Today SC Will Vote For More Of The Same - Happy SC?

[scottie55]

Last edited Sat Feb 27, 2016, 03:01 PM - Edit history (1)

If POC think Hillary will work her ass off to "change things for the better for their families" after taking all them millions from Wall Street, they have another thing coming. Same for the rest.

In stead of a war on crime, BC should have had a war on outsourcing. Like that would ever happen.

The establishment candidate they will vote for today will keep the 1% rule system in place.

Sorry, again.

Maybe next time right.

Goldman Sachs Wins Again, and Again, and Again.

Same old song and dance.

[LexVegas]

1. More Sanders suporter paternalism. Yawn. nt

[Jefferson23]

2. -10. Your justification for this is zero. We all live with our votes, and our votes belong to us.

That's called a democracy as far as I know.

[Karma13612]

106. Unfortunately, that narrow minded thinking is why we are

still seeing a huge gap between the 1% and the rest of us.

Your vote does effect me directly.

D.I.R.E.C.T.L.Y.

How?

Because when enuf people elect the wrong politicians ( the fanatic right wing nut jobs, the corporate shills, the war mongers):

WE. ALL. SUFFER.

ALL OF US.

I dream of a world where I can go live in a country or a state where the elected officials care about the 99%, and because they were elected, at least a majority of the residents must have chosen those sane politicians to oversee the country or the state.

I am absolutely sick of this country voting for the worst possible candidate, the candidate that will do them the least good, and the most harm.

The rest of the world is really beginning to wonder just what we are doing in this country, and just how sane we are.

I count myself among them.

[Jefferson23]

108. In a democracy you get one vote and it belongs to you and only you. So far the elite

are still afraid of that fact yet that doesn't change the sentiment of the OP.
There are a host of reasons people vote as they do, and we have only
the opportunity of campaigning to sway votes to our preferred choice
and that's about it.

This OP is castigating one group, it's ugly and wrong, there is no
justification for it. I also hear the DNC blaming disaffected voters for why we have lost so many Dem seats,
it makes me very upset to see that..WE, OUR party..every elected official has to look in the
mirror and examine why that is and fix it. Always pointing the finger to Republicans as the only reason
won't help us win.

[Karma13612]

112. OK, I don't really think you are responding to my comment at all.

All I am saying is that even though we do all have our own vote, how you vote does effect me.

So, I do feel it's OK to be pissed that we have a LOT of low information voters.

When a lot of voters make bad choices in their candidate selection, the whole country suffers.

[Jefferson23]

113. No, I heard you and I will only say again..people vote the way they do for a host

of reasons and in a democracy they get to do that..based on however they
see it. There is no area on the ballot that states, you must give your reasoning
to cast a vote. You are certainly within your rights to disagree with how people
vote YET this OP is selective in their blame and offensive as a result. The votes
cast for Hillary, they believe they're doing what is best for them.

What good comes from singling out people like that? The Happy now? question
is not flattering to anyone who wants to promote a thriving democracy. Best
to wait and understand why your side lost those votes.

[Jefferson23]

114. I wanted to add something I feel is important. We don't know definitively why

he lost..it is not clear. I get that some Bernie detractors here believe he was
rejected due to a decision he is not trusted, not good for minorities, his supporters fault
and on and on. That is not the kind of speculation that helps us to win
as we try and make gains these next few months...so to also say they are
low info voters is a mistake to presume. My hope is we can help Bernie
get his message across before time runs out.

See what I mean? I have been reading responses like this one in several
articles about SC:

snip*“I don’t even know Bernie Sanders. Who is that?”
said one voter, T Jackson, after leaving a polling station in Hopkins on Saturday. “Nothing against him. I’ve never even heard of him before now. But we known Hillary forever.”

It was that feeling of familiarity and loyalty that drew Jackson to the polling booth on Saturday morning.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/27/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-south-carolina-primary

[Karma13612]

115. Yea, we do need to make sure we address this. I agree 100%

But, also to consider:

I have known Hillary for years and quickly learned in 2008 that she was not who I wanted inhabiting the white house.

You make me ponder this:

Some states, and their voters, expect the candidates to visit all the coffee shops and the pubs, and visit every church or center of town. Apparently that is known as retail politics.

I live in a mid-size state as far as geography, NY state.

We don't have this luxury. I can only guess it has to do with the size of the state.

And the fact that we have 50 states that candidates need to visit when campaigning.

Although I wouldn't want to change the dynamics in these 'retail politics' style states, I do believe that voters need to take some responsibility for getting to know the candidates, even when they can't shake their hands and make eye contact. I would be positively thrilled to at least SEE Bernie in a live venue. But, give me a break, the candidates can't get to every human being before election day. Bernie has not visited my state, as far as I am aware. And I don't think he should cross us off the list just cause Hillary has history here. Many people who have been residents of NY state since she was a SEnator are not supporting her because they know her and didn't think she did a good job.

I have to do all my familiarizing about my candidate by the internet. We can agree that the MSM hasn't been helping Bernie's cause. They won't even report on current events unless he is either winning or losing in a landslide.

So, sorry to the people in SC, and elsewhere. I think expecting the candidate to make personal appearances to get your vote is expecting an awful lot.

thanks and with much respect.

[Jefferson23]

116. You're very welcome and the same to you.

What we want is to have a fair shot at it and Sanders did spend
2 million in ads there and they had people on the ground..so that is
why there is still much to learn and not presume and place blame
so we can catch up enough to win.

[Karma13612]

117. Just donated once again to Bernie while paying my bills this morning! eom

[Jefferson23]

118. Super!

Have phone banking here later today...in solidarity for the win.

[sufrommich]

3. "Happy POC?"

Sanders supporters will go down in history as worst.ambassadors.ever.

[grossproffit]

4. WTF is the "Happy POC" chit?

[PowerToThePeople]

89. the correct response

to OP's like this is

"Enjoy your stay."

[tazkcmo]

5. Just like white people.

Please stop.

[PeaceNikki]

6. Nice. That'll help.

[JackInGreen]

7. I don't think this helps

Just sayin

[demmiblue]

8. I find this offensive. Unrec. n/t

[DCBob]

9. You are blaming African Americans for Bernie's failures in the south??

Did you see the latest polling.. she is winning all demographics easily. People in the south.. black, white, brown.. simply don't get Bernie.

[ismnotwasm]

10. What. The. Hell?

[TDale313]

24. I second that emotion. n/t

[99th_Monkey]

11. Hills will try to "out-Republican" the Republican nominee in the GE

and then lose, if she's not indicted first.

[RBInMaine]

21. Thanks for the ultra-radical Tea-Leftist hyperbole.

[99th_Monkey]

27. No problemo. nt

[grasswire]

26. I'm beginning to hope for an indictment sooner rather than later.

It's the only way to save us from Trump.

[Bleacher Creature]

31. Hold on a second. You're hoping for an indictment?

Seriously? Did you really just type that statement? Every single legal expert in this area has been fairly sure that there's almost no realistic chance of an indictment, but you'd like to see one anyway, no matter how baseless?

This is one great Democratic website we've got here!

[grasswire]

33. please post your cites to those statements from legal experts.

Name them, too.

[Bleacher Creature]

35. There's no chance I'm playing this game.

You can do your own research if you don't believe it.

But nice job deflecting from what was a pretty offensive statement.

[grasswire]

37. okay, you got nothing.

Typical.

[revbones]

50. Many people believe that one will eventually come.

An indictment won't necessarily indicate guilt but if it's coming, when would the best time be?

Would it be better to dig our heads in the sand and hope it's after the general? If so, then it would be impeachment hearings as well. If it comes and Hillary won the nomination, it would hand over the election to the Republicans.

If it comes wouldn't it be better now so it could either be put to rest or if it has merit allow us to still field a viable candidate?

Regardless of how you feel about whichever candidate, you should really read up on the actual merits of the investigation. I've handled Top Secret materials before, and there are people currently in jail serving 3-10 for less than is implicated in this investigation.

I think with all the constant Hillary trashing by Republicans over the years, that some are now inoculated to any possible negative with the assumption that it is just more of the same.

[onenote]

71. Many people believe a lot of things.

[Jenny_92808]

83. Your post makes a lot of sense n/t

[FangedNoumenom]

86. Even if there's no indictment

It's all Trump will talk about in the GE. He will paint her as a criminal. The media will cover it non-stop. Will not be good.

[grasswire]

99. yes

that's why getting it over now will save the Democratic Party from that grief. If she should happen to beat Trump, there will be impeachment papers filed before the inauguration festivities are finished.

[99th_Monkey]

109. Yep. It's like Hillary/DLC is handing The Donald his script. Can't make this shit up. nt

[Mufaddal]

12. I think this thread and its title is profoundly offensive.

(And not that it should be especially relevant, but I'm not only a Bernie supporter, but someone who has loathed the Clintons since the first Clinton presidency.)

[fleur-de-lisa]

13. This is offensive and you're not helping

Bernie. I'm pretty sure he would disapprove. Please reconsider and self delete.

[PWPippin]

32. I agree and I, too, am a Bernie supporter.

The only reason to post something like this would be to undermine the campaign. And why might you want to do that?

[alcibiades_mystery]

14. Wow

What a telling post.

Sad.

It's nice to see other Sanders supporters disown it, though. That's encouraging.

[Stuckinthebush]

23. My thoughts exactly

We knew this would happen, though. Thank goodness for the many reasonable Sanders supporters.

[asuhornets]

15. Happy POC?...

Expalin...

[Depaysement]

16. Yes, let's blame black people in South Carolina

They get so many benefits from Wall Street.

[QC]

17. You know, I'm a big Bernie guy and even I find this really offensive.

Patronizing crap like this turns people off, and I question the goodwill of anyone who would post anything like it.

[greatauntoftriplets]

18. OMFG.

[MineralMan]

19. This is offensive on several levels.

You should probably self-delete.

[6chars]

20. wrong

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/27/south-carolina-hillary-clintons-pledge-improve-education

Clinton is promising a partnership with officials that would provide investment to ‘lift up’ impoverished parts of the state – a plan warmly met by voters.

[TDale313]

22. Please stop.

This is not helpful. I say that as a Sanders supporter.

[grossproffit]

25. People are rec'd this chit?

[Punkingal]

28. C'mon, Scottie, get rid of this.

Bernie would not approve of this talk. Neither do most of us here.

[cantbeserious]

29. All Too Sad - All Too True

eom

[vdogg]

30. Hillary now has majority white support in the Super Tuesday states

Will you still be chastising POC when she wins those states too?

[delrem]

34. This is racially divisive nonsense.

It serves no good purpose.

[emulatorloo]

36. You should self-delete.

It makes you look small, petty, desperate, and racist. And I'm being very diplomatic when describing your OP.

Additionally it detracts from Bernie's message.

Of course YMMV. Do what ever you want.

[SidDithers]

38. Yeah. Go with this...

Sid

[PeaceNikki]

39. Dear juror #6, "over the top" is one of the criteria listed on the alert.

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

YOUR COMMENTS

"Happy POC?" Really? I think that's over the top.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Sat Feb 27, 2016, 10:49 AM, and voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No. Just no. If this isn't hidden, something is wrong, IMO.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: This is divisive.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Don't care for the post personally, but "I think that's over the top" is not a basis for a hide. A poor alert.

[scottie55]

41. I Changed It Any Way

It's just sad that so many people of all stripes will vote for the person who owes so many favors to Wall Street, instead of the candidate that has been fighting for "the less fortunate" his whole career.

Very, very sad.

[PeaceNikki]

43. Good. It was shitty. But you left the first sentence.

[onenote]

73. Changing it after the fact doesn't hide your original sentiment

And as Bernie supporter I find your sentiment appalling.

[revbones]

40. Thought-police much people?

Rather than think that the poster might not have meant something offensive and try to see how they might have meant it, I see too many people complaining about it being offensive and very quickly raising flags due to perceived and probably unintentional slights.

Whether we like it or not, the Hillary campaign (as their firewall) and the media have made how POC will vote in the SC primary a huge topic and attributed much of how it will go to POC. The poster is merely replying to that attribution in the upcoming primary.

Sheesh.

Edited to add that I see the original post was edited and my comments were based on the most current version of that post.

[scottie55]

44. I Can't Wait Till POC Have Had Enough

And demand real change.

I mean more than just simply don't shoot me.

What will the oligarchs do when they demand jobs, and mean it?

(Unfortunately we know the answer and it isn't pretty)

[Squinch]

48. What is this racist shit you are peddling in this thread?

[kwassa]

52. Hillary supporters in SC are white and black, and other colors, too.

Singling out just the black voters for supporting her is racist.

[revbones]

57. All the media is constantly saying that she will win SC because of POC

So I'm confused at how his remark is racist given that narrative.

The narrative for New Hampshire was that Bernie won because of white people. Was that racist?

[kwassa]

59. you reaalllly don't get it.

The majority of the vote for Hillary in SC might be from black voters, but this OP is blaming them alone.

Think about that. Media narratives have nothing to do with it.

[revbones]

60. So rather than communicate that

It's better to just yell and call the poster racist? Maybe they didn't mean it they way you interpret it. Maybe they aren't as educated in this as you and they bought into the media narrative.

Maybe this could have been productive rather than creating two sides and putting both on the defensive...

[kwassa]

62. Why am I required to read his mind?

Since you are new around here, you will be shocked to learn that there are people expressing racist views on DU. It does happen. I take people at their word, by the things they say.

I didn't call him a racist. I said that what he said was racist, and it was, and is. Sorry if that offends your sensibilities.

[revbones]

65. I was also speaking in generalities and not just to you

It's also funny to have to elaborate that you called someone's statements racist and then follow it up with an insult about my sensibilities.

My point is that as Democrats we should try to rise about those things. Knee-jerk reactions don't really help our cause. But as you said, I'm new here - maybe I'll be out fighting the good fight by calling people or their statements racist without stopping to discuss it by next week.

[kwassa]

67. You will need to develop a thick skin. Primary time on DU.

DU is not a rise-above kind of place. You must be really new here. This is how we roll.

You might note that the vast majority of responders in this thread found the original OP offensive.

[revbones]

75. It's a bit odd saying that I need to develop a thick skin

Since I'm not the one claiming outrage. Also correlating the legitimacy of my views to the number of posts I've made on DU is a bit of a fallacy don't you think?

As far as your statement about the majority, perhaps a lot of people just didn't care enough to respond at all.

[kwassa]

78. whatever. How many different assumptions are in your reply?

You are supporting a racist viewpoint. Please continue.

[revbones]

88. Not enough to wait before getting outraged apparently

[Jenny_92808]

93. Who are you talking about

when you said this "what he said was racist"?

[Jenny_92808]

91. It is math -

statistics.

[EffieBlack]

61. Us po' ignant coluhd folk jess'n don't know what's good for us'n

But maybe one a dees days, we'll HAVE ENOUGH of lett'n ole massah treat us so bad and when dat day come, we will rise up and demand REAL CHANGE and make ourselves free!

Oh freedom!

[kwassa]

51. If he doesn't mean something offensive, then he shouldn't say something offensive.

He should say what he means, and the assumption is always that he is.

It was a very offensive OP.

[revbones]

53. What exactly did you find so offensive?

I read the original. What exactly do you find so offensive? I'm earnestly asking.

[kwassa]

58. I replied to this point in another post.

Everyone who votes for Hillary is equally responsible for her victory, if she wins. To call out POC out of that mix of voters as being solely responsible for her victory is racist.

[scottie55]

69. Her Support Is Strongest Among POC

And the prison complex system, the war on crime, NAFTA (outsourcing), Graham, Leach, Bliley and the rest of the BC legacy hurt POC most.

I am a racist for pointing this out?

Sorry, but that is bs.

I mean real BS!!!!

[scottie55]

70. Take A Look At Flint And Ask Yourself What Really Happened

In this town.

If you don't blame NAFTA for a large part of it, you don't get it.

[kwassa]

76. I blame Rick Snyder, actually.

[scottie55]

82. Flint Was Decimated Long Before Snyder Poisoned Them

Outsourcing.

NAFTA played a huuuuuuge role.

[sufrommich]

90. Flint was decimated when Americans started buying foreign cars.

I know people love to place the blame elsewhere ,out of guilt,but the auto companies were starting to suffer because of foreign car sales by the time I graduated from high school in 1975 and it was a free fall from then on,NAFTA wasn't even signed into law until 1994. NAFTA may have caused some problems elsewhere,but the auto industries pain was self inflicted by American buyers.

[sweetloukillbot]

107. Michael Moore made Roger and Me about the decimation of Flint in 1989

4 years before Bill Clinton was elected. It was already dying when NAFTA was passed.

[kwassa]

74. Strongest? What does that mean?

White supporters of Hillary don't support her as strongly as black supporters of Hillary?

And who are you to decide what is best for black people? That is racist. They are capable of determining their own self-interest, those that vote for Hillary, just as are the black people that vote for Bernie.

[revbones]

77. Didn't you just comment to me about needing a thicker skin?

The poster was obviously talking about numerical supporters based on polling.

[kwassa]

80. No. He did not say that.

You said that. Interpreting for him.

[scottie55]

84. revbones is right

The establishment is crushing black families.

And only one candidate represents the establishment.

Not that hard to see.

[revbones]

85. He said her support was strongest among POC right?

You interpreted that as something other than polling numbers

[kwassa]

105. Did he say anything about polling numbers? No.

You came up with that. You projected this idea on to his answer.

Here is his original post. He blames all PoC, and not any polls.

Today SC Will Vote For More Of The Same - Happy POC?

If POC think Hillary will work her ass off to "change things for the better for their families" after taking all them millions from Wall Street, they have another thing coming.

The establishment candidate they will vote for will keep the 1% rule system in place.

Sorry, again.

Maybe next time right.

Goldman Sachs Wins Again, and Again, and Again.

Same old song and dance.

[Jenny_92808]

94. It is math, statistics.

Of course people are looking at polls and statistics.

[Arazi]

42. Ugh. please self delete eom

[Squinch]

45. Hmmmm.... walking back on that one are we? Realizing how much slip we have shown, are we?

It's still there in the edits, and now we all know exactly what you are.

If you had any sense, or decency, you would just delete.

[whatchamacallit]

46. No way man, she's a game changer

[Attorney in Texas]

49. Yes, but we don't like how the Clintons changed welfare, for-profit prison, Wall Street regulation

[scottie55]

56. This Is My Point - POC Suffer The Most

The whole system (our government) is corrupt, and POC suffer more than anyone else, and have since the beginning of this nation.

I will fight tirelessly for their families, and the rest of the/us non-billionaires.

HRC?

Not so much.

How do you talk about, but not offend people who vote against their families?

Screw the politically correct.

Time to tell the truth.

[kwassa]

64. You have to live with the idea that they don't agree with you.

Some PoC think that Hillary more represents their interest than Bernie. They might have a different analysis of what is best for them. It is not up to you to decide their interest for them. To do so is patronizing, to put the mildest spin on it possible.

[Jenny_92808]

96. Of course, it is

your prerogative to vote against your best interest.

[etherealtruth]

100. ... and you know better than PoC regarding what is best for them?

i see

[scottie55]

101. So It Seems

There is a difference between borderline, and obvious.

No one can represent Wall Street, and POC at the same time.

Sorry.

It's a fact.

[kwassa]

102. no, it's an opinion.

[etherealtruth]

103. ah I see ....

It is obvious to you (what is best for PoC) .... so PoC are just wrong about what they want and what they believe .... got it.

Very telling

[Attorney in Texas]

47. Trump got 240,000 votes last week. How many will he today in votes for an un-electable Democrat?

[SidDithers]

66. Wut?...nt

Sid

[EffieBlack]

55. And people wonder why POC aren't falling all over themselves to align themselves with Sanders' team

[MineralMan]

63. Jury Results

For the record, I am Juror #3.

On Sat Feb 27, 2016, 10:12 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Today SC Will Vote For More Of The Same - Happy POC?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511353309

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

"Happy POC?" Really? I think that's over the top.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Feb 27, 2016, 10:49 AM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No. Just no. If this isn't hidden, something is wrong, IMO.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: This is divisive.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Don't care for the post personally, but "I think that's over the top" is not a basis for a hide. A poor alert.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[brooklynite]

68. Translation: why can't YOU PEOPLE be smart enough to vote for MY candidate?

[nadinbrzezinski]

72. When the other side does it, I am tired of calling them on it

but this is the kind of racist shit that truly does not belong

I guess you are assuming that all PoC are the same, just as some PoC on this board assume they speak for all.

[AgingAmerican]

79. People make their own beds

Then they have to sleep in them.

[JonLeibowitz]

81. I disagree and find this post shameful. People are entitled to their votes.

(And I am entitled to think, but often to decline to share, that they are voting for silly reasons; of course, everyone makes their decisions individually, not as a monolith, so my reasons for disagreeing with them are as varied as the reasons they have for their vote).

[scottie55]

87. Shameful?

Supporting a broken corrupt system that only benefits the .01% is what's shameful.

[JonLeibowitz]

92. Both are shameful. But voters may not realize that that is what they are doing. n/t

[Jenny_92808]

97. +1 n/t

[gwheezie]

95. Let's place blame where it really belongs

With the socialists. If only enough of them had come out to vote.

[yardwork]

98. Your edit didn't help.

Let's take a look at the words in your post - I'll work from the most recently edited version.

You're blaming People of Color for voting for Hillary, implying that they are uninformed and mistaken in their assumption that Hillary will work to change things for the better.

You close with the racist dog whistle "Same old song and dance."

Nice. So who should the people of South Carolina - and People of Color specifically - vote for instead? You don't mention a single alternative.

[scottie55]

111. How About A Candidate That Didn't Support Republican Welfare Reform

And double extreme poverty.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511354212

You read the OP.

[Agnosticsherbet]

104. That is "another think coming." If you are going to use a cliche...

use it right.

Attacking African Americans is ugly.

Was that an apology for your attack? If not, why is it there?

Sanders will be 82 in 8 years. I don't think he will run.

I don't think Cruz and his wife will win, so no.

I like to dance. It keeps me young.

[Carolina]

110. I live in a repuke area

where turnout was small. After joyfully voting for Bernie, I went by his headquarters in downtown Columbia which was bustling! Campaign workers were coming in and out reporting from voting sites throughout the city.

As an older woman of color, I am dismayed that many of my peers/friends on both sides of the color line are for HRC because she's a woman. When I point out how she sure fought repukes with her IWR and bankruptcy bill aye votes OR her support of the Glass-Steagall reversal and welfare deform as well as her tenure at state that left Honduras, Libya and Syria a mess, I am met with blank, so-what stares! I have tried talking about the TPP, the keystone pipeline and fracking and still no response. Or worse, I get the: I don't care about politics/I don't want to talk about politics response.

These are not dumb people... some are professional women who exceptionally, bright and talented in their fields. I reached a point where I think America is truly doomed, then am heartened by the youth. Hooray for all the active, engaged young people who are paying attention

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

119. It's worse than more of the same. It's a return to the Clintons. They didn't have a more of the same

candidate to vote for. But for other states, yes, they delivered us more of the same.