Is it possible that NEITHER major Democratic candidate is a racist?

[Fearless]

Is that really out of the realm of possibilities?

This is the DEMOCRATIC primary after all.

The clown car express is over on Fox News.

Thanks.

[bravenak]

1. None of them are

[still_one]

4. ++++++±+++++++++++++++++++++++

[Agschmid]

43. Ive been saying this for weeks...

[bravenak]

45. Nobody has actually been calling Bernie or O'malley racist.

I have though, seen Hillary called that. It's not true. She's not. None of them are.

[Kalidurga]

2. I will have to think about this

Does supporting institutional racism count?

[Demeter]

28. How about just not giving a damn about little people in general? The poor and the struggling

Although, that's more classism than racism...

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

31. If we use that consideration, both (sorry, all three) are, just to different degrees.

As well as most of the rest of America. Because most of our institutions are racist, and, barring perhaps anarchists, most (white) Americans support our racist institutions to greater or lesser degrees. Will either (any) expand whatever changes they try to enact beyond the legal system? By now, they're all paying attention to the overt racism of law enforcement and the 'justice' system, but I haven't really noticed any of them taking an open-eyed look at racist manifestations of our other institutions.

[Rebkeh]

67. Yes, it does

See my comment below (#57).

[elleng]

3. NONE, there are THREE!

[Scootaloo]

5. Many things are possible.

[billhicks76]

6. Hillary A Racist?

I don't think so but she's a lowlife for implying Bernie is. Her policies however promote institutional racism as she supported incarcerating a major portion of the population. Bernie does the opposite. Hillary would definitely support incarcerating just as many poor whites to feed te corporate coffers and keep the poor in a place where they can't fight for change.

[Cali_Democrat]

11. When did Hillary imply Bernie was a racist? nt

[billhicks76]

69. You're Correct

She played the sexism card. Racism card was her campaign.

[mcar]

82. Ok

[stonecutter357]

14. .

[NCTraveler]

18. When did Hillary make that implication? Nt

[Skittles]

7. all I know is

swooners SUCK, no matter who they are swooning for

[JI7]

8. none of the democratic candidates are racist

none are perfect on race issues either. all could do a better job in some way. either in reaching out or policy proposals.

but they are all good people and for those who do care about race issues among many other important issues they would do a lot better than any of the republicans.

[RichVRichV]

77. That's how I see it also. n/t

[DFW]

9. Not just possible

More like a certainty, I'd say

[cosmicone]

10. None of them are

Although one is tone deaf to issues of social justice.

[Betty Karlson]

13. Would that be the one who came ot for gay marriage when the polls finally showed it was safe?

And is she going to be just as fierce an advocate for PoC as she has been for GLBT?

[pnwmom]

21. Sanders only supported it a few years before she did. Big deal.

Before then, he said it was a matter of states rights and that Vermont had decided civil unions was enough.

He wasn't exactly a "fierce advocate."

[Betty Karlson]

33. Those few years are indeed a big deal.

The difference is conscience over polls, or polls over conscience.

[pnwmom]

37. Hillary and Bernie, like most Americans, evolved on the issue.

The few years of difference means very little. You could make the same accusation about Bernie -- he changed his mind about marriage when VERMONT opinion did. It just happened that Vermont was a few years ahead of the rest of the country.

[Bluenorthwest]

41. You are incorrect and it is a tad uncool for straights to preach about this subject.

You are just wrong. Wrong in what you say and wrong in that you think you have the right to speak as an authority about the lives of others.

Why do Hillary supporters feel they are entitled to lecture LGBT on our own rights and lives? It needs to stop.

[Betty Karlson]

61. Clinton was from New York.

Are you now saying that Vermont is more liberal than New York?

Because Senator Gillibrand did not need as much time as Mrs. Clinton to endorse gay marriage, and she was from the supposedly conservative (upstate) part of New York. But as she said: I now represent all of New York, and that means changing a few positions [to the left].

Clinton never did that, because other than Gillibrand, she cannot and will not lead. She will poll, and follow when her focus groups tells her it is safe to do so.

[pnwmom]

65. Vermont was the unquestioned leader. Years before any state it approved civil unione. So, yes,

on LGBT issues, Vermont was clearly ahead of NY.

Sanders merely kept up with the evolution of views in his state -- he didn't lead them.

[beam me up scottie]

34. Hillary opposed it on moral grounds.

She was defending marriage between a man and a woman, remember?

Opposing civil rights because of bigotry is a big deal imo.

[cosmicone]

38. bwaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Beating the non-issue over and over and over

But... but.... but.... Bernie stopped shouting 22 seconds before Hillary and those 22 seconds matter damnit!

[Bluenorthwest]

42. Straight Hillary supporters preach at LGBT about our own lives, when we correct them they laugh.

You are a classy lot of voters.

[Betty Karlson]

60. That is a most heteronormative comment.

I hope you have the decency to be ashamed of what you posted.

[cosmicone]

66. It is perfectly eunormative thank you. n/t

[Betty Karlson]

12. Very likely even. eom

[murielm99]

15. It is possible.

I don't think any of the three are racist.

[Lyric]

16. I don't think anyone here believes that Sanders is personally racially prejudiced.

At least, no more so than any white person is by birth. I think that perhaps black voters feel hurt by the perception that Sanders does not prioritize their suffering and their struggle. I'm sure you disagree with that assessment, but we don't get to tell black voters which of their feelings are acceptable, and whether or not their pain is "valid". If they feel ignored and marginalized, then it's Sanders' job to change that; it is NOT our job to tell them that they are wrong and should be quiet.

Just my opinion.

[daybranch]

19. you have totally misstated what Bernie has done.

He listened and met with BLM before Hillary. He does however understand that violence is inflicted on those poor people who have not he ability to fight back. You see this throughout Appalachia as police have brutalized the weak for generations and have not spared people based on their color. The Poor, and the powerless, African American, Latino , or Asian, LGBT or hetero-sexual white people should all be protected from police violence. Of course African Americans being poor and congregated in cities receive most of this abuse right now, but this abuse is a way of dividing voters for the election of republican haters. It is important to remember that first they attack the African Americans, and then they feel empowered to attack poor whites(already doing this), then the Jews or some other scapegoat for the problems created for working people by the oligarchy.
No matter which candidate you support, you need to recognize the merits of Bernie's message that we must take back control of our government from Billionaires whose minions in both major parties depend on racism and hate to maintain their position in elected office. Go Bernie!

[Lyric]

23. I didn't state anything that Bernie has done

so I can't see how I misstated anything. I stated my perception about how black voters FEEL. And when they talk about how they FEEL, they are marginalized and insulted by the Sanders Defense Squad, which (in my perception, and please correct me if I am saying this wrong, black DU'ers) makes them feel attacked for being black and having an opinion contrary to White Liberalia, which leads them to think that Bernie and his supporters are racist, because (in their view) black opinions only seem to be respected when they mesh with white liberal opinions.

If Sanders supporters don't like the racist label for themselves (much less for their candidate), then adopt some humility and entertain the notion that yes, YOU are capable of saying and doing things that are offensive to many black voters, and that when that happens, they are not wrong for being offended--you are wrong for offending them. Doesn't matter how liberal you think you are, it doesn't make you immune to saying the wrong thing.

Here's a clue--attacking black voters and characterizing them as weak, gullible, stupid, pathetic, childish, naive, "deserving of what they get", etc. just because they don't prefer your candidate? Yeah, they probably see that kind of behavior as racist. Because, you know, it IS. Sanders himself doesn't do that...but some of his defenders sure do.

Hope that helps.

[Skidmore]

79. Well stated. nt

[William769]

80. Well stated Lyric.

It's not that they don't understand, it's that they refuse to listen to anything outside of their bubble.

[bravenak]

81. I cannot that you enough for saying this. Yes. Doing those things are racist. And it happens non

stop.

[mcar]

83. Well said!

[freshwest]

84. Objectivity versus subjectivity always helps. I don't know why some take it personally because

the world does not revolve around one person. It'd be horrible if it was.

We live in a big world that's getting smaller everyday and to succeed we have to give a little to accomodate each other. We must learn what others want. They are not going away. One must accept that what one's personal reality says the world is, may not be so.

Embrace the other. Look for the very best in people. You may not be disappointed. If one carries luggage from the past, one's own hurt for whatever reason, chances are things will not work out.

It's the future, get ahead by getting informed and give respect. It's more interesting than any Hollywood movie.

[emulatorloo]

85. Well said, Lyric

Thanks for posting this.

[Warren Stupidity]

22. And there it is.

[Motown_Johnny]

29. I suppose that is why he was part of the March On Washington in 1963.

Because he "does not prioritize their suffering and their struggle".

Yes, everyone who has any basic grasp on reality disagrees with your assessment.

[Fearless]

87. Original racial sin... that's a new one. Even for my ears.

[stonecutter357]

17. yes it's possible

[jamesatemple]

20. I know that I'm a racist.

I was born in 1940 here in Texas and raised by good folks who were also racist as had been the generation before them. Having said that, I reckon that most folks are racist in some sense of the word. But I, and I hope most folks nowadays, refuse to act upon the racism that once was accepted as a natural state of being. But, then, I've hoped for a lot of things.

[Android3.14]

25. Truisms here

You are exactly correct. It is only after you realize you are bigoted that you notice the actual instances when you behave racist, and only then can you make real change within yourself.

[tk2kewl]

36. taking advantage of these ingrained biases is a problem for me

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2008/05/08/511780/-Hillary-s-white-Americans-comment-causing-a-quick-firestorm-Updated-x4

And I can't understand how she seems to escape responsibility for this and so many other blatant cases of pandering

[Puglover]

62. I have posted links to Jane Elliotts life

long work showing folks how institutionalized racist and homophobic behavior is in the US and elsewhere. She is one of my personal heroes. To quote her, "It is impossible to be raised in the US and not be a racist to some degree." I agree whole heartedly.

Never once have one of the posters that enjoy chasing other posters around this board calling them racists uttered a peep about her.

Jane Elliott was alienated and almost run out of lily white Riceville Iowa in 1963 when she did her now world famous exercise. She walks the walk and talks the talk. And not on a message board that no one knows about.

That's one of the reasons why DU (at least for me) these days is mostly just for shits and giggles

I beg posters to go to minute 27 or so of the first video and watch. You won't forget it.

[marym625]

70. She is also one of my heroes, Puglover.

I remember seeing her first experiment when I was just a child myself. It still resonates with me today.

I can't think of anything more appropriate to have posted. Thank you for posting it

[lovemydog]

71. Thank you Puglover.

I will watch the video.

I agree with you that we all have levels of racism.

[Puglover]

72. Please let me know what you think once you do.

[lovemydog]

74. Very fascinating.

She's gotten death threats and all sorts of angry responses. Boy oh boy it's difficult talking about stuff like this. People get really angry and bent out of shape. I am glad you pointed out these videos to me. I appreciate that we are talking as human beings with each other.

[Puglover]

75. Look believe me. I work on it every single day.

And I suppose will be sentenced to do so for the rest of my life. Again, like Jane, I believe this toxic Euro centric culture conditions us and it's ugly.

And yes, Jane Elliott did this exercise the first time in Riceville Iowa in 1963. She AND her family were ostracized and almost run out of town. I doubt that I possess the amount of courage and commitment that this wondrous human being does.

I'm very flattered you took the time to watch it. Fascinating to see the folks that just do not get it even when slapped across the face with it

Very nice chatting with you.

[lovemydog]

78. Likewise Puglover.

Very nice chatting with you too.

[blackspade]

88. +1000

[bullwinkle428]

64. Acknowledging one's "inner racism" is really the only way to the path that

leads one to recognize that "white privilege" is an actual, genuine thing.

[randome]

24. Enough with your divisive, wedge issues!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]

[Adrahil]

26. Yes! nt

[Motown_Johnny]

27. It seems the most reasonable conclusion.

[MannyGoldstein]

30. LOL! Another BernieBro trying to confuse the issue!

We can only have economic justice OR social justice. not both!

Bernie's picked economic justice, and must pay for his treachery!

Hillary, OTOH, has been a fierce lifelong advocate for the Civil Rights of ALL people since 2013.

Regards,

TWM

[stillwaiting]

32. One of the two candidates has made unfair racist allegations explode. Again.

I don't know either of them personally so I don't know whether they are racist (or how racist either one might be).

All I do know is that one campaign has made this primary season much, much uglier than it needs to be. Again.

[winter is coming]

35. ^^ This. n/t

[Dem2]

39. I'm pretty certain that neither are

or all 3 as pointed out in several other replies.

[Autumn]

40. i don't think they are. But I have seen anti-Semitism against Bernie

and sexism against Hillary in real life and some in posts here. Another thing, the clown car is all over the news today. Thanks DWS.

[Bluenorthwest]

44. I agree with all of that.

nt

[MuseRider]

53. Yes.

Agreed.

[bullwinkle428]

63. Excellent post.

[SidDithers]

46. I thought there were 3 major Democratic candidates...nt

Sid

[artislife]

47. As a Latina

I find the use of race by everyone as a brick to smash the other side just this side of vile.

And the smugness of one side the effing cherry on top.

That is racist, too. The denial of it just goes to show insidious it really is.

I would rather a candidate see my minority label together with other minority labels along with the majority as suffering from the actions of the very few. It smacks of looking at the content of character and seeing the broad base of our 'humanism" as the defining trait.

Maybe it is because I don't see this country or this world as Black and White...I see the shades of yellows, tans, and browns in there, too.

[Mike__M]

76. I'm with her ^

(I mean I agree with artislife, not necessarily "I'm With Her&quot

[MineralMan]

48. It's not just possible. It's certain.

Neither Hillary Clinton nor Bernie Sanders are racists. Anyone who doesn't understand that or implies otherwise is simply wrong, and hurts the effort to elect anyone.

It's the same as saying, "You're stupid if you don't agree with me."

[mcar]

49. None of them are

[Autumn]

50. Oops I forgot to rec this

Rec

[mmonk]

51. Agreed but people will use any tactic unfortunately.

[AuntPatsy]

52. A possible outcome leaves it open with room for error....

[Bluenorthwest]

54. Point in fact: In '08 Obama held rallies with anti gay evangelists who ranted against LGBT rights

at official events. Really nasty people who had called LGBT 'vampires' and accused us of 'trying to kill our children'.
DU's reaction to that was sanguine among the straights. His supporters would become very, very angry if anyone dared say he was homophobic. Holding rallies with anti gay speakers. Was not called homophobic.

So the straight folks I see throwing fits over Bernie, who has done nothing offensive at all strike me as privileged enough to be able to paint allies as enemies.

I'd also like to say that in '08 all candidates were opposed to LGBT equality. I voted for Obama because of a few factors. One of those factors was that both were a bit homophobic but Hillary's campaign also got a bit racist. This year, those who called her campaign racist point fingers at Bernie and claim Hillary is a saint of race relation.

It strains credulity. It just does.

[Autumn]

55. Very true. nt

[mmonk]

56. Great post and points.

[Mike__M]

73. In 2007, I think I remember

the angry old man on the debate stage favored full marriage.
The establishment candidates didn't want him in their party.
(Sorry -- back to topic...)

[Rebkeh]

57. Yes. It's possible but

it's not that simple.

I think Hillary is more than happy to benefit from racism, she has demonstrated such willingness several times. She may not, in her heart, be indifferent to racism, I don't know. It doesn't matter though, she's beholden to people that need racist structures to remain intact to suit their needs. Does that make her a racist? Arguably.

Bernie is just clueless, or he was. And he's changing that - I believe he is authentic. Does this make him a racist? Not in my eyes. He fumbled badly though, and many of his supporters are making matters far worse with their own racism.

As for the candidates themselves, I make a distinction between doing a racist thing out of ignorance and knowingly supporting structural racism.

Just one black woman's perspective.

[Chitown Kev]

58. For that matter

I don't think that John Boehner is personally racist...and I think that quite the same is true for a number of Republicans.

Heck, there's some evidence that even George Wallace wasn't personally racist.

However, if racism is what it takes to win elections, I don't think any politician is above that (just as the Dems weren't above homophobia against David Dreier in 2008).

[restorefreedom]

59. i believe that none of them harbor racial animus

but one is a craven political opportunist and classist.

[Starry Messenger]

68. I don't think any of them are.

[emulatorloo]

86. Neither Bernie, HRC, or MOM are racists

Thanks for posting this thread.