I found this (front-page OKP editorial) to be absolutely fascinating and perhaps a (rather bizarre) window into why Clinton enjoys ~85% of the Black vote polled thus far in this Primary.

but LOL @ "Electing Clinton is the most gangsta thing we can do"

f'real?

by: Wes Jackson

For some reason hip-hop has fallen in love with Bernie Sanders. Well, it is not for any arbitrary reason. It’s pretty much because of Killer Mike. The bombastic Atlanta MC, one time protégé of OutKast and now one half of media darling, Run The Jewels, has become the de facto political voice of hip-hop this electoral season. Devoid of the flash of Puffy’s long gone “Vote Or Die” campaign, Mike’s platform has adapted an activist tone more reminiscent of Miss Nina Simone.

Personally, I think this is all great for hip-hop and its culture. Inundated by a seemingly endless array of apolitical rappers over the years, Killer Mike’s unapologetic advocacy for the bespectacled senator from Vermont is refreshing. And as for Bernie, he has rung the alarm and averted another potential “Centrist Clinton” presidency from potentially happening. If given the opportunity, a Hillary-as-President term or two in the White House could give Americans another crime bill. Now, Hillary Clinton has been talking to whoever will listen about #BlackLivesMatters and even her husband, Bill Clinton, has apologized for approving legislation during his administration the reformed the prison complex and furthered criminalized black behavior.

With that being said, this piece is not to dig at Bernie Sanders nor be a pro-Hillary piece. On some levels I believe that this is truly an anti-Trump op-ed because we as voting Americans in a democratic society need to focus more on the burgeoning National Fascist Party that the faux-coiffured billionaire is attempting to build. But that’s another issue for another day. We, the hip-hop and black community, are questioning whether Bernie Sanders has been properly vetted. Is it time to stop giving the former Vermont senator a pass?

In full disclosure, I have to let you know that I will be voting for Hillary Clinton. While she’s not perfect, she is the most qualified candidate for the job and the most gangsta thing we can do to shake up this country is to go from a black man to a woman. Those are the only two groups that have been willfully and legally barred from evolving the American political process. Donald J. Trump’s rise to pop culture prominence has the air of the White Power Movement and to have him as leader-in-chief legitimately scares people of all backgrounds and genders. So, as I see America freaking out as 2050 approaches and the white, Anglo-Saxon, land-owning, heterosexual, Protestant male comes to an end — I want to put a finger in its eye and place Hillary in the Oval Office.

I know that our political “savior” won’t be in the form of a land-owning, heterosexual white male from Vermont.

To be honest, I am scared of Bernie Sanders. His talks about revolution will somehow leave us black people behind when the waters begin to rise. I fear that his plans for economic recovery will somehow skip over black, brown, queer and transgendered people, as well as women who often get hit with the double whammy of racism and sexism. My fear is that this career politician is attempting to pass himself off as an outsider despite the fact that he has been deeply involved with the political system for most of my natural born life. I am concerned that black and brown people in Vermont do not sing the hymns of Bernie Sanders — soldier for racial equality. Bernie has too much in common with the toupeed Mussolini on the right, as he too offers big ideas with no feasible plan of action.

As Bernie tries to beat Hillary with claims that she’s a duplicitous copy cat, Bernie has some explaining to do also. He voted for the bill himself and even predicted that it would harm the black community. Despite learning those factors, Bernie Sanders buckled under pressure to protect the women of Vermont who were victims of domestic abuse. A noble cause indeed, but does this tell me (or others) that Bernie Sanders is down for black-and-brown people? The answer would be a strong and resolute, “No,” as he seems more committed to protecting white women from harm over people of color.

Another concern I have about Bernie Sanders is pegged to his talk of revolution. For all the big stick swinging he does at rallies and town halls, Sanders becomes uncharacteristically pragmatic when the subject turns to reparations for slavery. Initiatives such as free college tuition, single-payer healthcare and a billionaire’s tax have absolutely no chance of passing in Congress with Republicans as the majority. Yet, Bernie still pushes the campaign forward. Why, when he was asked about reparations not being on his platform, Bernie answered “because they have no chance of passing.” Does this sound like a person who is concerned with the health and benefits of all Americans?

I am sincerely happy that Bernie moved the conversation involving police brutality forward and made Hillary say #BlackLivesMatter. Now, she is driving throughout South Carolina, talking like she’s Shirley Chisholm, but pulling her to the left does not make you John Lewis or even Barack Obama 2.0, Mr. Sanders. At the end of the day, your campaign was built as a protest operation. It was a move by the progressive wing of the Democratic Party to ensure that Hillary Clinton was not a GOP-in-Blue-Clothing—a well-deserved criticism of her husband’s administration and the Democratic Leadership Council. With that goal accomplished, I now fear that Bernie Sanders is drinking his own Kool-Aid much like Donald Trump.

Maybe the powers-that-be are right and our next president will be a thrice married, xenophobic, lying billionaire who is a born-again Christian that may have never read the Bible. Or, maybe Americans will be calling a Democratic Socialist from New England with a questionable economic plan and economists—Commander-in-Chief and President of the United States. If a former senator and Secretary of State who has been planning for this day for forty years can truly become the first female POTUS — then it will be a moment for the history books. My only point is that we need to question them all thoroughly and not let the ringing endorsements of others obscure the facts.
-->

I fear Bernie Sander will leave us behind... Wtf?

The Clintons left us in jails...

gatdammit that was a horrible article.

I would prefer for him to lie and say he wants Hillary to win because Bernie can't win but gatdammit... this fool said he trust Hillary.

Bill and Chelsea don't even trust Hillary.

Clintons put a spell on Black people... it's disgusting.

both candidates have flaws but i don't agree with letting the fear of the unknown lead to an automatic vote for hillary

>I fear Bernie Sander will leave us behind... Wtf?
>
>The Clintons left us in jails...
>
>gatdammit that was a horrible article.
>
>I would prefer for him to lie and say he wants Hillary to win
>because Bernie can't win but gatdammit... this fool said he
>trust Hillary.
>
>Bill and Chelsea don't even trust Hillary.
>
>Clintons put a spell on Black people... it's disgusting.
>
>

i agree with everything you just typed
pple's memory is just waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too short.

i also hate the argument that Sanders' policies won't pass Congress and that's why he should not be taken seriously.

i hate it because those are ideas that SHOULD pass Congress as they benefit everyone except for the people who need it least (aka the "1%"). as a Dem, you'd prefer the person who will hack and slash away at good ideas until they become a shell of themselves solely so that the Republican Congress will ok them?

the reason why everyone should be voting for Bernie is because the #1 issue in America is corporate dollars running politics. no matter who is the candidate, until this is not the case, we're ALL fucked. however, the fact is that Hillary is on the take from people who don't have my interests at heart nor the interests of the American people, and that should scare the fuck out of everyone. It should definitely scare you more than Bernie's so-called revolutionary ideals.

Horrible article....

There are real, rationale reasons to vote for Clinton over Bernie....He didn't even try to seriously lay them out...

Wtf is that dude smoking?

I read better articles in my,middle school newspaper.

>Wtf is that dude smoking?
>
>I read better articles in my,middle school newspaper.


It's ridiculous......I just want to know what's the source of this post?

>>Wtf is that dude smoking?
>>
>>I read better articles in my,middle school newspaper.
>
>
>It's ridiculous......I just want to know what's the source of
>this post?

http://www.okayplayer.com/news/is-bernie-sanders-really-hip-hops-choice-for-president.html

-->

I always like when people can analyze arguments independent of their bias. For this writer....it's simply about Bernie being a white man. I really haven't seen that type of argument made here by the pro-Clinton side and for that we should all be grateful.

>I always like when people can analyze arguments independent
>of their bias. For this writer....it's simply about Bernie
>being a white man. I really haven't seen that type of
>argument made here by the pro-Clinton side and for that we
>should all be grateful.


Thanks...

Basically, it's a dumb, uninformed argument...It's the type of written piece that should not be taken seriously....

Unfortunately, there are a lot of Bernie supporters (white AND black) that view such a silly Op-Ed as proof that black people are rolling with Clinton because we r simple ass folks...

That's the beef I have....

I would think we all agree that there's simpletons on both sides. We are probably spending a little bit too much time trying to characterize our opponent's supporters. The whole term 'Bernie Bros' is part of that too.

youaintknow?

.

"Another concern I have about Bernie Sanders is pegged to his talk of revolution. For all the big stick swinging he does at rallies and town halls, Sanders becomes uncharacteristically pragmatic when the subject turns to reparations for slavery. Initiatives such as free college tuition, single-payer healthcare and a billionaire’s tax have absolutely no chance of passing in Congress with Republicans as the majority. Yet, Bernie still pushes the campaign forward. Why, when he was asked about reparations not being on his platform, Bernie answered “because they have no chance of passing.” Does this sound like a person who is concerned with the health and benefits of all Americans?"

I know which one sounds more appealing to me at this point in time. Reparations, at one time, seemed like it could have been imaginable. I'm not sure how practical it is now since we don't even know what we'd want or even who'd be eligible. I digress though because that's a whole other nuanced argument.

>I found this (front-page OKP editorial) to be absolutely
>fascinating and perhaps a (rather bizarre) window into why
>Clinton enjoys ~85% of the Black vote polled thus far in this
>Primary.

Oh yeah...We can clown dude's silly ass Op-Ed without turning this into another BLACK PEOPLE DUMB FOR VOTING FOR CLINTON jab...

This piece has nothing to do with why black folks have been riding for Clinton over Bernie...In fact it gives no such window or any other bullshit Bernie heads are trying to convince themselves of...U want to know the reason why? Read this piece...



GOLDIE TAYLOR
FOOT IN MOUTH03.07.16 9:40 PM ET

The Unbearable Whiteness of Being Bernie
Judging from the Flint debate, Sanders seems to view poverty as an exclusively black problem. It’s not.

If you happen to see an older white gentleman walking down the road, cursing the asphalt, with a shovel lobbed over his shoulder, it’s probably Bernie Sanders. After picking up endorsements from local politicians in Michigan, the Vermont senator should have been basking in the spate of wins he racked up on Super Saturday. Instead, the Democratic presidential candidate managed to dig himself even further into a trench during a Sunday evening debate in Flint.

“When you are white, you don’t know what its like to be living in a ghetto,” Senator Sanders asserted. “You don’t know what it’s like to be poor.”

It was a tough moment for Sanders, who did not appear to recognize the implication of his words or that they might result in repercussions from black and white voters alike. Had he known, Sanders might have explained that black and white poverty do operate differently. Black poverty tends to be “more isolating and concentrated,” wrote Emily Badger for the Washington Post.

It was a tough moment for Sanders, who did not appear to recognize the implication of his words or that they might result in repercussions from black and white voters alike. Had he known, Sanders might have explained that black and white poverty do operate differently. Black poverty tends to be “more isolating and concentrated,” wrote Emily Badger for the Washington Post.

“It extends out the door of a family’s home and occupies the entire neighborhood around it, touching the streets, the schools, the grocery stores.”

For the rest: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/03/07/the-unbearable-whiteness-of-being-bernie.html

but there is some truth to it.

Inner city poor is different than rural white poor (not that they give a shit) and most whites who poor aren't dealing with cops, stop and frisk, etc...

They are owned by IAC/InterActiveCorp, and Chelsea Clinton sits on the Board of Directors.

Some of the headlines of their recent articles:

Pragmatic Hillary Tops Thundering Bernie
An Ode to My Berniebro Trolls
Hillary Clinton’s Star-Studded NYC Bash
The Much-Hyped Bernie Economy Is a Bust
It's Time for Bernie Sanders to Get in Line
This Is the Date Bernie Sanders Berns Out
Bernie Sanders is Low-Energy in Las Vegas
Vermont’s Black Leaders: We Were ‘Invisible’ to Bernie Sanders
Did Hillary Clinton Just Put Bernie Sanders 2016 on Life Support?
Bernie Sanders Collapses Under Fire on Guns
#BlackTwitter Turns On Bernie Sanders
Bernie Sanders Parrots the NRA
Bernie Sanders’ Biggest Donors Are Decidedly Middle Class
Can Bernie Sanders Be Less White?
Bernie Sanders Is The Left's Trump
Bernie Sanders Loves This $1 Trillion War Machine
How Citizens United Gave Us Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump

Etc., etc. They are like the National Enquirer for the Clinton campaign.

Both campaigns have some obnoxious and racist supporters, and although Sanders has some African-American support (particularly among voters under 35), he's obviously getting beaten in that demographic. But the Daily Beast isn't a reliable source for information on Sanders, one way or the other.

Yeah...that's cute (Them Bernie Bros. usually try to go this route on Goldie on Twitter. She tosses them like wet bread...lol)...But if u know ol' girl, u understand that she's no Clinton cheerleader....But by all means...Keep it up...

----

GOLDIE TAYLOR
GHOSTS
Black, 13, and Jailed for Life in Clinton’s America

As Hillary Clinton regaled an audience with a soul-stirring speech on race and opportunity in America today, inmate #0000950785 sat alone in Georgia prison cellblock.
Known as “Little B” on the street, Michael Lewis was 13 years old and less than 5 feet tall the day he was checked into an adult correctional facility. That was nearly 20 years ago and, although he is up for parole review again in 2016, it remains doubtful that the now-32-year-old will ever see the light of day.

Serving a life sentence for first-degree murder, Lewis likely cannot recite the names of the people who put him behind bars. He surely remembers Fulton County District Attorney Paul Howard, who had been just elected the first black district attorney in Georgia and who made the decision to try the diminutive teenager as an adult. However, it is improbable that he can recall the names of the federal lawmakers who voted in favor of the 1994 crime bill and successive pieces of supporting legislation or the state elected officials, including Gov. Zell Miller, who decided a 13-year-old could be tried as an adult.

In 1997, convicted in the shotgun killing of an Atlanta man, Lewis was among thousands of black children who were labeled “super-predators.”

Lewis has probably never heard of Sen. Bernie Sanders and is likely unaware that he and then-First Lady Hillary Clinton both supported the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. But it wasn’t the 1994 crime bill that put Lewis in an adult prison for a shooting many say he did not commit. (Lewis has maintained his innocence and many of the initial witnesses have recanted.) It was the mood sweeping the country that inspired the comprehensive legislative package and others like it that passed at the state level.

The rest: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/16/black-13-and-jailed-for-life-in-clinton-s-america.html

https://youtu.be/tDT-p1RRll0

Let murph cook.

-->

https://s3-media4.fl.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/2MvhvgS4PEJYminmTm64ZQ/ls.jpg

>Let murph cook.


Nah....Let Goldie cook....She good folk...And doesn't deserve that lazy SHE IN THE TANK FOR CLINTON bullshit....Anyone that has read that woman's work knows she's not on the take like that....She's one of the last true writers/journalist who doesn't hold her tongue for nobody...

Also, I'm still giving u the side-eye, dog....How does that tripe u posted give u a window into why black folks r voting for Clinton over Bernie....What r u trying to say? U Bernie Bro-ing that hard?

the majority of black voters are voting for Hillary because of her last name. They trust her.

They don't know Bernie, they don't trust Bernie.

plenty of Black people want to see Obama's policies carried out and trust her to do so... HOWEVER, when you really look at Black folk under Obama we aren't doing all that great.

but the Mao, focus is on trust and why do we trust Hillary to do right by us?

U not giving blacks enough credit...

And that's the reason why Bernie and his more rabid, confused supporters (not u...) keep stumbling when the subject of race comes up...

Black people are supporting Clinton for two reasons:

One: She was in Obama's cabinet (hence, she is viewed as supporting a President who is hugely popular with black people...It ain't rocket science.....)

And two: She's viewed as hella pragmatic....And black folks are historically pragmatic folks...We vote for who we think will win a race and what they can actually do. The only time I've ever seen black people vote with their heart was with Obama. Other than that, we have been pretty sober minded about these things....Bernie's message is big and bold...But black people r all about CAN U ACTUALLY PULL OFF A REVOLUTION? CAN U ACTUALLY GET THINGS DONE?...Fair or not, that's the reality of things...

When dem Bernie Bros try to make it out to be that black people are STUPID OR CLUELESS for voting for Clinton, that's doing more harm than good...

c'mon morph, you know damn well Black people are voting Clinton because of her last name.

We didn't fuck with Obama until we saw Michelle. Oprah damn near walked Obama into our living rooms.

If Michelle Obama played the background like Ben Carson's wife we would have never voted him in.

We love the Clintons bruh.

>c'mon morph, you know damn well Black people are voting
>Clinton because of her last name.



No....if that were the case we would have voted for Clinton over Obama...

>We didn't fuck with Obama until we saw Michelle. Oprah damn
>near walked Obama into our living rooms.


Again...Clinton name didn't mean shit....


>If Michelle Obama played the background like Ben Carson's wife
>we would have never voted him in.
>
>We love the Clintons bruh.

We are pragmatic....It's just that simple....Obama was the only time we voted with our hearts....But historically with Presidential elections, we don't get too wrapped up in that pie-in-the-sky talk....Sure, Clinton is a known commodity....But it's more about HOW R U GOING TO GET SHIT DONE?

Niggas i know are being realistic in their thinking..everyone knows bernie "SOUNDS" good but hes way too left..this country aint ready for that..you wouldnt have trumps racist ass leading if it was..the obama thing has a lot to do with it...ive never been excited about a white president before now including bill clinton..


>c'mon morph, you know damn well Black people are voting
>Clinton because of her last name.
>
>We didn't fuck with Obama until we saw Michelle. Oprah damn
>near walked Obama into our living rooms.
>
>If Michelle Obama played the background like Ben Carson's wife
>we would have never voted him in.
>
>We love the Clintons bruh.
>
>

>Niggas i know are being realistic in their thinking..everyone
>knows bernie "SOUNDS" good but hes way too left..this country
>aint ready for that..you wouldnt have trumps racist ass
>leading if it was..the obama thing has a lot to do with
>it...ive never been excited about a white president before now
>including bill clinton..

Again this^^^^

Black people are just like everybody else. CAN U GET SHIT DONE..?

Like I said, Obama was the outlier...He was the curve pitch...The irony is Clinton gets an extra boost from being in Obama's cabinet...

But yeah, I'm not with Bernie supporters implying that black folks are being simplistic twits for supporting Clinton....Whether they are black or white....

to debates, articles, etc..

but c'mon...

I'm not going to give our community the benefit of the doubt while blasting the "average American Voter" as uninformed.

We have no problem calling it like we see it when it's everyone else but then we act like Black voters are sitting around watching CNN, MSNBC and reading opinion pieces.

That isn't the case

voter that yall niggas insisted trump would be president up until about 5 days ago..fk outta here...people are voting for hilary bcz shes the most logical candidate..duh

and nah, it's not about being arty smarty...

if I'm going to paint the average voter with a broad brush it will also include Black voters.

We aren't any better or worse than the rest of them and I damn sure think a large segment of the American voting public isn't invested in voting beyond going to the polls and picking "their guy/girl"

more credit as voters than crackas out here voting for trump bcx hes rich and they mad...who made something up?? Until the backlash from them kkk comments you niggas here except murph..me and wluv...INSISTED that trump would win and the country was goin to shit...NOW yall seein as i told yall two weeks ago...AINT ENUFF hatin CRACKA ASS CRACKAS to get trump in there..HELL THEY COULDNT EVEN KEEP BARACK OUT

>more credit as voters than crackas out here voting for trump
>bcx hes rich and they mad...who made something up?? Until the
>backlash from them kkk comments you niggas here except
>murph..me and wluv...INSISTED that trump would win and the
>country was goin to shit...NOW yall seein as i told yall two
>weeks ago...AINT ENUFF hatin CRACKA ASS CRACKAS to get trump
>in there..HELL THEY COULDNT EVEN KEEP BARACK OUT

LMAO.. yeah, you are making shit up.

First off.. I'm talking about all voters, you are too focused on Trump to have a normal conversation.

When did I insist in Trump winning? From the beginning I have said Trump was working for Clinton and still dpubt he will get the nomination.

but nah, you got me mixed up with Denny or someone else playa

...and some of Goldie's criticisms of Sanders have merit. But her piece on the debate was completely one-sided. Clinton's answer to the racial "blind spot" question was vague and evasive, but based on this you'd think it was completely unobjectionable.

I also think raising questions about the Daily Beast's funding, and the dozens of anti-Sanders articles they've run, leavened with a few "both Clinton and Sanders are flawed on race" articles, is fair game. Anyone who insults the intelligence of African-American voters is an asshole. But the Daily Beast is at least as guilty of insulting the intelligence of African-American Sanders voters (and, yes, they exist, even if the proportion is smaller). And following the money has nothing to do with questioning anyone's votes.

>...and some of Goldie's criticisms of Sanders have merit. But
>her piece on the debate was completely one-sided. Clinton's
>answer to the racial "blind spot" question was vague and
>evasive, but based on this you'd think it was completely
>unobjectionable.


Goldie is a big picture writer....Her point was more about such a misstep is par for the course for team Bernie....Add that recent Tweet of his team making a point about the Selma march while posting a image of THE SELMA MOVIE...lol

Bernie's team has not done him any favors....


>I also think raising questions about the Daily Beast's
>funding, coupled with the dozens of anti-Bernie articles
>they've run, sprinkled with a few "both Clinton and Sanders
>are flawed on race" articles, is fair game. Anyone who insults
>the intelligence of African-American voters is an asshole. But
>the Daily Beast insults their readers' intelligence
>frequently, and following the money does explain a lot in this
>case.

I think it's lazy when talking about specific writers. I see it all day on Twitter....Bernie Bros. trying to imply that Goldie Taylor is in the tank for the Clintons.....That, and same black people are clueless in their support for Hillary Clinton, shit....

The media goes with momentum...If they smell that a candidate is on the losing end then it is what it is....Bernie is a good dude. But at this point he's swimming in a storm....

also if congress is blocking entirely sane policies of obama the totally "insane" leftist policies of sanders will get nowhere ..in 2050 maybe

>also if congress is blocking entirely sane policies of obama
>the totally "insane" leftist policies of sanders will get
>nowhere ..in 2050 maybe


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>RE: Bcz In 2016 super leftist bernie is unrealistic....trump wouldnt exist if he wasnt
>also if congress is blocking entirely sane policies of obama
>the totally "insane" leftist policies of sanders will get
>nowhere ..in 2050 maybe


So, let's just say that we went out and voted to put Dems in the majority of those seats. Dems who would support the "insane leftist policies" on Bernie's agenda. Do you still think it would take until 2050 for the "revolution" to occur?

>>RE: Bcz In 2016 super leftist bernie is
>unrealistic....trump wouldnt exist if he wasnt


>>also if congress is blocking entirely sane policies of obama
>>the totally "insane" leftist policies of sanders will get
>>nowhere ..in 2050 maybe
>
>
>So, let's just say that we went out and voted to put Dems in
>the majority of those seats. Dems who would support the
>"insane leftist policies" on Bernie's agenda. Do you still
>think it would take until 2050 for the "revolution" to occur?
>
>
>
>

I think there's an opportunity for drastic change either right or left. From what I can tell....you think Trump's popularity indicates the country's increasing resistance to socialist policy. The time seems ripe to for big changes....whether it goes left or right seems to be the question.

there aint enough cracka ass crackas to push shit all the way right just like theres not enough progressives to push all the way left...maybe in 30 years when the country is 70% brown.. .latinos are the x factor

>I think there's an opportunity for drastic change either
>right or left. From what I can tell....you think Trump's
>popularity indicates the country's increasing resistance to
>socialist policy. The time seems ripe to for big
>changes....whether it goes left or right seems to be the
>question.

there's no doubt in my mind this will be a far more progressive country with their community digging into the political system, longtime community organizing, generational growth of immigrant-heavy communities, and memory about the current climate.

And it works as intended. Politics and politicians are not about aiding any group outside of the majority.

Bernie Sanders is my favorite presidential candidate this round, but I'm not foolish enough to believe he's here to save us all, on some Chino XL shit. That type of thinking is partially what led people to be disappointed by Barack Obama's presidency.

#KeepItGangsta

-->

Is Bernie got a real estate sidejob or something? I honestly don't know what the author is referring to by 'land-owner'.

I typed his name into google:http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/food/WesJackson_sized.jpg

I'm assuming that's not him

So many contradictions in this article, it's mostly struggle barz

since I read it, I feel compelled to reply

base, as I've said through this entire process

I'm not sure what HRC's platform is other than fear

fear the other guys

LOL@Hilbots claiming Bernie is attacking her

and this article equates him to a slave owner

"the white, Anglo-Saxon, land-owning, heterosexual, Protestant male comes to an end — I want to put a finger in its eye and place Hillary in the Oval Office.

I know that our political “savior” won’t be in the form of a land-owning, heterosexual white male from Vermont."

hunh?

"To be honest, I am scared of Bernie Sanders. His talks about revolution will somehow leave us black people behind when the waters begin to rise. I fear that his plans for economic recovery will somehow skip over black, brown, queer and transgendered people, as well as women who often get hit with the double whammy of racism and sexism."

as I've said before, HRC is one of the most powerful politicians of my lifetime, but she's getting the pass here.

"My fear is that this career politician is attempting to pass himself off as an outsider despite the fact that he has been deeply involved with the political system for most of my natural born life. I am concerned that black and brown people in Vermont do not sing the hymns of Bernie Sanders — soldier for racial equality. Bernie has too much in common with the toupeed Mussolini on the right, as he too offers big ideas with no feasible plan of action."

OkayPlayer.

at least he started that mess of with 'fear', see above

I believe Bern has the highest approval rating of any US Sen

I'll just assume the homie didn't even do any research into Bern, his history, or campaign

who is this fool again?

>LOL@Hilbots claiming Bernie is attacking her
>
>and this article equates him to a slave owner

there is something to be said about the "colorblindness" of white liberals. a lot has been said of it, going back decades. hop on social media, and you'll be slapped in the face with 90 thinkpieces on the topic a minute.

if they said, "I'm scared Bernie won't win the general election" or "I'm scared his big promises won't pan out because Congress eats shit", and left it there... I'd respect this

but the other shit they say about Bernie, and the "Bernie Bros" and all that other shit... is extra, dogg.

the thing I want to ask these people being extra: were you motherfuckers hand-in-hand with them got-damn PUMAs, who got butthurt over Obama whoopin' that ass on the campaign trail? no? stfu then.

if Hillary is so great a candidate, she WOULDN'T have to deal with all of this. It's not sexism, it's politics. this is a ploy they've tried again and again to tar Bernie/his supporters with, and it's just not true.

they did the same to Obama, who played it EXTRA safe, btw.

people act like the 90s were ancient history, and Google/The Internet doesn't exist. or that the '80s were absolute SHIT politically. we're talking about a time where the Democratic Party rolled with an also-ran ass also-ran in Dukakis and all it took to remove him is put up a picture of a big scary Negro (Willie Horton) to sink him. the Clintons were extreme benefactors of that era running its course.

not that Democratic voters DON'T have the uninformed within their ranks, but there are a lot more in their ranks that see Sammy Boy (Walton)'s hands in the Clinton's back pockets, being reminded of the "welfare to work" bill, and NAFTA (especially with the mass media, the Democratic Party, and everyone else trying to keep the TPP out of people's mouths), the erosion of Wall Street protections and being like "nah... either switch up or suck my dick".

"not that Democratic voters DON'T have the uninformed within their ranks, but there are a lot more in their ranks that see Sammy Boy (Walton)'s hands in the Clinton's back pockets, being reminded of the "welfare to work" bill, and NAFTA (especially with the mass media, the Democratic Party, and everyone else trying to keep the TPP out of people's mouths), the erosion of Wall Street protections and being like "nah... either switch up or suck my dick"."

ol' heads are rolling with the Clinton Brand

but I want to be optimistic and say the millenials are actually looking at the information that is readily available

and actually making an informed decision on which candidate will directly benefit them the most

I've said it time and time again

if HRC thinks she's being attacked, smeared, etc...now vs Bern

and he's sticking to actual policy

what will be the plea cop if she wins the nomination and gets dragged vs Trump

this article is practically slander.

>I've said it time and time again
>
>if HRC thinks she's being attacked, smeared, etc...now vs
>Bern
>
>and he's sticking to actual policy
>
>what will be the plea cop if she wins the nomination and gets
>dragged vs Trump

Bernie even said Hillary is better than anyone in the GOP. which is true.

so this "attacking her" charge is bullshit. he attacks her policy, and her corporatist record.

and "Anglo-Saxon"

It's amazing - and gave me high-level comedic life this morning.

-->

also, I think their personal networths were something like $250K vs $12.5M...or something like that

This article is an argument against itself.

He founded Seven Heads, Brooklyn Bodega, and the Brooklyn Hip Hop Festival.


_______________________________
gamblers and masturbators.

http://mixcloud.com/urkelmoedee

PSN: UrkelMoeDee

One of the first homes to Unspoken Heard and J-Live.

I liked dude's label. I'm sure he's a smart person in general. This article is dumb though.

...all this continues to illustrate is that American electoral politics are 100% bullshit.

The Democrats' years of playing "the good cop" is catching up to them. They can't keep going on with this "closeted corporatism", and shit like "Hair by Dolezal" Wasserman Schultz getting "Loan Shark" money, and Howard "Sellout" Dean going from single-payer champion to "Death Panel Middle Man" shill. This is further compounded with the obvious preference of the Democratic Party (and the mass media) for Clinton, who isn't just an establishment candidate, but THE establishment candidate.

We saw this same shit in 2008 with Obama v. Clinton, but unlike Sanders, Obama was a Democratic junior senator, who campaigned on a slightly more progressive position than Clinton did. Sanders is an independent senator who caucuses with Democrats and is running as a Democrat this time around. He would be coming from an even more "outsider" place than Obama here, and the DNC definitely doesn't want to deal with that.

With no Obama around, and presumably an Obama co-sign, Hillary should be whoopin' any ass presented to her. In fact, the Democratic hopefuls looked like a bunch of also-rans to start.

But... Hillary's campaigning is bullshit.
When she's challenged, her responses are even more shit.
Her social media game is shit.
Her demeanor is soaked in entitlement.

The distance between her and Obama (who... when you look at actual policy and record as President, isn't that much different from her politically) as a politician is like the distance from the West end and East end of I-80.

If you ask why Bernie Sanders, a guy who "scares" so many is so popular despite so many "electability" strikes, it's because of the above.

Hillary is a known entity. We know her brand of pragmatism. Compromise on the shit Democrats honestly shouldn't (corporate welfare, consumer protection, privacy, war... again, much like Obama). But we're about to go into a post-Obama era, an era that brought a lot of obstruction, reactionary, racist and classist policy, and a GOP sweep of state governments that shows you what kind of bullshit "state's rights" is... but also brought us a slightly less draconian health system, marriage equality, and an environment where we finally start to question some of these country's ills....

Sort of like how Trump's candidacy is peeling back the veil on America's longest con... Obama's presidency peeled back further the idea that American voters won't go for "liberal" things. In fact, depending on your pitch, you could actually find that on a national stage, American voters could be (on policy) more progressive than they aren't?

Obama has shown us that we don't NEED to worry about some of this shit.

So why not campaign that way?

Bernie is, and that's why he isn't going away.

I think the seeds are being set for the "corporate" wing of the Democrats becoming the new GOP, and perhaps the end of the "Southern Strategy" outside the South.

I say this as someone who's voting for a Democrat regardless in the general election. The Supreme Court is too important to let another "Bush" happen. We got gifted the death of Scalia. Let's not fuck it up.

But democracy and choice is taking it in the ass this year, especially if you are a progressive.

>But democracy and choice is taking it in the ass this year,
>especially if you are a progressive.


In what way?

if you're a progressive who doesn't want to see another assfuck of a trade deal, or continued erosion of consumer protections, the social safety net...

your choices are:

1. Blatant racist, misogynist corporatist (anyone in the GOP)
2. Barely closeted corporatist with warhawk record (if the Democratic Socialist who makes people with Kim Davis hair in cow towns pee themselves with fear doesn't pull off the upset)

that's some bullshit.

and that's just the main ticket.

>if you're a progressive who doesn't want to see another
>assfuck of a trade deal, or continued erosion of consumer
>protections, the social safety net...
>
>your choices are:
>
>1. Blatant racist, misogynist corporatist (anyone in the
>GOP)
>2. Barely closeted corporatist with warhawk record (if the
>Democratic Socialist who makes people with Kim Davis hair in
>cow towns pee themselves with fear doesn't pull off the
>upset)
>
>that's some bullshit.
>
>and that's just the main ticket.


Trade deals are beyond Dem/Reug ideology...Corporations don't care about people. They care about profit...If they can find a cheaper way to make a profit they will do it in a heartbeat....Add the fact that American manufacturing jobs are going to way of the mood ring...So politicians will get in where they fit in....

The only way we can fight bullshit trade deals is to go all in on more American technological and climate change type based jobs ....

Basically this election is about voting for the party that has shown they are the adults in the room;that they are level headed enough to run the country vs. a reactionary, extreme party that is imploding after years of taking advantage (and playing to) of a scared and at times unhinged base thirsty for blood...

And to add on to my previous point....I came across this post from a Republican who hates Trump....He basically sums up my views about trade/jobs, except for the establishment Republican talking points....He says it in a much more cold-hearted way, but his bottom line on the bullshit TRADE talk is real...

----

"1) The people the Democratic Party is losing to Trump do not want government 'projects' or welfare programs paid for by 'taxes on the rich'- they don't want to be paid to dig and re-fill holes, ala JM Keynes. They want real, private-sector jobs. But unlike actual conservatives who are ideologically married to free-market economics, they don't understand the negative impact on others that Trump's policies would produce - or if they do, they don't care...

2) Even if Trump got his 35% tariff (which he won't), outsourcing is just a stand-in for automation. We are never going to have a 1950s economy, where ignorant & unskilled people are paid large amounts of money to do simple repetitive tasks. AT THE END OF THE DAY, this is the price we pay for not leveling with people back in the 80s, when it first became obvious that the US was becoming too economically developed to support a manufacturing economy...For 30+ years, both left & right have paid homage to the fiction that 'somehow, some way' (through tariffs, or deregulation, or subsidies) the factories will come back, when everyone with half a brain knows that this is not economically viable or desirable...

And here comes Trump, going from lipservice to a dictatorial 'I will bring them back' promise... And now we have a problem..."

>2) Even if Trump got his 35% tariff (which he won't),
>outsourcing is just a stand-in for automation. We are never
>going to have a 1950s economy, where ignorant & unskilled
>people are paid large amounts of money to do simple repetitive
>tasks. AT THE END OF THE DAY, this is the price we pay for not
>leveling with people back in the 80s, when it first became
>obvious that the US was becoming too economically developed to
>support a manufacturing economy...For 30+ years, both left &
>right have paid homage to the fiction that 'somehow, some way'
>(through tariffs, or deregulation, or subsidies) the factories
>will come back, when everyone with half a brain knows that
>this is not economically viable or desirable...

"...for who?" is the question I'd ask

>>2) Even if Trump got his 35% tariff (which he won't),
>>outsourcing is just a stand-in for automation. We are never
>>going to have a 1950s economy, where ignorant & unskilled
>>people are paid large amounts of money to do simple
>repetitive
>>tasks. AT THE END OF THE DAY, this is the price we pay for
>not
>>leveling with people back in the 80s, when it first became
>>obvious that the US was becoming too economically developed
>to
>>support a manufacturing economy...For 30+ years, both left &
>>right have paid homage to the fiction that 'somehow, some
>way'
>>(through tariffs, or deregulation, or subsidies) the
>factories
>>will come back, when everyone with half a brain knows that
>>this is not economically viable or desirable...
>
>"...for who?" is the question I'd ask

Actually, the question is....why?

Yall killing him in here. LOL. I can't defend this article though.

lol....

the dismissiveness has been off putting
continues to be off putting

but mainly and most detrimentally they have Bernie believing he he can still champion socialism to black folks who have repeatedly lived and voted through mostly failed idealistic blind to color mofos

but hillary?!

she's someone who clearly has learning and is learning
and bernie who was was in congress voted on those same bills, mind you, passed that major bill
matter o fact mind you
and came out the other side
clearly not learning a damn thing about race
still don't know how to talk to black folks...

but no don't be concerned
socialism will save us
now if you problematic unrealistic black folks will just get out the damn way!
right

so while i'm not emphatic about voting for Clinton seeing this shit gives me just as little hope w bernie

ya boy didn't do to badly but you clearly have a bunch of koolaid drinking folks feeling bernies burn
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

'socialist'

we went over this in another post

you know that breakfast program, free clinics, etc...practiced by the Black Panther Party for self defense

= socialism

somebody else posted some quotes from MLK and X where they were championing a transistion from capitalism to socialism

this article might have some merit if it contrasted their economic policies so we could actually have a factual discourse

homie wrote a bunch of words just to say, I'm not voting for Bernie because he's an old white guy.

I think we can assume the reaction if a similar article was written from a Bernie Bro perspective of I'm not voting for an old white woman

c'mon

...socialists. As were MLK, Angela Davis, and on and on. And all them were as committed to fighting white supremacy as anybody alive. But they insisted on connecting racial justice and economic justice, rather than connecting racial justice language with a Wall Street agenda, as Clinton is trying to do.

Also, it isn't the case that most African-Americans are rejecting Sanders because they hate socialism. Polls consistently show that African-Americans are further to the LEFT than white voters on economic issues:

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/03/bernie-sanders-black-voters-firewall-primary/

So this isn't about opposition to socialist ideas, but about perceptions of electability. It's about completely rational and pragmatic calculations about what is necessary to keep the Republicans out. In this view, even a Democrat with a deeply problematic record and policy agenda is the safest bet to keep out a far-right Republican.

BUT we need to be careful not to lump skepticism of Sanders' electability in with widespread hatred for socialism as such--that's a myth propagated by the corporate media.

Glen Ford nailed it last month:

http://www.blackagendareport.com/victor_of_fear_blacks_and_dems

Donna Murch also made some good points on the Clintons' southern patronage networks on Democracy Now recently:

http://www.democracynow.org/2016/3/2/super_tuesday_roundtable_few_surprises_as

"A lot of the mainstream coverage of the Sanders campaign has really talked about how it’s an all-white campaign and they have very few black campaign workers. I have been to some of the events, I’ve met the organizers involved, and there is significant black staff. So what this does is raise larger questions about political coalition in the history of the Democratic Party.

I think that, looking at the results, first in South Carolina and now on Super Tuesday, what we’re seeing were immense black voter turnouts for Hillary Clinton. And she is a compelling political figure for significant portions of the African-American electorate. On the other hand, there really is a very big base of support particularly among the black left and among academics, intellectuals and also working-class people in other parts of the country. So I think we have to do a little bit of an analysis about what’s happened. One of the things that I’m surprised about is that the issues of mass incarceration and the Clintons’ history, not only with the war on drugs, but also the war on gangs, which is the context in which that "superpredator" and "bring them to heel" comment was made, that much of the historical memory of that doesn’t seem to be informing the voting practices. And so, I think all of us who are very concerned about mass incarceration and these larger issues about equity and social justice are trying to interpret what’s happened in the South.

What I would say is that there are real social constraints in getting out the vote. Hillary Clinton and her husband have built a patronage network. They’ve been supported very strongly by a black leadership class, not only electoral. We know about the Congressional Black Caucus PAC, but Congressman Clyburn was supporting Hillary very strongly, as were local ministers and the local and municipal and state black legislatures. So I think that trying to make Bernie Sanders legible to a black population, many of whom don’t know who he is, a 74-year-old senator from Vermont, that is a large part of the challenge. In that sense, we have to think about it in that way. This is really an insurgent campaign inside the Democratic Party that can’t draw on long-standing patronage networks."

thanks for sharing that. Great work from Glen Ford & Donna Murch.

-->

>BUT we need to be careful not to lump skepticism of Sanders'
>electability in with widespread hatred for socialism as
>such--that's a myth propagated by the corporate media.



some common damn sense

UGH i cant with mofos

oh and its not the corporate media
its dumb fucks like who commented who LEAP WHOLEHEARTED to stupid ass conclusions
that isnt the corporate media
at all
BY FAR
its simple as stupid fucks over eager and mainly dumb

~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

If most black voters don't vote for Sanders, that doesn't mean they are rejecting "socialism" in some general sense. Polls show that more black voters support national health care, income supports for the poor, wealth redistribution, and similar policies than whites. And there is a long history of black socialism, up to and including many people in Black Lives Matter. Saying black voters are rejecting socialism because they're rejecting Sanders (which not all are doing) isn't supported by the facts. That's BECAUSE Sanders does not = socialism.

And NOBODY here is equating Sanders with Martin and Malcolm. Bentagain is just saying that 1) a lot of civil rights leaders were socialist, and 2) socialistic economic policies (depending on how you define them) have a lot of black support. Both of those are facts.

My point about the corporate media is that they are trying to make Sanders = socialism, and that if people don't vote for him, they reject single-payer, tuition-free college, etc. And that IS a myth. A lot of people support those things but don't support Sanders for other reasons.

>If most black voters don't vote for Sanders, that doesn't
>mean they are rejecting "socialism" in some general sense.
>Polls show that more black voters support national health
>care, income supports for the poor, wealth redistribution, and
>similar policies than whites. And there is a long history of
>black socialism, up to and including many people in Black
>Lives Matter. Saying black voters are rejecting socialism
>because they're rejecting Sanders (which not all are doing)
>isn't supported by the facts. That's BECAUSE Sanders does not
>= socialism.

why are you telling me this like i dont know
you just had a fool try to tell ME a. who he apparently KNOWS i'm voting for b. because i dont like socialism
keep talking to HIM and rob below because they swear by it clearly

>And NOBODY here is equating Sanders with Martin and Malcolm.
>Bentagain is just saying that 1) a lot of civil rights leaders
>were socialist, and 2) socialistic economic policies
>(depending on how you define them) have a lot of black
>support. Both of those are facts.

that 'just'...*sigh* no
no he actually WAS saying that
rob below even tried to align that shit closer

wtf are yall ON!?

the racial aspect they were HEAVILY savvy about negates it all
ALL
dont believe me? ask all the black people not voting for sanders
now matter how much yall try to align sanders with martin and malcolm
its not going to fly because bernie has been constantly and consistently COLORBLIND recently the past 40 years recent
which is ANTITHETICAL to martin and malcolm
BECAUSE
he has not done that very specific racial work

>My point about the corporate media is that they are trying to
>make Sanders = socialism

sanders did and continues to do that to himself
his harping on wall street is constant and continued
this isnt the corporate media
do you not understand that he can't get off his own damn message?

and that if people don't vote for
>him, they reject single-payer, tuition-free college, etc. And
>that IS a myth.

that i know

> A lot of people support those things but don't
>support Sanders for other reasons.

that i also know
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

because those two spoke of socialism without regards to racism right?

because Bernie is so damn good at understanding and speaking on racism and how it intersects with socialism great recent track record there at understanding current issues and how they intersect

who said i cant vote for Bernie?

again and again yall STAY FUCKING THIS UP
seriously
SERIOUSLY

PLEASE STFU
cut it the FUCK OUT

trying to preach to someone who KNOWS this shit
worse trying to preach to folks who LIVED through this shit
maaaaan fuck you
motherfucker
this is why people left this place
stupid shit ass typing like this

i gives a fuck where else you think you spoke about something
you ainr schooling me on shit
but its REALLY fucking clear you know jack
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

i think there are good indications based on historical precedent that if bernie were president he'd be forced to grow on racial justice. it's the reality of being in charge of the executive. it's a very different role than being a legislator.

i think perhaps hillary would be more insulated on that front given her history.

>i think there are good indications based on historical
>precedent that if bernie were president he'd be forced to grow
>on racial justice. it's the reality of being in charge of the
>executive. it's a very different role than being a legislator.
>
>
>i think perhaps hillary would be more insulated on that front
>given her history.


How this old ass man who has been in civil rights
Been in the congress
Ignored his black constituents in his state
Been coached for damn near a year now
Stays fucking up on racism
Folks trying to speak for him dont help
Him trying to speak for himself constant fuck ups and cringe worthy

Shit it's a learning curve but god damn man
If he still can't grasp this shit
It's as bad as the benevolent shit Bill pulled in the 90s

I'm willing to vote for him but this blind ass support if he gets in there
The same way folks are carrying his ass now, badly
You cant carry his ass through the presidency

I might vote for his ass but really want to see how much further Y'all or he can fuck this up


Got stupid up there comparing Bernie to Martin and Malcolm
I just ugh
Dumbasses
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

they both have been meh on race. no one thinks bernie is good on it.

bernie's more likely to improve on race because he's represented one constituency and had one job for the past 2 decades. hillary's has had multiple jobs in multiple facets of government. any growing she was going to do would have likely happened already.

both are better than alternatives, which is what matters most. i just don't see a logic to preferring hillary other than electability, experience, or thinking socialism is just plain bad. and that's not what people in here have been talking about.


edit: i think it's pretty indisputable that malcolm and martin at the time of their assassinations would have had more common ground with bernie than hillary. the posts above didn't phrase that shit well, and it's not the end of the discussion. but shit's still true.

>they both have been meh on race. no one thinks bernie is good
>on it.



>bernie's more likely to improve on race because he's
>represented one constituency and had one job for the past 2
>decades. hillary's has had multiple jobs in multiple facets of
>government. any growing she was going to do would have likely
>happened already.

actually thats exactly why he is unlikely to improve
he hasnt done anything on race since the 60s and that was as a foot soldier
and is in the exact same position as hillary frankly

his time for growth is also clearly past
his attempts have been lackluster to be quite polite about it

>both are better than alternatives, which is what matters most.
>i just don't see a logic to preferring hillary other than
>electability, experience, or thinking socialism is just plain
>bad. and that's not what people in here have been talking
>about.

>edit: i think it's pretty indisputable that malcolm and martin
>at the time of their assassinations would have had more common
>ground with bernie than hillary. the posts above didn't phrase
>that shit well, and it's not the end of the discussion. but
>shit's still true.

um...no its not indisputable not at all
lord no not even close

and again this trying to get around race
trying to tie it to the 60s movement
not working
he is as bad as hillary at race
no actually she at least has some language down
his history for being in the civil rights movement makes it quite inexcusable
in fact that he still does not get it
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

The article was selected to appear on OKP's front-page - so naturally people are going to respond to the merits of the article. Beyond some blatant (and lazy) factual errors - the article is absurd on its premise (even Clinton supporters aren't defending this particular stance).

Certainly there are substantive and understandable reasons why one would support Clinton. None of those reasons are found in this article.

-->

>Certainly there are substantive and understandable reasons why
>one would support Clinton. None of those reasons are found in
>this article.


That's not the issue....We all know that post was laughable....

The issue is U trying to make it out like (or at the very least implying) that Wes's nonsense write-up opened up a window into why African-American voters support Clinton....

And that's bullshit...

>The issue is U trying to make it out like (or at the very
>least implying) that Wes's nonsense write-up opened up a
>window into why African-American voters support Clinton....
>
>And that's bullshit...

Not really. I think it's useful to observe all the varying rationales for why the aggregate Black vote is overwhelming supporting Clinton over Sanders. Why? Because Sanders is polling as poorly as some Conservatives when it comes to the Black vote (thus far). When 85% of a particular demographic is polling for one candidate in a democratic primary, it's worth examining - particularly when the dynamics are as peculiar as they are in this primary.

Of course - there are a myriad of reasons why Clinton is polling so well with the Black vote, including:
-Clinton brand-name
-Bill Clinton being regarded as "the first black president"
-Clinton pandering to the deeply religious, conventional, older black Southern demographic
-Establishment perks to the Congressional Black Caucus for supporting the monied interests backed by the Clinton Machine.

etc...etc....

Sanders does not enjoy such name recognition - has not been involved in presidential politics for several decades (like the Clintons) - and I would wager that a large percentage of the 85% Black Clinton vote are from voters who either don't know or don't care to know about the Sanders record on racial equality, criminal justice, and economic equality.

But let's not act like there isn't a deep examination going on. Michelle Alexander has been a powerful voice chronicling the near monolithic black vote that has afforded presumptive legitimacy to Hillary Clinton in this primary - and we're not talking about a candidate (Hillary Clinton) who should be such a no-brainer vote in comparison to Bernie Sanders.

So - yes - we're going to talk about it, and we're going to examine it - and when I see articles like this - it helps to understand a piece of the logic behind the reflexive Clinton support.

Just the way this "piece" is getting roasted that's all. I hear yall, it's just cringe worthy because I know the man.

>Just the way this "piece" is getting roasted that's all. I
>hear yall, it's just cringe worthy because I know the man.

No doubt. I'm sure Wes is a great dude (I *still* bump Seven Heads era works)....

that said - talk to your boy, please lol

-->

>I found this (front-page OKP editorial) to be absolutely
>fascinating and perhaps a (rather bizarre) window into why
>Clinton enjoys ~85% of the Black vote polled thus far in this
>Primary.

You left me hanging. Lol. I'm curious: what did the editorial reveal to *you* about why there's a majority--Clinton leaning Black vote? I mean...in what way is this fascinating or a window?

And. Do you think Bernie can make significant headway with the Black vote?

I have nada to add. Curious about your perspective.

>You left me hanging. Lol. I'm curious: what did the editorial
>reveal to *you* about why there's a majority--Clinton leaning
>Black vote?

It's been very interesting to observe the Black vote in this democratic primary. Indeed - the black vote is not monolithic - but in the early states with high percentages of black voters - the vote has been largely monolithic in support of Clinton (~85%). However, I think there are more dynamics at play than simply racial demographics. The early states with large percentages of black voters have been states in the Deep South - where voters tend to be more conservative and traditional, en-masse. These voters tend to be deeply religious - and Clinton has pandered for that vote - while Sanders has turned off that electorate by saying that he doesn't subscribe to organized religion. Also - the black political brass (Congressional Black Caucus) are in line with Schultz and the DNC - and are clearly vying for prestigious political appointments and know that if they dissent against Clinton in this primary - there will be consequences.

But I think there are some useful observations to make from this OKP editorial - which also mirrors this article (which kinda bit the theme of the OKP piece):
http://verysmartbrothas.com/maybe-black-people-arent-feeling-bernie-sanders-because-were-tired-of-people-saying-we-should-be/

There definitely is a valid point that was made by Charles Blow to urge people to stop "Bernsplainin'" as to why Sanders is the better advocate for black communities. Nobody needs or wants to be lectured on who to vote for. Conversely, it's also not really admirable to be willfully misinformed. I see far too many instances (including the aforementioned two articles) where Clinton supporters are simply factually incorrect about Bernie Sanders - and even worse - display a IDGAF attitude about his record and legitimacy as a political figure - mischaracterize his view/record - while simultaneously (and rather oddly) giving Clinton a pass on her overt policy transgressions that have had real, verifiable consequences within the black community.

But in short: the Clinton brand is huge - they've been involved in presidential politics for decades - Bill Clinton was deemed "the first black president" (ridiculously so) - and the overwhelming percentage of black voters who actually vote are older, more conservative voters.

>And. Do you think Bernie can make significant headway with the
>Black vote?

Yes. He has made headway tonight in Michigan - and seems to be polling at about 30-35% with the black vote (significantly better than he has performed in the Deep South). Sanders does well with younger, more progressive black voters - and as this primary moves away from the Deep South - I think you will see Sanders attract more black voters for two reasons: (1) we're no longer in the Deep South; (2) as voters become more aware of who Bernie Sanders really is - that only helps him - and it only hurts Clinton.

-->

in black votes. it's losing 2 to 1 versus losing 5 to 1. but it might be interesting.

especially because, as you said, there's no monolith here. and especially if we're trying to keep people from doing stupid shit like blaming black voters for bernie losing.

i would suspect that other than age and those southern democratic networks, differences in religion are probably the biggest predictor for bernie with black voters. (and there might not be much difference between grouping by religion and networks in a lot of places).

and i don't mean deeply religious versus not religious. you don't count as "deeply religious" in the u.s. unless you're a certain kind of christian. i'd assume bernie does waaaaay better with black muslims than he does with evangelicals, for example.

But it's just one factor. There are certainly other factors (I also mentioned age & religion). Further, there's a difference between rural and urban environments and the respective electoral attitudes found in those regions.

>i would suspect that other than age and those southern
>democratic networks, differences in religion are probably the
>biggest predictor for bernie with black voters. (and there
>might not be much difference between grouping by religion and
>networks in a lot of places).

For sure - religion is huge - but that's also linked to region. The Deep South tends to be far more religious (and conservative) than Northern regions. The young black vote in the North is virtually split 50-50 on Clinton-Sanders. So age is obviously a huge factor as well.

>and i don't mean deeply religious versus not religious. you
>don't count as "deeply religious" in the u.s. unless you're a
>certain kind of christian. i'd assume bernie does waaaaay
>better with black muslims than he does with evangelicals, for
>example.

Would be interesting to see some data on that - but I'd suspect that if that is the case (that bernie is polling better with black muslims) - then it has less to do with race, and more to do with Bernie's foreign policy. Bernie (who is Jewish himself obviously) was the first to boycott Netanyahu's absurd speech to Congress, has been a vibrant supporter of the Iran Deal and in reaching out to the Muslim world, and has been vigorously opposed to interventionist (and illegal) wars of regime change in the Mid East (while Clinton has supported those wars).




-->

The gist of the argument is
- Hillary is better than Trump
- I don't know if Bernie will support us
- he doesn't like reparations
- Don't vote for Bernie just b/c Killer Mike said so

I would've preferred a more substantive op ed looking at policy differences and things they've actually said vs. a lot of fluff

some of which are even real legit reasons to be annoyed with the supporters but this shit is all types of retarded

when it comes to the issues...people are always on this "he's good intentions...BUT"

and all the BUTS are so fucking ridiculous

he's racially tone-deaf...rank all the candidates from top to bottom...despite his slips, trips, and boneheaded quotes...he's still the highest ranked...i don't understand how that can be argued

some folk think it's about how electable he is against trump...all polls so far have him winning by a wider margin than hillary against trump...ALL...i'll concede that doesn't mean a lot but it means something

if you beef about how effective he will be...i'll even concede that to a certain extent...that's literally the only thing that really holds weight imho...it's not that important to me bc i'd rather have someone ineffective with the right ideas than have someone effective with too many wrong ideas...

bc despite his racial shortcomings...he's far more aligned even if there are things he doesn't under stand or know how to phrase

who gives a fuck...the policies he's pushing still address most of those issues head on

i don't give a fuck if he doesn't understand how "ghetto" is a shitty way to phrase that shit...as troublesome as that phrase is...it's not indicative of him having policies that would be equally problematic...wtf is wrong with people being so easily offended by a few obvious outsider styled confusion when you compare it to someone who refuses to even explicitly defend/apologize for "super-predators" and would likely continue to support shitty justice system legislation

like WTF

Superpredator
NAFTA
Crime Bill
Welfare Reform
Stop and Frisk

all the shit they loathe but somehow they overlook it because she is a woman and can get things done.

She gets things done alright... and it's rarely in our best interest.

and I don't want to hear about how it was Bill's record and not hers. She takes credit for plenty of shit done during Bill's tenure.

look up

because I'm not going to directly reply to being called all types of MFers

and his record on black issues is much more than being arrested in 60s

which is dismissive IMO, to overlook his record with CORE while HRC was a Goldwater girl, but we're not allowed to talk about that

FTR, I would expect an author to actually do this type of research before associating his name with Mussollini

and alot of it is directly linked on his website

anyway, here you go:

against mass incarcertaion and it's disproportiante effect on blacks, 1991

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZJ7f-3XGB4&feature=youtu.be

also, voted against ending pell grants for prisoners, 1994

supports ending the war on drugs

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Drugs.htm

voted against welfare reform, 1996

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/dear-colleague-youth-jobs?inline=file

^^^ those are pretty easy to contrast against HRC

recently

on Ferguson, 2014, before a presidential campaign

"To the Editor:

The New York Times and other media have focused enormous attention on the tragedy in Ferguson, Mo., where an unarmed black youth was shot and killed by a police officer. Unfortunately, there has been very little discussion about the economic and social tragedy that has befallen an entire generation of young black men.

Today, more than 5.5 million young Americans have either dropped out of high school or graduated from high school and have no jobs. Today, while youth unemployment is 20 percent, African-American youth unemployment is 35 percent, and in the St. Louis area, it is even higher than that.

Incredibly, there are estimates that if present trends continue, one of every three black American men born today can expect to go to prison in his lifetime.

If there is anything that we can learn from the Ferguson tragedy, it should be a recognition that we need to address the extraordinary crises facing black youths. That means, among other things, a major jobs program, job training and vastly improved educational opportunities.

BERNARD SANDERS
U.S. Senator from Vermont
Burlington, Vt., Aug. 20, 2014"

on restoring the voters right act, 2015

“Today’s Supreme Court decision is an important step in the fight against voter suppression. When congressional districts are controlled by partisanship it is bad for voters and our democracy. Allowing non-partisan commissions to draw district lines will help combat the hyper-partisan gerrymandering we have seen in some states. We still must go further—it’s time to restore the Voting Rights Act, expand early voting periods and make it easier for people to vote, not harder.”

employ young amercians now act, which addresses black youth unemployment, 2015

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/dear-colleague-youth-jobs?inline=file

I think his stance on LGBT rights has been rather well documented, so I don't even think I need to address that issue in contrast to HRC's defense of DOMA

but yeah, his priority is the economy and income inequality, and if you need that delivered in a race specific wrapper, I don't know what to tell you

it's there, can you see it?

I do find it convenient that Bern is being forced to defend himself, yet I haven't seen HRC's (one of the most powerful politicians of my lifetime) record on these issues

ironic that those first few I listed occurred during the Clinton administration

I also said in a previous post, HRC is parading grieving mothers like Gwen Carr on the campaign trail

but to my knowledge, didn't do anything in her capacity as a Sen NY to end policies like broken windows and stop and frisk that directly contributed to atrocities committed against so many black NYers, including Eric Garner

?

they want Hillary because they want to make history again. Loyal to a fault...smh

what's scary is her numbers with working class whites is horrible right now. She crushed Bernie in the South but none of those states are in play in the general.

It's going to a bumpy ride if these trends continue and Bernie really is the better candidate for the GE.

https://berniesanders.com/issues/

Yes, Hillary got the majority of the black vote in Michigan. But if she had won among black voters in margins as high as the Deep South (5 to 1 instead of 2 to 1), she probably would have taken the state. Or, at the very least, she would have come as close as Sanders did in Iowa.

Sanders' inroads among Black voters in Wayne and Genesee counties (Detroit and Flint) paid off. I think we will see more of that in Illinois and Ohio, where the electorate is a lot less conservative.

There might have been parameters I didn't see/notice....but I'm pretty sure that Sanders got 33% of the black vote. Looks like the land-owning heterosexuals are gaining steam lol. I thought he was cooked. Probably still is...but I didn't see this coming.

Then again, this is the rust belt and working class folk lost a ton of jobs to NAFTA...

and like I said earlier, in the GE, we aren't winning any of those southern states except for FL and Bernie can compete in the GE there due to the white & jewish NY votes.

...allowing him to beat Clinton 59-39 in Dearborn, which is 40% Arab American. Meanwhile, white voters in Dearborn chose Donald Trump, which is kind of like whites in Alabama voting for George Wallace.

It would be interesting to know how many Black Muslims supported Bernie. I know Keith Ellison is representing that in the Twin Cities.

http://americablog.com/2016/03/pundits-scratch-heads-sanders-won-big-michigan-muslims.html

http://www.ibtimes.com/bernie-sanders-wins-big-michigan-muslims-political-pundits-cant-quite-believe-it-2333030

Also see these pics:

http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/embed-md/public/2016/03/09/gettyimages-510451890.jpg

http://twitter.com/KhaledBeydoun/status/707357286381924352/photo/1

I think there are 8 states in the deep south that are >>> 20% black

those are the states that she's won handly, of those that have voted so far

the rest are dogfights, and most so far have been Ls for her, some rather lopsided Ls too

how is that a GE strategy

and as you've pointed out, most are red anyway

Exactly. She isn't winning most of those states in the GE, but she needs Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, Colorado, etc.

just about every state BHO won in the 2008 primary was a red state in the GE

to you in another way

In the GE, do you think she wins the states she's losing in the primary?

if she's losing the historical D states in a primary against a party outsider

Its a little troubling seeing the GOP get 20% more voters in most states...

add in Hillary's recent struggles with working class whites and we could have serious problems in toss up states.

Starting to think Cruz wpuld be an easier path IF the GOP unites... but chances are they won't.