Perhaps knowing names isn’t a good proxy for political engagement, but NOT knowing names strikes me as a pretty good proxy for non-engagement…
I’d wondered a while ago if there would ever arise a Democratic version of the Tea Party. Bernie Sanders supporters are the closest thing to it.
A lot of Bernie voters believe that they somehow see corruption that the rest of us can’t see. We see it; we just have a different strategy for dealing with it.
And the pure self-righteousness of denunciation just feels so good!
All that making change happen stuff is hard work and compromising and just takes too much commitment. Much easier to demand that others do it instead. While remaining pure themselves, somehow.
FWIW despite the berating of Sanders supporters that is going on here I read this as no double leg takedown by Obama on anyone, not Sanders supporters or the BLM movement, as much as it is a sales pitch to to try to move some of the passions of both groups into sustained actions that make actual progress. He berates and belittles no one in this.
Barney Frank’s style is to exhort in a takedown mode perhaps … Obama instead tries to convince that voting in midterms matters mightily and longterm sustained action with compromises but staying at the table working it out is the true path to progress more than yelling alone.
Dang I’ll miss him as President.
I can’t tell if you’re being ironically or unironically self-deprecating, and I know that using my irony meter anywhere near the Internet voids its warranty, so I guess I’ll live with the mystery :).
I agree that Obama has some ideas in this speech that are pretty clearly aimed at Sanders and his supporters, but he really isn’t singling out Sanders supporters as staying home in 2014.
He calls out two groups in particular for not bothering to vote in the midterms: young voters (not sure what constitutes “young”) and African American voters.
The first group went heavily for Sanders this time around, so there’s a good bet that most of the “young people” who stayed home, if they’re involved in politics at all at this point, are Sanders supporters now.
OTOH, black Americans went heavily for Clinton this time around, so it’s a good bet that most African Americans who stayed home (again assuming they have become involved for the first time or again) are Clinton supporters now. Either way, he isn’t blaming the 2014 loss on any one group or on either candidate’s base.
That being said, I think Skammer’s question above (about whether Sanders supporters were more likely to have stayed home in 2014) is an interesting one. I don’t know about any data on the subject. What we do know is that Sanders has talked frequently about bringing people into the political process. If this is true, then yes, a lot of those people must have chosen not to vote in 2014. (If you did vote in a midterm two years back it’s hard to see how you were “brought in” to the process this year.)
A corollary is that Clinton is NOT bringing people into the process…so if Sanders’s statement is accurate, then it makes sense to conclude that yes, many current Sanders supporters did stay home in 2014. --But I don’t know if Sanders has any real data to back that up.
Uhm, I’ve voted in every election since I turned 18 back in 1974. I am not the leader of the nation, Obama is. Whose problem is this again?
But I just got my CA primary ballot today in the mail, and I’m going to happily vote for Bernie. You don’t like it, that’s your problem!
Cut a little too close to the bone for ya, huh?
I just happened to hear on a podcast that only 25% of Millennials voted in 2010. So…do the 24-35yo Bernheads represent that 25%? I have my doubts.
As I said before: ironically, or unironically, self-deprecating? The world will never know.
(Folks can easily read my posts to see that I’ve defended both Clinton and Sanders from what I consider the wave of unwarranted attacks on both.)
Nope, try again.
I am sure you honestly perceive yourself as having done such.
Well, of course I do. I’ve been blocked by Sanders supporters on Facebook, and I’ve come out against people here for being jerks about Clinton. Are you saying you believe I am mistaken? Do you genuinely think that you’re coming at this election from a fairer perspective such taht your judgment on the issue is better than mine? Say the word, and I’ll give quotes.
Screw it, here are your examples of my criticizing Sanders supporters, complimenting/defending Clinton, or a mix. Keep in mind that I do have real problems both with Clinton’s approach to politics and with her actual politics, so I’m never going to be a full-scale cheerleader for her; still, can either of you claim any similar fairmindedness that would justify your snark at me?
DSeid has asked people to stop using terms like “Bernie bros” and has been mostly fairminded, despite being a little worked up about Sanders hammering on Clinton’s money connection. ElvisL1ves on the other hand…
Huh. I confess I missed that, Dseid, and I appreciate it.
I honestly am not at all interested in rehashing this Pit thread.
Yes, you believe that I am an obnoxious and biggest “Elections forum tweaker” … feel free to give all the quotes supporting that you want in a new Pit thread if you so desire. You have “the word” to do so.
And yes I believe that you honestly believe that you are a paragon of evenhandedness since of course what is evenhanded is where your personal perspective lies of what is and is not over the line. And of course I believe I am doing the same. And of course I believe that my judgement on the issue is better than yours as much as you believe that your judgement is better than mine.
Yes you have called out some of the more extreme hostility from some of the Sanders side during this cycle, mainly when it crosses the place you draw your personal line: announcing an actual intention to vote against Clinton.
Yes you have defended both Clinton and Sanders from what you consider the wave of unwarranted attacks on both … but mild criticism of Sanders that you disagree with has to you warranted derision back. You have, to my read and experience, from where I sit, a very low threshold for what is off limits in that direction. I accept that our perceptions of where the lines should be placed vary.
In any case, again, feel free to open a Pit thread if you want. For this thread my input is that there is no beat down in Obama’s statement and using it to attack Sanders supporters is unwarranted and unhelpful.
You are incorrect. I’m not a paragon of evenhandedness. When my buddy and I are chased by a bear, and I put on my sneakers so I can outrun him, it doesn’t make me Jesse Owens. It just makes me faster than my buddy.
I should say, I agree with this. At this point, I’d prefer Democrats confine bickering to substantive policy issues. Criticism of Sanders’s economic proposals is awesome. Criticsm of Clinton’s support of military interventionism is fine. These continued snipes about how Sanders supporters are too naive, or Clinton supporters may as well be Republicans, is vituperative nonsense.