Why did Bernie Sanders succeed with Latinos and fail with blacks? (1 Viewer)

[Henry Ford]

What were their thoughts on Pete?  Did the reparations response have any impact?

Most of the people I spoke to said they mostly like him, especially after the Michael Harriot articles, but if he becomes President it’s just another perfect example of an unqualified White man falling into a dream job where a black woman had to work for years and be perfect first and still dropped out first. 
 

I know a lot of Harris supporters. They all went Biden.  

 

[wikkidpissah]

i cant remember if it was Cali-specific or not but, when CNN was scrambling to figure out if the Biden sweep would affect California, their numbers guy flashed sumn interesting - black voters are almost opposite by age: 80-20 Biden for black voters over 40, 80-20 Sanders under 40. Unfortunately for the Bern, under-40 blacks have a ridiculously low vote-rate

 

[BassNBrew]

Most of the people I spoke to said they mostly like him, especially after the Michael Harriot articles, but if he becomes President it’s just another perfect example of an unqualified White man falling into a dream job where a black woman had to work for years and be perfect first and still dropped out first. 
 

I know a lot of Harris supporters. They all went Biden.  

Thanks for the insight

 

[squistion]

Most of the people I spoke to said they mostly like him, especially after the Michael Harriot articles, but if he becomes President it’s just another perfect example of an unqualified White man falling into a dream job where a black woman had to work for years and be perfect first and still dropped out first. 
 

I know a lot of Harris supporters. They all went Biden.  

I am in that camp. Was for Harris until she dropped out and then couldn't decide and was favoring Mayor Pete and Klobuchar until the SC primary. Fortunately I didn't get my mail in ballot until last Saturday, so I was able to vote for Joe. 

 

[zftcg]

Why did Sanders fail with black voters?  I think Sanders does better with young minorities than older ones.  I thought they were making headway with older ones as well.  But South Carolina, and the results since, seem to have blown that theory out of the water.  I do think people underestimate the power of corporate media to manage public opinion.  By the time Sanders had to answer for socialism a gazillionth time, and not every other pharma/insurance-backed shill for why people are dying in the street, the damage was already done.  

I’ll be honest.  I’m disheartened by it.  I don’t mean to scold people for voting the way they do. I really don’t.  I just don’t understand what it is that they think they’re voting for.  Biden is a police state authoritarian.  He has argued viciously for policies that destroy young black men’s lives, and immigrants’ as well.  

Even now, today, he thinks there’s not enough research on marijuana to remove it from the list of controlled substances.  The health care system chews up the poor and spits them out.  Health insurance stocks exploded upon news of Biden’s turnaround.  It was Biden’s 40/50 years in the Beltway, and others like him, that made Trump possible.  

Perhaps the real problem is that Obama’s presidency was never properly understood for what it was.  When blacks see Obama, they don’t see Timothy Geithner and the banks they bailed out.  They don’t see the open air slave markets in Libya that Obama’s war brought back.  They don’t see the catastrophe in Yemen, or the drone that killed a 16 year old boy.  They don’t see him providing the cover Rick Snyder needed to tell lead-poisoned Flint residents the water was fine.  They don’t see the world burning behind the tv screen.  For the first time at long last, they just saw themselves.  

Not just African Americans either.  A solid majority of the electorate believes this myth. That’s how Biden gets to have the core image of a friendly sidekick who likes ice cream and was friends with Obama.  That’s how Michelle Obama gets glowing news coverage for passing candy to a war criminal.  People just don’t understand the real nature of political power.  

The failure of electoral politics to address these issues, and mass media to cover them in an honest way, will leave us no choice but to engage directly with the system as it is. We’re not going to like it when the time comes.  

Ren, I disagree with a lot of what you post here, but reading this I genuinely felt bad for you. It sucks when your candidate loses*, and it particularly sucks when his superiority seems so obvious to you but is not seen by voters at large. Our entire democratic system is built on trusting voters to do the right thing, and when they don't it can make it really difficult to reconcile.

IMO, the only way to square the circle is to keep two thoughts in your head at the same time: First, to continue believing what you've always believed, and that your candidate/movement is the path to achieve it. Second, have enough humility to recognize that the fact that voters are wrong doesn't necessarily mean they're stupid, or gullible, or mindless sheep. They may be making what is in their mind a completely rational choice, and ultimately, if you want to win elections, you have to figure out a way to reframe the debate and bring them to your side. I think Bernie did a lot of things well this time around, but I also think there was a reason he wasn't able to build on his successes (or address his weaknesses) from 2016. I assume Bernie is not going to run again if he loses this year -- because God help us if we're trotting out 83-year-old candidates -- but I would genuinely love to see someone emerge who could build on his legacy. There's a long history of that in our politics: Al Smith led to FDR, Goldwater led to Reagan, Jesse Jackson led to Obama (and, er, Sarah Palin led to Trump).

* Standard caveat that Bernie hasn't lost anything yet and the race could still have a few more twists and turns.

 

[BladeRunner]

Minorities in this country don't feel safe with the Republican Party. We can argue honestly about what policies will benefit them the most but there's no debate that Dems have done a much better job at safeguarding minority political rights since LBJ. And that matters.

I don't know if that's revisionist history but that's just preposterous.  

Don't feel safe?  Wut?  We've had 60 years of Democrat policies and they're no better off.  Also, the amount of violence in democratically controlled cities is ridiculous as well.  The Democrats only show love to them every 4 years and give them JUUUUUUST enough for their vote but not too much so they can stay down.  After all, they'll need them again in another 4 years and you can't get votes from them if they can take care of themselves and be successful.

Black people need to wake up to the 60 year scam that's been perpetuated on them from the Democrat Party.

 

[Daywalker]

I don't know if that's revisionist history but that's just preposterous.  

Don't feel safe?  Wut?  We've had 60 years of Democrat policies and they're no better off.  Also, the amount of violence in democratically controlled cities is ridiculous as well.  The Democrats only show love to them every 4 years and give them JUUUUUUST enough for their vote but not too much so they can stay down.  After all, they'll need them again in another 4 years and you can't get votes from them if they can take care of themselves and be successful.

Black people need to wake up to the 60 year scam that's been perpetuated on them from the Democrat Party.

Black people are not better off than they were 60 years ago?

That is hilarious.

I know some of your best friends are black maybe go talk to them.

 

[AAABatteries]

Most of the people I spoke to said they mostly like him, especially after the Michael Harriot articles, but if he becomes President it’s just another perfect example of an unqualified White man falling into a dream job where a black woman had to work for years and be perfect first and still dropped out first. 
 

I know a lot of Harris supporters. They all went Biden.  

What happened to your avatar?

And to stay on topic - her dropping out so quickly was always confusing to me.

 

[Sinn Fein]

And to stay on topic - her dropping out so quickly was always confusing to me.

Meh.

I suspect she ran out of money, and may be in debt.

Harris came out of the gate strong, and a better managed campaign might still have her in the race.  But, she opted for dual campaign managers - her sister being one.  The campaign managers were not on the same page (nor the same coast) - and that was her biggest problem.

It resulted in a disjointed campaign, where they assumed they would be nationally viable, and started to ramp up the organization with a national campaign in mind.  Then, at the last second, they decided they needed to compete in Iowa, so resources were diverted to Iowa.  In the end she was never gaining traction in Iowa, and lost support nationally, and then lost all their money.  

A better managed campaign would have had a better strategy, and executed it.  But, you can say the ability of Harris to build that type of campaign infrastructure indicates she was not ready to build a presidential staff either.

 

[zftcg]

A better managed campaign would have had a better strategy, and executed it.  But, you can say the ability of Harris to build that type of campaign infrastructure indicates she was not ready to build a presidential staff either.

Any time I evaluate a political candidate, particularly a president, I look at them entirely apart from my opinion of their politics and try to figure out whether they're a good manager. There was a lot I didn't like about Mitt Romney, but he ran a smart, effective campaign and I think would have been a competent chief executive even if I didn't like the ends to which that competence would have been applied. Same with Jeb Bush. Meanwhile, I voted for Bill Clinton and think he was a good president, but managerially speaking the dude was a mess (and that's without even getting into the whole "screwing around with WH staff" thing).

Harris was one of my favorites from the start, and I think at her best she could have been an incredibly formidable challenger to Trump, but the political and managerial skills she showed during her campaign give me serious pause. 

 

[zftcg]

Black people need to wake up to the 60 year scam that's been perpetuated on them from the Democrat Party.

And yet Republicans have been saying this for all 60 of those years and they haven't managed to convince any black people to switch. I wonder why that is. Do you think maybe because telling voters they're too stupid to recognize their own self interest is a bad way to persuade them to vote for you?

 

[Sinn Fein]

What happened to your avatar?

Ran afowl of the "no cocks" rule.

 

[zftcg]

Black people need to wake up to the 60 year scam that's been perpetuated on them from the Democrat Party.

And yet Republicans have been saying this for all 60 of those years and they haven't managed to convince any black people to switch. I wonder why that is. Do you think maybe because telling voters they're too stupid to recognize their own self interest is a bad way to persuade them to vote for you?

What's interesting is that the Democrats have a similar issue with rural white voters, expressed most famously in the book What's the Matter with Kansas? and most infamously in Obama's "bitter clingers" comments. But here's the thing: Frank's book was not focused on telling rural voters why they were wrong to vote GOP, it was explaining to liberals why they do (his follow-up book was literally called Listen, Liberal). Obama's comments, as clumsy and condescending as they were, were his attempt to explain to a bunch of liberal donors what the Democrats needed to do better in order to reach those voters.

The GOP message is the exact opposite. Never do they explain to their own base why African American voters don't trust them. Instead, they project blame outward: blacks are dumb, need to "wake up", don't realize they're being "scammed". 

The tactics are so ineffective at persuading black voters, it almost makes you wonder if the real goals are to a) suppress enthusiasm and discourage them from voting at all, and b) reassure the GOP base that they're not racist and have done nothing wrong in their approach to African Americans.

I gotta say, "We're not racist; you're just too dumb to know how to vote correctly" is a special kind of chutzpah.

 

[roadkill1292]

What's interesting is that the Democrats have a similar issue with rural white voters, expressed most famously in the book What's the Matter with Kansas? and most infamously in Obama's "bitter clingers" comments. But here's the thing: Frank's book was not focused on telling rural voters why they were wrong to vote GOP, it was explaining to liberals why they do (his follow-up book was literally called Listen, Liberal). Obama's comments, as clumsy and condescending as they were, were his attempt to explain to a bunch of liberal donors what the Democrats needed to do better in order to reach those voters.

The GOP message is the exact opposite. Never do they explain to their own base why African American voters don't trust them. Instead, they project blame outward: blacks are dumb, need to "wake up", don't realize they're being "scammed". 

The tactics are so ineffective at persuading black voters, it almost makes you wonder if the real goals are to a) suppress enthusiasm and discourage them from voting at all, and b) reassure the GOP base that they're not racist and have done nothing wrong in their approach to African Americans.

I gotta say, "We're not racist; you're just too dumb to know how to vote correctly" is a special kind of chutzpah.

This is a pretty good explanation. I didn't think what I wrote earlier about minorities not feeling "safe" with the GOP was even remotely controversial. There appears to be a massive lack of empathy among white conservative voters in regards to what minority voters had to go through to simply exercise the same freedoms as everyone else and why those gains feel so vulnerable to them at times.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

it almost makes you wonder if the real goals are to . . . reassure the GOP base that they're not racist and have done nothing wrong in their approach to African Americans.

Of course I'm biased but I tend to think this sort of thing is true of a LOT of right wing rhetoric.  One of the foundations of modern conservatives is "if we actually help struggling people they'll be worse off because they'll be dependent."  That makes it a lot easier to feel good about yourself while voting against helping people.  Not only do you get to keep all your tax money, you can also feel good about the fact that the government is not providing a robust safety net for others. 

With that said, I don't doubt the sincerity of most conservatives about this stuff.  I think the vast majority of them actually believe it. 

 

[zftcg]

Of course I'm biased but I tend to think this sort of thing is true of a LOT of right wing rhetoric.  One of the foundations of modern conservatives is "if we actually help struggling people they'll be worse off because they'll be dependent."  That makes it a lot easier to feel good about yourself while voting against helping people.  Not only do you get to keep all your tax money, you can also feel good about the fact that the government is not providing a robust safety net for others. 

With that said, I don't doubt the sincerity of most conservatives about this stuff.  I think the vast majority of them actually believe it. 

Yeah, it can be difficult to find the line between cynicism and genuine belief. Not with Trump; he's the most cynical politician human being that ever lived. But I'm sure there are many conservatives who genuinely believe in racial equality and think the GOP's approach will help minorities. And I'm also sure that, as you say, there are many who have convinced themselves of that fact in order to rationalize their own selfish behavior. In other words, it's complicated.

But whatever is at the root of their motivations, the net result is that black people, and indeed most minorities, don't trust them, and the GOP is not going to win them back without acknowledging that fact and taking steps to address their mistrust. Instead, they're doubling down. 

 

[roadkill1292]

Yeah, it can be difficult to find the line between cynicism and genuine belief. Not with Trump; he's the most cynical politician human being that ever lived. But I'm sure there are many conservatives who genuinely believe in racial equality and think the GOP's approach will help minorities. And I'm also sure that, as you say, there are many who have convinced themselves of that fact in order to rationalize their own selfish behavior. In other words, it's complicated.

But whatever is at the root of their motivations, the net result is that black people, and indeed most minorities, don't trust them, and the GOP is not going to win them back without acknowledging that fact and taking steps to address their mistrust. Instead, they're doubling down. 

When your state legislature makes it more difficult for poor people to vote, it's unrealistic to expect those same people to "appreciate" conservative economic policies that may help them (I don't think they will, just sayin'). The obstacles placed in the way of easily voting by people who don't understand the day to day difficulties of being poor are seen as outright hostile by someone whose ancestors had cops and dogs turned on them when they tried to vote. This isn't rocket surgery, Republicans. Expanded voting rights is good for everybody and signing on to making it easier for our most disaffected citizens to vote will pay off for you, too. Once you've succeeded in winning their trust, you can pitch those Reagan-y policies at them with a more reasonable chance of success.

 

[BladeRunner]

Black people are not better off than they were 60 years ago?

That is hilarious.

I know some of your best friends are black maybe go talk to them.

Let me know when you want to have a serious discussion.

Until then, leave your insults at the door, please.

 

[zftcg]

Let me know when you want to have a serious discussion.

Until then, leave your insults at the door, please.

Cant speak for Daywalker, but I’m interested in having a serious, insult-free discussion about why you think African Americans should vote for the GOP. Feel free to scroll up and respond to any of my posts upthread on the topic. 

 

[BladeRunner]

Cant speak for Daywalker, but I’m interested in having a serious, insult-free discussion about why you think African Americans should vote for the GOP. Feel free to scroll up and respond to any of my posts upthread on the topic. 

Yeah, I will.  I'm busy working right now but I'll respond back tonight or tomorrow!

Thanks, Dude! 

 

[Navin Johnson]

Blacks are smarter than you give them credit for?

By supporting the guy who authored The Crime Bill?

 

[zftcg]

Yeah, I will.  I'm busy working right now but I'll respond back tonight or tomorrow!

Thanks, Dude! 

Cool. I'm genuinely looking forward to it. 

 

[boots11234]

What was the average age of Latinos who voted v blacks who voted? What about sex breakdown?

Also - there isn't one answer. Urbanhack maybe could have been more polite, but he's basically right. Grouping Blacks or Latinos as one monolithic block is silly. There are a lot of variables that go into it.

Not according to Tim. It’s alway Black and white. Literally. 

 

[boots11234]

When your state legislature makes it more difficult for poor people to vote, it's unrealistic to expect those same people to "appreciate" conservative economic policies that may help them (I don't think they will, just sayin'). The obstacles placed in the way of easily voting by people who don't understand the day to day difficulties of being poor are seen as outright hostile by someone whose ancestors had cops and dogs turned on them when they tried to vote. This isn't rocket surgery, Republicans. Expanded voting rights is good for everybody and signing on to making it easier for our most disaffected citizens to vote will pay off for you, too. Once you've succeeded in winning their trust, you can pitch those Reagan-y policies at them with a more reasonable chance of success.

What is difficult about voting for poor people?

 

[hammerva]

Well one way to make sure you are not getting black support is to try to convince people that Joe Biden is a racist.   Using a video from the 70's talking about Strom Thurmond as their proof. Yes I am sure the guy who was Obama's vice president just hates black people 

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

I think there are many reasons but there's one reason that may be so simple it's often overlooked. Bernie ran a lot of Spanish language ads in NV and a lot of Latinos liked that. After SC, Clybern said Sanders never asked him for his endorsement. A big part of all this possibly comes down to feeling like the candidate is simply asking for your vote.

 

[Peyton Marino]

Yes.  Socialism should be unappealing to everyone.  

I wll surely regret this, and maybe it should be its own thread, but:

What does Socialism mean to you?  What elements of Bernie's platform constitute Socialism in your view?  And do you see any elements of 'Socialism' present in America already today? 

 

[rockaction]

I wll surely regret this, and maybe it should be its own thread, but:

What does Socialism mean to you?  What elements of Bernie's platform constitute Socialism in your view?  And do you see any elements of 'Socialism' present in America already today? 

Hey Peyton, good to see you, man. I hate to be a killjoy, but this forum is replete with threads asking the socialism question and debating Bernie's place therein. It's the usual suspects arguing similar things, actually. RedmondLonghorn and I debate it in the "You Can't Be Kidding Me With Sanders..." thread on Page 2, about 1/4 of the way down the second page. 

 

[Peyton Marino]

Hey Peyton, good to see you, man. I hate to be a killjoy, but this forum is replete with threads asking the socialism question and debating Bernie's place therein. It's the usual suspects arguing similar things, actually. RedmondLonghorn and I debate it in the "You Can't Be Kidding Me With Sanders..." thread on Page 2, about 1/4 of the way down the second page. 

You're right - if there is any poster here who doesn't deserve to have his thread derailed, it's Tim.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

This feels like a data free discussion. Or a false positive. Sanders did well in NV, CA, CO & Utah, across the board, right? I don’t know if it’s the progressive strain in CA, or the libertarian pro-pot element in the Rockies, but both might account for this supposed data point.

 

[rockaction]

You're right - if there is any poster here who doesn't deserve to have his thread derailed, it's Tim.

Ah, I was worried you might take that the wrong way. All I'm saying is that the questions you're asking might not draw the greatest responses as it's been done. I'm not playing forum cop -- in fact, I hoped you would take a look at the discussion I had with Red as sort of the typical lines upon which it proceeds. 

 

[Peyton Marino]

Ah, I was worried you might take that the wrong way. All I'm saying is that the questions you're asking might not draw the greatest responses as it's been done. I'm not playing forum cop -- in fact, I hoped you would take a look at the discussion I had with Red as sort of the typical lines upon which it proceeds. 

it's fine - I really just couldn't pass up that opportunity to sideswipe timmy

 

[rockaction]

it's fine - I really just couldn't pass up that opportunity to sideswipe timmy

Sounds right. He's over in the FFA New Wave thread he created getting into T-Bones all day, so what's a little sideswipe now and again?   

 

[Snotbubbles]

I wll surely regret this, and maybe it should be its own thread, but:

What does Socialism mean to you?  What elements of Bernie's platform constitute Socialism in your view?  And do you see any elements of 'Socialism' present in America already today? 

Socialism is where the government or employees own or regulate the means of production without allowing the free market to be a factor in the outcome. 

So for example, having Medicare for All without a private option would be a Socialist policy.  

Social Security IMO is a Socialist policy because it forces workers to pay into a system without allowing them a private option to place those earnings instead.