By request...some comments from Bernie Sanders 2014 NPR Interview

[Chitown Kev]

Number 23 requested that I remind people of NPR's 2014 Interview with Bernie Sanders...I will only be commenting, briefly, on the bolded portions:

On why he says Democrats are losing white voters

Well, I am focusing on the fact that whether you’re white or black or Hispanic or Asian, if you are in the working class, you are struggling to keep your heads above water. You’re worried about your kids. What should the Democratic Party be talking about, Steve? What they should be talking about is a massive federal jobs program. There was once a time when our nation’s infrastructure — roads, bridges, water systems, rail — were the envy of the world. Today that’s no longer the case.

I would say if you go out on the street and you talk to people and say, “Which is the party of the American working class?” People would look to you like you were a little bit crazy, they wouldn’t know what you were talking about, and they certainly wouldn’t identify the Democrats.

On African-American support for Democrats

Well, here’s what you got. What you got is an African-American president, and the African-American community is very very proud that this country has overcome racism and voted for him for president. And that’s kind of natural. You’ve got a situation where the Republican Party has been strongly anti-immigration, and you’ve got a Hispanic community which is looking to the Democrats for help, but that’s not important.

You should not be basing your politics based on your color. What you should be basing your politics on is, ‘how is your family doing?’ … In the last election, in state after state, you had an abysmally low vote for the Democrats among white, working class people. And I think the reason for that is that the Democrats have not made it clear that they are prepared to stand with the working class people of this country, take on the big money interests. I think the key issue that we have to focus on, and I know people are uncomfortable about talking about it, is the role of the billionaire class in American society.

What you got is an African-American president, and the African-American community is very very proud that this country has overcome racism and voted for him for president. Personally, I think this is poorly stated. I get the gist of what Sanders attempted to say here. Inarticulately stated, though.

You’ve got a situation where the Republican Party has been strongly anti-immigration, and you’ve got a Hispanic community which is looking to the Democrats for help, but that’s not important. Uh, yes that IS important...otherwise, the Dems would not be getting the share of the Latino vote that they have been getting. Remember, George W. Bush was able to get a decent share of the Latino vote but his own party rebelled against him when Mr. Bush attempted to handle the immigration bill.

You should not be basing your politics based on your color In an ideal world, I would agree with that sentiment but many white people that now vote republican, white people, do vote based on their their color and vote to uphold white supremacy as opposed to voting for their economic interests. White supporters are not supporting Donald Trump because he has favored single-payer health care in the past.

In the last election, in state after state, you had an abysmally low vote for the Democrats among white, working class people. And I think the reason for that is that the Democrats have not made it clear that they are prepared to stand with the working class people of this country, take on the big money interests. To put it bluntly, many white working class people vote that way because of racism and Sanders was either clueless or simply didn't care about that well-documented fact. These white-working class people didn't seem to mind that many (if not most) blacks got a raw deal on The New Deal.

Now I agree with Mr. Sanders that the Democrats don't do enough to uphold the interests of the working class; hell, I don't think that the Democrats, by and large, do enough to uphold the causes of racial/gender justice.

But we really don't need to look very far to find the source of the the idea expressed in this abominable thread.

Sanders, himself, has articulated a version of this very idea.

And I have heard many white progressives lament the loss of the "working, hard working American, white American vote" while, at the same time, purposefully ignoring the black/brown elephant in that particular room..

[Number23]

1. I've never understood this bit

You should not be basing your politics based on your color.

Is this something that anyone thinks that black people actually do?? Black people who have voted for and supported milquetoast after milquetoast white Democrat for senator, governor, president and everything in between??

Why is that we had the first viable black candidate for president and then all of a sudden, black people and minorities need to be told not to vote "based on color?"

Meanwhile, there are about 50 million people in the U.S. who actually DO vote based on color. But they're white people so I guess that's okay or something.

[Chitown Kev]

2. Exactly

Many white people DO vote based on color but when black people do it (and black people rarely get that chance) they are wrong.

I'd bet that Artur Davis would sure have liked it if color was the basis for black people voting.

[gollygee]

3. A lot of white people think that

I know some white Republicans who support Ben Carson specifically because they assume all or almost all African Americans will vote for him. They think African Americans voted for Pres. Obama only because of his color.

And yes, a number of white Americans vote based on color. There's a percentage that are all about racism, and I think they're why Trump has gotten any traction at all. He's a total joke, but he is very racist and that percentage of voters LOVE that he's willing to say it out loud.

I know racist people who voted for Obama too. I'd never claim Republicans have a corner on that market, and voting for a person of color doesn't prove someone isn't racist. Bobby Jindahl would have no political career if racist people never voted for people of color.

[Number23]

7. This is the impetus behind the desperate waving around of any brown person that even so much

as glances in Bernie Sanders direction. There are still people to this day that think that him bringing Cornell on board will make dramatic inroads with black people. The vast majority of them are white but just as you can find a smattering of black folks at every Tea Party rally, there will be a smattering of black folks that subscribe to this line of thinking. And they would be every bit as wrong as their white friends.

Someone recently posted a cartoon of Hillary, Trump, Sanders and Bush. Sanders has a sign that says "Love" and thousands of followers. Trump has a sign that says "Hate" with about a dozen or so followers. Clinton and Bush are in the lead but have no followers and both look pretty sad.

The cartoon is trying to make a point but it's kind of stupid. If neither Clinton or Bush had no followers, how in the world would they be in the lead??? But the idea that Trump, who is unquestionably running on a platform of hate, has less followers than Sanders is just wrong. Hate has always appealed to more voters than love.

voting for a person of color doesn't prove someone isn't racist. Bobby Jindahl would have no political career if racist people never voted for people of color.

You couldn't be more right about this. And we see evidence of this every single day and have for the last eight years.

[gwheezie]

4. Good points

In 08 most of my friends and family were HRC supporters. Obama had to make his case for voting for him. Yes people had a tremendous sense of the historical significance of the 1st black president but considering all those black folks had voted white men into office, there was no automatic given they would all vote for Obama. It's really an insulting statement to make. Yet I know white folks that specifically voted for McCain even though they used to be dems.
Otoh I remember having a discussion with one of the old farmers down at the feed store who was so disgusted with Bush and the war he said " I quess I'm going to have to vote for that black boy".
It's just such a tone deaf statement to assume correcting income inequality is going to level the playing field after decades of racist, sexist, homophobic ingrained into our laws and society bullshit that has supported white privilege.
I like Bernie I really do, he's no more racist than I am but us white liberals never think we are, we've gone along with all of this. I commented to someone we get the policing that's acceptable to the majority because if it wasn't acceptable we would have changed it by now. Sure there have been some heroic people of all colors that have fought the status quo but not enough, not nearly enough.
And I'm not thrilled with Hillary although I plan on voting for her, I think she'll be a better president than bernie. I think Obama has been exceptional, I don't think the next president will meet the bar he set.

[Number23]

8. Your whole post is fabulous but this bit is magic

I like Bernie I really do, he's no more racist than I am but us white liberals never think we are

If more liberals like you existed, this whole country would be different. Seriously.

[randys1]

18. Like 23 says, this is genius

I like Bernie I really do, he's no more racist than I am but us white liberals never think we are

This is why I never rely on my own opinion on anything involving race.

As a str8t, white male, my knowledge and attitude is insufficient in this area and I therefore always need guidance.

Because, as you say, I dont think I am racist...but what I think on this issue is suspect, always.

[stonecutter357]

5. K&R!

[Starry Messenger]

6. I think the problem goes deeper than Sanders, honestly.

His campaign approach just ripped off the lid on some serious ideological errors on the left that have been simmering away for decades.

White progressives have to recenter their definition of economic rights/civil rights. The current package of economic reform ideas considered "neutral" are not; they largely benefit whites and don't penetrate to the levels of disadvantages and punitive laws that impact the layers of people who are not white/male/straight/cis/abled.

"Now I agree with Mr. Sanders that the Democrats don't do enough to uphold the interests of the working class; hell, I don't think that the Democrats, by and large, do enough to uphold the causes of racial/gender justice."

I agree too. I also agree that working class whites don't vote with Democrats because of racism. We have a friend who is a professor in IN who says that his neighbor is a white union guy, smokes pot, and votes Republican because that is a cultural hallmark of being white where he lives. I don't see where the FDR coalition reaches back into the time machine and changes what has been done to working class whites to get them to vote against their interests. Any movement this group is making *as a mass* has been reactionary.

More insidious to me is the line of thinking that fights for civil rights/equality/"identity politics" have somehow been a distraction from teh "real" fight. Where I am stuck as an activist--is it our responsibility to draw a picture of how Big Capitalism* has actually been at work fighting us on civil rights and that we have been impacted by the system and that our fights are not just some political dessert topping? Or do we just keep doing our thing in the Obama coalition and ignore this reactionary strain in left-wing ideology? It seems to be small, but noisy, I don't know where to put my energy on this.

*(for example, the role that free market think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute have played in legitimizing works like The Bell Curve, attacking feminism, etc. That's just one off the top of my head. The far right forces of monopoly have been behind a lot of discriminatory bullshit that also has economic consequences, as I am sure many here can attest.)

I think the conversation has to go beyond the 2016 elections, since we are talking about the future alignment of the total electorate and what we are doing.

[gwheezie]

16. Great post

This really is the best group on du

[Starry Messenger]

20. I love this group.

The timing of EW's speech yesterday is interesting too. How this all shakes down, I'm not sure. One thing about this election, it is certainly not routine, and is full of big topics that have been overdue for discussion.

[portlander23]

9. Bernie

I've been listening to Mr. Sanders on the radio for the past ten years. It's the reason why I was all-in on his campaign the moment he announced.

I can tell you that Mr. Sanders has been a very strong defender of economic justice, which is why I'm supporting him. That said, in those ten years, I can't think of a time he's spoke forcefully about racial justice. I'm not saying I know where he's at, but I can tell you it just has not been the core focus of his career the way economic justice has been.

This has all been a wake-up call to me personally. A few months ago if you asked me that if we solved economic equality, would we solve racial equality? I would have said yes. I think the What if the Religious Right allied with the Working Left? thread has basically the same point of view, and it's one of ignorance.

It's true that working class right wingers could agree with Mr. Sanders on economic justice. If he completely ignored racial justice, he could bring this group "back into the fold". I bought into that line of thinking too. That said, we can't ignore racial justice. If having a racial justice platform means we don't get those right wing voters "back", then fine.

I'm not going to tell you that Bernie is perfect, and he was always a strong voice on racial justice, and Spike Lee likes him so you should too. I'm hoping that he got the message that economic justice does not imply racial justice. I recently got the message too.

[tishaLA]

10. Please read Sen Warren's comments from today

""Economic justice is not — and has never been — sufficient to ensure racial justice"

[portlander23]

11. I did

And I agree. And I can tell you until recently it hasn't even been a distinction I knew how to make.

[tishaLA]

12. First, let me apologize if my post sounded curt

I didn't mean it to sound that way, but it may have seemed dismissive or mean.

And thanks for sharing your evolution on the economic and racial justice issues.

I will admidt to a bit of exasperation--and ecstasy--about Sen Warren's comments. They are so important, especially coming from someone so admired by progressives, and I hope will help provide something of a framework for other white progressives in speaking about racial justice. My exasperation comes from the fact that her comments come in the wake of other African Americans being dismissed for saying many of the same things she has. And I'm especially thinking about people here at DU who have been timed out for offering critiques of a pure economic justice narrative.

[portlander23]

13. :D

I didn't take it as curt

I'm glad she gave the speech and I wish Bernie would have given it. I hope that he does before the campaign is out.

[randys1]

19. I am enjoying your interaction here. Well done.

Watching people evolve is always fun.

I do it all the time and sometimes I scare myself and think I have gone too far

Anyway, thanks for what you are saying here and I wish more would follow your lead.

[Chitown Kev]

14. If Bernie HAD been a strong voice on racial justice

(and I assume that you mean on the Thom Hartmann Show) then more blacks would have heard of him. He would not be having the problems connecting with black voters that he has been having. he would have well made a beginning on getting the type of networks that he needs to win over black voters.

I mean, for sure, Hillary Clinton isn't perfect nor do I expect Bernie Sanders to perfect in that regard.

[Number23]

22. Every word of this post is truth.

If Bernie HAD been a strong voice on racial justice (and I assume that you mean on the Thom Hartmann Show) then more blacks would have heard of him. He would not be having the problems connecting with black voters that he has been having. he would have well made a beginning on getting the type of networks that he needs to win over black voters.

So damn true it bears repeating

If Bernie HAD been a strong voice on racial justice then more blacks would have heard of him.

[Number23]

15. This is a fabulous post. Is this the thread that lead you to post your OP on Warren in GD??

[portlander23]

17. Unrelated

I've been thinking about this for a while. BLM interrupting Mr. Sanders in Seattle was the wake up moment for me. When I read Warren's speech I thought that people ought to read it so I posted it. I wanted to chime in because I think what is posted here is a fair criticism of Mr. Sanders.

That said, I'm watching his campaign and I really hope he's moving towards Elizabeth Warren's position on this. Recent changes he made to his campaign suggest he is, but I think we need to see him express Warren's passion and clarity. I want him to say explicitly that economic justice is not the same as racial justice.

I'm willing to give politicians a bit of a pass. As I've said in this thread, I don't care where Mrs. Clinton used to be on Keystone XL as long as she's strongly against it now. I'm hoping Mr. Sanders can be a very strong voice for racial justice even though it's not been his focus in the past.

So, yes I think this is fair, even necessary criticism. I think a lot of Sanders supporters may bristle at it and personalize it in a very unconstructive way. Where I'm at right now is I think Mr. Sanders is the best candidate and rather than protect him against criticism like this, I want to be one of the people pushing him as hard as I can towards a better position because I think it needs to happen.

[Number23]

21. I think he's moving towards Warren's position too. But what amazes me is the number of Bernie

supporters who are breaking their fingers pretending that he's ALWAYS been at Warren's position. That he's always been a strong advocate for racial justice. He has not and his campaign could not make that more obvious.

Even his press secretary has clearly stated she's made this argument to him.

“One of my suggestions, he took it and ran with it on Meet the Press, is that racial inequality and economic inequality are parallel issues,” she said. “I [told him,] you know, economic equality is an issue. It’s something we need to address. But for some people it doesn’t matter how much money you make, it doesn’t matter where you went to school, it doesn’t matter what your parents do. It doesn’t matter that Sandra Bland had a job and was on her way to teach for her alma mater. It doesn’t matter. None of that matters.”

Bernie Sanders took to the advice, Symone Sanders said. She also confronted him with one of the criticisms he faced earlier in the summer, when Black Lives Matter activists rejected his statements about his past civil rights movement work. http://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/bernie-sanders-campaign-adds-young-black-woman-as-new-public#.rl5wb1k1y

If Bernie was such a stalwart advocate for racial justice, it would not be the hallmark of the criticism against his candidacy (along with his stance on guns and the lingering concern from many that he is not a member of the Dem party). So this idea that everyone has just made all of this up in order to criticize him is incredibly stupid and bizarre.

Where I'm at right now is I think Mr. Sanders is the best candidate and rather than protect him against criticism like this, I want to be one of the people pushing him as hard as I can towards a better position because I think it needs to happen.

Then he is very lucky to have you among his supporters. And it will be people like you that get him into the White House.

[portlander23]

23. My only suggestion

My only advice about how you might consider Mr. Sanders as a candidate is to not judge him by his loudest fans on an internet message board

[Number23]

24. And my only suggestion is that alot of folks here need to understand that most of the people in this

group fully support ALL of the Democratic candidates for office. Most of DU may even fall into this.

They'd happily vote for Hillary. Or Bernie. Or Joe. Or O'Malley.

So when you've got four candidates that are all pretty similar on their positions and all enjoy support from the same people, the behavior of your supporters can be a huge mitigating factor in the depth of support your candidate may get.

If the people who support a particular candidate make it their mission to denigrate issues and causes that you think are critically important, and it is only the supporters of ONE CANDIDATE who are doing this, what are the chances that these supporters could have an effect on your support for their candidate? I would say that they're pretty high.