To Black American Voter: Time to shutter the "Underground Railroad"

1. 78

   Credence2posted 8 years ago

   Underground Railroad Syndrome (URS): Unfortunate tendency for African-American people to allow themselves to 'be led' based from a state of unsubstantiated fear and panic.
   
   I have the utmost respect for Clinton supporters, as most have completely valid reasons for providing her with her support. (But if she brought on, say, someone like Liz Warren as her running mate, it would go a long way with me.)
   
   But for the African-American community, why are we supporting Clinton over Sanders? Is there a good reason?
   
   We have a habit of allowing those that want our vote to use a formulaic approach; go throughout the South, buddy up with Pastors, and show up for Sunday morning services being prepared to sing a 'Negro Spiritual' or two.
   
   We have the 'old guard' Civil Rights people Rep. Clyburn of S.C. and John Lewis of Georgia, for example, who use their influence to gather votes for Ms. Clinton. The problem is that they 'ordain' candidates that only advocate a continued jockeying for an ever elusive tactical advantage for Black Americans within a generally corrupt system. It is as futile as 'washing a turd'.  That is our 'underground railroad' with Hillary Clinton in the role of Harriet Tubman. Whether they want to admit it or not, they are part of the 'machine' that needs to be brought to heel.
   
   I loved the 'nineties' and Bill Clinton to death as a breath of fresh air from the Reagan 'eighties'. But now, all of that seems like eons ago. There are new problems and new challenges, and many of my folks are still using 1960's tactics.
   
   The Clinton campaign has been creating this schism in regards to race when attacking Sanders. I don't appreciate that. This 'old white guy', Bernie Sanders, seems to 'get it', knowing that merely moving peas from one shell to another is no substitute for removing a corrupt gaming system.
   
   So as far as I am concerned, those  people that stand with me and Bernie, my fellow citizens who ever and where ever they are, are my brothers and sisters in this struggle. Among fellow Democrats, this race schism is just a smoke screen and we all have to identify the source and eliminate.
   
   Just like Trump inspires from the right, Bernie does that for the left. No one enjoys a better favorable/unfavorable rating than does Sanders. I have not seen such political potential and excitement since Robert Kennedy in 1968.  My mom campaigned for him and she was just as giddy as a school girl in his very presence. We are going to need that kind of excitement that continues to perplex the pundits at the caucuses and primaries, to defeat 'the Right' its hoards.

   replyreport
2. 78

   colorfuloneposted 8 years ago

   Bernie Sanders is the candidate Republicans want to run against in November.    (they know the ugly truth)
   
   Good post, Cred!   

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks...

      replyreport
3. 0

   PrettyPantherposted 8 years ago

   The only candidate in the race on either side who has had a consistent message for the last 30 years is Bernie Sanders, and his message is all about saving the middle class by changing the rules so that money is not the only thing that talks.  It's pretty simple, really.  I don't see Clinton as an enemy of the middle class, but she is content to make tiny inroads on the status quo.  Bernie is calling for a peaceful revolution, a rising up of the people to say we are not going to put up with it any longer.  If he can pull it off, his policies will benefit every economically and systemically disadvantaged group.

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

      It seems simple to me as well, thats the ticket, Panther!  Thanks

      replyreport
4. 97

   RonElFranposted 8 years ago

   For most who support her, the choice of Clinton over Sanders has nothing to do with any kind of syndrome. Yes there is a familiarity factor the helps her, but favoring her is an entirely rational decision. And the issue is not which of the two has the more appealing message. What it comes down to is the fact that, whatever he promises, Sanders won't be able to deliver. Consider these factors:
   
   (1) If the Dems lose, President Obama's legacy, such as ObamaCare, is at grave risk. All the Republicans, with the possible exception of Kasich, are pledged to yank 20 million people's health care away from them. None has put forward any realistic plan to replace what they want so fervently to destroy.
   
   (2) Sanders has demonstrated appeal for people on the far left, but not for others. Independents and moderate liberals, not to mention conservatives, far outnumber the group that has been so excited about Sanders. He has not demonstrated that he can reach the larger electorate.
   
   (3) Young people and far left voters have no problem with the Socialist label. But most of the country will never get past that label to even give Sanders' program a hearing. To most Americans, Socialism = Communism (Republicans are already using that in their messaging). Anything that can be labeled socialist is anathema to them. They won't even listen to the message of an avowed Socialist.
   
   (4) Given all this, the probability is that Sanders being the Dem nominee is the only thing that can get Donald Trump elected President of the United States.
   
   (5) Even if Sanders was elected, there is zero possibility of him getting his program through Congress. He says he'll do it by stimulating such a groundswell of support from the electorate, that Republicans in Congress will have no choice but to enact his program. This is moonshine. First, if he could do that, he wouldn't be trailing Clinton in the first place. Second, most GOP House members represent safe conservative districts and are therefore immune to political pressure from the left. If they could shut down the government, costing the country billions of dollars, and suffer no political consequences, as they did, nothing Sanders can do will move them.
   
   Bottom line: even if you wholeheartedly love Sanders' proposals, you run the risk of saddling this country with Donald Trump as president, and losing everything Obama accomplished. That's the most probable outcome. Even if Sanders beats Trump, the disappointment his followers will face when none of his domestic policy priorities get enacted will only increase the anger and cynicism of the electorate. And who knows what it will mean for foreign affairs - Sanders has so far demonstrated little interest in that aspect of the job.
   
   Whether you agree with the points made in this analysis or not, they are rational points of debate, not the overflow of some mindless syndrome.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      PrettyPantherposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Rational post.  I will point out, though, that in head-to-head match-ups, Sanders performs far better than Clinton against Trump.  Polls show Clinton has high negatives while Sanders has high positives.  I realize this could change in a general election campaign with Trump and others going after Sanders, but current polling shows Sanders has a better chance of beating Trump than does Clinton.

      replyreport
   2. 78

      Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks, Ron for engaging in just the sort of discourse that I was anxious to have.
      
      Let's go point by point
      
      Yes, the danger of the unravelling of ACA by the GOP is quite real. Why is this risk any less present under a Clinton presidency?
      
      How has Sanders failed to appeal to 'others'?  From what I am seeing, he does well under virtually every demographic with the exception of relatively wealthy Democrats and black folks. And as 'the Panther' points out Sander's following has been legendary and he always does better than Clinton against Trump and any other GOP candidate in any poll you care to look upon.  Stats show that he does exceedingly well among independents and that can well make the difference of a victory next November. The 'larger' electorate is gravitating toward Sanders, and what you saw in Michigan is just the beginning.
      
      I don't care about GOP messaging, they put insufferable roadblocks before the Obama administration during his entire term. Obama was hardly a bomb throwing radical. Why are we to presume that Clinton is going to get such a group to 'cooperate'? They are so far from the progressive objective and agenda, their opinion means nothing to me. 
      
      Donald Trump may be easy for either Clinton or Sanders to defeat, in any case. But, I am going with the one with the best chance and right now, that is Bernie Sanders.
      
      Sanders can only begin to get at the progressive agenda through a campaign that is more than just electing another politician, but is a movement that can sweep the GOP rubbish out of their majorities in the House and Senate. Clinton does not generate that kind of excitement, Sanders does. He trails Clinton only because of a 'machine' advantage that often times defies the will of the electorate with PAC and high level contributions standing in stark contrast to a candidate that manages to get his support only from individuals along the way. I know who would be more credible for me. If Sanders can't move the stubborn GOP, what makes you believe that Ms. Clinton can?  If disappointment is your lot, better to have your candidate shooting for the moon, instead of settling for the house next door.
      
      He doesn't have to get all of his proposals enacted to start moving things in the correct direction. We are going to need more than an establishment run of the mill politician to accomplish that.
      
      What do any of the GOP candidates know about foreign affairs with the exception of 'talking tough'? Obama was not an expert in foreign policy at the time of his election, but I believe that he has done well in this area.  I trust both Obama and Sander's instincts and that is not a show-stopper for me.
      
      Your points are rational points in this debate, I just disagree with them.
      
      So do you think that Blacks give Clinton this fealty of support because they think that she can 'deliver'?

      replyreport
      1. 86

         RJ Schwartzposted 8 years agoin reply to this

         I'd be interested in seeing the list of what legislation the GOP blocked - great post by the way. Partisan issues that the two parties fight about continuously really have no bearing.  Republicans can counter with the fact that every job bill and the Keystone pipeline have been blocked by Obama's people.  It's tough to just open the checkbook to all  of the ideas Obama had when we are beyond broke.  Its tough to work together when he violates the law with the DREAM act. 
         
         I'd like to see Bernie get the nomination and let him and Trump put on their best sales pitch for the future of America and see what happens.

         replyreport
         1. 78

            Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

            Thanks RJ, The GOP resisted the idea of the 'stimulus' legislation to provide jobs to deal with the infrastructure, which are not make work projects.
            
            Keystone comes with serious environmental issues associated with it. There were questions of just how many jobs and was it worth the environmental risks. That is what I heard anyway.
            
            Without all the GOP constant tax cut/trickle down philosophy for the plutocrats we may just have resources to help build the economy from the middle class outward.
            
            This is my opinion from my study of the issues at hand and yes I am looking forward to having Bernie or even Clinton destroy a clown like Trump in the general election, then the right will pine for some sort of coup d'etat to take the country back when the democratic process does not meet with their approval. The rightwing mind is anything but democratic in nature.

            replyreport
   3. 70

      rhamsonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      "What it comes down to is the fact that, whatever he promises, Sanders won't be able to deliver."
      
      FACT? If you take any of the promises from the Presidential hopefuls their promises are fairy dust as well. The fact is that Congress is in the way of any one of these candidates promises. Your preferred candidate Clinton is repeating everything Sanders says except her willingness to reign in her chief campaign donors. One big difference is that Clinton espouses years of fighting for the poor and disadvantaged and has produced what? As I stated she is a carbon copy of Sanders and Congress will obstruct her more than they did Obama. So why elect her?
      
      "(1) If the Dems lose, President Obama's legacy, such as ObamaCare, is at grave risk."
      
      Paul Ryan is already in cahoots with McConnell to defund it anyway. It is just a matter of time. They won't need Hillary's signature for any of that anyway.
      
      "(2) Sanders has demonstrated appeal for people on the far left, but not for others."
      
      Sanders has also demonstrated that his grassroots appeal has resulted in far more support by actual voters than Hillary's pumped up special interest superpac backers. Sanders appeals to those who are tired of Hillary and her dead on arrival promises that have been bolstered by any actual say in what is happening. Sanders wants to give the governing back to the people and not an elitist oligarchy that wants no part of losing their grip. Take the blinders off my friend.
      
      "(3) Young people and far left voters have no problem with the Socialist label."
      
      What about all the services and entitlements in this country don't you understand are socialist and we love them. We are democratic in name only with the government run by billions of dollars in special interest money. We left democratic rule a long time ago when the we assuaged our interest in the running of the country and rewarded the slime bags who steal right from under our noses.
      
      "(4) Given all this, the probability is that Sanders being the Dem nominee is the only thing that can get Donald Trump elected President of the United States."
      
      Is that another fact? Latest poles show a Sanders candidacy would resoundingly beat Trump because of Trumps divisiveness and bullying tactics. Fact?
      
      "(5) Even if Sanders was elected, there is zero possibility of him getting his program through Congress. He says he'll do it by stimulating such a groundswell of support from the electorate, that Republicans in Congress will have no choice but to enact his program."
      
      Sanders main priority is to have a political revolution that will replace the tired dead rhetoric of the ruling class by electing representatives without the baggage we have been overlooking for years. Hillary is the most divisive and reviled character in this election. It is just that a sensible and objective review seems to elude so many. Hint.....hint.
      
      "And who knows what it will mean for foreign affairs - Sanders has so far demonstrated little interest in that aspect of the job."
      
      And you wish to put the failed mess Hillary left behind her at the State Department as a case point to object to Sanders. Obama had absolutely no experience in foreign affairs yet he was elected twice.
      
      You are right Sanders can't do it on his own and frankly much of it is not in reach. But what he does do With his agenda is make the country inclusive and not exclusive to the top 1%.
      
      Your factual and point driven diatribe is as bias as I can see and has no facts that I can agree with.

      replyreport
5. 78

   colorfuloneposted 8 years ago

   The media doesn't cover things like a Black Pastor bringing the house down at Trump's Cleveland rally, so I felt like I would be amiss to not post a link to this inspiring and spiritually uplifting man of God.  He sees through all the world leaders and media lies & politicians rhetoric (etc.) about Trump being a racist. 
   
   He is a blessing from God Almighty!   
   YouTube video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCHZbB-M9oE

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Credence2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Colorfulone, like those two quirkly ladies you showed pictures of earlier, one or two aberrations is a far cry from saying that the Black community is 'jumping' in to the compassionate arms of Donald Trump.

      replyreport
      1. 78

         colorfuloneposted 8 years agoin reply to this

         Very good people, Black voters are rallying to support Trump...maybe not in masses (or vocally) but this phenomenon isn't over.  Its a scary deal out there when African American Trump supports are being accosted by Black Lives Matter members.   
         
         There were several shootings after protesters shut down the Trump rally in Chicago last Friday...deaths and people wounded, beatings, etc.   (In a state with the toughest gun laws in the USA.)   I value your researched opinions, and your heart for the African Americans that I embrace. 
         
         I long for the Spirit of Martin Luther King Jr's.  "I Have A Dream" to be awakened again.   The living history of the progress King made has digressed into a dark history.   Maybe you see that as progress? 
         
         Chicago: 32 Shot, Five Fatally in Weekend Violence
         http://www.breitbart.com/big-government … ium=social

         replyreport