Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

snowy owl

(2,145 posts)
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 02:48 AM Apr 2016

Clinton appeals to more elite in democratic party - it's class hierarchy

Last edited Thu Apr 28, 2016, 03:55 AM - Edit history (3)

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/27/opinion/campaign-stops/how-the-other-fifth-lives.html
A Democrat whose wallet tells him he is a Republican is unlikely to be a strong ally of less well-off Democrats in pressing for tax hikes on the rich, increased spending on the safety net or a much higher minimum wage.

Bernie Sanders has tried to capitalize on this built-in tension within the Democratic primary electorate, but Hillary Clinton has so far been able to skate over intraparty conflicts. In the New York primary, for example, she did better among voters making $100,000 or more than among the less affluent, while simultaneously carrying African-Americans and moderate Democrats of all races by decisive margins.


The trends at the top and the bottom are undermining cohesive politics, but more important they are undermining social interconnection as they fracture the United States more and more into a class and race hierarchy.


As more and more of us move into desperate situations financially and as the middle class continues to dwindle, we will be the worse for choosing the status quo. She is one of the elite. That's what you bought.

I've noticed few people actually go to original articles. This isn't talking about the 1% - but about the top 20%.

In 2012, of people with incomes less than $10K, 46% voted. In 2014, 24% - almost half.
In 2012, of people with incomes $10K to $15K, 48%. In 2014, 31%.
In 2012, of people with incomes $40K to $49K, 60%. In 2014, 40%.

Bernie is bringing back our democracy - he's getting people to vote again.

29 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Clinton appeals to more elite in democratic party - it's class hierarchy (Original Post) snowy owl Apr 2016 OP
For me, it's not only economics, not by a long shot. merrily Apr 2016 #1
There, there ... NanceGreggs Apr 2016 #2
Bernie's revolution is ongoing. The dissolution of our democracy is relevant. snowy owl Apr 2016 #3
Losers don't get to make demands. NanceGreggs Apr 2016 #5
May be your opinion but doesn't make it mine or anybody elses. snowy owl Apr 2016 #7
That doesn't mean he gets to "make demands". NanceGreggs Apr 2016 #9
We do...his supporters. We hold the votes she needs, not Sanders JimDandy Apr 2016 #10
Once again, I'm reminded I'm part of the 1%. RandySF Apr 2016 #4
Well, all of us HRCers ... NanceGreggs Apr 2016 #6
Another intellectual response. So typical. You didn't read it, did you? snowy owl Apr 2016 #8
This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Apr 2016 #11
Well, this is about who votes. Among those voting, she has done well. snowy owl Apr 2016 #12
This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Apr 2016 #13
"working class democrats" - yes. Closed priomaries. Independents - open primaries, Bernie. snowy owl Apr 2016 #14
This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Apr 2016 #15
This is a change election. Status quo candidates are being challenged on both sides. snowy owl Apr 2016 #17
This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Apr 2016 #23
Um, Clinton also won a BUNCH of open primary states. JoePhilly Apr 2016 #16
But several with close results. Is it significant to win by a few points? Not denying she won but... snowy owl Apr 2016 #18
But she still won them. JoePhilly Apr 2016 #19
If by "several" you mean 2 out of 10, yes. onenote Apr 2016 #21
There have been 13 fully open primaries. Clinton won 10. onenote Apr 2016 #20
Yep it's defensiveness loyalsister Apr 2016 #22
Cool article, except for the fact its Hillary winning among low income voters. JaneyVee Apr 2016 #24
I love Bernie but Hillary's support comes from women, African Americans and Hispanics, not exactly pampango Apr 2016 #25
Sanders does not do well with people over 45.... beachbum bob Apr 2016 #26
Or perhaps you're simply unable to see the vision...burned out as they say. snowy owl Apr 2016 #29
Premise of article is the top 20% care less about the bottom than they used to and snowy owl Apr 2016 #27
Yes, it's class heierarchy . . . i.e. it's Republican pdsimdars Apr 2016 #28

merrily

(45,251 posts)
1. For me, it's not only economics, not by a long shot.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 02:59 AM
Apr 2016

I don't have amnesia about her Senate record, about the 2008 primary, about "traditional" marriage before 2013, about McCain being ready for the 3 am call, but not Obama, about The Family, etc. Nor do I have amnesia about this primary.

NanceGreggs

(27,813 posts)
2. There, there ...
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 03:00 AM
Apr 2016

Bernie will not be the nominee - we all know that now. Continuing to bash HRC no longer serves any useful purpose. It will not change any Hillary-supporter's mind and encourage them to vote for Bernie is the upcoming contests - and even if it did, it wouldn't change the fact that Bernie has already lost the nomination.

So what is your point in posting this exactly? What are you hoping to accomplish?

Just wonderin'.

snowy owl

(2,145 posts)
3. Bernie's revolution is ongoing. The dissolution of our democracy is relevant.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 03:06 AM
Apr 2016

You may be apathetic to it but I'm not. You may not care. I do. The revolution will continue . . . I hope. Otherwise, we can stick a fork in ourselves because we're done. BTW, the campaign is not over until the grand ol' man makes his demands.

NanceGreggs

(27,813 posts)
5. Losers don't get to make demands.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 03:12 AM
Apr 2016

And if you think the campaign isn't over until the loser makes his demands, you might want to brush up on how the process works, and who's in a position to "demand" anything.

snowy owl

(2,145 posts)
7. May be your opinion but doesn't make it mine or anybody elses.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 03:19 AM
Apr 2016
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/25/us/politics/bernie-sanders-campaign.html
Senator Bernie Sanders and his allies are trying to use his popularity to expand his political influence, setting up an ideological struggle for the soul of the Democratic Party in the post-Obama era.

Aides to Mr. Sanders have been pressing party officials for a significant role in drafting the platform for the Democratic convention in July, aiming to lock in strong planks on issues like a $15-an-hour federal minimum wage, breaking up Wall Street banks and banning natural gas “fracking.”

Amid his unexpectedly strong showing in the Democratic primaries, Mr. Sanders has tapped his two-million-person donor list to raise money for liberal congressional candidates in New York, Nevada and Washington State. And in the waning months of Barack Obama’s presidency, Mr. Sanders’s allies are testing their muscle against the White House, mounting a public attack on the president’s housing secretary, Julián Castro, over his department’s sales of delinquent mortgages to banks and private equity firms.

“There is a greater goal here,” said Representative Raúl M. Grijalva of Arizona, a co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, who sent a letter to Mr. Castro criticizing the mortgage sales. “The contribution of Bernie that will be lasting for us is that we will coalesce around an agenda.”

The pressure from Mr. Sanders and his allies is putting the party establishment, which is closely aligned with Hillary Clinton, in a delicate position. Democratic leaders are wary of steering the party too far left, but do not want to alienate the Sanders supporters whose votes Mrs. Clinton needs in November, or risk losing the vast new donor base Mr. Sanders has created.

RandySF

(55,978 posts)
4. Once again, I'm reminded I'm part of the 1%.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 03:10 AM
Apr 2016

I'm sure the people of the South Bronx, South Carolina, Philadelphia and elsewhere will also be glad to hear it.

NanceGreggs

(27,813 posts)
6. Well, all of us HRCers ...
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 03:17 AM
Apr 2016

... are now part of the 1% since we started being paid for posting, and have all been bought-and-paid-for like all of the other Hillary endorsers.

You obviously haven't received your first check yet - and it's a whopper! You'll be a 1%er overnight!



snowy owl

(2,145 posts)
8. Another intellectual response. So typical. You didn't read it, did you?
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 03:22 AM
Apr 2016

BTW, you didn't actually read it, did you? It isn't talking about the 1% . . .

Response to snowy owl (Original post)

snowy owl

(2,145 posts)
12. Well, this is about who votes. Among those voting, she has done well.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 04:02 AM
Apr 2016

Look at the numbers for the story. You're looking for a sell-job on Bernie. That's not what I posted. The trend was few people voting in all classes. And the trend shows a definite hierarchy with the rich becoming a much bigger and more influential group. Absolutely, this election did bring out more people. Do you think it was Hillary alone who accomplished that?

Response to snowy owl (Reply #12)

snowy owl

(2,145 posts)
14. "working class democrats" - yes. Closed priomaries. Independents - open primaries, Bernie.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 04:18 AM
Apr 2016

If you read the story, my point really is that little by little, the top 20% are becoming the voters who are the deciders. Fewer working class are joining the party and many more have become independents. The numbers you are using are skewed and not representative anymore of the classes. My point is really that people are feeling disenfranchised and betrayed and are voting less. My point is that independents make up a large sector of unrepresented voters. My point esp. is that we are losing our democracy to the top two tiers - not the 1% but the 20% who are still voting although in fewer numbers than they used to as well.

I'm extrapolating that it was Bernie who brought out the vote whether it was by finally representing those independents and poor and middle class that had stopped voting or whether it was as a response to Hillary's possible failure to win the nomination. I don't know which. I'm also responding to the articulation that financially speaking that twenty percent isn't interested in helping the rest of us. They are for social justice but not necessarily for parting with their wealth to do so. That's where Bernie enters the picture for me. Clinton will attract and does those voters and they will have influence on her policies.

I think I'm processing this, too. My reasoning for putting this out there was more informative than to influence for either side but definitely to show that Bernie's attempt to bring our democracy back to the people (and not the top 20%) was his target. What we used to call the top 1% is now the top 20% in terms of its influence. That does not bode well for middle class Americans.

Finally, I'm not sure the poor and diverse necessarily understand the ramifications of all this. That's not condescension, that just reality. If they are less engaged, they are less informed. So what finally attracts them to a particular candidate?

Response to snowy owl (Reply #14)

snowy owl

(2,145 posts)
17. This is a change election. Status quo candidates are being challenged on both sides.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 05:09 AM
Apr 2016

Aside from this year, the numbers show dwindling voter turnouts. Northern elites tend to be democratic but not necessarily southern elites. The increase in independents has been shown to be a matter of not having a candidate to vote for because they are coming out for Bernie. I see his voters as having been apathetic before his candidacy. Which may partially explain the higher turnouts.

Obama's appeal was message and race. I hope you don't think me offensive when I say that. I think - know because I hear it from friends in large numbers - Clinton has a good number of gender votes. I voted for Obama on his rhetoric which proved to not hold up. So I voted Stein in 2012. Didn't impact him but made me feel better. I come from working class all of whom are democrats as are most of our social group. I moved further left than any but I"m also more educated.

You have targeted a weakness in my thinking because I haven't nailed exactly how to turn what I'm feeling into words and a concise articulated message. Nevertheless, the article speaks to me emotionally and now I have to try to clarify and articulate whatever the hell it is that conflates with my feelings about Bernie and his campaign.

So, not to pursue it further, I appreciate the discussion anyway. Sometimes I post too fast when I'm emotionally connecting with information but before I've had time to really understand it. Sorry.



Response to snowy owl (Reply #17)

snowy owl

(2,145 posts)
18. But several with close results. Is it significant to win by a few points? Not denying she won but...
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 05:15 AM
Apr 2016

you must agree his support and votes were far beyond what had been expected considering starting late and having low name recognition and being an old white guy from a small northern state.

I'm not bashing Hillary here. I' was trying to look at numbers, demographics, voting patterns discussed in the article. But I admit I'm still coming to clarity myself.

JoePhilly

(27,787 posts)
19. But she still won them.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 05:19 AM
Apr 2016

There has been an endless effort to discount the states Hillary won after every single set of primaries so far.

Its only southern states. Its only blacks and women. Its only the "elite".

At the end of the day, she's winning with a far more diverse coalition of voters than Bernie ever had.

Bernie is doing better than I expected. But he's still going to lose.

onenote

(41,946 posts)
21. If by "several" you mean 2 out of 10, yes.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 06:37 AM
Apr 2016

Clinton has won 10 open primaries. The margins in those ten were:

47 points
58 points
36 points
43 points
31 points
32 points
66 points
29 points
2 points
0.2 points

onenote

(41,946 posts)
20. There have been 13 fully open primaries. Clinton won 10.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 06:24 AM
Apr 2016

Her vote margin in those 13 primaries is around 5.5 million to 3.95 million.

If you include semi-open/semi-closed primaries, the split is three to three.

Bernie's greatest success has been in caucuses,both open and closed, not primaries.

loyalsister

(13,390 posts)
22. Yep it's defensiveness
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 06:55 AM
Apr 2016

A lot of people who are economically comfortable see her as the defender in class warfare. A lot of people believe whole heartedly in the lie of the "American dream." It has not been true for a very long time and someone is finally talking about it.

pampango

(24,692 posts)
25. I love Bernie but Hillary's support comes from women, African Americans and Hispanics, not exactly
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 07:58 AM
Apr 2016

people whom I generally consider to be the Democratic Party elite. She certainly also attracts more well-to-do Democrats than Bernie does (one reason I prefer Bernie) but it is hard to say that 'she appeals ore to the elite'.

 

beachbum bob

(10,437 posts)
26. Sanders does not do well with people over 45....
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 08:31 AM
Apr 2016

We simply don't buy into the angry old white guy scenario

snowy owl

(2,145 posts)
29. Or perhaps you're simply unable to see the vision...burned out as they say.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 05:44 PM
Apr 2016

That's why young people should be voting and determining their future. I watched a Anthony Bourdaine show in which he talked to young people in Okinawa. The young there were unhappy because the old were stuck in a WW2 mentality. The young want the old to let go and allow the young to plan a future for themselves.

Funny you call him old and yet you say it is old people that don't like him He is youthful, isn't he? He still believes change is possible. But we seem to prefer the status quo...as if that has been so good for us. Human animals. I don't understand them.

snowy owl

(2,145 posts)
27. Premise of article is the top 20% care less about the bottom than they used to and
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 12:14 PM
Apr 2016

bottom is voting less which will leave us even more polarized and inequitable. I think Bernie is trying to change that. This election - with closed and open primaries, a candidate with less name recognition, older, less visibility due to less MSM acknowledgement - has put a well-known challenger with huge loyalty, money and gender identity on notice big time. So, I'm no sure the above comments tell the whole story.

For whatever reason, we are no longer a real democracy. We no longer vote in numbers that will save us - Bernie did bring about change. Young people have responded and it is their future. Why the rallies didn't translate into votes, I do not know unless they were attended by unregistered independents. But a message was sent, parse it any way you want. A message has been sent. A seed planted. Will it grow? To me that is the larger question. And this primary may have asked more questions than it answered about how Americans will respond in the long run.

If it doesn't, then we have more inequality and a smaller safety net to look forward to. That is what the article is really saying.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Clinton appeals to more e...