Why The Left Has Failed With Black Voters

[comradebillyboy]

https://forward.com/opinion/435826/why-the-left-has-failed-with-black-voters/

Much has been made about the rise of the left in the Democratic Party. After Bernie Sanders performed above expectations in 2016, some predicted that his brand of left politics would soon dominate the Democrats’ politics nationally, and they were right, judging by the 2020 democratic primaries. Some pundits went as far as to call Sanders the frontrunner for 2020 immediately after the 2016 election, and many of the 2020 candidates took the narrative of Sanders’ ideological strength at face value. Most notably, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren has matched Sanders on the ideological left, to much success.

The problem is that the Democratic electorate isn’t nearly as close to Sanders and Warren ideologically as some pundits would have you believe. Although Sanders essentially tied with Hillary Clinton with white voters, he lost black voters nationally by 50 points, which went a long way towards her winning the nomination. The candidate favored by black voters has won the Democratic primary in each contest going back to 1992. Black voters have an outsized influence on the primary process because of their concentration in the south, and because of their propensity to vote as a bloc. The south is a delegate rich region where white voters have abandoned the Democratic Party — meaning the primary electorate of many of these states is plurality or majority black.
snip

Moreover, black voters tend to choose candidates that have worked hard to build a relationship with their community over time. Because of the unique history of black Americans, earning the trust of this community is not an overnight affair. Going back 30 years, nominees such as Barack Obama and the Clintons had deep ties to the black community before even deciding to run for president.

This is in stark contrast to Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, candidates favored by the white left that have struggled mightily to pick up black support. Neither Sanders nor Warren spent much time building relationships with black voters prior to deciding to run for President. And they are not alone on the left in this regard. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was largely unable to move black voters in her direction during her primary; her strength was mostly with college educated whites. Trying to attract black voters after the fact is extremely difficult.

by Marcus Johnson

[Boxerfan]

1. Alrighty then- Comrade.

I'm not buying the premise-among other things.

[comradebillyboy]

3. That's fine but Sanders and Warren surely do need more

African American support if one of them is to win the nomination. Of the two Warren is more of a bridge builder than Sanders so I would think she's more likely to broaden her non-white support.

But mostly I look at Johnson's article as a critique of the left's excessive focus on class warfare over all else.

[LesterT]

9. Race and Class are intertwined.

Attempting to address one or the other as separate entities is reactionary and reductionist. It also plays into the hands of the owners and capitalist pirates.

[comradebillyboy]

10. I don't believe that true at all. Do you have some evidence?

[LesterT]

14. Sorry...I'm not a teacher.

I could go do some digging but people need to take some responsibility in educating themselves on the political matters at hand. Otherwise, reactionary slogans take on a life of their own. The material and history on the subject matter is quite clear and a has very deep repository. Good luck.

[ismnotwasm]

11. Aren't you sweet.

Erase all responsibility whiteness as a social force and historic colonialism by saying “race and class are intertwined” oh and “capitalist pirates”

This seems familiar...

[LesterT]

13. The history is on my side.

A cursory amount of research on the matter is all you need to understand the history. The history of the Black left is a rich and storied one.

[Amimnoch]

32. No. You are wrong.

And it’s your assertion, not mine. It’s your place to back up your own claims with evidence.

And welcome to DU.

[Lobster Sauce]

34. Expand your thinking...

“If a white man wants to lynch me, that's his problem. If he's got the power to lynch me, that's my problem. Racism is not a question of attitude; it's a question of power. Racism gets its power from capitalism."

(Stokely Carmichael)

[radius777]

36. Racism/sexism/etc occurs in all economic systems including socialism.

Power is not merely economic, but cultural and social, through which gender and racial dynamics express themselves.

[Garrett78]

38. This notion that racism doesn't exist without capitalism is clearly false.

Even if race was originally an invention borne out of greed.

Those who say we must focus on income or wealth inequality in order to reduce racism and sexism have put the cart before the horse. If anything, we should focus more on anti-racism and anti-sexism as a way to chip away at wealth and income inequality.

[Lobster Sauce]

46. Expand your thinking...

http://socialistworker.org/2002-2/431/431_08_Racism.shtml

The roots of racism

(Alex Taylor)

(Excerpt)

"FOR MANY people coming to radical politics--Blacks and whites alike--hatred of racism and a desire to get rid of it is a huge motivating factor. This is in contrast to some of the common assumptions about where racism comes from.

The first is that racism is part of human nature--that it's always existed and always will. The second is the liberal idea of racism--that it comes from people's bad ideas, and that if we could change these ideas, we could get rid of it.

Both assumptions are wrong. Racism isn't just an ideology but is an institution. And its origins don't lie in bad ideas or in human nature. Rather, racism originated with capitalism and the slave trade. As the Marxist writer CLR James put it, "The conception of dividing people by race begins with the slave trade. This thing was so shocking, so opposed to all the conceptions of society which religion and philosophers had…that the only justification by which humanity could face it was to divide people into races and decide that the Africans were an inferior race."

History proves this point. Prior to the advent of capitalism, racism as a systematic form of oppression did not exist. For example, ancient Greek and Roman societies had no concept of race or racial oppression."

[Garrett78]

48. You're not actually addressing the points being made by myself, radius777 and others.

If you want to just post quotations, have at it. But you aren't actually addressing the points being made.

And if you think there'd be no racism with socialism, you're the one who desperately needs to "expand your thinking."

[Lobster Sauce]

49. Leftists don't deal in subjective points, opinion, or beliefs...

leftists deal in objective material reality and historical facts. Subjective opinions or beliefs do not change the reality and history. You're also building scarecrows of straw and dissembling at an alarming rate. No leftists are saying racism, sexism, etc...would be completely eradicated by socialist policy. Leftists are saying it offers the most complete program in dealing with what has become institutionalized under capitalist social relations. What you or I "believe" is irrelevant. Slogans for all times are not relevant. The historical reality is what is relevant.

[Garrett78]

50. Some reading to help expand your thinking:

https://www.leftvoice.org/socialism-universalism-and-anti-anti-racism

[Lobster Sauce]

52. This does not contradict anything being said except yourself...

It reinforces it. There is no separation.

[Garrett78]

53. You clearly didn't actually read the piece. Peace.

[Lobster Sauce]

55. It's a mixed bag...

Clearly the writers are not calling for the abandonment of the class struggle as you seem to want to believe. Denouncing Marx's materialist conception of history is not uncommon even in certain strains of leftist thought. They are obviously full of shit on their point of "doing both" is a failed program. The writers are hopeless idealists but much further along in their journey than liberals. They could certainly benefit from reading more Marx and less Spinoza and Althusser I don't think they get Marx.

Nothing prevents us from lining our criticism with a criticism of politics, from taking sides in politics, i.e., from entering into real struggles and identifying ourselves with them. This does not mean that we shall confront the world with new doctrinaire principles and proclaim: Here is the truth, on your knees before it! It means that we shall develop for the world new principles from the existing principles of the world. We shall not say: Abandon your struggles, they are mere folly; let us provide you with true campaign-slogans. Instead, we shall simply show the world why it is struggling, and consciousness of this is a thing it must acquire whether it wishes or not.

(Marx)

[Garrett78]

56. Wow, you're even more misguided than I imagined.

"...are not calling for the abandonment of the class struggle as you seem to want to believe."

I have no idea how you got the impression that I'm calling for that or that I think the author is calling for that. You've completely invented that notion out of thin air.

But I do love how you've, after being called out for clearly having not read the piece, pivoted from saying the piece supports your position to claiming the author is full of shit. LOL

Let me help you out by sharing a brief excerpt that explains where I'm actually coming from when I say looking only through a class lens is insufficient:

Here, those who face violent state repression on a scale unknown to white workers (or Leftists) and who dare to mobilize against this repression become infiltrators who seek to “play up” identity to neutralize a purely economic program. What is the effect of such a position? It leaves the significant part of the working class that is African-American and Latinx (who are projected to be fifty percent of the working class under the age of 54 within ten years) to fight police killings, mass incarceration and deportation on their own, and instructs the most exploited, the poorest and those who daily face an array of threats unique to them, to set aside their demands so as not to alienate those who, however marginally, are better off in nearly every measurable way.

[Garrett78]

57. And here's another excerpt that explains my position:

Such an approach to strategy is disarmingly simple: if we choose a universal issue (one that affects everyone equally–in theory) and explain our demand in plain language, the people, now awakened to their self-interest, will rise. If our attempts to rouse them fail, the problem is that too many have been mistakenly drawn to particularistic diversions: police killings of African-Americans, deportation and detention of Latinx, or constant Islamophobic mobilizations, not to mention the focal points of international solidarity movements, such as Palestine. In fact, anti-imperialist movements have radicalized entire generations, with large numbers actively promoting the defeat of their own colonial power and the victory of “the enemy.” And just as social democratic parties and some Communist Parties (such as the French Communist Party), opposed national liberation struggles in the colonies (often citing the “immaturity” of their economic development), so they opposed these movements of resistance and solidarity as provocations likely to alienate French or British workers and bring about state repression.

[Garrett78]

60. Once again, you've made up this idea that myself or the authors are advocating...

...an abandonment of the class struggle. Talk about a straw man. Neither I nor the authors said any such thing, but you've got your agenda, so whatever.

And you can continue to suggest that there's no racism without capitalism (or with socialism) or that a class analysis is sufficient to address racism, but that position's not supported by reality. Say it again and again while clicking your heels and it still won't be made true. Sorry.

[Lobster Sauce]

51. Think deeper...

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/preface.htm

(Excerpt)

"In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which arises a legal and political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness."

[Cha]

41. Nah, Lester.. it's Not.

[DaDeacon]

17. Race and Class ARE intertwined!!!

Dr. King knew this hell the Black paanther party knew this.

just look it up :

https://www.poorpeoplescampaign.org/history/

http://theconversation.com/chicago-1969-when-black-panthers-aligned-with-confederate-flag-wielding-working-class-whites-68961

[LesterT]

20. Nice.

A few added words from Dr. King Speaking to the AFL-CIO on Dec. 11, 1961

"Negroes are almost entirely a working people. Our needs are identical with labor's needs: decent wages, fair working conditions, livable housing, old-age security, health and welfare measures, conditions in which families can grow, have education for their children and respect in the community. That is why Negroes support labor's demands and fight laws which curb labor. That is why the labor-hater and labor-baiter is virtually always a twin-headed creature, spewing anti-Negro epithets from one mouth and anti-labor propaganda from the other mouth."

[Ligyron]

54. Impossible to argue with that.

Someone just may try though.

[Garrett78]

31. They're both linked and separate. Without wealth inequality, racism would persist.

As I put it, in the form of a poem:

With Friends Like These…


Colorblindness ain’t a way to heal

Don’t be toutin’ that shit as a progressive ideal


Race is not a card any more than racism is a game

Race is a construct with consequences just the same


Save your breath about how "all lives matter"

You miss the point with such useless chatter


Self-congratulate for being on the left

But your critique of oppression is bereft


Your politics may not be one of hate

Be cautious, still, about the narrative you create


Let’s deconstruct the systems that’ve been built

Not mock the phenomenon of white guilt


Class consciousness is important to be sure

But without wealth inequality racism would endure


Don't claim I want diversity just for diversity's sake

Women and POC in power aren't just icing on a cake


Studies make clear the oppressed are less likely to lose

When there're more in power who've walked in their shoes

12/5/2019

[Lobster Sauce]

33. Gibberish at best.

Let me help you with your journey in further understanding race and class...

"It was one class - the oppressed, and that other class - the oppressor. And it's got to be a universal fact. Those that don't admit to that are those that don't want to get involved in a revolution, because they know as long as they're dealing with a race thing, they'll never be involved in a revolution."

"We never negated the fact that there was racism in America, but we said that the by-product, what comes off of capitalism, that happens to be racism. That capitalism comes first and next is racism. That when they brought slaves over here, it was to make money. So first the idea came that we want to make money, then the slaves came in order to make that money. That means, through historical fact, that racism had to come from capitalism. It had to be capitalism first and racism was a byproduct of that."

"We have to understand very clearly that there's a man in our community called a capitalist. Sometimes he's black and sometimes he's white. But that man has to be driven out of our community, because anybody who comes into the community to make profit off the people by exploiting them can be defined as a capitalist."

"We got to face some facts. That the masses are poor, that the masses belong to what you call the lower class, and when I talk about the masses, I'm talking about the white masses, I'm talking about the black masses, and the brown masses, and the yellow masses, too. We've got to face the fact that some people say you fight fire best with fire, but we say you put fire out best with water. We say you don't fight racism with racism. We're gonna fight racism with solidarity. We say you don't fight capitalism with no black capitalism; you fight capitalism with socialism. Socialism is the people. If you're scared of socialism you're scared of yourself.

(Fred Hampton excerpts from Power Anywhere Where There's People)

[Garrett78]

35. Race was an invention. And, yes, it was invented to divide and conquer.

Last edited Sun Dec 8, 2019, 04:00 AM - Edit history (2)

Origins aside, however, racism would persist even without wealth inequality. Wealthy Black folks get profiled and abused by police. Wealthy Black folks get stereotyped by society. You can be poor and white and receive better treatment than if you're Black and well-to-do.

A class analysis is not sufficient. And a rising tide that lifts all boats isn't sufficient when some boats are starting so much higher, or when some have been left at the shore and don't even have boats.

Those who only view society through a class lens might argue against race-based affirmative action and they're wrong if they do so. Or they might argue against reparations for everything from slavery to Jim Crow to police brutality--again, they're wrong. Or they might argue, as we see on DU frequently, against the notion that it matters whether or not those in power are POC or women--when, in fact, studies have made clear that women and POC receive stronger representation, in general (there are always exceptions), from representatives who are women or POC. The origins of racism don't alter those realities. Frequently, though, you'll see here at DU - whenever there's criticism over a lack of diversity - dismissive comments (from both leftists and moderates) such as, "I'm not going to vote for someone just because they're a woman or a POC." Or, worse, you'll read posts (again, from both leftists and moderates) using the bullshit right wing term "race card."

This is not meant as a defense of capitalism. It most certainly isn't. In fact, I haven't mentioned capitalism, and that's the point--racism would persist even without capitalism, even if racism was borne out of capitalism originally.

If you want to bring down capitalism, you had better take a big bite out of racism (and sexism) first.

[Lobster Sauce]

47. There is no first, there is no either or, and there is no separation...

More expansion of your thinking...

https://www.blackagendareport.com/poor_black_lives_matter_to_capitalism_new_jim_crow
How Poor Black Lives Matter to U.S. Capitalism Today: Reflections on “The New Jim Crow”

(Paul Street)

-----


http://socialistworker.org/2011/01/04/race-class-and-marxism

(Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor)

------

https://www.umass.edu/stpec/sites/default/files/Workshop_Readings/T.F.Reed,%20Jacobin--%20Why%20Liberals%20Separate%20Race%20from%20Class%20_%20Jacobin.pdf

Why Liberals Separate Race from Class

(Toure Reed)

[Cha]

39. NO THEY ARE NOT, Lester.

[MH1]

45. Not relevant in the USA. When you show me that poor white people

are just as f*cked in this country as poor (most) black people - or even in the same order of magnitude!! - then I will be ready to listen to a "class first" approach.

Not that my opinion (not a black person) matters. It's the opinion of the black community that matters. But I'm pretty sure that as long as innocent black teens are getting gunned down or unfairly locked up by white cops, as long as the black teens that escape that still can't get a good job when a less qualified white kid does easily ... it's not likely Sanders is going to appeal to them with "race-blind", economics-first policies. "Economics first" keeps American blacks right where they are in the back of the economic bus, and there is no reason they should be satisfied with that.

[TheRealNorth]

16. If you want to give aid and comfort to the Right's attempt to Divide and Conquer

You could similarly argue that moderates and the social justice warriors have failed the Left. They have advanced or been indifferent to neoliberal trade and labor policies that have destroyed labor unions and depressed wages.

That is part of the reason why I think we lost the upper Midwest- when you are mostly just talking about minority social issues while small town economies suck in the Midwest, you are creating a disconnect with those voters.

However, I would rather not have this fight because I believe both labor and social justice are important, and accusing that the other wing is "too involved" with their own interests only furthers the Republican goal to Divide us.

[comradebillyboy]

18. I thought the author of the article had an interesting perspective that

was worth sharing. We are in the midst of a primary election campaign and the differences in candidates views and positions are very much worth examining. The time for unity comes once we have selected a nominee.

[BeyondGeography]

2. IOW, "safe" choices, aging leadership, stagnation

Appreciate the update.

[LanternWaste]

4. Creative and imaginative inference.

regardless of how inaccurate it may or may not be.

I imagine many people require these short, bumper-sticker length translations such as yours to make it easier for a bias to digest inconvenient information without any awkward, gassy moments later in the night.

[BeyondGeography]

5. Inconvenient information like Joe Biden getting half the black vote

while people here complain about the lack of qualified black candidates in the top tier?

[JoeOtterbein]

6. +1000! nt

[Demsrule86]

21. As I have noted before, Warren is above 70...if you live in a glass house don't throw stones...

[BeyondGeography]

22. I don't know what that means but I enjoy your posts anyway

Btw, if there has been a better speech on black America in this campaign than this, I'd love to hear it. Post it in your response.

It starts at 1:33:30:

Link to tweet

[Demsrule86]

24. I like your posts too..haha. We will both vote blue no matter what!

[BeyondGeography]

25. Abso-tively

[Demsrule86]

26. And that sounds like an interesting speech...will have to watch it..Thanks!

[The Valley Below]

7. Not everyone is Susan Sarandon.

Not everyone is insulated from real harm when I guy like Donald J Trump gets elected president.

N'est pas?

[appalachiablue]

8. Unsuccessful effort to create division that we truly don't need now or ever

> "This is in stark contrast to Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, candidates favored by the white left.."

[Demsrule86]

19. Obviously they are favored by the White left...I don't see what there is to argue about.

[Mr.Bill]

12. What a bunch of Malarkey.

[DownriverDem]

15. Biden

has a great relationship with black voters. Just ask who they support.

[TreasonousBastard]

23. I'll take a guess at this one...

Black voters have been bullshitted for so long that you have to do more than throw more fancy words at them.
I suspect they knew what to expect when they heard about 40 acres and a mule.

Even though it was actually their idea.

https://www.pbs.org/wnet/african-americans-many-rivers-to-cross/history/the-truth-behind-40-acres-and-a-mule/

[tirebiter]

27. They did believe it when Sherman marched through Georgia because he followed through on it

Lincoln was more ambivalent. Sherman was using it to establish order and get the freed slaves to act as occupiers.

[crazytown]

28. A: Because they were not Barack's Obama's VP.

[highplainsdem]

44. Sigh. As has been pointed out here before, including in a thread you responded to, Biden

had a strong releationship with the black community decades before he became Obama's VP.

That thread:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287363712

The article it linked to:

https://apnews.com/86ac620dd00045dc9a8f21900ee4cfdc

From that article:

People who have known Biden for decades speak to the depth of good will he has among black voters. They talk of Biden as someone who has known and courted black voters for more than a half century. That, they say, could make it difficult for other candidates who hope to persuade some black voters to change their minds.

“He knew our plight, he knew how we felt,” said Richard “Mouse” Smith, who met Biden as a kid in Wilmington, Delaware’s black community where Biden worked as a lifeguard during college.

“He walked through gangs, learned all nicknames, he was part of this community,” said Smith, who remains one of Biden’s oldest and closest friends. “Joe had to be accountable to the black leadership in this city. We made him.”

Biden has credited his early years in Delaware politics as formative, particularly the community known as “The Bucket,” the largely African American, downtrodden northeast Wilmington neighborhood that was home to housing projects, crime, drugs and violence. He returned to the area as a young lawyer during the 1968 Wilmington riots after the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. He represented the community of New Castle as a county councilman, supporting public housing and opposing highway projects he saw as potentially harmful to black neighborhoods.

After his election to the U.S. Senate in 1972, Biden remained a fixture in the black community, a regular at the annual NAACP dinner and a commencement speaker at historically black Delaware State University. He talked to everyone, including the wait staff, according to people who knew him at the time. Most important, he listened, recalled Delaware State’s provost and incoming president, Tony Allen, who served as Biden’s speechwriter and special assistant when Biden was in the Senate.

“It almost seemed like he had a unique familiarity with people who might not have been advantaged,” said Allen. “He was always the last one to leave, making sure he connected with people and knew what their issues were. It’s kind of why a lot of African Americans affectionately call him ‘Uncle Joe.’ We feel like he’s got our back, he’s gonna consult with us and make the right decision.”

Please stop trivializing this by pretending the only reason Biden does better with black voters is that he was Obama's VP.

[Cha]

62. Thanks for this, hpd.. I saw that post

yesterday and was thinking the same that you're reporting on.. but, I didn't even have the ******* energy to even respond.

Link to tweet

Goth https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287363712#post39

[Gothmog]

29. This is a great article

This is from the article cited in the OP

Another one of the left’s most critical messages is their rhetoric around what they see as political revolution, that expresses itself in rhetoric about tearing down the Democratic Party. Sanders and his surrogates are the biggest offenders here, but other elements of the left have echoed the same messages. The idea that the Democratic Party is corrupt, infiltrated by corporate interests, and needs to be torn down may win cheers with the white left, but it doesn’t attract black voters. That is because the Democratic Party as an institution both codified and defended Civil and Voting Rights for minorities for decades. Black voters view the Democratic Party as an institution that has fought for them and protected them from Republican offensives. It is not one that should be blown up.

You might wonder why Democrats haven’t realized that their messaging is at odds with that of most black voters. But the truth is, white voters in the Democratic primary are more educated, less religious, wealthier, and more ideologically liberal than black voters, and they live geographically separated from black voters, both within cities in the northeast and west coast and regionally in the south. This effective segregation has resulted in a huge blind spot for these progressive candidates.

As white voters continue to move left, the divide could lead to mounting tension within the Democratic coalition, a symptom of which can be seen in the debate over President Obama’s legacy. While the white left is eager to reinterpret Obama’s legacy as a failure, black Democrats have a near universal approval of the former President.

In general, the problem can be summed up as follows: Black Democrats want the party to continue its fight to protect civil and voting rights and to expand access and opportunity, while white Democrats want the party to take on ideological stances regardless of the electoral consequences. Since black voters have disproportionate influence on the primary contest, there is the possibility that black voters could essentially override the choice of the white left (and deliver a Biden victory over Warren or Sanders).

That outcome would likely increase the intra-party tension, with inevitable calls to limit the electoral power of the southern states in future primaries. Of course, the white left could go in the opposite direction and decide to learn more about black voter decisions. But if the aftermath of 2016 is any indication, that rosy scenario probably isn’t going to happen.

[BlueWI]

30. Glittering generalities abounding in this article.

There's far more regional, generational, and ideological diversity among black voters and among the so-called white left than broad brush articles would have you believe. Where's the polling data that shows that the white left views Obama's presidency as a failure? It makes much more sense to frame the left's perspective as a preference for structural solutions over incrementalism. That's more accurate and less reductive than to say the left wants ideological stances.

And as a party, we need to tap into all the swaths of likely Democratic voters. That's the key to future wins, rather than assuming that a plurality of black voters supporting Obama's former vice president is some kind of explain-all trend.

In 2016, faulty assumptions were made about black voter enthusiasm for the nominee because of excessive confidence in a "black firewall," which was largely clustered in red states. If you look at the GE totals, Trump actually improved by 2% over Romney among black voters, and combined with vote suppression and lower than expected enthusiasm for the nominee in key urban districts, the margin didn't materialize for a Democratic win in the GE.

What we need to be doing is acknowledging that there is a black left AND a black moderate voting block, and tailoring our messages AND our policies to reach both.

That would be a sea change from the flyover cliches of this article.

[redqueen]

42. Not to mention lies. How many lefty Dems want to "tear down" the party?

Utterly dishonest spin.

[radius777]

37. Class-populism deracializes and degenders the truth of white male supremacy,

effectively excusing away racism/sexism/etc as the byproduct of class oppression.

The fact is, whites of all classes over the past 500 years have created and actively defended a system of white supremacy.

Populism both from the left and right could be seen as a nativist reaction to the ascendancy of PoC/women/etc, to trade with nonwhite countries, to nonwhite immigration, etc. Globalism is scary because the globe is full of nonwhite people who want access to the global economy that whites have heretofore monopolized (while still exploiting those countries).

Remember that many/most of these white working class 'populists' spent the past 40 years voting for Reagan Repubs, now suddenly claim to hate the capitalist system once they saw a black man rise to the top of it.

[Cha]

40. "Trying to attract black voters after the fact is extremely difficult."

Awww.. your OP has apparently upset some..

Thank you, comradebillyboy

[highplainsdem]

43. K&R!

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

58. There is no Left in American Politics

Only Extreme Right, Right and Centrists...…….

[Hortensis]

63. 87% of black voters ARE LW voters. I agree with the article,

Last edited Mon Dec 9, 2019, 07:25 AM - Edit history (1)

but the headline that suggests the giant, hugely diverse Democratic Party doesn't define America's left and isn't heavily dominated by the very large liberal demographic is...at very least etymologically challenged. Everyone else is a variation of left, including the radical-to-extremist fringe groups whose reason for existence is opposition to the mainstream left.

Call Sanders what he is: radical left. Socialist left if preferred. He considers capitalism evil and seeks universalist solutions, including communal ownership of business. In today's America, that's so radical he can't give it away.

Sanders' view admits no really significant difference between Democrats and Republicans. He's been claiming for decades that it doesn't really matter who wins if it's either one, "Tweedledum or Tweedledee." That's radical thinking. Only HE is different enough to be worth voting for. That's not "left," as in the Democratic Party's dominant liberalism, that's a distant view from so far out differences can't be seen.

As for why he failed POC, Sanders is a socialist running a white populist campaign. He can't serve AA as they require and also draw resentful, antagonistic white populists, most of whom are some combination of economically progressive and socially conservative. And there are a whole lot more angry white populists who think they're "getting left behind" than there are black voters.

Anyway, we know, because Sanders has said so many times, that he will take care of POC with his universalist solutions. He's not forgotten them, just has his own ideas about what they should want.

"I am not now, nor have I ever been a liberal Democrat." Bernie Sanders