African Americans Help Hillary Win Nevada Democratic Caucus:

originally posted by: DupontDeux
a reply to: Spider879

As a European outsider I have NO idea what they are thinking ... Hillary is good for the minorities how..? Seriously, it makes no sense (to me).

Someone explain?

Lol, as an American, I have ZERO clue either.

Just remember this simple formula.

Democrats = Blacks/Minorities/Immigrant Families

Basically

a reply to: Spider879

#SuperDelegatesLivesMatter is the only thing you have to remember.

Your vote doesn't matter in a DNC caucus.

a reply to: DupontDeux

Explain why u feel like that first

I love how internet talkers know the what the black population needs. We needed jim crow, projects,segregation,fear,no job,no education........ i could go on.

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: Spider879

Don't forget that Hilary has all the 'super delegates' in the bag already.

The fix is in.

I fear that you are right..

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: DupontDeux
a reply to: Spider879

As a European outsider I have NO idea what they are thinking ... Hillary is good for the minorities how..? Seriously, it makes no sense (to me).

Someone explain?

I'm still trying to figure out how the Democrats in general are considered good for the minorities. They've been voting Democrat for generations now and their lot in life has not improved.

Progressive platforms generally are more supported regarding economics, sociology, outcomes, etc.... As in, the policies are evidenced by relevant studies and expertise.

We could actually cite it all but it would be exhaustive.

Furthermore, you can't blame the fact of who someone votes for for whether their "lot has improved." The American political system is f#cked, and in reality both parties seem to be serving the oligarchy not the common person. THIS is the real problem.

originally posted by: DupontDeux
a reply to: Spider879

As a European outsider I have NO idea what they are thinking ... Hillary is good for the minorities how..? Seriously, it makes no sense (to me).

Someone explain?

I agree with you.

Hilary is partly getting the support from social justice warriors and relevant groups (such as BLM) because she is female. Also, with her being the Democrat establishment candidate the media is warped in her favor, including in its targeting of minority voters.

In reality, however, precisely because she is a tool of the oligarchy and elite she in fact is bad for minorities and other disadvantaged peoples such as low-income groups generally.

a reply to: DupontDeux

Her husband had literally hundreds of affairs. That gives the clintons street cred

Given that ...

In order to win the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, a candidate must win 2,382 delegates at the national convention (this total is current as of February 21, 2016). Currently, there are expected to be 4,763 delegates at the Democratic National Convention.

and further that ...

Unpledged delegates, often referred to as "superdelegates," are automatic delegates to the convention and are not required to pledge their support to a presidential candidate. Unpledged delegates are members of the Democratic National Committee, Democratic members of Congress, Democratic governors, or distinguished party leaders (such as former presidents or vice presidents). There are expected to be approximately 712 unpledged Democratic convention delegates in 2016. If an unpledged delegate is unable to attend the convention, an alternate delegate is not substituted as a replacement.

712/4763 = 15%

Hardly a "fix."

Democratic National Convention

originally posted by: Looselungjones
I love how internet talkers know the what the black population needs. We needed jim crow, projects,segregation,fear,no job,no education........ i could go on.

On other other hand, how do you know the races of posters? Also, I have heard friends and colleagues say as well as read online people of color saying "Don't bernie-splain to us, Hilary may be looking out for us more." While I get that logic if we are talking generally, with these candidates in particular I have to disagree.

As I've said in other posts, Hilary is a shill for the banks, oligarchy, and military-industrial complex, ALL of whom do not look out for the best interests of traditionally marginalized peoples. In fact she and they exploit the public at large for gain. This harms people of color.

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

What current candidate is "looking out for the interests of traditionally marginalized peoples"?

Bernie (while I personally like him more than Mrs. Clinton) is hardly offering legitimate, reasonable policy.

His recommendations are ... idealistic.

As far as the Republicans ... please.

So who? Who is the champion of the marginalized?

a reply to: Gothmog

OK, so I educated myself a bit more about this issue. It appears to me that, in the early 1960's, issues such as segregation were based more on geographical regions than just party affiliation. And, in fact, both Democrats and Republicans outside of the South supported the Civil Rights Bill.

However, both Democrats and Republican in the "Solid South" did not support it. And, as you pointed out, they filibustered the bill in Congress.

Furthermore, even as the South became more Republican, the extant Southern delegation remained Democrats. Though one could possibly make the argument that they could be considered DINO's. According to Wikipedia:

Of the known Dixiecrats, only three switched parties becoming Republicans: Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms and Mills E. Godwind, Jr.

In summary, I agree that this part of my statement:

seceded from the party and became Republicans.

was made in error. However, I submit that the sentiment I expressed remains unchanged.

Thanks for correcting my error. I don't like to make false statements. And your calling me out on that statement led me to research the topic a bit more, and come to a better understanding.


-dex

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

What current candidate is "looking out for the interests of traditionally marginalized peoples"?

Bernie (while I personally like him more than Mrs. Clinton) is hardly offering legitimate, reasonable policy.

His recommendations are ... idealistic.

As far as the Republicans ... please.

So who? Who is the champion of the marginalized?

Some of his policies are "idealistic," but most not.

Remember, most of what he is mentioning, i.e. policies that invest and support all citizens, are already STANDARD practice and policy in virtually every other developed country EXCEPT for the US....

It's not radical in the slightest. Americans have been brainwashed into thinking so, while the rest of the developed world mocks us.

Economic, education, health, standard of living, and other related research virtually all support a move towards these policies.

Without any doubt anybody familiar with the relevant research regarding disadvantaged communities would know that his policies are the best out of the currently running candidates.

That doesn't mean he is perfect nor that we couldn't have a better candidate, however.

The real story on the Democrat side is the overall lack of turnout to caucus and vote.

Not a pretty thing when you consider the historic turnouts for the Republican primaries so far.

Bernie may get his political revolution, but it may not manifest in exactly the way he is hoping.

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Right. Show me how we pay for it.

That's not too much to ask.

a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

Just remember this simple formula.

Democrats = Blacks/Minorities/Immigrant Families

Basically

You left out Intelligent Well-Educated, Thoughtful White Adults who are also Democrats.

And by the way - the "switch over" came about after the CIVIL WAR. 150 years ago that happened.

a reply to: DexterRiley

Thanks for correcting my error. I don't like to make false statements. And your calling me out on that statement led me to research the topic a bit more, and come to a better understanding.

You weren't talking to me, or with me, but -
congratulations.

Well done for at least looking it up and educating yourself.


I'd give you a formal "APPLAUSE!" if I could, but, well, since I can't:

a reply to: DexterRiley
No offense was intended . And do some more researching of that era . It is surprising the Democrats have the African-American vote at all.

originally posted by: ketsuko
The real story on the Democrat side is the overall lack of turnout to caucus and vote.

Not a pretty thing when you consider the historic turnouts for the Republican primaries so far.

Bernie may get his political revolution, but it may not manifest in exactly the way he is hoping.

LOL ... 3 caucuses/primaries ... only off 22% overall from 2008.

Riiight ... and Romney swept Ohio right?

Keep dreamin' the dream.

a reply to: Gothmog

No offense was intended

Of course. No offense taken. You made a good debate point that forced me to review the actual details of the actions taken by the politicians of that era.


-dex