes upgraded immediately. But even though that's not realistic or likely, she's wise enough to know that even SOMETHING SMALL is better than nothing at all.

She understands that even with the small steps forward, and with the targeted improvements for the WORST areas, at least SOMEONE is benefiting. (Imagine the outcry if she were to proudly proclaim: "No! That's not good enough! All or nothing!" Would the citizens be equally proud and happy that she decided to "stick to her guns"?)

All or nothing, baby! All or nothing!

There's no shame in compromise and finding common ground that leads toward the greater good.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

83. Exactly. Thanks so much! When Bernie realizes that he'll have to compromise on his "far left"

principles, will his supporters ridicule and abandon him?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

81. The far left is exclusionary, too. They exclude most people who don't think EXACTLY like them.

Moderates and conservatives be damned.

Black voters? If you're not supporting the "far left" candidate, you're stupid and voting against your own best interests.

Actually, the far left is virtually no different than the far right in that regard.

[Jefferson23]

87. lol

The FAR left and the FAR right meme.

I find it fascinating how one defines themselves to be of another subset and
by what measure, they never say..except they know they are in the "realistic"
position.

Carry on.

[beam me up scottie]

42. Looks like the right wing and the right wing of this party have a lot in common.

Starting with left bashing.

[TubbersUK]

30. Love Barack Obama, have never liked Hillary

That NPR piece is drivel.

[rurallib]

32. I think this speaks more to the crap that passes for reporting on NPR these days

than any real insight into the current electorate.
NPR has turned decidedly right in the past many years. It sneaks these little opinion pieces in under the guise of analysis trading on its past reputation.

I heard that and cringed and told my wife "there's another piece of their horse crap disguised as news." We turn the terrestrial radio on to NPR and it usually is on for about 5 minutes before I get pissed and turn it off.

NPR has to be one of the right wings most important tools in there tool box to move the US rightward.

Couple days ago they had Eric Erikson on with no mention of what a right wing cretin he is. Can't remember what he was an 'expert' on.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

33. That's ridiculous.

Last edited Tue Feb 9, 2016, 02:04 PM - Edit history (1)

I always liked Obama, still like him even though I haven't always agreed with him on everything. I stopped liking Hillary in 2008, not because she aligned herself with him (obviously, she didn't until she became SoS and he was her boss), but mostly because of the way she treated him during the primaries that year. The racist dog-whistles and the snide comments about him not being ready for the 3:00 a.m. phone call, among other things, put me off her then, and now she's still running the same sleazy kind of campaign. I don't think Obama went far enough with some things and I think Hillary will maintain the status quo or even go backwards. What a dumb comment. NPR has really fallen far.

[Skwmom]

40. Total b.s. It is the corrupt rigged system. n/t

[beam me up scottie]

45. I like Obama, always have. You're confusing disappointment with dislike.

I supported him in 2008 and I still do.

[TBF]

46. I worked on Obama's campaign -

you??

[Jefferson23]

47. Nope, wrong. I get that Clinton would prefer people believe that, and why she uses

Obama as her airbag when it suits her. The Obama administration is as vulnerable
to special interests as any other and that evidence exists whether internally or
when he steps out and can't pass a gun reform bill due to 3 DEMOCRAT'S
voting against him.

We have a corporate protection based economy and the nation does not thrive
because they have more leverage than the average voter. Republicans have
long ago jumped ship with few and minor exceptions and the revolt is about
that which blocks what the American people need and want.

People can decide why he pushed for TPP, and why so many do not
support him on that measure. Corporate influence has a long history
in US policy here and abroad, long before Obama left Harvard to
begin his career. What Sanders is saying is we need to remove the
influence and only then we will be able to maintain a thriving
democracy..you're kidding yourself if you think we have that now.

Obama's legacy will be out of his hands the day he leaves office, applying
idolatry and a Clinton administration will not prevent nor shield what was
accomplished and what was not accomplished and why..reputable historians
will write all of it and within the context of the political obstacles that were
before him.

Obama did many wonderful things, and if you read the transcript from
his last State of the Union, you'll see he is speaking more in a visionary
manner and mentions the perception Americans have of a rigged system.

The Sanders platform is NOT a rebuke of Obama, it is a rebuke of
said obstacles aka the status quo of quid pro quo.

[whatchamacallit]

49. Thoughts? I think someone just shook a nugget out their pant leg

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

51. Absolutely, 100% true! I think there's quite a bit of racism involved, too, on both sides.

They never liked Obama. And anyone who aligns with him or his agenda.

Cornel West is supporting Sanders for personal reasons. His hatred for the president has always been about HIM, and most black people know this quite well.

[earthshine]

69. The last time I heard Dr. West interviewed ...

He clearly said his dislike for Obama was about how he talks to Main street, but always goes to Wall street.

And that's my opinion as well.

I voted for O twice. But, my choices were severely limited.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

73. He hides behind that nonsense. But that's not the real reason. In my journalist circles, in academia

on discussion boards, and every area of black life, we've known Cornel West and his buddy Tavis Smiley for many years, much longer than before Obama got on the scene.

Articles have been written about how West, especially, is a vindictive, narcissistic charlatan who goes after anyone he thinks has wronged him. See Melissa Harris Perry for an example.

But what has been written about West since 2008 is how he took it personally that Obama did not give him a premium ticket to the Inauguration and how upset he was about that. West, himself, wrote about this and has been quite candid in his dislike of Obama PRECISELY because he thought he deserved a special seat at the table. His hate is no secret. For that he has been invited to all kinds of commentary shows, even on Faux News. For someone who derides Corporate Media, he accepted invitation to ANY outlet where he could air his personal attacks on President Obama, even calling him the "n-word" at some point and receiving all kinds of accolades from white racists on Faux News and other wingnut outlets. West has been on the scene for at least 30 years, and no mainstream outlet knew or cared who he was....until...he started attacking the president. White liberals and conservatives. could hide because Cornel West and use him as a shield against claims of racism. And now many white liberals are shoving Cornel West in the faces of black voters, thinking that'll convince us to support Bernie Sanders. Why? Because West is black? It doesn't work that way. Just as it doesn't work when white conservative put up people like Larry Elder or Jesse L. Peterson. Yes, they are black, but that doesn't sway the minds of black voters.

WE THINK FOR OURSELVES.

Indeed, black people (collectively) have never forgotten about this. Both he and Smiley participated in these antics, but West was much worse.

Even though there is some disappointment in the black community, we see how the president has also been treated and don't like it.

Cornel West is now a joke. Ask any black person on the street---just randomly---and they'll tell you he's a joke. He lacks credibility because we know that this isn't really about policy; it's all personal with Dr. West.

Just a few articles on this subject:

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_obama_deception_why_cornel_west_went_ballistic_20110516

http://www.thenation.com/article/cornel-west-v-barack-obama/

https://newrepublic.com/article/121550/cornel-wests-rise-fall-our-most-exciting-black-scholar-ghost

http://ideas.time.com/2012/11/15/what-behind-the-bad-blood-between-cornel-west-and-obama/

[earthshine]

96. You've been following this more than I have

I am not as knowledgeable as you on this subject. Thanks for the info.

West is definitely a kook. But he has presented some factual info.

In my opinion, Obama is a disappointment to the 99%. Others may feel differently. I don't care about their opinions, and they don't care about about mine.

[DCBob]

53. There are alot similarities between Sanders and Trump supporters

Here are a few..

-- angry
-- misinformed
-- love simplistic solutions
-- prone to believe all sorts of conspiracy theories
-- ready to blame anyone in a position of power
-- convinced the solution is to trash the system and start over

[earthshine]

72. You present nothing but straw ...

as in the "Straw-man" argument.

No Sanders supporter will believe you.

[randome]

54. Interesting premise, along with that familiar phrase, 'Follow the Constitution!'

[hr][font color="blue"][center]You have to play the game to find out why you're playing the game. -Existenz[/center][/font][hr]

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

55. People are sick and tired of politics-as-usual and politicians-as-usual.

We're fed up with the corruption, the political posturing, the promises, the slick and expensive campaigns, the platitudes, the payoffs in the form of campaign contributions, the endless wars for PR, the rewards given to the rich and penalties imposed on the poor.

We're tired of the tweedle-dee/tweedle dum candidates that are proffered by the two party system and told to vote for as "not as bad".

[randome]

84. But don't they say that every single election? That everyone is sick and tired of politics-as-usual?

I'm somewhat weary of hearing that phrase trotted out every time. It's as tiresome as any sentence that starts with "The American people..."
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You have to play the game to find out why you're playing the game. -Existenz[/center][/font][hr]

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

85. I'm equally sick of "hold your nose", "party loyalty", and "not as bad".

Which are trotted out in every election.

[EdwardBernays]

56. The OP is wrong.

Used to kinda like Barrack, now have very mixed feelings... don't trust Hillary, though she's probably a nice enough person...

The OP is inaccurate though... the creeping changes in the culture comment is levelled specifically at Trump voters, not Sanders ones... and he doesn't say "creeping" he says "sweeping"...

Not sure the OP got that so wrong... I wonder if I check and see if they only post pro-Hillary stuff

and they accidentally wrote an OP that ties Trump to Bernie...

That would be weird.

[islandmkl]

66. never underestimate intention that can be described as coincidence....

[Dawson Leery]

58. The far right misses the strict social structure of the 1950's.

The far left misses the "good economy", which was good for white males only.
It is far past time to end this nonsense about the "good old days".

[randome]

63. The economy has changed A LOT and in a very short time.

Last edited Tue Feb 9, 2016, 02:52 PM - Edit history (1)

We tend to overlook the fact that we are more and more a service economy and not a manufacturing economy. And there's no way we're going back. If something replaces the new digital economy, it won't be manufacturing again.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You have to play the game to find out why you're playing the game. -Existenz[/center][/font][hr]

[Matariki]

61. I'm a Sanders supporter. I like President Obama.

Even though I'm dismayed at quite a few of his appointments - particularly in the financial sector.

He's been great in many areas and disappointing in others. And not just because of push back from an uncooperative Congress, but by some of his decisions.

[Armstead]

62. My thoughts towards your post would get me a hide

So I'll just say I think conflating the motivations of racist Trump supporters with the vast majority of Sanders supporters is bullshit.

[islandmkl]

64. I have always admired Obama...which does not mean that I have to have been in agreement

with everything he has/hasn't done...he pretty much jettisoned his supporters as far as keeping the 'rally' going, especially when the Repubs mounted their program of obstinance...he choose to take a 'I'll fight this fight myself' approach...which is fine in some situations, but also made him somewhat able to keep distance between himself and responding to many of the voices of his non-DC supporters...

He accomplished a lot...probably the best President all in all in the past 40+ years...yet:

Guantanamo...Wall Street...TPP...Prison reform...Pay equity...Voter suppression...etc....did I mention Wall Street and the Banksters?

Everything became talking points, not action...he did not seem to really want to mobilize his on-the-ground support to get some tough things done, especially after the Congress went south...

When Hillary attempts to drape herself in Obama's cloak any 'dislike' for Hillary has no relevance to a 'dislike of Obama'...it is merely a dislike of Hillary...and for her to try to coat-tail Obama's popularity, as opposed to having her own merits generate support, is only making it appear that she is not a leader...maybe a cheerleader...but not the quarterback....

[Wig Master]

65. Crotchety young people just can't get with the times

How do you explain to them - calmly, rationally - that their fuckedness is really a positive thing?

[bullwinkle428]

67. TOTALLY inaccurate bullshit. The quote you used in the title came from

Robert Costa, where he mentioned in the report the observations he was hearing while attending "Republican events" in general during this campaign.

Please re-listen to the report and confirm my finding.

[Wig Master]

70. Pundits in 2016

[Dustlawyer]

71. My thoughts, you are wrong!

While Bernie has sensible positions on the issues, the main focus is on the corrupting influence that is used to sell us out. Take that as you will, but any politician that puts Wall Street in charge and does their bidding is dead to me.

[Orsino]

76. Barack Obama is not the culture. n/t

[arcane1]

77. Your "perception" is completely full of shit.

But whatever helps you sleep at night

[mhatrw]

88. Such bullshit. Voters are sick of a our rigged electoral and economic system.

Obama did some nice things around the margins, but the center of the page still reads:

[bunnies]

91. Your article doesnt mention Obama once.

Maybe you linked to the wrong thing?

[Beacool]

94. Yes, it's an angry bunch.

But, when all the votes are counted, I doubt that Trump and Sanders will be their parties' nominees.

[LWolf]

99. I never liked Hillary Clinton.

Surprisingly enough, considering her reputation as a leader for women, it was in that arena that she failed. And, in the beginning, it was more personal than political.

You see, I cannot abide cheaters. I'm fine with people having any kind of relationship they want, and dealing with their issues privately. Except, of course, that public people who present their marriage as supposedly traditional to keep their support safe. I can't abide cheaters. I think that men, (and women) who cannot successfully abide in monogamy should not get married, unless it's an open marriage. I think cheating is a kind of misogyny/misandry. I neither liked nor trusted Bill Clinton from the beginning, and he proved me correct. He not only didn't stop cheating on his wife, he got in bed with Al From and helped usher in that neo-liberal bloodless coup, helping tear down protections that limited their efforts to exploit people. His wife? I would have respected her if she'd kicked him to the curb instead of taking it, repeatedly. I found her "I'm no Tammy Wynette" schtick to be hypocritical in the extreme.

Barack Obama? I wanted to like him. I did. His interview with FOX, when asked what Republicans get right? That's when he lost me. He said they had better ideas for education, and that he sometimes got in trouble with teachers. That's a paraphrase.

He was half right. That did get him in trouble with me.

Still, I had hope, up until he started making appointments after he won the GE.

I think Obama is a decent man. I was thrilled to know that my country would elect a PoC, even if that PoC and I didn't see eye to eye on issues. I don't dislike him. I do have a difficult time forgiving Arne Duncan.

I'm all for "changes in the culture," if they are changes that benefit the 99%. They haven't been.