Presidential Election 2016

[David Greene]

Honest question: how much of the perception of Clinton's honesty/empathy is due to her being a woman? Same politics, experience, etc if she were a male, would folks view her the same way?

That is a very good question. I don't think people distrust Bill as much as her and he has a track record of lying and/or being deceptive. As far as I know they have similar politics.

[David Greene]

And as a supporter of BLM from the beginning, I've been put off by recent actions (like this one) that seemed destined/intended to alienate allies.

I see it completely differently. BLM, by its very mission, must challenge the status quo. That means ALL candidates are fair game. No one gets a pass and no one should get a pass.

If allies are alienated, that is completely on them, not BLM. BLM is very consistent in its message. We need this discussion front-and-center and that means bringing it up at every opportunity. If candidates refuse to engage, it's going to reflect badly on them.

Bernie is having trouble with people of color because white liberals have been fawning over him so much. Many Black people innately distrust anyone or anything popularized by white people, because over and over again, things popularized by white people (even if well-intentioned) have turned out pretty bad for the Black community. Bernie could do himself a *world* of good by directly challenging those white liberals to do something about racism and oppression. White liberals need to be uncomfortable.

I would not say the BLM leadership considers Clinton "their" candidate. But I think it is true that the average person of color probably defaults to that position, mostly because Bill somehow got coronated as the "First Black President," as ridiculous as that is. I haven't specifically talked to anyone about it, I'm just going by what I've read.

[Didier]

What if BLM alienating allies makes the allies feel less committed to a cause they otherwise would have been sympathetic to?

Asking for a friend.

[Didier]

But in seriousness, it's interesting that gay rights activists were able to change public opinion by taking a very personal approach, at least as far as the Minnesota marriage amendment is concerned, but BLM seems to be going about it very differently.

[Tiller]

He set himself back at Netroots Nation.

Until Bernie is able to fully embrace Black liberation, he's going to have a tough going with many Black folk. His economic populism is seen as catering to the white liberal establishment by leaders of #BlackLivesMatter. They understand the economics helps everyone but they do not see him addressing the specific concerns of the Black community. Until he does, they aren't going to carry water for him.

Not that Clinton is any better (and BLM understand that) but right now she is seen by many Black people as their candidate. Bernie has to step it up big time. His economic populism won't matter if he doesn't talk about racism and oppression.

I wouldn't say he necessarily set himself back at netroots. One of his biggest problems has been name recognition among minorities, and while the incident itself wasn't inherently good, it wasn't very damaging, and will surely expose more people of color to his candidacy.

And having seen a number of his speeches, it is simply not factual to say he doesn't address black oppression. He has always emphasized that half of young African Americans are unemployed, and 1/4 will end up in jail, while also railing against things like voter suppression. He has even said that America needs to apologize for slavery, like we have apologized for our treatment of the natives.

The perceived indifference, if anything, is because Bernie doesn't pander. Hillary's campaign will be doing plenty of that, like what she did after the netroots event, since she can only really run against Bernie on social issues. Bernie just shoots straight as he always has.

I'd also say that the black lives matter movement was created in reaction to police violence against blacks, so their focus tends to be social, not economic, issues. While the economic structures that Bernie is targeting are certainly used to oppress African Americans, deliberately or not, he's not absolutely lazer-focused on the racism itself, which should be perfectly acceptable (and I suspect it will be for many African Americans, because the BLM movement doesn't speak for all of them; African Americans aren't a monolithic group incapable of individuality.)

What African Americans need more than anything is their 40 acres and a mule. Reconstruction failed because they ultimately didn't address the economics, only some political rights. Without an economic backing, the political rights they won fell away, and Jim crow was Instituted. In the 60s, political and social rights were won, including Affirmative action. Affirmative action didn't actually address the core economic issues facing African Americans, and the war an drugs then came along, eroding what progress was made. We can't keep going in circles.

If we were to enact Bernie's economic agenda, and enact it in a color blind way, then the vast disparities in our society would close up to a great degree. There still has never been a period of time in which generous left-wing economic policies have been enforced in a color blind way. Being disproportionately empoverished means anti poverty programs will disproportionately help. It's the root of the problem that must finally be addressed.

Fixing economic inequality will inherently reduce racism as well. Racism initially was a way for sugar Plantation owners to rationalize their brutal treatment of slaves (processing sugar was extremely "labor-intensive"). Racism has been in part perpetuated by lingering economic inequality, as most people don't think correlation=/=causation by default (so many black people are poor lazy criminals! It must be because they're black!)

[clf]

The main stream media has not been covering much of you all are posting about.

Sanders connects at the Latino civil rights group's big convention.
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/w ... raza?sc=fb

20 Examples of Bernie Sanders' Powerful Record on Civil and Human Rights Since the 1950s
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/2 ... ghts-1950s

[mplsjaromir]

It is nearly impossible not to have a neighbor or someone in your family who is gay. So personal appeals for marriage equality worked.

Due to miscegenation laws and red-lining it is the default for white people not to have black neighbors or black family members. In fact one could argue that American society is deliberately organized so that white people and can easily ignore black people. The tactics of BLM are out of necessity.

In regards to Bernie Sanders, who I believe is undoubtedly the best candidate, look at the last 400 years of American history and you won't be nonplussed as to why the black community is skeptical of a white man.

[David Greene]

What if BLM alienating allies makes the allies feel less committed to a cause they otherwise would have been sympathetic to?

Asking for a friend.

[Note: Speaking for myself only]

I would say they weren't all that committed, then. Not much of a loss, frankly.

Being a white person in authentic relationship with people of color is NOT easy. You're going to get offended. But no offense will come close to what Black people have to deal with. You've got to be open to listening and examining your own privilege, biases and yes, racism. It takes a constant swallowing of your own pride, your own assumptions and your own voice. You have to shut up so others can be heard.

You're going to screw up, you're going to get yelled at and you're going to get dismissed. The question is whether you're going to pick yourself up and get back to work.

BTW, I'm no model example. Having a child resulted in my pulling back from a lot of this work. I engage where I can but I fully recognize I'm using my own privilege to prioritize our family. It's a constant gnaw on my soul, actually. It's the price of actually caring about this stuff.

[David Greene]

If we were to enact Bernie's economic agenda, and enact it in a color blind way, then the vast disparities in our society would close up to a great degree.

I agree with some of what you've said but this statement here is just wrong, wrong, wrong. Color-blindness is what perpetuates the status quo. We in fact need to see and respond to color. We need programs that actually lift up people of color *more* than they do white people. We do this in all kinds of ways for other demographic slices (homeowners, for example) but somehow, even the smallest such program cut on race, Affirmative Action, is under constant attack.

It's naive to think that lifting all boats will magically bring a people oppressed for centuries up to the economic level of the oppressors. No, we need to lift the Black and people of color boats a LOT MORE than others.

The forces of oppression aren't color-blind. Therefore, the forces of restoration can't be either.

[David Greene]

The main stream media has not been covering much of you all are posting about.

Sanders connects at the Latino civil rights group's big convention.
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/w ... raza?sc=fb

20 Examples of Bernie Sanders' Powerful Record on Civil and Human Rights Since the 1950s
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/2 ... ghts-1950s

Sorry, this is just apologetics. Blacks have seen plenty of this before. Trust me, it's not helping Bernie.

The issue with the action at Netroots Nation isn't that Sanders doesn't think the right things (I believe he does). The issue is that he ignored and dismissed grassroots Black leaders, refusing to engage with them. He should have praised them for their work and rallied the attendees to join in solidarity.

This is fundamentally about whites refusing to share power with blacks. One of the ways for whites to share power is to shut up, listen to and follow Black leaders; not to try to take over and control every damn action, which is what usually happens.

[PigsEye]

by sharing power do you mean supporting them and helping them fix themselves? legalizing drugs would eliminate the drug trade discouraging illegal activity and help weaken gangs that alone would have a huge positive effect. Also raising the min wage would also discourage girls from becoming "welfare mothers" having babies for government checks and could encourage more better structured families such as two parents households not just one. A huge problem in the black community seems to be the mentality that they don't want to work towards an education for whatever reasons. Policies such as free education will be an outstanding opportunity to help the black community advance IF they want to.

Sure police abuse is out of control but beyond that I think the black community would be very better off with higher wages, and free college education opportunities. Pot legalization will continue to expand state by state and I think any Democratic president won't stand in the way to much. The existing population of kids being raised by single mothers will still exist but they will have the opportunity to get a free college education which will put them at an equal playing field and give them a good shot at reaching the middle class.

Police brutality should be dealt with by police department, not on a national level. The protesters seemed to be protesting the wrong guy, and the wrong channel. SMH. It just us how badly that free college education is needed!

[mulad]

I'm a bit cynical about the Netroots Nation protests, particularly since Hillary Clinton wasn't there. She potentially benefits from whatever stumbles that were made by Sanders (as well as Martin O'Malley, who was more directly disrupted by the protesters). The topic he was supposed to be talking about there was immigration reform, so his thinking had to switch contexts in order to address the crowd, and that doesn't always happen very quickly. A disruption like that throws everyone off.

Here's a story and video where he addresses what happened and talks about his record and ideas in the context of the Sandra Bland traffic stop. I also found this article insightful -- it relates to what PigsEye was just saying, that Sanders' proposals to reform economic policies, get more people into college, and get people employed would do a huge amount to help.

I think all politicians are struggling to deal with the prime thrust of the Black Lives Matter movement, though -- the fact that minorities are far too likely to end up dead after an encounter with the police. Again, improving the economic situation of blacks would help somewhat here (fewer people hanging out on streets because of higher employment and better housing with A/C, better-maintained cars that draw less attention, perhaps better clothes, etc.), but that's not something that can happen tomorrow or even next year. The police themselves have to change, and nobody has a great answer for how to do that, as far as I can tell.

There really has to be a worldwide search for the best police force, and their skills and techniques need to be spread around as quickly as possible. I'm thinking of something similar to how the GM Fremont Assembly plant workforce was retrained to start the NUMMI plant back in the mid-'80s, but maybe that's not quite applicable.

Anyway, I think Sanders has a good record and is doing alright. Yes, he needs to clean up his messaging, but he doesn't have the benefit of having run for national office before like a few too many candidates out there this year.

[LakeCharles]

I think it's about a lot more than just police brutality. Yes, that is a real problem, but it's just a symptom of our structurally racist society.

I read this article recently and thought it was interesting: https://thsppl.com/i-racist-538512462265

Quotes:

"Racism is a cop severing the spine of an innocent man. It is a 12 year old child being shot for playing with a toy gun in a state where it is legal to openly carry firearms.

But racism is even more subtle than that. It’s more nuanced. Racism is the fact that “White” means “normal” and that anything else is different. Racism is our acceptance of an all white Lord of the Rings cast because of “historical accuracy,” ignoring the fact that this is a world with an entirely fictionalized history."


"And White people, every single one of you, are complicit in this racism because you benefit directly from it. This is why I don't like the story of the good samaritan. Everyone likes to think of themselves as the person who sees someone beaten and bloodied and helps him out.

If I could re-write that story, I'd rewrite it from the perspective of Black America. What if the person wasn't beaten and bloody? What if it wasn't so obvious? What if they were just systematically challenged in a thousand small ways that actually made it easier for you to succeed in life? Would you be so quick to help then? Or would you, like most White people, stay silent and let it happen?

Here’s what I want to say to you: Racism is so deeply embedded in this country not because of the racist right-wing radicals who practice it openly, it exists because of the silence and hurt feelings of liberal America."

[David Greene]

by sharing power do you mean supporting them and helping them fix themselves? legalizing drugs would eliminate the drug trade discouraging illegal activity and help weaken gangs that alone would have a huge positive effect. Also raising the min wage would also discourage girls from becoming "welfare mothers" having babies for government checks and could encourage more better structured families such as two parents households not just one. A huge problem in the black community seems to be the mentality that they don't want to work towards an education for whatever reasons. Policies such as free education will be an outstanding opportunity to help the black community advance IF they want to.

Wow. I think you covered just about every racialized "blame the victim" angle here.

What's going on in Black communities is complex, no doubt, but there's a fundamental issue of structural racism at play. Part of that racism is whites trying to dictate the course of events within those communities. Sometimes that takes the form of the white savior. Other times it takes the form of "reform" that ends up punishing poor people and people of color. It all involves not listening to what Black people actually want.

Sharing power means what I said it means: white people shutting up, *listening* and *following* Black leadership. It's about more than respect. It's about letting those Black leaders dictate what *you* do, rather than the other way around.

Police brutality should be dealt with by police department, not on a national level. The protesters seemed to be protesting the wrong guy, and the wrong channel. SMH. It just us how badly that free college education is needed!

So Black people are too stupid to organize effectively, is that it?

The action was right on. The target was correct. Sometimes white allies need a shock to actually take a moment and think.

It's laughable to think that the police problem is going to be solved at the department level. Voting rights were not given by state Secretaries of State. There are so many things wrong with policing that I don't even know where to start. The whole thing needs to be blown up (figuratively, figuratively!) and rebuilt from the ground up.

[David Greene]

I'm a bit cynical about the Netroots Nation protests, particularly since Hillary Clinton wasn't there. She potentially benefits from whatever stumbles that were made by Sanders (as well as Martin O'Malley, who was more directly disrupted by the protesters).

That's simply evading responsibility. It doesn't matter who wasn't there. What matters is the response by those who *were* there.

I also found this article insightful -- it relates to what PigsEye was just saying, that Sanders' proposals to reform economic policies, get more people into college, and get people employed would do a huge amount to help.

Again, this misses the point. Policy-wise, I think Sanders is great. He needs to work on following the lead of Black leaders.

[David Greene]

This is a good read.

http://www.thenation.com/article/bernie ... ts-nation/

[acs]

The most powerful black leader ever has all but ordained Hillary as his successor.

[PigsEye]

Wow. I think you covered just about every racialized "blame the victim" angle here.

What's going on in Black communities is complex, no doubt, but there's a fundamental issue of structural racism at play. Part of that racism is whites trying to dictate the course of events within those communities. Sometimes that takes the form of the white savior. Other times it takes the form of "reform" that ends up punishing poor people and people of color. It all involves not listening to what Black people actually want.

Sharing power means what I said it means: white people shutting up, *listening* and *following* Black leadership. It's about more than respect. It's about letting those Black leaders dictate what *you* do, rather than the other way around.

So Black people are too stupid to organize effectively, is that it?

The action was right on. The target was correct. Sometimes white allies need a shock to actually take a moment and think.

It's laughable to think that the police problem is going to be solved at the department level. Voting rights were not given by state Secretaries of State. There are so many things wrong with policing that I don't even know where to start. The whole thing needs to be blown up (figuratively, figuratively!) and rebuilt from the ground up.

I just don't get it. Policy changes such as free college education could greatly help level the playing field. Also working to legalize pot would greatly decrease the amount of black police arrests. Increased min wage would also be HUGE to getting struggling mothers and minorities a living wage they can start to have purchasing power and increase their own families wealth. Those things alone would be amazing to bringing the black community up to truly being equal.

The issue at hand is being treated fairly by the police right? Well isn't the main reason is that the police don't treat black members of society as being equal? Why is that? could it be because they have the concept that they are not as educated, and not as well off? Well giving them the opportunity to afford lawyers, get a good education and become members of the middle class well then that alone will start to prove they are truly equal be MAKING THEM EQUAL!

I don't think my ideas or Bernie's ideas are "blaming the victim" but trying to help a community who clearly is struggling to achieving success. I agree policing in this country has gotten way way out of hand and it's shocking and shameful this behavior continues. Yet, if the black community are not willing to support Bernie Sanders I'm not sure what the black community wants.

I do find it very frustrating, I would love to see these policies enacted so we can start to see the black community thrive and become successful and BECOME an equal class. Yet it's when black people like you say no no no that's not what we want. Well then I get disenfranchised and want to throw up my hands and yell let them fix their own situation I'm done!

[David Greene]

Well giving them the opportunity to afford lawyers, get a good education and become members of the middle class well then that alone will start to prove they are truly equal be MAKING THEM EQUAL!

Yet, if the black community are not willing to support Bernie Sanders I'm not sure what the black community wants.

You know what the Black community wants? Not having to PROVE THEY'RE F'ING EQUAL!

Black people have been told for decades, "just get an education and the world will open to you." B.S. That hasn't happened and it never will happen until we dismantle the racist structures in this country.

Yet it's when black people like you

I am not Black.

[Tiller]

Well giving them the opportunity to afford lawyers, get a good education and become members of the middle class well then that alone will start to prove they are truly equal be MAKING THEM EQUAL!

Yet, if the black community are not willing to support Bernie Sanders I'm not sure what the black community wants.

You know what the Black community wants? Not having to PROVE THEY'RE F'ING EQUAL!

Black people have been told for decades, "just get an education and the world will open to you." B.S. That hasn't happened and it never will happen until we dismantle the racist structures in this country.

What racist structures need to be abolished that haven't been talked about? Poverty is a cycle that sustains itself. Poverty sustains poverty. Unequal poverty sustains racism. To end racism, we must end disproportionate poverty. To end poverty, you must address poverty, ie allowing everyone the education, health care, opportunity to work, etc. Enacting an agenda of economic populism will do this, as long as Bernie doesn't decide to slip in some kind of "red-lining" to deliberately oppress blacks (which I hope you aren't suggesting). You seem to be conflating the present and future here. We aren't saying blacks are poor NOW because they choose to not get an education or a job. They can't, along with poor people of every other race. Heck, I'm taking a gap year before college to try and save up for it because it's so damn expensive.

What we're saying is that by letting EVERYONE, including African Americans, participate in the economy (which isn't what national policy is doing now), they then will. Then the gaps will close up. If we aren't imprisoning them, sending people from schools to jails, then they can join everyone else. None of us support the drug war. None of us support police brutality. We know black people aren't equal like they should be, but what additional racist structures are you referring to? Will blacks be refused entry to college because they're black, even though it's free? Will people not hire blacks just because of their own unconscious racist tendencies, even when they need the labor? I really just don't see where things would go. What am I missing here? Are we just talking past each other because of unspoken assumptions, only having a slight difference in opinion? I think a comprehensive anti-poverty push would do wonders.