Yes Bernie, the System is Rigged. Whining about it won't win you Black votes. Here's why.

[UMTerp01]

http://www.theroot.com/articles/politics/2016/05/yes_bernie_sanders_the_system_is_rigged_what_else_is_new.html

Yes, Bernie Sanders, the System Is Rigged—What Else Is New?
Whining won’t win the Democratic presidential candidate black votes. Here’s why.

BY: JASON JOHNSON
Posted: May 21 2016 7:05 AM

Bernie Sanders has no reason to be angry. He’s done more to raise his profile in the last 18 months than he’s done in over 30 years in the House and Senate. He’s managed to drag the Democratic Party left after years of centrist posturing by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. He’s raised millions and galvanized millions more. However, he and his supporters still complain that the primary system is rigged and the Democratic Party isn’t treating them fairly. It was the belief that the Democratic establishment is out to get Sanders that led to the violence and disruptions at the Nevada State Democratic Party Convention last week. This attitude is also the main reason Sanders has failed to consistently resonate with African-American voters. Black folks have always known that the system is rigged—what they want is someone to change it, not just complain about it.

Objectively speaking, there is a great deal to like about Sanders’ political positions, regardless of your party affiliation. Who isn’t in favor of taking money out of the hands of big business and putting it back into the pockets of consumers? Who isn’t in favor of making Washington, D.C., more accountable to voters? You may quibble with how Sanders proposes to accomplish his goals, or whether he can actually achieve them, but the goals themselves are pretty party-neutral, which is befitting a lifelong independent senator (more on that later). Despite a strong message about economic inequality, Sanders has never managed to be competitive with African-American Democrats in primary states. Many have argued ad nauseam about why the Sanders campaign has struggled with black voters, and the arguments generally fall into two equally simplistic and nominally insulting categories: 1) Black folks are foolishly loyal to the Clintons in some form of electoral Stockholm syndrome; or 2) Black folks don’t ultimately know what’s best for them and don’t know Sanders well enough to realize that he’s the best choice.

I’ve avoided stepping into this fray because not only are both arguments faulty, but neither one in any way reflects the black Democrats and independents I know. The real reason Sanders has failed to connect with many mainline African-American Democrats is what happened at the Nevada convention May 14. Sanders and his surrogates represent a discomfiting liberal white privilege that has always made African-American voters feel ill at ease, even when ultimate goals are in sync. Stop me if you’ve had this experience before: You are driving downtown on a Friday night with one of your white friends in the passenger seat. Suddenly, those all-too-familiar red and blue lights start to flash behind you and you’re pulled over. The police officer plays cops’ favorite game, which is to ask a lot of perfectly legal, but thoroughly insulting and inconvenient, questions in search of a post hoc rationalization for pulling you over to begin with.

While you try to calmly navigate the situation, your white friend is going ballistic now that real, live, actual racism is happening in front of him or her. Which hits you with two simultaneous feelings: first, that it’s nice your friend has your back; and second, annoyance that it took a routine example of racial discrimination for your friend to finally realize your daily reality. And your friend’s reaction, while sincere, is way out of proportion to the offense. If anything, it reflects a sort of alienating privilege. In a nutshell, Sanders is your white friend in the car. Of course the Democratic primary system is rigged, Bernie Sanders. What else is new? Party systems have always been rigged—ask any African-American candidate over the last 100 years. Sanders is angry because the Democratic Party put debates on weekends to help Clinton? How about when the Republicans handcuffed Alan Keyes to keep him out of the Atlanta debates in 1996?

Sanders is angry because the Democratic National Committee state bosses are in the tank for Clinton? In 2008, then-Sen. Obama had to start his own national organization, Obama for America, because he knew that party leaders wanted Clinton. At no point did you see supporters of Obama or Keyes or half a dozen other black candidates throw chairs or make death threats because they were losing. The problem with Sanders and his supporters goes even deeper, though. Sanders just became a Democrat about 15 minutes ago so that he could run for the party nomination. For almost 40 years he’s been a proud independent, remember? Legally and structurally, the Democratic Party has every right to make things difficult for a relative outsider to snag the nomination.

When Sanders complains that the Democratic primary is rigged against an independent candidate, he sounds like a white sorority complaining that they lost the step show on points because this year’s theme was “Dark and Lovely.” It takes a lot of gall to show up with a membership card so new the ink is wet and start complaining about the process. Now that same sorority is tearing up the gym, throwing chairs and threatening to go all the way to the Pan-Hellenic Council if they don’t get their way. Just because you lost something doesn’t mean it was stolen—unless you’re dipped in the kind of privilege that tells you something is owed to you to begin with. African-American Democrats have every right not to like Hillary Clinton, who wore her white privilege like a ski mask in 2008 and whose policy history leaves a lot to be desired. But that doesn’t make the self-righteous complaining of Sanders any easier to stomach. Yes, Sanders has been a freedom fighter for progressive causes for decades, but when it comes to the Democratic primary, he and his supporters have been consummate whiners reeking of privilege.

You want to talk about a rigged system? Look at Shirley Chisholm, Keyes, the Rev. Jesse Jackson or, even better, ask Democratic state Sen. Maria Chappelle-Nadal of Missouri, Republican Lenny McAllister in Pennsylvania, or dozens of other African-American Democrats and Republicans who are actual long-term party members who were betrayed in their primaries. If Sanders wants to be a part of the system, he has to find a way to beat it, then take it apart from the inside—not start halfway, then begin flipping chairs when the numbers aren’t adding up in his favor. Protest appeals to black voters, revolution appeals to black voters, but whining doesn’t. It has not always been clear that the Sanders campaign knows the difference.

Jason Johnson, political editor at The Root, is a professor of political science at Hiram College in Ohio and an analyst for CNN, MSNBC, Al-Jazeera and Fox Business News. Follow him on Twitter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is one of the best arguments I've seen to challenge so many of those claiming that Blacks must have "Stockholm Syndrome" to be voting for Hillary Clinton. They just don't get it. I flirted with Bernie for awhile. I went from solid Hillary to undecided. But my state voting later in the process probably helped me go back to Hillary's side because you could see the unraveling of Bernie's campaign begin. Had my state voted in February or Mid-March I may have pulled the lever for Sanders. But voting later on actually didn't work in his favor. So that whole "once people get to know Bernie more they will like him" narrative that his supporters always used was actually the opposite for me. I still like the guy, but the more I have gotten to see this process play out I knew he wasn't the one I wanted to pick. Don't get me wrong. I'm not thrilled to bits with Hillary either, but she is my choice for a number of reasons and I will vote for her in November.

[The Polack MSgt]

2. Stand by

For incredulous replies and clueless denials.

[Baobab]

42. No chairs were thrown.

Last edited Sat May 21, 2016, 07:04 PM - Edit history (1)

The neoliberalism of Hillary Clinton (And Obama) is an existential threat to all of us who are non-wealthy.

Because it prioritizes wealth over morality and tries to write compassion out of the picture and then nail it down. So for example, Hillary's energy chapter in t-tip might radically impact affordable housing in a bad way, leaving a lot of people with nowhere to live. They don't see that as mattering because their "free trade" ideology frames corporations as having a right to frack until its gone and export it to where they can get the best price, (Asia) and they likely see rent stabilization laws as undesirable subsidies to the poor - when in all practical terms there likely is no other way to prevent millions of people from being forced out of cities if any of a number of delicately balanced things falls out of whack.

With friends like that, who needs ....

Similar issues exist around environmental issues.. which disproprtionately impact the poor.

The battle over single payer is basically been hijacked away from any discussion of the true root of the problem, greed and bad Clinton era trade policy. Which they are trying to make worse with three pending deals.

http://www.pnhp.org/resources/pnhp-research-the-case-for-a-national-health-program

http://www.pnhp.org/sites/default/files/Nick%20Skala%20GAT%20and%20Health%20Reform.pdf

[wildeyed]

51. Are you serious?

[Baobab]

62. No chairs were thrown. A chair was lifted by one guy who was hugged and the chair was taken from him

and he was hugged. Thats what the video shows, thats what Nina Turner explained, thats what happened.

[wildeyed]

69. You are serious!

I thought maybe you were being sarcastic and just forgot the sarcasm tag. The article is about why many black voters chose Clinton over Sanders, and your post is a pretty solid example of the type of missteps that occured.

This is the AA forum, BTW, in case you are lost.

[Baobab]

76. I understand- My first post I didnt realize that- but I do now- But wait a second before you lump me

in with that kind of attitude because I'm trying to point out a truly horrible situation which may redeem us in your eyes - we're all, but especially you, are being gamed by Mrs Clinton. In a particularly cruel way, I think.

Because their- the neoliberals' scheme, which has been in the making for 20 years- pits all of us ere in the US, against people in developing countries, in competition for the same jobs.

And its going to really hurt the public sector and eliminate carve outs for women and minority owned businesses, unless you get carve outs put in there for them somehow.

Like the Europeans put audiovisual services in there.

This also explains something ugly about school privatization. I think.

Its a big and complicated thing that I think I should just leave at this. We are not your enemy and in fact, we are basically all in the same boat on this one, and I think to some extent the people in developing countries who also have corrupt goverments that would prefer they left to cleaning up their act - we have that in common. This isnt about race its about the extremely wealthy trying to against all odds, lock in their growing slice of a shrinking pie by pitting other group against one another.

All American workers will be framed as the privileged ones, trying to take back the long promised, long delayed pay back for globalization from the developing countries firms "who have earned it".

[wildeyed]

81. Those things may or may not be true.

But I'm going to stick with the original topic to avoid hijacking this thread.

Peace.

[Baobab]

85. Sounds like a plan-

But, consider this- things like the links in my s-i-g show how its rigged - and basically prove thats true. And we have to unite to solve these problems.

HRC is clearly not part of the solution, the fact that her husband signed this huge 90s deal, and then she's failed to disclose it is inescapable proof that shes part of the problem.

rather than speak up when she could have made a difference and pervented G*** Hillary helped hide it with her fake healthcare plan and opposed generous benefits for childrens health insurance when research had proven that poor families were so starapped that high co pays and deductibles would serve as a total barrier to poor kids getting care, that didnt matter. it was only when she was embarassed into signing on to SCHIP that she did.

Recently she has basically attempted to rewrite history to show herself in a more complementary light.

T deals are irreversible, countries like South Africa have discovered that- the hard way.

That should give us all pause before endorsing her and her "irreversible privatization" (thats what "progressive liberalisation" means!) globalist agenda. (Which European economists agree works out badly for the "indigenous workers" in developed countries- US economists don't seem to realize that other work applies to us! Not a good sign.)

[Number23]

91. So instead of answering the clearly stated points in the OP, you come racing in here to talk about

no chairs were thrown -- as if a) anyone gives the first damn or b) that comes anywhere NEAR discussing the meat of this OP -- and you are surprised that the only responses you got was someone laughing at you?

This post was clearly about Sanders EXCEPTIONALLY well-documented inability to connect with minority voters. There is a brief mention of Hillary as well, but the meat was about Sanders. But as usual, Sanders supporters immediately pivot to "bbbut what about Hillary??!" It's embarrassing at this point.

[Baobab]

97. maybe we should do less talk about "connecting" and more talk about money for example, health care

and jobs. All the warm and fuzzy stuff in the world wont make up for hundreds of thousands or even millions of lost jobs given away to foreign staffing firms and the loss of the ability to have public truly affordable health care and education, because jobs as we know them are going away due to automation. Also, the sudden jump in the cost of natural gas could lead to the loss of a lot, as in - a good chunk of our postwar and prewar multifamily housing. Where will people go?

It certainly does make a lot of financial sense for the powers that be to befriend black people right now, but its not for the reasons you think it is.


You want to know the reason I care about this, its that I was similarly shafted by a close relative and I know how hard it is on people physically and emotionally and I just see something like that destroying a lot of lives. It will literally kill people to have this done.

They are not going to tell us they are doing it.

[Number23]

99. I don't really know what you're talking about in this post

[Baobab]

108. In the 1990s, the US was instrumental in setting up the WTO, one of the so called

global governance institutions. the WTO is based on a concept called "progressive liberalisation" of the world economy which basically means it sees government as a problem and tries to compel countries to privatize and then globalize those opportunities so corporations everywhere can have a level playing field without discrimination against any corporation based on where they are from, in fact, corporations from continents like Africa and South Asia are given special permission to discriminate for example, by subsidizing various things like agricultural products )food subsidies) or wages.

More developed countries like the US are assumed to no longer need crutches like public health care and education so when they signed the WTO any further expansion of their nonconforming monopoly services was halted by a standstill clause.

The WTO seems to be based on the concept of comparative advantage. Some countries are poor in raw materials but are rich in people, who can work, other countries excel in high tech industry, and export their world famous educational brands, Harvard, Stanford, Princeton, etc. other countries have lots of raw materials other countries can use, other countries farm.

In theory, the concept of progressive liberalisation sounds good to developing countries leadership as it merely encourages them to do what they have done all along which is funnel all the wealth to themselves. However in other countries, the ones that have built cutting edge public healthcare and educational systems, the idea of giving all that up for a promise of economic integration if they just privatize seems foolish and risky. But that is what the oh so modern and successful US, which was able to eliminate welfare programs has done.

The biggest lure if they give up their crutches is the promise of access to a global economic meritocracy in services. If they just work really hard for really cheap they will be able to win business all around the world, even in developed countries, like the US, which have severe labor shortages.

The promise of jobs in developed economies has been a big draw in keeping the developing countries involved in the never ending rounds of WTO negotiations. Some insist that they were never promised jobs in so many words, but it seems as if the evidence is strong that the language of the deals make it clear that if they can shine in terms of offering good value, I think its going to be clear that they were..

Some random reading on global trade in services agreements and economic integration

mpact on the health sector Natalie Van Gijsel - Campaign and Policy Officer at Third World Health Aid, Belgium

The Trade-Migration Linkage: The Impact of GA TS Mode 4- Betts and Nicolaides

A discussion on the public services interaction and the scoping of the privatization mandate

[Number23]

113. And I still don't know what any of that has to do with this OP.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

123. I believe there is some lecturing going on here as to why you need to support

Bernie.

Problem is, Bernie is likely not to be elected.

Then what?

Is what I would ask this person.

[840high]

82. Even Snopes says - false.

[KittyWampus]

138. not about the death threats and doxxing.

[MisterP]

3. Sanders 87%, Trump 6%

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512022793

why side with the beneficiary of the machine that screwed over Chisholm and Rev. Jackson?

[UMTerp01]

6. Thats general election support...NOT PRIMARY

I think Black voters have expressed their preference during the primaries.

[retrowire]

4. ummm

Bernie helped Jesse Jackson.

And, he's not pointing out the rigged system to pander to AA's.

He's just pointing it out.

This is streeeetching. The system is rigged period, how did that become a "catering to blacks" thing?

Also noticed this article mentions chair throwing... when there were no chairs being thrown. Sigh...

Another slight against Bernie.

[kacekwl]

5. +1

[DarkScholar82]

7. Agreed

I don't understand why the OP thinks that Sen. Sanders's complaining about unfairness in the Democratic primaries is somehow directed specifically at African Americans.

The OP's condescending dismissal of Sanders's complaints as "whining" illustrates the arrogance of many Clinton supporters, which I suspect will drive a small but potentially decisive portion of Sanders voters away from the Democrats.

[UMTerp01]

13. Reading comprehension? You should try it.

The article doesn't say that Sanders' complaining is directed specifically at African Americans. The article is saying that his and his supporters basis for their frustration is not news to African Americans and thus is like no shit buddy we've known the system has been unfair and rigged and you coming along after being a Democrat for 15 minutes while we have been life long Democrats isn't going to garner you our votes. No its not intentional per se toward African Americans; its just a message and strategy that most African Americans aren't going to be sympathetic to because we've known for awhile this is how the system works. Bernie isn't exposing any new shit to us. Its just that now that your candidate is on the losing end of it, the rest of us are supposed to be so up in arms. Umm.....NO!!!

[SusanCalvin]

21. That's how I read it. nt

[The Far Left]

30. So it's OK if Hillary does the rigging? nt

[SusanCalvin]

37. I don't like any rigging. Are you aware of where you are? nt

[The Far Left]

65. A safe place to share views I hope

We need to remember that this may be an anti-establishment election, and that all Democrats will have to come together after the Primaries to defeat Trump no matter who wins the Primary.

[Baobab]

70. Have people here read this?

Last edited Sat May 21, 2016, 07:17 PM - Edit history (1)

This is an important missing piece of data on what was really happening in 1994-1995.

http://www.pnhp.org/sites/default/files/Nick%20Skala%20GAT%20and%20Health%20Reform.pdf

behind the scenes, this global deal was being set up. The other part of it, not mentioned here, is a jig job trading scheme. Part of its goal is lowering wages in developed countries by pitting us against people - highly skilled professionals, in developing countries.

Its a moral minefield but I propose that we all take a deep breath and dive in and read about it and ask ourselves, what is right. I think its a case of the Clintons and their friends basically "two timing" us all, making promises which were and are designed to milk the most possible money out of peoples trust- without delivering the goods-

Perhaps promising (or not promising, they would probably claim no futures were promised) the same futures to two separate groups of people.

Developing countries could access that wealth, if they just were the winning low bidders on services procurement bids- Big chunks of the public sector have to be privatized under GATS- and then globalized- this will hurt black people and women and all Americans because jobs here created by tax money wont go to us unless we have the winning low bids, which may be impossible because of wages-

You can learn a lot about "progressive liberalisation" and economic integration - I dont know the best place to read criticism of it- the problems with their sort of el-dorado like aspect

The pro globalization viewpoint is all you will read on web sites like ictsd.org

http://www.ictsd.org/bridges-news/bridges/overview
http://www.ictsd.org/bridges-news/bridges/news/services-liberalisation-talks-among-group-of-wto-members-move-forward
http://www.ictsd.org/bridges-news/bridges/news/us-presidential-contenders-spar-on-trade-as-white-house-continues-tpp-push

Maybe cuts-geneva.org's "WTO Note" series?

http://www.cuts-geneva.org/pacteac/images/Documents/EAC%20Forum/Forum17/EAC%20Geneva%20Forum-%20WTO%20Note%2017.pdf

here are some others

http://www.ictsd.org/downloads/2008/06/gallagher.pdf

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTRANETTRADE/Resources/C13.pdf (see around page 278)

http://www.cuts-geneva.org/pacteac/images/Documents/EAC%20Forum/Forum22/EAC%20Geneva%20Forum-%20WTO%20Note%2022.pdf

[The Far Left]

88. WTO talk is pretty wonky!

But I'm game.

The "Free Trade" deals screwed any country that didn't adopt a backdoor VAT tax (the US).

[Agnosticsherbet]

28. +1

[Enthusiast]

10. +2

[Nitram]

16. Yes. "Sanders and his surrogates represent a discomfiting liberal white privilege."

"If I don't win, the system must be rigged."

[UMTerp01]

19. Exactly!!! And Black folks saw right through it nt

[NNadir]

25. Well, I have only one thing to offer to the "they rigged the system" crowd.

Hi SDs: It's me, Bernie

What is really, really, really appalling about the Sanders crowd is that they seem to want their candidate nominated and elected by acclamation. This is a set of people who are so self absorbed, so disconnected, that they believe it is impossible that a majority of people simply don't believe that Bernard Sanders is either competent, informed, or electable.

I, for one, as an environmentalist deeply concerned about the climate object strongly to Sanders. His proposed methods of addressing climate change have failed at a cost of two trillion dollars spent over the last ten years; and he wants to extend Vermont's horrible climate policies to the rest of the United States and even the world.

I am thrilled that many Americans, and most Democrats agree with me on rejecting Sanders, even if their reasons for doing so may be different than mine.

Nevertheless, we have a very, very, very, very loud and apparently increasingly violent crowd who want to shove this horrible candidate down our throat by claiming that they, and only they, know what an honest election is.

If New Jersey holds a primary that means something, I intend to vote proudly for Ms. Clinton. I don't need anyone to come to me and tell me I'm a liar.

As a person who spends most of his free time in the primary scientific literature learning about climate issues, I can say on the environment, they're badly informed, contemptuous of science and frankly clueless. I assume that there are many other issues on which they are just as bad. I'm appalled by his position, and so are important climate scientists.

http://epillinois.org/news/2016/4/6/james-hansen-condemns-bernie-sanders-fear-mongering-against-indian-point

One thing I know that they're very bad at is accepting defeat. Now it appears they'd like to change their so called "revolution" into a violent revolution, every bit as odious as Trump's violent "revolution."

We don't need their type of revolution. The great strength of the United States I'm learning as I speak to people from all over the world, many of whom have struggled all their lives to get here, is that we have a strong rule of law in this country.

Sanders and his supporters are making me sick and disgusted.

I wish they'd go away. They don't care about their country; they don't care about the world; and they seem to know very little about either.

[retrowire]

29. wow that's a fucked up opinion you have there.

And I'm offended.

[Tarheel_Dem]

50. ^^^ THIS ^^^. Especially, "I wish they'd go away".

[yuiyoshida]

54. hmmmm

"I wish they'd go away. They don't care about their country; they don't care about the world; and they seem to know very little about either. "

what an arrogant attitude you have.... goman na hito ga Kirada.

[truebluegreen]

64. So many things ...but "we have a strong rule of law in this country."

Wow. Talk about knowing very little--that statement was so far from reality that it calls everything else you say or think into question. And you have learned this "as (you) speak to people from all over the world"--like they know? Really?

We have a "strong" rule of law all right. Very "strong" for those without wealth or political clout; just the opposite for their "betters."

Such "thinking" makes me sick and disgusted.

[SusanCalvin]

71. That pushed my button as well. nt

[truebluegreen]

79. And all that from an (apparently) AA perspective?

That doesn't make any kind of sense to me. At. All.

[NNadir]

86. I regularly interact with people from China, India and a number of European countries.

In fact, I just spent three hours in a car with a fellow from India who's spent eight years here and just can't wait to become a citizen, because he wishes to escape permanently from a system of castes, nepotism.

You say that it's laughable that this country has a rule of law.

Your evidence for your claim is what? That Bernie Sanders is a loser?

Frankly, kid, your view is that of a provincial. The problem with most people who define themselves as "progressives" even if they despise progress, is that only perfection is worthwhile to them, and what's notable, is the intellectual and moral solipsism they embrace that insists that their view of perfection, and only their view of perfection is, um, perfect.

The rest of us live in the real world, and we don't seek perfection. I'm not looking for the messiah, Bernie Sanders or otherwise; I'm looking for a world where people interact and look outward as much as inward.

Anybody can scream "injustice!" when they don't get their way. It's not very clear, nonetheless, that they are doing anything more than asserting that their view of justice is the only view, and thus are willing to create injustice.

The Constitution of the United States is more than 200 years old. No other written Constitution has survived as long. It has managed to evolve with the times.

Now, I think most of us think that some Supreme Court decisions have been wrong; I would certainly agree that the courts responsible for Citizens United, for Bush v. Gore, etc are wrong, as were Dred Scott, and Plessy v. Ferguson long before them. That however, doesn't imply a right to violence, nor does it make everyone who claim that these cases are or were the end of the world right.

Now, there was one instance where people who wished to disregard the outcome of an election took forceful action to overturn it. As it happened six hundred thousand people died in combat as a result.

In nearly every other case, we, as a people, have generally respected the law. This doesn't mean the law is perfect; nor does it mean that the law is always right, but even if you are personally clueless about the privilege of living in the United States under its system of Government, I assure you that there are many people who are far less provincial who get it.

Now, I'm familiar with the fact that many Sanders supporters are unfamiliar with the contents of science books; and now I'm left to wonder if they are also unfamiliar with the contents of history books or books on current affairs. Do you know what Nigeria has gone through? India? Sri Lanka? China? Are you remotely aware that India and China alone contain all most half of the world's population?

And you're complaining because a bunch of two bit paper towel salesmen, the Kochs, can run TV ads and contribute to Party politics. It seems to me that they're getting theirs. They have a violent racist as a candidate, who if elected, will destroy international relations, as well the economic prospects of everyone, billionaire and minimum wage earner alike.

And your reaction to this? THE COUNTRY'S CORRUPT BECAUSE PEOPLE DON"T KNOW SANDERS IS GOD!!!!!

Bull. As an environmentalist, I can securely say that he has no idea what he's talking about.

From what I see, the people here screaming to overturn the results of an election, the one in which Ms. Clinton strongly leads, are simple thugs. I have no use for them. And if they hate Ms. Clinton so much that they are willing to advance the cause of another thug, Trump, so be it. I believe my country will nonetheless do better. We suffered two Bushes, but our country self corrected with William Clinton and Barack Obama, and both of those Presidencies have restored my faith in my country, even if provincials don't get it.

Take your little ball and go home. This country will survive without your help.

Enjoy the rest of the weekend.

[truebluegreen]

111. My evidence of my claim is the unequal application of our laws

to the poor, especially minorities, and the rich. Not controversial, really. Common knowledge for a progressive in fact. Your proof that our system is equitable and just is the opinion of some guy from India who thinks that our system is better than his? So your stance is, essentially, Not As Bad As Those Guys = Good?

And btw, where did I ever say, or imply, that "Sanders is God"? Or that our country doesn't have a rule of law because Sanders is not "winning"?

Your quantum leaps are hilarious, but hey! you are an environmentalist (so you say) so clearly your judgment and opinion are worthy of my respect. And I, as a long-term ex-pat, looking at the US from outside, am totally clueless as to how the US stacks up against the rest of the world, or other advanced nations. Good to know. Thanks for the instruction; I feel so much better now.

[NNadir]

118. Well, I'm happy you live in some foreign Nirvana. Which one?

Sweden?

Is that where you become a vast expert on the rights of minorities and the poor? How many minorities and poor people have the privilege of declaring themselves experts on American affairs by being an ex-pat?

I've traveled all over the world. The most startling place I've been was India and one doesn't go to India, in particular Mumbai, without getting a real sense of poverty. I'm not sure that the airhead Sanders knows very much about that kind of poverty, and from your glib platitudes, I'm quite sure you don't either. In any case, I don't accord you the right to speak for the impoverished because you're an expat.

If you live in a country where laws are equally applied to everyone, maybe you should just shut yourself up in your province wherever it is and stop whining about the United States.

As for your assertion that the perfect is the enemy of the good, I have no use for that either.

As a scientist, I find your misuse of the word "quantum" rather amusing. You apparently don't know what it means, but that's fine with me. Lots of people misuse the word. It applies to small things, very small things.

I have not asked to be worthy of your respect. Frankly, I'm rather choosy about whose respect I seek. Um, yours doesn't qualify.

I made it clear that I regard self declared "progressives" to be a rather clueless lot, and I couldn't care less about what they think of me or about anyone else. I'm an old man, and even if I started out as one among them, well, my pimples cleared up, I grew up, and I realized that bludgeoning people with my own opinions - at least the puerile ones I held in my twenties when I thought myself "progressive" - is rather counter productive.

I will be happy however, if you just stay away, and view our country from thousands of miles away. I find kibitzers to be rather useless, and nothing you've said in any way discourages me from thinking otherwise. We certainly don't need you here, and I for one don't want you here.

Have a nice...well...whatever, depending on what time zone you're in.

[truebluegreen]

121. I live in a "developing" country, not that that is any of your business.

Your assumptions are profoundly amusing to me, but I find laughter is a good thing, so thanks for that.

Enjoy your day, you have certainly brightened mine!

[sheshe2]

73. ^^^This^^^

[Jackie Wilson Said]

83. Bernie is against nuclear power, lots of environmentalists are against nuclear power.

[Silver_Witch]

126. You do realize that Clinton Supports Fracking?

[October]

26. Agree.

Bernie is not pandering at all.

[secondwind]

33. I agree!

[Number23]

92. Can you tell me exactly where in this article anyone mentioned ANYTHING about "pandering" to black

voters by pointing out the rigged system? Please. I am asking politely.

I want to find out precisely where you got tripped up reading this piece because it is beyond apparent that you could not have misunderstood it any more than you did.

[Gothmog]

127. There are good reasons why Sanders is not appealing to African American and other voters

There are good reasons why the demographics are not working for Sanders and why many voters including some African American voters are not supporting Sanders. Demographics are important in that this explains one of the big divides between Sanders supporters and Clinton supporters. There is a vast difference in how Sanders supporters and Sanders view President Obama and how other Democrats view President Obama. I admit that I am impressed with the amount accomplished by President Obama in face of the stiff GOP opposition to every one of his proposals and I personally believe that President Obama has been a great President. It seems that this view colors who I am supporting in the primary http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/clinton-sanders-obama_us_56aa378de4b05e4e3703753a?utm_hp_ref=politics

But lurking behind this argument about the future is a dispute that's really about the past. It’s a debate over what Obama accomplished in office -- in particular, how significant those accomplishments really are. And it's been simmering on the left for most of the last seven years.

On one side of this divide are activists and intellectuals who are ambivalent, disappointed or flat-out frustrated with what Obama has gotten done. They acknowledge what they consider modest achievements -- like helping some of the uninsured and preventing the Great Recession from becoming another Great Depression. But they are convinced that the president could have accomplished much more if only he’d fought harder for his agenda and been less quick to compromise.

They dwell on the opportunities missed, like the lack of a public option in health care reform or the failure to break up the big banks. They want those things now -- and more. In Sanders, they are hearing a candidate who thinks the same way.

On the other side are partisans and thinkers who consider Obama's achievements substantial, even historic. They acknowledge that his victories were partial and his legislation flawed. This group recognizes that there are still millions of people struggling to find good jobs or pay their medical bills, and that the planet is still on a path to catastrophically high temperatures. But they see in the last seven years major advances in the liberal crusade to bolster economic security for the poor and middle class. They think the progress on climate change is real, and likely to beget more in the future.

It seems that many of the Sanders supporters hold a different view of President Obama which is also a leading reason why Sanders is not exciting African American voters. Again, it may be difficult for Sanders to appeal to African American voters when one of the premises of his campaign is that Sanders does not think that President Obama is a progressive or a good POTUS.

Again, I am not ashamed to admit that I like President Obama and think that he has accomplished a great deal which is why I do not mind Hillary Clinton promising to continue President Obama's legacy. There are valid reasons why many non-African American democrats (myself included) and many African American Democratic voters are not supporting Sanders.

I understand why Sanders supporters dislike talking about demographics but the fact remain that Sanders supporters tend to not like President Obama and that dislike affects the amount of support that Sanders is getting from certain demographic groups.

[Digital Puppy]

128. Good analysis, imo.

Thanks for this post.

You 'foot stomp' a very important point regarding Obama-momentum and support. There are those that are more upset with Obama because he wasn't "left/progressive/liberal-enough" than they are happy with what he has accomplished for this country.

[SusanCalvin]

8. I do see the point, and it's a good one.

I am nevertheless still a Bernie supporter, even with some things that could have been done better. (ETA: They should have listened to bravenak.)

Oh, and as far as is currently documented, no chairs were thrown.

[Bodych]

9. Still trying hard to divide us by color?

Let's face it: That's why this subject keeps coming back, like clockwork.

Now we're supposed to bring up private-prison money and Clinton crime bills, to continue this charade. Oh yes, that famous "predatory" video by Hillary, too. Right?

Yet all along, you're just wanting to divide us. You label Sanders as "whining", but it's really YOU who are whining, by returning to this dead horse so that you can continue beating it with a stick.

I receive Bernie Sanders mailings, since day 1. He doesn't focus on skin color. He focuses on issues and inequality.

So go ahead: Continue the color divide, if it makes you feel like you're accomplishing something (HINT: you're not).

[UMTerp01]

11. I'm speaking about a specific issue in the AFRICAN AMERICAN GROUP

Thats what I'm doing and I don't give a single damn if anyone thinks I'm trying to "divide". The whole point of the article is being missed.

[Bodych]

15. You are dividing. That's why you brought this stale issue back.

The whole point of the article has been raised again and again and again during the past few months. If not by the author in question, then by other authors.

You just keep believing that you're being relevant.

[UMTerp01]

18. You have some nerve talking about issues being raised again and again....

....when I see the same articles and things repeatedly said by Sec Clinton ad nauseum. This is the classic deflect attitude when anyone is uncomfortable and has NO talking point or defense against a particular argument. You want to talk about independents and show other groups who are against Hillary but I can't point out why Sanders just hasn't gained traction with Black voters. You better get used to seeing it because it will be the footnote of this primary and one of the main reasons he loses the nomination. Thats not division. Thats just facts....like basic math that doesn't seem to go over well with you'll either.

[Bodych]

20. Yes, I have NERVE all right. And your true colors are showing. n/t

[UMTerp01]

23. What true colors? I raise an issue specific to African Americans in the African Americans group

And your point coming up in here to get pissy about what I posted from a journalist from an African American specific website is what?!!! You just don't get it and won't get it but you're the type who I expected to come in here with your dismissals and usual denial code words like "you're trying to divide". Don't agree with the article? Take it up with the person who wrote it. He's got twitter.

[retrowire]

31. Yes we get it, you posted it in the AFRICAN AMERICAN GROUP

...But that African American Group is in a DEMOCRATIC FORUM on a DEMOCRATIC WEBSITE...

And your OP is being seen as DIVISIVE.

[UMTerp01]

34. Divisive how? Because it isn't kissing the Sanders ring? nt

[retrowire]

44. No, this isn't about Bernie, as much as you want to make it about him.

The key topic is the system being rigged. We SHOULD ALL be agreeing on that. Hillary supporters and Bernie supporters.

But your OP seemingly only wants to point the finger at Bernie supporters for some reason.

Thus the division. There's no need for it.

[UMTerp01]

48. Its not really division. Its "you guys are late to the party"

Again, we have long known the issues that exist with the Democratic Party, the DNC. But its like oh now Bernie Sanders and his supporters are really up in arms about it and we are looking at you like "no shit Sherlock". So I think its the whole aspect of privilege that irks the hell out of many of us cuz it was like where was all this outrage in the many years before the same stuff was going on? Money isn't new to the Democratic Party. Superdelegates aren't new. Sanders is an Independent though who has been a "Democrat" for 5 minutes and so there are certain ways this has been played out that have rubbed people the wrong way who have been complaining and been at a disadvantage for years because of this stuff.

But now all of a sudden we are supposed to be up in arms because Sanders people are up in arms? No.

[retrowire]

59. ... But Bernie isn't trying to pander to black folk by pointing out a corrupt system lol

That's the point you keep avoiding.

Bernie, and no one else is telling black folk specifically how to interpret the system.

[UMTerp01]

67. No one is accusing him of trying to pander

He's not doing that at all. Its just that its a message that unfortunately is not going to resonate with a group of folks who think he's late to the party and he and his supporters express this sort of privileged arrogance that just doesn't go over well.

[SusanCalvin]

74. Yes, that's what I read.

And I didn't take it personally; just saw it as an observation.

[retrowire]

75. No ones accusing him of pandering?

Please tell me how your thread title is SUPPOSED to be interpreted then.

Thank you.

[wildeyed]

60. Not to me.

I think it is a good topic

Why do you think we should we defer to your opinion, in the AA group?

[retrowire]

104. i told no one to defer to my opinion lol. nt

[Number23]

93. Not ONE BLACK PERSON in this thread has seen it has divisive. Judging by the rec's and the

participation, the only people seeing this as divisive are the exact types of folks that this OP is talking about in the first place.

[retrowire]

106. the only people that see it as divisive

Are the ones you're divided from.

Therefore, you don't feel the division, because you don't care to be apart of them as they care to be apart of you.

That's natural.

[Number23]

107. How the hell is anyone in here "divided?" This is the most racially inclusive forum on this web site

There are Sanders supporters who are regular posters and even hosts of this forum. And they are some of the main ones saying "I see and understand exactly what this guy is saying."

You and your pals are the ones breaking into a damn sweat and burning calories acting as though anything in this OP is so unusual or divisive. This OP does absolutely nothing but give one of the 5,253,913 reasons that Sanders has done such a piss poor job of connecting with minorities, not to mention the Dem base. And if Sanders' horrendous primary results in minority communities didn't teach you anything, they should have taught you that instead of screaming and crying, you should be listening.

[retrowire]

110. but again, and everyone misses this point for some reason...

Last edited Sat May 21, 2016, 11:55 PM - Edit history (1)

Pointing out the system is rigged has nothing to do with pandering to the black vote.

Bernie is just pointing it out.

It's everyone's problem.

Pretending that it's pandering to AA's is the divisive part because it pits Bernie and his supporters in an opposing stance to AA's, thus the divide.

Sorry, I just feel pretty divided by the rhetoric that saying that the system is rigged, somehow means that myself and Bernie are trying to get the African American vote. It's turning a universal issue into a racial one for no reason. It's just weird.

[Number23]

112. Why in God's name do you keep talking about "pandering?" And how is it possible that you do not

see how your use of charged language says EVERYTHING about you and your understanding of racial issues?

I don't even understand how you get "Bernie's not pandering to black people by pointing out the system is rigged" out of this article. The point is that black people already KNOW the damn system is rigged and want someone that is going to do something about it instead of whine, scream and give his supporters the wink, wink, nudge, nudge even after they hurl misogynistic, racist and violent language at others. You need to read this article again and spend alot less time talking and more time listening/reading.

[Tarc]

122. "it pits Bernie and his supporters in an opposing stance to AA's"

That's where you've pretty much been since the beginning of the primary season. Sanders has made zero pitches directly to the A-A community.

[JustAnotherGen]

114. Blocked Member - Long Time Group Disruptor

Went back to 2013

Protected Group as poster has acknowledged.

[Cha]

132. It's only "divisive" to those coming into the AA Group who are disrupting and trying to divide.

That's BS' fans go to meme when anyone is discussing why African Americans don't vote for sanders.

Nobody bought it when the accusations were first hurled and no one is buying it now.

[Tarheel_Dem]

52. Are you aware you're in the African American Group?

[sheshe2]

77. You are posting in the African American Group.

This not a forum.

[JustAnotherGen]

117. Blocked Member

Bodych
20. Yes, I have NERVE all right. And your true colors are showing. n/t


Interpreting this as accusing OP of being a race divider. Disruptive and rude. Newer poster with low post count and no prior interest in the Group of non Primary topics.

[wildeyed]

57. It's not stale and this is the AA forum.

Discussions about privilege are relevant to those of us who participate regularly. If you don't like it you are free to trash the group.

[Number23]

94. If you don't like that important issues of race are discussed in the African American group, PLEASE

do yourself (and us) a favor and trash this entire forum. Because the day we let other folks determine what we talk about here will be the day that the entire Internet comes crashing to the ground.

[JustAnotherGen]

116. I blocked the poster

Search posts in the Group back to 2013.

[Cha]

131. "Still trying hard to divide us by color?" That's the go to meme for BS fans

when anything is being discussed in the AA Group, or anywhere else, on why African Americans aren't voting for sanders.

Nobody bought the accusation when it was first hurled and even less so now.

[Wibly]

12. "Whining"?

Editorialize much?
Want to be taken seriously?
Try presenting facts without an obvious bias.
One person's whine is another person's clearly articulated exposure of obvious undemocratic manipulation.

[Nitram]

22. Yes, whining.

Complaining aboiut a system that everyone knew was in place, and for which the rules were published for all to see. Whining about the loss off two candidates in one county when Clinton won a majority of voters back in February.

[Cryptoad]

14. perhaps Bern u should have been a member of the Democratic Party

all these years and fixed all these loopsholes as u call them..... its not rigged,, if u had bothered to read the Primary rules it is just as it was laid out long ago....... but feel free to Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaah! and we will even let toss a chair ,,,, or two!

[Nitram]

17. It is sad to watch Bernie throw away all the amazing gains he made

and the influence he achieved, on this last-ditch effort to "win" at any cost.

[The Far Left]

35. It's wonderful if you win by creating a movement. nt

[Nitram]

38. True. But if "winning" means giving Trump an advantage, I'd say you lost.

[The Far Left]

53. We give Trump an advantage by having him run against Hillary. nt

[stupidicus]

24. whenever anyone uses the "throwing chairs"

they can and should at this late date, be dismissed as dumb or dishonest.

And where in the hell did BS openly suggest or even insinuate that the reason for "whining" (another pathetic, inaccurate, and unnecessary negative characterization that belittles him and the corrupted condition he's addressing) about the situation has anything specifically or generally to do with getting more votes from the AA community.

I'll put that clown down as one who approves of and supports the corrupted, bs dem primary system, andf that's about it.

[Jopin Klobe]

27. At no point have you seen supporters of Bernie Sanders ...

... throw chairs or make death threats because they were losing ...

.. the so-called "throwing chair incident" never happened ... the guy was told to put the chair down and the current excuse for "media" just said that the klown was a Bernie Supporter ...

... at no time has it ever been verifiable that any actual Bernie supporter(s) did or said anything violent ...

... anyone can say anything about anyone ...

... just ask Anita Hill about David Brock ...

... you know ... David Brock ...

[MisterP]

43. I'm more disturbed that they're using the sabotage of Rev. Jesse Jackson's campaign as their example

when Sanders attended a Democratic caucus in Burlington, a number of caucus-goers he recognized as “old-time Dems” stood and turned their backs as he gave a speech in support of presidential candidate Jesse Jackson. When Sanders returned to his seat afterwards, a woman slapped him in the face

Sanders received an icy reception at the caucus from some Democrats, who stood up and turned their back to the stage during his address. "And when I returned to my seat, a woman in the audience slapped me across the face"

Bernie Sanders & Jim Hightower were among the few elected White officeholders brave enough to “cross the color line” to support him when it mattered

this is as bad as when Clinton asked where Sanders was during the 1993 health insurance push

more importantly, they feel more than comfortable using real and dangerous issues to support a candidate they admit to disliking because they've ginned up an anger at her rival and don't want to let go of that anger

[Number23]

95. This is a level of denial that would be disturbing if it was in any way surprising

You and the handful of other folks with fingers in ears can continue to believe that the CATALOGUED and WELL DOCUMENTED death threats, rushing the stage at the Nevada convention, trashing people's social media, posting super delegates information online etc. etc. etc. were all fake.

No one cares in the least and if it does anything, it bolsters the rapidly growing belief that Sanders supporters will believe every conspiracy under the sun, no matter how incredibly stupid, as long as it will keep them from facing the truth.

[wildeyed]

119. WTF does David Brock have to do with this conversation?

And we ALL saw the video. Y'all should just let go of defending the chair incident. You are not changing minds, just bringing more attention to the incident.

[Agnosticsherbet]

32. +1000

[ReRe]

36. Good for you, UMT

Many voters step in that booth and don't know what the hay they are doing, haven't thought out their decision of who to vote for.

For me, deciding on a candidate to vote for has more to do with how his/her (the candidate) policies are going to affect me, my family, my neighbor, my community, my country. Am I happy with the way life has been going for the aforementioned? If so, then choose the one who keeps things the way they are at present, i.e. the status quo. If not, pick the one who doesn't go along with the status quo, who aspires to a different way of making our lives better.

[highprincipleswork]

39. In politics, doesn't it feel and work best to go with the candidate that stands up for the issues

that mean the most to you? And I'm not saying you aren't doing that.

I tend to pick my friends and allies by picking people I think will stick with me when the going gets tough, no matter what assholes they may be before, during, and after. I'd prefer they be cool, but we all sometimes are not cool or don't understand.

I really wish Bernie's personal outreach to the PoC community had been better and with better surrogates early on. I would at least have played some different music sometimes when coming out to speak, but then I'm a fool for "Black music" - it's probably the best, most American music we've got.

I do think, however, that it can get little harsh and counter-productive to get on to White people for having the experience of being White. We understand through our experience, and we don't fully understand until we have had the experience. I was profiled recently, because I bought my car from my Hispanic mechanic and it's Black Lexus at night rolling through Hollywood with the lights turned off. They made assumptions, and they approached the car like I was public enemy number 1, even though there was no other violation I was guilty of. We White Liberals certainly have been known to feel the pain of PoC in some form, even just from simple humanity. And we have marched and fought and suffered, some of us, to some degree. Not to make it equivalent in any way.

But I work with people who have gone through trauma, and it might be surprising to find that trauma affects us all, to some degree. It could even be growing up rich and abandoned and uncared for by your corporate parents. That can be an even more lasting trauma than the lives of folks growing up poor but maybe well-loved and with many people close to them.

Therefore, after your long and thoughtful piece I'm still kind of mystified what "the number of reasons are" that convince anyone to vote for someone who seems less likely to back up Progressive values in a pinch. I mean, who wants to go back to the 90's!

In the end, I hope the Democratic Party comes together around the candidate who can truly carry Progressive values of all kinds for all people forward into the future. That, to me, is what we probably are looking for and moreover that is what I think has the best chance to win against Donald Trump in November.

For me, that is Bernie Sanders, but I am remaining open to Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party showing that they can remember the really, really successful policies of FDR at least as much as the much less successful and often downright hurtful of the first Clinton years.

[UMTerp01]

41. I really appreciate your very thoughtful response

That was excellent and thought provoking and went deeper than just "you're trying to divide us" or anything dismissive. You make some very good points.

[highprincipleswork]

46. Thank you back. I think it's great we can have a real conversation. Phew! Little bits of

discussion and reaching out like this have got to ultimately forge a better, larger, and stronger Democratic Party.

It's hard right now when people are so impassioned, but thank you for digging into what I said.

[stupidicus]

47. yep, that's what makes the author of the OP so laughably dumb or dishonest

stealth HC supporters and faux/former BS supporters alike can and have thought of all kinds of reasons to justify their support for HC and to diss on Bernie with bs that has nothing to do with what we should be electing them for -- their respective positions on this and that.

And to any oldtime lefty or real progressive, the preference is a no brainer

[highprincipleswork]

58. Yo, I would suggest care and ease with a fellow Progressive who'e working it out their own reasons

for who and what is best. And no name-calling, especially when posting in "the African American group". Unless you're AA, we're all just guests here.

I plead guilty, in my passion for Bernie and what he stands for, to sometimes going off with those who embrace the HRC side. I can be especially hard on their reasons, because some of them I don't go for.

But this poster is definitely trying to make a hard choice as to who and what is best, and has come to the conclusion stated above.

I raised some questions that I hoped were thoughtful more than critical, and I think we've all got to do that for each other in order to perfect our Democratic Party schtick, platform, candidates, etc.

I don't think it's fair, honest, or good to start with the name-calling, because we all have to got to judge things from our own perspective, from our own values, and for what we think is right and good.

Somebody in another post wondered about forming a Sanders/Clinton group or Clinton/Sanders group, to encourage discussion between the two opposing camps. One of the first rules for any such probably impossible venture would be "no name-calling".

[stupidicus]

63. if BS can be described/called a "whiner" for his noble efforts

or charged with mindless exercising of "white privilege", etc, then the one who penned it can be described/called dumb or dishonest for having done so.

If the poster wants to feel some guilt by association that's their problem.

[Number23]

98. Your posts in this thread are combatively and needlessly antagonistic. Was a nerve touched?

Regardless, please do not return to this thread or to this forum. Thanks.

[Cha]

135. "... his noble efforts".. oh Good Grief! Whatever he had went out the window when

he started whining that everything was "rigged" when he lost a primary but it wasn't rigged in the states he won.

If he were winning it wouldn't be "rigged" we wouldn't have to hear about any of this.. but, he lost. More people, especially POC, want Hillary to be our President.

So everything is "Rigged" "establishment"... etc etc etc.. according to the loser.

It was the same system that Hillary lost to President Obama in 2008.. where she conceded with grace and dignity. She didn't go accusing everything of being "rigged" and look where she is today.. She's going to be POTUS #45.

[Number23]

96. Please step away and do not return to this thread

[JustAnotherGen]

115. Group Host - Blocked

Disruptive - New poster to the Group - personal attack - Stupid and Dishonest used to describe regular group member. Blocked until after the primary if poster requests to be reinstated.

[Cha]

134. Nah, it's not the author of the OP who is so "laughably dumb or dishonest".

[SusanCalvin]

78. Thanks. nt

[beastie boy]

40. Amazing.

You post an article that shows how white privilege has defined Bernie's campaign, and all I see in the responses is white privilege talking back at you and telling you how wrong you are.

Illustrates your point as good as the article.

[UMTerp01]

45. Its like some of them can't help themselves...

...but to go right ahead and prove the exact point that the author in this article was talking about.

[stupidicus]

55. his hit piece has no point worth considering

it was basically what, a "we coulda told you so" hit piece with next to no merit whatsoever since the only option BS has regarding the issue is to "whine" or what, stay silent.

How long have you been an advocate for silence on such matters, and how productive do you think that would be eh?

And since when did his seeking positive change on such a matter become a negative in terms of who you're gonna vote for?

Yeah. sit down and shut up Bernie -- old white geezers like us are to be seen and not heard. lol

[beastie boy]

61. Once again, point entirely missed

The OP was contrasting the Bernie Come Lately response to the system he considers rigged (which, I am sorry to say, amounts to nothing more than whining) with the responses of many black leaders in the Democratic party to the same system, a system that was rigged against them far worse than it was rigged for Bernie. And their responses, unlike Bernie's, was to work their asses off for many years to get the system changed.

Get the difference?

[stupidicus]

66. meaningless garbage

that doesn't undermine much less rebut a damn thing I posted

Sure, BS should just shut up because they've thus far failed. WHat's next, he should quit advocating in tandem with the BLM movement because prior efforts on the part of the AA community have been dinsufficient?

take your senseless and "whiney" garbage elsewhere, no?

[beastie boy]

72. There is one thing worse than ignorance.

And that is patently belligerent ignorance.

if you don't get the point that whining will get you nowhere, and you have to work your ass off for many years before you can expect things to change, why even bother responding?

You are welcome to hurl the last insult, but it's as consequential as a fart in a crowded room: offensive at first, but only good for a laugh a minute later.

[Number23]

100. Thank you for trying, beastie. That person's proudly antagonistic ignorance is why he's been asked

to trash this forum.

Your posts in this thread were excellent.

[mcar]

109. The tone deafness is remarkable, isn't it?

I say that as a white woman " of a certain age." It's really not that hard to see.

[uponit7771]

139. +1

[tom_kelly]

49. I knew it was a bullshit piece as soon

as I read about the "violence in Las Vegas." Couldn't read anymore.

[Number23]

101. We're all devastated you couldn't read the entire piece but astounded by your need to comment

anyway.

[JustAnotherGen]

120. Fair point

DFTWL

[Number23]

125. Que??

DFTWL

[Cha]

133. From Bernie Sanders Supporters, Death Threats Over Delegates

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/17/us/politics/bernie-sanders-supporters-nevada.html?_r=0

"Death Threats" are violence.. you need to wake up to reality.

Sanders supporter Lucy Flores condemns harassment and "misogynistic vulgarities" at NV Convention

This is strong statement condemning the actions of some Sanders supporters in Nevada. It was needed after the embarrassment at the convention this weekend.

Thank you Lucy Flores!

I understand and share the frustration that many progressives in Nevada feel, but there were actions over the weekend and at the Democratic convention that very clearly crossed the line.

Progressives need to speak out against those: making threats against someone’s life, defacing private property, and hurling vulgar language at our female leaders. Regardless of whether you agree with the leadership of our Chairwoman Roberta Lange, under NO CIRCUMSTANCES do her actions warrant being harassed, insulted with misogynistic vulgarities and or threatened in any way.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/5/16/1527115/-Sanders-supporter-Lucy-Flores-condemns-harassment-and-misogynistic-vulgarities-at-NV-Convention

Yes Gracias for denouncing the violence of the sanders supporters @ the Nevada State Convention.. somebody has to from that campaign since sander wouldn't do it.

But that’s down the road. Bernie Sanders is going to face far more public neutering from all sides in the mean time. Lucy Flores, a congressional candidate in Nevada who has been so tight with Sanders that they’ve been co-fundraising, put out a statement condemning the actions of the violent Bernie loons at her state’s convention. She’s clearly not willing to allow her career to be derailed by association Bernie’s apparent descent into bitter madness.

http://www.dailynewsbin.com/opinion/bernie-sanders-officially-sides-with-his-violent-supporters-his-political-career-just-ended/24824/

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1107137211#top

[Tarheel_Dem]

56. I suggest in future you stick (AA Group Posting) in your title, it will save the hosts a lot of.....

headache. Most of the respondents in this thread don't post in this group, don't care about this group, until and unless there's a suggestion that St. Bernard ain't all that as far AA's are concerned.

[gwheezie]

68. UMT, please listen to white people

They are once again trying to explain to you just how wrong black people are about Bernie. Clearly you don't understand the system has been rigged up until a career politician explained it to the rest of us. He's the only chance for black people to stop being so divisive.
I am not thrilled with Hillary or Bernie and can't believe the dem party was not able to come up with better choices. I support Hillary though. I think she is a realist and has a good grasp of issues. I really dont think Bernie is going to be very effective. Up until Obama, we've only had white presidents. There have been political risky exceptional moments when white male presidents have risked their power to the benefit of black people, but mostly not so much and mostly go out of their way to make things worse for black people.
I'm white and female. The few times that white male presidents took a stand was when the tide was turned by history. If black people had not bled in front of cameras, what risk would lbj have taken? And I do appreciate the political risk he took but it was black people who forced his hand. It was slavery that forced Lincoln's hand.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

84. Yes, that is what all of this is about, again.

[JI7]

80. When have things not been rigged ?

[Digital Puppy]

87. Thanks for posting this

Despite the howls from the DU community, the author summarizes the disposition of many AA voters (including me) as to why they are not flocking and falling over themselves to support Bernie and his message.

I think it is also interesting (entertaining?) to hear all of the BS defenders talking about chairs instead of the heart of the OP which is about privilege and connecting with diverse voters.

[fleabiscuit]

89. Yes.

[Number23]

103. I noted that same thing. BS supporters are screaming that no chairs were thrown, or even more

hysterically, trying to equate in ANY way the violence in Nevada with that one Hillary supporter who beat somebody's ass AND WENT TO JAIL FOR IT.

The throwing chairs bit has been the very LEAST of the shit that the Sanders campaign has been accused of over the last week or so. I don't blame them for focusing on it so much, though. If I had to choose between worrying about throwing chairs or that my candidate's losing campaign was becoming increasingly supported by racist, misogynist, idiotic fuckheads, I'd choose chairs too.

[Number23]

90. Got damn, got damn, GOT DAMN!!!!

Just because you lost something doesn’t mean it was stolen—unless you’re dipped in the kind of privilege that tells you something is owed to you to begin with.

Stop. Halt. That's it. Over. DONE.

[liberal N proud]

102. +1000

[elleng]

105. There's no whining.

Find a better way to describe 'disagreement.'

[fleabiscuit]

124. Or you could start your own thread? n/t

[Cha]

136. Excellent idea.. a thread about how burnie doesn't "whine" about how the system is "rigged"

when he loses a primary.. And, nothing about "rigged" when he's won a primary.

He's a selective non whiner.

[fleabiscuit]

137. Ya, his initial snivel jumped the shark to whining twenty-five years ago.

Cha!

[elleng]

141. Sorry, Cha;

we disagree.

Meet you in Hawaii some time maybe.

[uponit7771]

140. He's whining, the long shot black guy won with the same system Sanders is losing with right now...

... and he did it with less PD's to choose from.

[Cha]

142. Yep, he's whining...

Dan Pfeiffer
✔ ??@danpfeiffer
If the Dem primary system was rigged, Obama wouldn't have defeated a former first lady, a former VP nominee, & a bunch of long time Senators
12:19 PM - 23 May 2016
650 650 Retweets 935 935 likes

https://theobamadiary.com/2016/05/23/president-obamas-bun-cha-huong-lien-experience/#comments

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1107143148

[betsuni]

129. K&R

[ismnotwasm]

130. K&R