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 Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nonhlanhla

(2,074 posts)
6. No disrespect intended
Sun Mar 6, 2016, 05:15 PM
Mar 2016

but I personally don't like this kind of analysis when it comes from the Bernie folks, and I don't like it when it comes from our side. Caucuses obviously don't draw such large numbers as primaries (and even primaries don't draw immensely large numbers). Secondly, just because it's a red state does not mean that we should discount it - just like we don't want the Bernie supporters to discount Hillary's votes in the red Southern states. Thirdly, Kansas actually has a long history of populism - it used to be more progressive populism, but the tide turned eventually. See above mentioned "What's the Matter with Kansas"?

So, in short, obviously the whole of Kansas does not support Bernie - and perhaps not even large numbers of people there do. But the same can be said of South Carolina's support of Hillary. What was it, about 13% of Dems there voted?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Hillary Clinton»Kansas isn't actually fee...»Reply #6