Democratic Super Tuesday discussion thread

I’m not making a claim that Sanders has done more for blacks than Clinton has. I’m refuting the claim that Sanders can’t possibly know anything about black people because he’s from Vermont, which is apparently a magical land that stops People of Color at the border, so Sanders has simply never ever needed to think about them (bless his heart; he means well.)

I’m also pushing back on the idea that Clinton has some special connection to black people because of all her hard work, which as you correctly point out, isn’t really anything to speak of in terms of results for the black people, although it’s clearly paying off in results for Clinton.

Hmm, the school to jail track… where did I just hear that, oh, right.

There’s no one solution that just fixes all of racism. You’re dismissing the idea of free college benefiting black people because it won’t fix all racism.

It would undoubtedly have an effect, because it would give poor blacks a viable way to get out of poverty. It would make non-criminal paths more viable.

What is Clinton proposing to fix the school to jail track that Sanders isn’t? Is this another one of those “Clinton will somehow make people with black names get called for job interviews” things?

Actually, I think I was confusing the Super Tuesday margin with the March 15th margin, and misspoke. This is not something he’ll make up with a shift of less than 5% of voters.

This is bad, and barring a huge swing in public opinion, or a wildly different base of support in unpolled states, you’re probably right. Oh, well.

I still think he’s a better candidate, and I am still hoping for that swing.

I’m not comparing Clinton to Sanders on this matter, you are. You are saying that free college addresses the concerns of black people. I’m saying “I doubt it, since they get screwed long before college.”

Free college appeals to middle class whites - the folks Sanders does well with. It appeals to other people, but it isn’t the pressing concern it is for middle class whites.

(And it doesn’t appeal to all of them - I think its a lousy idea and I’m a middle class white - although to Merneith point, I lost relatives in the gas chambers. Roma, not Jewish - so maybe I’m not white and I’m an outsider. It would be news to me though).

Nor does free college education much help the person that needs to work to support the family, or the one that can hardly read, or any of a bunch of other problems.

Frankly - if you have time, the smarts, and the support to attend college - fees are not your major problem. So much more needs to be done at the very bottom end to make this worthwhile.

As correctly mentioned - free college is of the biggest benefit to the middle class - they will the get the disproportionate value out of it compared to lesser well off minorities…

So it is clear that some Bernie supporters do not get why Black voters so overwhelmingly do not prefer him. They don’t get it, the why Blacks concluded that he does not get it, the why they don’t buy what he is selling.

Which is fine.

What is less fine is therefore concluding that since they don’t get it that Blacks must therefore be “low information” voters who don’t know what is in their own best interests. If only they would listen to their intellectual superiors, the younger White folk, who clearly are looking out for the best interests of the less informed Black voters and know better, and are who matters.

FWIW I am a White Jew who also had much extended family who died in HaShoah. My Dad, born, like my mother, into poverty, was also one of the first Americans at the gates of Dachau. He lived through lots of anti-Semitism here at home. These facts permeated my upbringing, even though it was suburban middle class. I completely understand that Bernie in fact understands otherness in America but let’s be real. My Dad could (and did) go on sales calls and use an Italian name. My Dad, who experienced otherness, was also a bit of a racist at times and did not really know any Blacks. Expecting that Blacks will hear “Jew” and give that cred for experiencing being marginalized and stereotyped as “low knowledge” who needs others to look out for his or her best interests because (s)he is not quite able to … not realistic.

Being realistic here - being Jewish and irreligious were both items that Sanders had to overcome in these communities, Black and Hispanic alike (see slide 22 and 23). His non-practicing Jewish identity was not a means of connecting on an “I understand otherness” dimension. Even if he does.

He does not understand the Black community and played to them very poorly, did not connect, and they do not get and understand him and maybe do not believe him on his positions. Maybe the faults go a bit both ways … I dunno. But again, if it somehow was miraculously possible to win with overwhelming percents of Blacks, most Hispanics, and about half of all Whites preferring the other candidate (say as a benefit of delegate overweighting to the later states which happen to be more White, so somehow an amazing come from behind delegate win with a less than 50% popular vote) … would that be good for the party?

Not sure why no one is up for answering that.

Well, these voters were already conditioned by Democrats to think of poor people who don’t vote the “right” way as stupid and voting against their own interests.

Apparently Magical Negro’s are just for movies. There must not have been any of their wisdom among the 97% of elderly black South Carolinians who voted for Hillary.

The demographic that his campaign played to does not exist, it is an imaginary figment of the typical Bernie fan. In the fantasy, the black community is best connected with through Cornel-West-My-BruthA and the middle-aged rapper the Bernie fan cues up on his Spotify while driving home from Whole Foods in his Prius.

This contest has really laid bare some of the ignorant, even innocent, latent racism among the lefty activist scene.

Threadshitting, inability to tell a (bad) joke because you can’t spell, whatever.

This is a Warning to stop trolling.

[ /Moderating ]

Are you referring to a policy of his that he advocate for Vermont, or for the nation? Because I’m unfamiliar with such a policy of his today. Namely–state paid tuition at public universities. I’m aware of a pie in the sky “Wall Street speculation tax” funded initiative to pay for a $75bn/yr college tuition plan, one that would sap liquidity in the markets and hurt our economic performance by applying tax in an almost monumentally stupid way that damages the ability of everyone to invest in the economy.

I’m also familiar with Hillary’s plan to fund historically black colleges and universities, and her plan to enable most students to attend colleges without incurring debt. Which sounds pretty similar to Sanders plan, minus the really stupid tax scheme to pay for it.

And actually for a long time I was an opponent of Affirmative Action, both for reasons of equity (I didn’t feel we should be discriminating on the basis of race, for good or for bad) and because of how poorly blacks who go to colleges based on AA policies perform.

I’ve changed my opinion on affirmative action in the last few years and think it’s a valuable tool to address historical and systemic racism. However I think the fact that most of the discussion about it is in regard to college admissions is like slapping a band aid on someone with a gun shot wound. As you say, by the time college rolls around many black youths are not in a great place already. Affirmative action for college admissions is fine, great–but the focus of the Federal government should be promoting policies that insure black children have equal access to quality public education as white children. I’m fine with wealthy parents sending their kids to private K-12 schools, that’s perfectly acceptable to me. But I find it troubling that through the horrible way our school system’s are funded and districts can be the size of a postage stamp wealthy homeowners can create amazing public schools that no poor people have access to–that’s anathema to what public schooling is supposed to be, which is a force of equalization in society that gives both the rich and the poor equal opportunities to succeed.

Oh okay, and this was happening in Brooklyn? I must have forgotten where Baden-Baden and Auschwitz were located.

Okay. If your retort to Bernie being a privileged white man when compared to a woman or a black person is to point out that he’s Jewish, I don’t really think you want to listen to reason. We don’t make Jews wear Stars of David in America, so their treatment is fundamentally different from people like blacks and women who have no mechanism to conceal their status. Additionally he doesn’t even have a “stereotypically Jewish name” so that wouldn’t be an easy identifier (I mean for fucks sake, until this year the most famous Sanders in American history was the Colonel, and he’s about as un-Jewish as it gets.)

What does this have to do with Bernie’s policies in support of black people here in the year 2016? And I’ll sit wherever the fuck I want–but Bernie doesn’t get “Holocaust survivor by proxy” street cred. So is your argument that the evidence Bernie will be a better candidate for minorities that some people in his extended family suffered at the hands of the Nazis? 70 years ago? We’re actually going in the wrong direction here–I asked for some stuff that he’s proposing in this campaign, or at least in the lifetime of someone 50 years old or younger. Instead you go back to the 1940s.

Well, explain to me why he can’t talk to black voters without telling them “what’s in their best interests.” Explain why he has no relationship with any local black community leaders? He’s collected some celebrity endorsements and a couple national-level civil rights advocates, but why doesn’t he have huge numbers of black ministers supporting him? Local community leaders? It’s because he’s not established a relationship with them.

Also, explain to me why Bernie snuggled up to Castro, a man who has overseen a very racist society that discriminates immensely against Cuba’s blacks?

Who are you quoting?

The mods here love to flex their muscles, don’t they? Take a chill pill mang.

Well, that’s the part I’m talking about - the part that says Bernie is from Vermont, therefore thinks People of Color are an urban legend and has never needed to think about them.

Speaking personally, I’m not all that interested in the rest of the conversation, except to point out that the Clintons’ special connection to black people hasn’t really produced any special results for black people.

That’s not telling black people that they are wrong to support her. That’s questioning Hillary’s narrative about why they support her.
It’s nice that she has this rapport, and she demonstrably does, but you know - talk is cheap.

So I’m not convinced that the reason black people support her is because of her years of outreach. And I’m not convinced yet that her years of outreach (and negligible results) will ultimately prove inviolable.

If I was arguing that Bernie has a special relationship with black ministers that would be a really killer argument. But I’m not. And he doesn’t. So - ten points for you?

I’m not entirely clear what you mean by “snuggling up to Castro”. If you’re referring to that one video from 1985 where Sanders says - well here, it’s short, let me quote it (Daily Mail, no less, heh):

So if by “snuggling up”, you mean, Sanders was absolutely factual in his assessment of America’s attempts at Cuban interference - then yeah, they were supes cozy.

What that has to do with Bernie’s failure to reach black voters on Super Tuesday I’ll leave to your imagination.

I thought we were talking about why we think Sanders is not making inroads, not what Clinton might say. I’ve never heard Clinton talk about Sanders not making a dent with the black communities in the south. I know why I think he hasn’t.

Some of the sexism as well. “women support Hillary because she is a woman or they want the first woman President” And I’ve gotten more than my share of the “you just don’t understand” from male Bernie supporters who want to explain to me what is best.

I have a male friend who is a somewhat public figure (he has tens of thousands of Facebook friends) and Clinton supporter who says the sexism of some of the feedback he’s gotten from Bernie supporters is shocking.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Racism is too loaded a word, IMHO. But that some, maybe even many, of us Left of Center have less understanding of the complexities of the various Black communities and how they work politically than we presume we do? Clearly the case.

I am pretty ignorant myself but dang it is pretty obvious even to me that there are many contributing factors to why Sanders failed here, and is, in this case not “low information” and only going by name recognition.

Although yes, Clinton is a known entity to them, and perceived positively. It starts that she was the default choice and he needed to give a reason to do otherwise.

He has no established cred or connections within the community. It is very telling when your claim for cred is a student protest over half a century ago. Yes, he had a good record voting for things as they came along, but he had no leadership role in all his years in Congress on anything that positively impacted these communities. And likely his vote on protecting gun manufacturers played poorly there too, as much as it played well to the rural Whites in Vermont: Blacks are much more commonly supportive of gun control than are Whites.

He came and lectured to them, basically using the his same stump speech with added “And Blacks are really hit by the system being rigged!” and a cringe-worthy “Thurgood Marshall was a damn good Supreme Court Justice.” He did not go on a listening tour. He did not communicate along the channels that impact most within these communities.

That consistent class-based message appeals to most middle class Whites who perceive their position as middle class, their share of the power, is under threat. The loss of what one has is a scary prospect, and these middle class Whites have always presumed that staying in middle class or moving up, that having a certain amount of power in this society, is something they could expect. The realization that increasingly it is no longer their birthright, that the wealth/power is less their future, motivates a demand for change, now. As pointed out in this thread, his message is fairly dismissive of other issues, such as racial identity, that impact wealth and power in and of themselves. The OMG we are losing power and less secure than our parents were aha experience that drives the response to a new call for action just does not automatically resonate with as many within these communities. A bit silly to think it would.

He failed to draw any specific to the community positive contrasts between himself and Clinton.

His message is predicated upon the belief that Obama has failed to deliver, failed to be strong enough and/or principled enough to change the system in the ways it must change, but he will be. Clinton embraces Obama, is of his team, and celebrates what he has accomplished promising to build upon its solid base, a “I will stand on the shoulder of this giant” motiff. Given Obama’s approval ratings within the Black community which would you think would sell better?

Being religious, and frankly Christian, is more commonly important within these communities than in Sanders White core of support.

So on and on. Clinton campaigned extremely effectively and he campaigned … ignorantly and maybe a bit arrogantly.

And his supporters who thought that Black voters would just listen to the revealed truth of Sanders and rally round him? Naive, ignorant, and arrogant … yeah a bit.

Sorry that you, and other Sanders supporters, aren’t interested in the rest of the conversation.

To my read Sanders supporters are coming off as being upset that those other Whites are hogging up all the White privilege now, but within the party they still want it for themselves.

I guess I understand why that conversation does not interest you.