The fight for black voters is on in the Presidential Primary race

[bravenak]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-sanders-minority-vote-glanton-talk-column.html

presidential primaries when the Democratic candidates rip each other apart over which of them will do the most for African-Americans.

With the races in mostly white Iowa and New Hampshire behind them, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are turning their attention to Nevada and South Carolina — states that look more like the real America with large numbers of blacks and Hispanics.

This stage can make or break a campaign because black voters, particularly in the South, get to use the power granted to them every four years to lift the future presidential nominee to the top of the heap, leaving the others staggering in the dust.

It’s a duty that African-Americans take seriously. They’re not going to throw their precious vote away on a candidate they don’t think can win in the general election.

And as it stands right now, Bernie Sanders still has a lot of convincing to do.

That doesn’t mean Clinton can sit back and watch the votes roll in. She learned that in 2008 when African-Americans defected to Barack Obama, a little-known candidate whose name most blacks at first couldn’t even pronounce.

[nc4bo]

1. Brave, could you snip a few paragraphs. This isnt loading properly on my tablet. nt

[bravenak]

3. Ok. I will snip a few, then post a bit onthread

[nc4bo]

9. Thank you much! nt

[noretreatnosurrender]

2. Can't Access

The article is behind a paywall.

[bravenak]

4. Give me a few

Sometimes if you copy the link directly and paste it in it lets you behing the wall. Let me get some for you though

[bravenak]

5. More:

It wasn’t until Obama won the Iowa caucuses that African-Americans began to rally behind the idea that they could help elect the first black president. By the time the campaigns got to South Carolina, African-Americans — initially Clinton’s most ardent supporters — had said goodbye.

Until now, most African-Americans — particularly the older, more loyal Democrats — haven’t paid a lot of attention to the elderly, white-haired “democratic socialist” who speaks with a funny New England accent. It’s safe to say they aren’t feeling the Bern. Many African-Americans in the South, though not necessarily all that excited about a Hillary Clinton presidency, have been willing to rekindle their love affair with her and Bill for the good of the Democratic Party.

According to a CBS News/YouGov poll released in January, Clinton leads Sanders in South Carolina by 60 percent to 38 percent — significantly less than the 56 percentage-point lead she had last fall.

But among African-Americans, Clinton is polling 76 percent to Sanders’ 22 percent in South Carolina.

African-Americans have a long, shaky history with the Clintons. And while blacks aren’t likely to go looking for a candidate outside the Democratic Party, they are willing to shop around within it. That gives Sanders an opening.

[noretreatnosurrender]

7. Thanks Bravenak

I appreciate the extra info.

[bravenak]

8. No prob. Read post six, lol

[noretreatnosurrender]

12. An Opening

I hope he can rise to the occasion.

[bravenak]

13. He can if he wants to

[bravenak]

6. This part is INTERESTING

Thursday night’s debate, Clinton and Sanders said all the things they think African-Americans want to hear. Issues such as black unemployment, black incarceration, and housing and job discrimination suddenly were at the forefront of their platforms. I lost count of the number of times the candidates used the word “racism.”

Both pledged their allegiance to President Obama, who has a nearly 90 percent approval rating among African-Americans. And while Clinton considers herself the heir apparent to the Obama legacy, Sanders isn’t willing to concede without a fight.

South Carolina, where up to 60 percent of the electorate is African-American, is where the campaigns tend to get ugly. Already, former President Bill Clinton is out stumping for his wife and reminding black voters of the glory years of the 1990s.

The Clintons want African-Americans to remember Bill Clinton’s diverse administration, the increase in minimum wage, the financial reparations to struggling black farmers and the proliferation of home ownership among blacks.

Perhaps the Clintons think African-Americans owe a debt to them and now it’s time to pay up so Hillary can take her rightful place in the White House. The problem is that blacks have a hard time relating to presidential entitlement. That’s a concept of the privileged class, which excludes most African-Americans.

Ooooooooooo!

[noretreatnosurrender]

10. Me too

I have a hard time relating to presidential entitlement too.

[bravenak]

11. It's a weird thing. Almost medieval.

[noretreatnosurrender]

14. Yes

I also have a hard time with family dynasties. There is a lot of that in American politics. It's like they want to be the royals. There are a lot of families where politics is the family business. Some of the candidates I like (some I don't) but I'm very uneasy with them feeling that just because a family member served that everyone should support them too even if they are totally different from their family member who served. I don't like it.

[bravenak]

15. Like we have a new nobility

[noretreatnosurrender]

18. Yes

Looks like Glenn Greenwald agrees with us. He posted this piece today.

Two Former U.S. Presidents Simultaneously Advocate for a Close Family Member as the Next U.S. President

Americans love to mock the British for choosing — in the 21st century — to live under a monarchy and honor the hereditary succession of a royal family. I enthusiastically participate in that derision. Few concepts are as antithetical to reason and democratic liberty as anointing families that are vested with an entitlement to wield power through dynasty and lineage.

The U.S. officially has no formal royal families, but clearly loves dynastic political power. As the U.S. becomes increasingly oligarchical — all of its institutions, including its political ones, dominated by a tiny number of extremely rich families — it is natural that all forms of hereditary power will flourish. There are still examples of people from backgrounds devoid of family wealth or influence attaining political power — Barack Obama certainly qualifies — but it’s virtually impossible for them to succeed without the overwhelming support of those oligarchical circles.

And finally...

Still, the spectacle of having two former U.S. presidents simultaneously stump for the election of their close family members as the next U.S. president is a uniquely illuminating symbol of what the U.S. has become. It is still highly likely that of the last five U.S. presidents, four of them will come from the same two extremely rich families. It’s becoming increasingly difficult for any American to comfortably mock the British, who at least have the dignity to consign dynastic power to the largely symbolic realm.

https://theintercept.com/2016/02/16/two-former-u-s-presidents-simultaneously-advocate-for-a-close-family-member-as-the-next-u-s-president/

[qwlauren35]

16. Gotta Quote Janet...

What Have You Done for Me Lately!

And I'm not sure they are talking about the right things. Mass incarceration is a problem. But so is police brutality. Did they talk about that? Free college is wonderful, but what about the importance of Head Start and K-12. Did they talk about that? Nine people died in a church. It had nothing to do with employment, incarceration, housing, job discrimination... it was pure hate. Did they talk about that?

Inquiring minds want to know...

[bravenak]

17. That's how I feel

Clinton does talk about that Charleston racist murder spree as the epitome of why money won't fix hate. Wants to fix the Charleston loophole that allowed Roof to get a weapon.
She brings up head start and the way our schools are sidelined. They both talk mass incarceration and police brutality. Both have good ideas. She is better at having a broader view of issues and he is better at talking money