We don't have to choose between fighting bigotry OR fighting to limit corporate power

[Ken Burch]

between standing with women, LGBTQ people, and people of color/Muslims/immigrants, on the one hand, and with working-class folks(most of whom ARE women, people of color, LGBTQ people, Muslims and immigrants.

We can and must fight for all of the above, with all our passion and energy. It isn't "either/or". It isn't binary and it never was binary.

Whoever we choose next time, we're only going to put together an electoral majority by fighting both hate and the things that help nourish it-want and fear of want.

It's time to find the language of justice for the many and the language of trust BETWEEN the many.

For that, we need dialog and the willingness of everyone here to believe that we are all on the same side and that no one wants anyone left out or silenced.

[CBHagman]

1. Thank you. "Both-And" is a better approach.

After every election there's an effort to put everything down to just a few bullet points, and I don't think the country is served by that.

[kcr]

2. Yep. It was never necessary to alienate anyone.

The time for that advice, and to stand with those trying to make that point was a lot sooner.

[Ken Burch]

5. I was making that point last year, and all through the primaries.

There was never any reason to imply that it had to be one or the other and there isn't any reason for it to be either/or now.

[kcr]

6. I didn't mean that for you personally

But I strongly disagree that it never had to be one or the other. It was the exclusion that very early on lost my support. There is no reason why the revolution couldn't have included everyone. This idea that white voters have to be targeted specifically and that our failure to do that loses us votes is based on clueless outdated assumptions about class in America and it needs to be dumped. If the left thinks this is the path to victory in claiming the party for economic equality they're in for disappointment. They can blame Hillary and claim she stole the nomination and make that the scapegoat all they want but it isn't true.

[Ken Burch]

12. The campaign never intentionally excluded. It never offered whites-only policies.

Economic inequality affects women, gays, people of color and immigrants as much as it affects anyone else.

Yes, his program would have had the effect of reaching out to some voters who happened to be white, but never at the expense of social justice and anti-oppression activism, and he'd have won their support to an anti-bigotry program BY acknowledging that these folks had been through some troubles, too(No, not the same as the groups who backed Hillary, but some).

What the post-1968 era taught, among other things, is that bigotry will always grow when times get harder. So it's necessary, as PART but not all of a program of defeating bigotry, to eliminate insecurity and both want and the fear of falling into want.

We need to fight bigotry in any case, obviously, but scared people will usually be more bigoted.

I agree that Bernie could have found different language early in the campaign, but he did adjust the message repeatedly as the campaign went on.

[bettyellen]

3. Tell it to Bernie. He's the one who needs lessons in coalition building.

[Ken Burch]

4. We're past that, now.

n/t.

[bettyellen]

7. Nope. You don't get to decide that for anyone. He's out there saying stupid sexist shit this week.

[Ken Burch]

9. Bernie's not going to run again.

What does attacking his supporters achieve?

[kcr]

10. Maybe some of us would like Bernie to get a clue

I, for one, would love economic equality to get a stronger presence in the Dem platform, and I'd hate to see what progress made get pissed away with his bullshit.

[bettyellen]

11. Geeze no one is attacking you, but stop being an apologist for his assholery.

It matters what he says now- and I'm embarrassed for him. He's lost his decency. And yeah it matters.

[grossproffit]

8. He's still adding logs to the flame.