voting for Hillary does NOt make anyone a lowinformation voter

[Setsuna1972]

I've been a member of DU since the very dark days of W in 2001 . So I've seen it all, and got the t shirt to prove it . Three yearsI went overseas to serve as a Navy civilian, and now I'm back in my home state of Virginia . So I decided to read up on the primary coverage here on DU, and what do I see..."southern black supporters of Hillary Clinton are low information voters.


Really???

[Gothmog]

1. I am also shocked by this claim

[tk2kewl]

2. What is your opinion of ISDS?

Do you think they represent a threat to democracy?

[revbones]

3. I'd like to dispute that...

1. Hillary supporters say $675k directly, $2.5mil to campaign aren't bribes and won't influence her. Well they conveniently ignore her selling her vote on the bankruptcy bill.

2. Hillary attacks Bernie on gun control by misleading and cherry-picking votes, but then quietly stops talking about gun control and raises money from NRA.

3. Hillary promises unions to fight the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, but her emails show she actively and secretly lobbied for it

4. Hillary deflects criticism about her being on the take by lying about Bernie, the one single honest candidate in the race specifically not taking corporate money. Seriously, how is this even possible?

5. Hillary refuses to release the transcripts. Her supporters brush it off as sexist to even ask her, or repeat the line that republicans need to release theirs first. Never mind that she is the one trying to say she'll regulate Wall St, not them.

6. Hillary doesn't take a progressive position until Bernie does, and then only goes halfway. Minimum wage? Bernie wants $15, Hillary says that is too much, so she'll do $12. Single-payer? Bernie wants it, she says it will "never, ever happen" even though she was for it before. It goes on and on.

7. Hillary blatantly lies during debates about Bernie wanting to get rid of Obamacare and start all over from scratch.

8. Hillary is a subject in an active FBI investigation. The FBI is not an arm of the republican party and her supporters will climb all over themselves to quote articles from mid-2015 or compare her case to Petraeus (who plead guilty) or spout talking points - the most egregious of which is to try to argue that because Colin Powell also had a private server, that it is ok.

9. Her campaign is staffed by Goldman Sachs, yet her supporters see nothing wrong with this.

10. She takes money from private prisons and was a primary actor in the Crime Bill. Her supporters, rather than defend her position, simply cherry-pick Bernie's vote as if to say "But he also did it" which would supposedly make it ok. Nevermind that he only voted for it, after much negotiation and getting things like the Violence Against Women and Assault Weapons provisions.

11. She championed welfare reform. Regardless of how you view the terminology she used while championing it, you can't deny the damage it did to people.

12. She is against bringing Glass-Steagall back, and argues that Dodd-Frank is enough. Nevermind that Glass-Steagall protected us for decades and the provisions she's citing from Dodd-Frank are after-the-fact solutions which won't prevent another crash. She's even walked back her language on using that, to carefully phrase that she'd only use it if the system had already collapsed and the bank posed a systemic risk.

13. She ran an overtly racist campaign against Obama in 2008, but now hides behind his accomplishments. Her supporters are just fine with this because she worked in the Obama administration and that somehow makes it all better.

[revbones]

6. So it's either low-information, wrong-information, or no-information

Or really just willful ignorance.

[LanternWaste]

11. Or people simply disagree with your and your allegations.

Or people simply disagree with your and your allegations.

However, I do (truly) understand the self-validation required by the myopic and dogmatic "my opinion or the wrong opinion" crowd. The shallow pretense of purity is illustrative of myopia, if not of character as well.

While I'd thought that type of grade-school behavior was relegated to, well... grade school children, you've certainly illustrated that particular premise of mine as not quite accurate (unless of course, you are indeed enrolled in grade school... which may explain more than I'd originally allowed for).

[revbones]

20. Ok, I'll bite. Explain your disagreements with those points then. n/t

[giftedgirl77]

12. You forgot to switch accounts before you responded to yourself.

[sufrommich]

17. Oops. Hilarious.

[revbones]

19. It was meant as a continuation rather than editing the original

Sheesh. You guys see right-wing conspiracies everywhere.

[giftedgirl77]

21. Usually just in your post's.

[revbones]

25. Dispute anything I've posted here as just "right-wing smears"

1. Hillary supporters say $675k directly, $2.5mil to campaign aren't bribes and won't influence her. Well they conveniently ignore her selling her vote on the bankruptcy bill.

2. Hillary attacks Bernie on gun control by misleading and cherry-picking votes, but then quietly stops talking about gun control and raises money from NRA.

3. Hillary promises unions to fight the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, but her emails show she actively and secretly lobbied for it

4. Hillary deflects criticism about her being on the take by lying about Bernie, the one single honest candidate in the race specifically not taking corporate money. Seriously, how is this even possible?

5. Hillary refuses to release the transcripts. Her supporters brush it off as sexist to even ask her, or repeat the line that republicans need to release theirs first. Never mind that she is the one trying to say she'll regulate Wall St, not them.

6. Hillary doesn't take a progressive position until Bernie does, and then only goes halfway. Minimum wage? Bernie wants $15, Hillary says that is too much, so she'll do $12. Single-payer? Bernie wants it, she says it will "never, ever happen" even though she was for it before. It goes on and on.

7. Hillary blatantly lies during debates about Bernie wanting to get rid of Obamacare and start all over from scratch.

8. Hillary is a subject in an active FBI investigation. The FBI is not an arm of the republican party and her supporters will climb all over themselves to quote articles from mid-2015 or compare her case to Petraeus (who plead guilty) or spout talking points - the most egregious of which is to try to argue that because Colin Powell also had a private server, that it is ok.

9. Her campaign is staffed by Goldman Sachs, yet her supporters see nothing wrong with this.

10. She takes money from private prisons and was a primary actor in the Crime Bill. Her supporters, rather than defend her position, simply cherry-pick Bernie's vote as if to say "But he also did it" which would supposedly make it ok. Nevermind that he only voted for it, after much negotiation and getting things like the Violence Against Women and Assault Weapons provisions.

11. She championed welfare reform. Regardless of how you view the terminology she used while championing it, you can't deny the damage it did to people.

12. She is against bringing Glass-Steagall back, and argues that Dodd-Frank is enough. Nevermind that Glass-Steagall protected us for decades and the provisions she's citing from Dodd-Frank are after-the-fact solutions which won't prevent another crash. She's even walked back her language on using that, to carefully phrase that she'd only use it if the system had already collapsed and the bank posed a systemic risk.

13. She ran an overtly racist campaign against Obama in 2008, but now hides behind his accomplishments. Her supporters are just fine with this because she worked in the Obama administration and that somehow makes it all better.

[giftedgirl77]

34. Those aren't facts, they're opinions.

[revbones]

36. Prove one wrong.

[giftedgirl77]

39. Every single one where you followed or led with but her supporters.....

[revbones]

41. Can't do it then?

[giftedgirl77]

48. I just answered your question. I can't help it if you can't

differentiate between a fact or opinion.

[revbones]

49. Whatever. It's obvious you can't even pick one and dispute it.

Call it whatever you want, but I view it as willful ignorance.

[one_voice]

63. There are things on your list that I don't like..

there are things about Bernie I don't like.

More to the point; what in the world makes you think someone would take the time to have a conversation with someone (you) when you start and end with insults.

Let's list the names you've called Hillary supporters:

Low information voters, no information voters, willfully ignorant, and the one that started that list: cultist. And some in between.

You weren't looking for real debate/conversation. You were looking to insult and get attaboy & high-fives for doing it.

[revbones]

67. You are obviously invested in this conversation. It's unfortunate that you can't dispute any

and would rather just talk meta to avoid the facts.

[giftedgirl77]

75. I stated the fact that those are opinions. Nothing more, don't like it?

I don't give a damn. You have 0 credibility.

[revbones]

76. That's just your opinion. Mine is that you can't back up anything, so you attack personally

such as with your "0 credibility" statement, which is more a reflection on you.

[giftedgirl77]

77. Whatever you've got to tell yourself.

[1StrongBlackMan]

51. How does one "prove" an "opinion" "wrong"? eom.

[revbones]

55. He's just dismissing them as opinions

Especially since he said all the ones starting with X are just opinions, and none start with that.

[1StrongBlackMan]

58. They ARE just opinions. eom.

[revbones]

60. Sure. That proves it. You guys win, I admit that facts are opinions in Hillary supporter land

[1StrongBlackMan]

64. LOL. It is a sad day when there is, or even can be, a discussion ...

on whether a statement is a fact or an opinion.

DU certainly has seen finer days; though, hardly more tragically entertaining days.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

78. Most of us learn the difference between objective and subjective in the first year of college...

Most of us learn the difference between objective and subjective in the first year of college and opinions fall into the latter category.

[revbones]

79. Sure. deflect all you want.

Deep down you know everything on that list is true. Sad really that ppl would get invested in just discrediting the messenger rather than own up to truth.

[LexVegas]

23. ...

[Katashi_itto]

9. I like the term "Banality of Evil"

[BreakfastClub]

28. I could make a list like this, with all kinds of claims, for any political figure

who has been around for a while. It reminds me of those "hit" lists that circulate about Bill Clinton, that try to claim he got everybody and his mother murdered. Quite frankly, your list is mostly a bunch of bs with barely a fact in sight.

[revbones]

30. Sure. Just avoid the items in there. She deserves your vote. It's her turn.

I don't think you could make a list like that. At least not one that is true like that one. Go ahead and give it a try if you can't dispute the items there though.

But the hypocrisies know no bounds.

[Dems to Win]

52. One correction: Hillary has NEVER supported single payer health care

She wouldn't even say the words 'single payer' in public in 1993. She only had one, dismissive, meeting with single payer advocates in 1993.

Do you have a link to show I'm wrong? If so, I'd be happy to read it. But I don't think so.

Otherwise, a great post that I agree with.

[revbones]

54. Here's the first video that came up when I searched

https://secure.democraticgovernors.org/white-house-poll?utm_medium=ads&utm_campaign=whpoll&utm_source=fb_lp&geo=na

I'm sure there are more.

[Dems to Win]

59. I can't watch Internet videos. but thanks anyway nt

[Dems to Win]

69. Hillary: " I never seriously considered a single payer system."

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2008/march/hillary_clinton_on_s.php

From a transcript of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s interview with Kevin Sack of The New York Times about health care.

The New York Times
March 27, 2008

Q: Let’s talk for a minute about the formulation of your plan. I’m interested in how seriously you considered proposing a single payer system and at what point in that discussion did you decide to propose an individual mandate?

MRS. CLINTON: You know, I have thought about this, as you might guess, for 15 years and I never seriously considered a single payer system. Obviously, I listened to arguments about its advantages and disadvantages, and many people who I have a great deal of respect for certainly think that it is the only way to go. But I said, as you quoted me, that we had to do what would appeal to and actually coincide with what the body politic will and political coalition building was. So I think if you look at most public opinion surveys, even from groups of people who you would think would be pretty positive towards single payer, Americans have a very skeptical attitude. They don’t really know that Medicare is a single payer system. They don’t really think about that. They think about these foreign countries that they hear all these stories about, whether they’re true or not, which they’re often not. And so talking about single payer really is a conversation ender for most Americans, because then they become very nervous about socialized medicine and all the rest of this. So I never really seriously considered it.

[sufrommich]

4. There's a pile up of bodies under the Sanders bus.

There has been no rock left unturned in their zeal.

[AzDar]

22. Don't be modest... when it comes to body-count, few can compete with Hillary.

[WDIM]

44. Well said indeed! ^^^

[Kip Humphrey]

5. 'southern', 'black', 'Hillary' do not in & of themselves describe low information voters. 'American'

is closer to the mark.

[beachbum bob]

7. Low information voter...that's prescious

Consider the bulk of sander supporters ignores his protection of the gun industry as well...

[PonyUp]

10. Aaaaand NRA lobbyist to co-host Clinton fund raiser. LOL! You can't make this @#$# up!

https://theintercept.com/2016/03/01/nra-lobbyist-will-co-host-clinton-fundraiser/

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has called her support for gun control laws a key differentiator from her opponent Bernie Sanders, who she claims isn’t tough enough on the industry. But in mid-March, a Clinton campaign fundraiser will be co-hosted by a lobbyist whose clients have included the National Rifle Association (NRA).

As David Sirota reported Monday in the International Business Times, Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta is a co-host and the guest of honor at a fundraising lunch in the nation’s capital on March 21.

One of the other co-hosts is Jeff Forbes of the lobbying firm Forbes-Tate.

[AzDar]

24. Astonishing, isn't it?

[Eko]

47. Perhaps because things like this happen.

"Tad Devine: campaign adviser for Bernie Sanders. Worked at Winston & Strawn LLP, the law firm that has represented Microsoft, Verizon, Phillip Morris, Pfizer and, my favourite because of the magical effect the name has, MONSANTO! Yes, indeed, Bernie’s advisor worked at a law firm that has represented MONSANTO!"
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/12/25/1463668/-So-You-re-Deeply-Concerned-About-Clinton-s-Connections

[WDIM]

46. Hillicon supporters ignore our Government dumping Billions of $ into the gun industry every year.

They ignore Hillicon's approval of gun and weapon sales to brutal dictators that oppress women and violate human rights.
Who really protects the gun industry... The people who keep starting wars and making them billionaires that's who.

[NurseJackie]

8. Is that claim meant to be an intentional insult? Or, is it just a coping mechanism ...

Is that claim meant to be an intentional insult? Or, is it just a coping mechanism, and a way for them to rationalize things that they cannot understand or accept?

If it's the latter, and if they're not prepared for the fact that Hillary is going to be the nominee, there will be a LOT of rough landings when they finally return to earth-based political reality.

For what it's worth, I think it's meant to be a deliberate insult and a manifestation of perpetual anger at how well Hillary is doing.

[gcomeau]

13. Does voting for Hillary *make* someone a low info voter?

Well no. There are informed reasons for doing so. They're damn few and far between and pretty threadbare but they exist.

Is it a warning sign that there's a pretty decent likelihood that voter isn't paying as much attention as they should be? Sorry, but yeah. I've been watching this contest unfold and policy based arguments for supporting Clinton over Sanders are damn near impossible to find around here.

[kath]

18. +a brazillion."informed reasons for doing so.They're damn few and far between and pretty threadbare"

damn straight.

[redstateblues]

31. Your condescension is duly noted

Your superiority complex is very appealing. You guys crack me up. Insults will not win you converts.

[gcomeau]

42. If you think it's condescension rather than observation.

Perhaps you could point me at the trove of policy based arguments for Clinton over Sanders that I've been missing? I mean sure, occasionally one will pop up here and there, usually not terribly convincingly, but face reality. Almost the entire case for Clinton over Sanders has always been, from day one:

1. She's going to win so just get on board and accept it.
2. She can get stuff (generic) done because she's got ever so much experience. (What specific stuff? Silence quickly falls when the question is asked)
3. Bernie *can't* get stuff done because the GOP won't pass anything he wants (but apparently we're supposed to believe they're so in love with Clinton they'll fall all over themselves cooperating with her presidency because... ummm... they just will)
4. Bernie's got a lot of white supporters. <<Insert subtle or not so subtle insinuation of racism to smear man who spent his entire fucking life fighting it >>
5. Hillary! We Love Hillary! Because Hillary!


Etc...

[stonecutter357]

14. K&R!

[JudyM]

15. Speaking from the experience of thousands of doors knocked and phone calls made...

we are finding that a good percentage of "leaning" or "strong" Clinton supporters are actually low information on certain key deciding issues. With good reason since the media does not cover these issues well at all, and Clinton quite intentionally mischaracterizes and obfuscates. She may just "shrewd" us out of the White House in November.

[1StrongBlackMan]

57. Of course you have a link, or something to validate that claim, right? ...

Or, should the other "Wes" just trust it?

[JudyM]

81. As I wrote, this was personal experience; dozens of us with thousands of voters.

[thereismore]

16. No, of course not everyone. Some, for sure. You can't disagree. nt

[nichomachus]

26. No, ignorance is what makes you a low-information voter, but

that's what leads a lot of people to vote for Mrs. Clinton.

[BlueMTexpat]

43. So you have expanded the scope of

the insult to include ALL who vote for Hillary Clinton as being "ignorant?"

Please keep digging. I sense that you haven't reached bottom yet.

[Broward]

27. So, all voters for Hillary are informed?

[BlueMTexpat]

29. This is one of the "kinder"

statements aimed towards AAs here, apparently with impunity.

I am so sorry that you are greeted with such trash upon your return. I am sorry that ANY AA is subjected to such.

[redstateblues]

35. It shows why AA voters don't trust Bernie.

[ThePhilosopher04]

32. That's exactly what Hillary voters are - LOW INFORMATION VOTERS.

No way you can claim to be a real progressive Democrat and support her, unless you suffer from Stockholm Syndrome. It's a GOD DAMN shame.

[redstateblues]

38. Bullshit. You are showing why a majority

Of voters are turned off by Bernie and his condescending minions

[Herman4747]

33. Actually, I agree with this contention:

"voting for Hillary does not indicate that one is a low information voter."

I believe that the evidence that Bernie is more electable than Hillary is strong, much stronger than any evidence to the contrary. However, I concede that there is at least some evidence suggesting that Hillary is more electable. Voters believing such have likely considered this evidence, concluding it is paramount, and therefore will vote for Hillary.

For example, running for President is an expensive proposition, and we can be sure that Trump will have plenty of money to fling excrement at our nominee in the summer and autumn. Bernie has shown that he has an astonishing capacity to raise money from ordinary folks, "the 99%". Some might conclude, though, that going up against Trump this would not be enough -- we need a candidate who would sell her soul to Goldman Sachs in order to match The Donald dollar-per-dollar, so that we can win in November.

My own position is that Bernie can at least reach the level in which further campaign advertising & commercials fail to yield any increase in votes worth considering. For when one sees these political commercials again & again & again, they just bounce off of you.

Bernie should have more than enough money for the general election, in my opinion.

[WDIM]

37. I think the average voter is a low information voter.

A minority of people follow politics like we do here on DU.
Very few people watch the news or read the news.
Mainstream news itself is setup to be low information and misleading.
The average person does not have time to hunt for the real story.
The average voter votes based on sound bites and what M$M sells to them and on name recognition.
Clinton and Trump both high name recognition and both leading in the primaries.
It definitely has nothing to do with race, or gender. It is just the way the majority have been taught to be and unquestioning and unthinking.

[Kittycat]

66. ^^^ please read this post ^^^

Truer words. Sometimes I'm shocked by how little people around me pay attention, then complain about how politics impact them. Very well educated people. We are recovering from 4 years of local problems in our schools due to "vote for my neighbor, he's a cool guy" type of politics. People had no idea who or what they were voted for until it was too late. They have so much coming at them, that they just shut it out.

Today, my best friend posted someone to their FB page that reads, "Your Facebook status really made me change my political views... Said no one ever". She hasn't voted in the past 2 local or state elections, at least.

When I discuss politics directly with friends, I frame issues - not candidates. That can come later. But here, on DU, this is where we come to discuss it. We had some disagreements of course, and this time is always rough, but it's different. I've been here since what 2003 I Think? There are things that we as a collective have always just seemed to stand for or against. But now - I mean holy shit, I don't recognize my party anymore. I just don't. I think, how can people outrages with DWS and payday loans, and not HRC and Goldman or Lybia, pharma, for profit schools and prisons, big oil and and and. These are just foundational party issues.

I'm struggling here, and want to understand - but can't.

[BKH70041]

40. "Low information voter" means they disagree with me.

Same as "voting against their own best interests" means they don't vote the way I think they should.

Worthless phrases.

Bunch of individuals who think they're smarter and in a better position to determine than those who are actually having to live their own lives.

[Setsuna1972]

71. boy...

Seeing these houlier than thou insultso many black voters makesmewant to go back overseas...

[fontagobay]

45. Its Not Black Democrats...

...that made up what the media is calling Hillary's firewall. It's southern CONSERVATIVE Democrats and yes a lot are black. But I can tell you as a black guy in Chicago I have yet to meet a black Hillary supporter.

And I think we all know value of truthful information to the conservative minded.

[Gwhittey]

50. African Americans being lower information

is true. Because AA are less likely to have resources many whites have to computers and internet. Pew research did a study in 2014 that showed AA had a lot less access to broadband internet about 12%. This drops to even a bigger >30% when over college age. So as we all know the Cable news are crap and very lacking on information and are geared to have establishment win(election adds are a billion dollars industry). So more whites have access to internet where they can get a much wider range of information that the bob tube provides. This is not a slam on AA community it is something that we need to change and get more AA people access to the internet and technology.


source *http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/01/06/african-americans-and-technology-use/
On side note check out http://colorofchange.org/

[LittleBlue]

53. Disagree. The Hillary alliance is similar in stucture to the GOP alliance

Low info voters and powerful, rich people at the top fueling it with cash. Both heavily reliant on corporate cash and lobbying interests.

[revbones]

61. Watch out! I compared Hillary supporters to Trump supporters in another post

and they jumped on that to hide it, lest someone in her camp read it and faint.

I still think they are like them in many ways, particularly the ability to ignore facts and attribute their positions to their candidate regardless of whether the candidate has shown they hold that position or not.

[RiverLover]

56. Unless you're a millionaire or love war for oil

It really does hint that's the case.

[Avalux]

62. True, but low information voters certainly voted for Hillary.

When people's reasons are "she looks presidential" and "her name is familiar" - hard to reach any other conclusion.

Ever hear of Maslov's hierarchy of needs?

When basic needs aren't met, when people spend all their time struggling to put food on the table and a roof over their head, etc., they don't have the bandwidth to delve into the specifics of a candidate or presidential race. Their concerns are day-to-day survival.

Hillary knows this, and exploited it. Trump is doing the same thing.

[Setsuna1972]

70. so let me get this right

since I actually like Hillary's proposals and NOT Bernie's,and oh by the way I'm also black, that made me in your eyes a low information voter. Nevermind that I actually did some homework on both candidates, you just wrote me off as being stupid and black. And Bernie supporters wonder why they lost so badly in the past five days . So based on your logic, the only good progressives are those who support Bernie and are also white .

[Avalux]

74. I'm NOT making a blanket statement and I didn't say anything about you personally.

For you to not even acknowledge what I said might be true in some cases is turning a blind eye to the problem. Not everyone is politically astute. Same is true for whites, hispanics...low information voters come in all colors. Trumps happens to be exploiting the white ones.

[Vinca]

65. The sorry truth is, a good chunk of the population is low information.

There was a study a few years back that showed an alarming number of people can't name the Vice President so how on earth do you expect them to know the candidates for office and their proposals, etc.?

http://gawker.com/5783852/nearly-one-third-of-americans-dont-know-who-the-vice-president-is

[Bread and Circus]

68. Agreed. But being a low information voter is probably more likely for a person to vote for Hillary.

At least from I have read.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

72. I have requested

I have requested that those posters who suggest other posters have an intellectual deficit to post their curriculum vitae, resume, SAT, GRE, LSAT Stanord- Binet score, et cetera to no avail.

Go figure.

[AgingAmerican]

73. We are continually told that voters "Don't know Sanders"

That qualifies as low information by default.

[Maedhros]

80. I'd say that 90+% of American voters are "low information voters."

They vote based upon their feelings for the candidate, and not much else. I'm sure a representative portion of that 90% is Black (and Latino, and Asian, and Polynesian, and White....).

There is a contradiction that needs explaining: people who trumpet their "liberal" politics are supporting a candidate who has done many, many things antithetical to liberal governance. E.g. being mentored by Henry Kissinger (!). This begs the question: are those people ignorant of these many, many things, or do they just not care? If they don't care, they are hardly 'liberal.' If they are ignorant, they are by definition 'low information voters.'