Sanders supporters are wealthier, whiter, and more male than Hillary supporters.

[DanTex]

This is a simple fact, confirmed by polls. For example:



Why?

Because wealthier white males, being the least vulnerable group in our society, have the luxury of being able to risk a Republican presidency. People who can't afford, for example, to see ACA repealed and SS privatized are less keen on punishing Hillary for the IWR vote over 10 years ago. They care less about the ideological crusades and personal animosity, and more about what policies actually get passed and direct impact on their lives.

Rattling on about how there's no difference between Hillary and the GOP is not only ignorant, but it reflects quite a bit of privilege. And so does entertaining the delusion that a self-described socialist is going to be able to beat the GOP in the general election.

[Warren DeMontague]

1. they're also younger.

wonder why you left that bit out?

[DanTex]

2. And older. "Hipsters and hippies."

[Warren DeMontague]

3. yeah, fuck those people, huh

It's not like Millennials matter or anything.

[DanTex]

6. Umm..what? I don't think they matter more or less than anyone else.

[Warren DeMontague]

14. right, you're just making an observation: about stupid kids, dumb hippies and "wealthy white men".

just an observation!

[DanTex]

15. Yes, I made an observation about wealthier white men. They are Bernie's top demographic.

I didn't say kids or hippies are dumb.

[Warren DeMontague]

17. And like I said, it's fucking August of 2015, and as much as we may think everyone on the planet is

breathlessly dialed into the election at this early date, the simple fact is that most people won't be paying attention for a while.

Most people don't have the privilege of paying attention. I'm sure the political junkie class skews heavily wealthy and white (can't speak to male) -- it sure represents that way on DU.

Outside the political junkie class, Hillary has wide name recognition that Sanders simply doesn't. But that will change, and I suspect the numbers you've posted will, too.

[DanTex]

19. Yeah, that's one explanation. The political junkie class who sees it all as a game

and isn't affected personally by much of it, I can see how the Bernie phenomenon is a fun distraction.

[Warren DeMontague]

29. or perhaps that's just who is paying attention, given that the primaries don't start

for over 5 months.

but, you know, keep it going with the ad hominem broad brush attacks that you're -honest!- not making, here. Well done!

I'm sure you're convincing TONS of people to support HRC.

[DanTex]

38. Of course, the old "black people don't pay attention, they just vote on name recognition" meme.

One of the classics.

[Warren DeMontague]

45. Except nobody is voting, yet. You yourself are spinning all sorts of spurious generalizations about

who is doing what, and why.

How about we look at those numbers in 5 months.

Pretty fucking simple way to determine who is right, wouldn't you say?

[DanTex]

51. Actually, you're the one spinning the generalizations about how black people

and women and lower earners don't pay attention and just make decisions based on name recognition.

Yes, we'll see in five months.

[Warren DeMontague]

54. Sure.

see you then, Dan.

[7962]

102. Yes, just like everyone else.

"name recognition" is the main reason ANYONE has a lead at this point in the race.

[whathehell]

278. Don't tell that to the race and class baiters..

They're on a search and destroy mission for every "ism" on earth,

and get upset when one fails to appear.

[7962]

299. Man, aint THAT the damn truth! nt

[whathehell]

327. I think it is, unfortunately

[ArcticFox]

306. you can't be serious

I mean, this person puts fourth a well-reasoned hypothesis and you accuse it of racist origins?

Do you have evidence regarding the name recognition of the respective candidates across different demographic groups? Anything about who knows what the various candidates' positions are?

I wish people would stop playing along with the opposition's divide and conquer strategy.

[artislife]

393. He didn't say anything about Black people

Hate to tell you Dan, there are more than two races in America.

[George II]

198. "Ad hominem broad brush attacks"? Can you be specific, don't think anyone here sees it that way.

[Warren DeMontague]

224. I do.

[George II]

227. But you won't (or can't) say what those attacks were, leading one to assume..............

[Warren DeMontague]

230. I guess

[beam me up scottie]

33. You're the one playing games.

But I understand why you're feeling a little more desperate each day.

Keep it up, you're campaigning for Bernie without even realizing it.

[Warren DeMontague]

36. the old "oh yes I agree. With that thing you didn't say"

I'll take bad internet arguments for 500, Alex.

[beam me up scottie]

43. See what you've been missing?

All this Win! in one thread.

[merrily]

116. I don't get it.

Your reply to Beam me up scottie does not seem to mesh with the comment bmus made to Dan Tex.

[Warren DeMontague]

225. in ref. to this post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=542323

[merrily]

232. Thanks.

I am still not sure I get it, but that's probably on me.

Nice to see you, though. Hi.

[Ken Burch]

144. Bernie beats several GOP candidates in head-to-head polls.

HRC is not the only candidate who can win, and the country isn't demanding that we nominate the least-progressive candidate.

[whathehell]

253. Who cares?

besides you, of course.

[DanTex]

255. People interested in the primaries, and in the demographics of the supporters of the

various candidates might care. I guess you don't, but for some reason you're still replying to this thread.

[whathehell]

260. Why did you find this particular demographic interesting enough to start a thread on it?

[kenfrequed]

342. Feh

It is ironic that you are trying to create the impression that the most economically progressive candidate is somehow for the wealthy.

How the hell do you even sleep at night?

[onlyadream]

71. What a surprise

When both my kids, 15 and 18, started talking about Bernie, asking me if I knew who he was, lol. I was shocked that they did!

[newfie11]

41. Old white female hippy here

For Sanders

[whathehell]

280. Another one right here with you

for Sanders.

[newfie11]

289. Cool! Nice to meet you!

Go Bernie

[whathehell]

290. You too!

Where did you spend your happy hippy days?

I didn't make Woodstock, but I did spend serious time in San Francisco

when it was wonderful.

[newfie11]

325. LA seems like 100 years ago! Nt

[whathehell]

326. Is that where you were?

I know what you mean about the time!

[newfie11]

332. Yeah I was going to jr college then

That was when Robert Kennedy was killed and the Watts Riots were going on.

A very interesting time.

[Blue_In_AK]

347. Ditto.

[fasttense]

104. Yup

And they said the same things when Obama ran. Oh he would split the party. No one would vote for Obama in the general election. Not true then and not true now.

[leftofcool]

4. And here I thought his supporters were all in the 99%

[virtualobserver]

8. the one percent supports Hillary with their wallet

you get more influence that way

[leftofcool]

21. I must be in the 1% then, unfortunately, I don't have much influence.

[virtualobserver]

27. The priveleged donors at her high dollar fundraisers do

[Warren Stupidity]

24. what income level do you think puts you in the 1%?

[7962]

335. Gross income of about 350K.

[Warren Stupidity]

336. 'xactly.

While Clinton funds her campaign from wall street her supporters here are inferring that anyone making more than 80k is a "one per-center". The disconnect is staggering.

[7962]

337. 80K? Really? I dont know how anyone could take them seriously then

I mean, you can live pretty good where i am on 80K, but I'm in Ga 100 miles from Atlanta. Even so, you're not living the high life! MAke 80k in pretty much ANY major city in the US and see how thats a "one percenter"
Ridiculous

[virtualobserver]

5. It is always about his supporters, never about Bernie

His supporters aren't running for President.

It is always about what is wrong with them....their "delusion" or their "privilege"
and how "ignorant" they are.

[DanTex]

7. This post is about his supporters, and the reason why they tend to be more

privileged than Hillary's.

[virtualobserver]

11. you also called Bernie supporters ignorant, the truly privileged donate to Hillary

[DanTex]

13. Well, the ones that think there's no difference between Hillary and the GOP are ignorant.

[Warren DeMontague]

16. you mean like the post downthread that compares Sanders Supporters to the GOP?

Fucking brilliant, sort of like how my computer runs on electricity and so does a toaster, therefore my computer is a toaster.

[Ed Suspicious]

112. Oh, I like you! Logic is lovely.

[jeff47]

176. Let's see...you overclock the hell out of the processor...

Add some slots for bread....Hrm...gonna need a mechanism to flip the bread over or we're gonna need a two-CPU system. I guess we could try overclocking the graphics card too....

(/snark)

[Warren DeMontague]

226. The crumbs would pose a serious problem I think.

but, then, geek squad I aint.

[virtualobserver]

18. they are probably not ignorant of her record

and on certain issues there has not been enough of a difference.

But the truly privileged are donating to Hillary.

[Scuba]

69. Oh, there's a difference. Hillary has evolved on a couple issues, economics not being one of them.

[Warren DeMontague]

12. Hillary comes into it with FAR greater name recognition. It is August of 2015.

Perhaps "privilege" skews more towards the political junkie types who are actually paying attention beyond simply knowing who "Hillary Clinton" is.

I strongly suspect those numbers will change, particularly as various candidates that have been deliberately vague make specific policy proposals - assuming they actually do that - and we have debates, assuming we actually have them.

[Ken Burch]

146. No they aren't.

A lot of the jobless back Bernie, and his support is increasing in all demographics.

[Autumn]

183. That chart doesn't show that Sanders supporters are wealthier, whiter, and more male than Hillarys.

Her percentages are higher in all categories.

[unapatriciated]

231. damn that's news to me, my daughter her wife and

my disabled son. I didn't live a charmed life, struggled just to provide the basic. I was involved in politics because I struggled and as a result when my children grew up they too were involved. You got one thing right I am an old white "female" hippie.

[whathehell]

281. It's because they can't come up with an honest argument against his positions..

He's just not their fan girl and his supporters aren't part of their club.

[liberal N proud]

10. Wealthier, whiter? Wonder what other party that emulates?

Oh, I know... Republicans are wealthier and whiter.


Just saying!

[Bonobo]

20. Yes, it is a fact that with a measure of comfort, people can lift their eyes to a higher goal.

Last edited Tue Aug 25, 2015, 04:12 AM - Edit history (1)

It is hard when you are buried to be anything but pragmatic.

You did pretty well in your OP, Dan, until you fell into your old habit of mixing in horseshit with the soil...

"Rattling on about how there's no difference between Hillary and the GOP is not only ignorant, but it reflects quite a bit of privilege. "

THAT'S where your straw man lies. No one says there is no difference. Perhaps some say there isn't ENOUGH difference, but that is another matter entirely.

You know, many popular movements have been led by privileged students throughout history for the same reasons you cite here. They have the wherewithal to reach higher, and to lead in that direction.

Perhaps you should follow instead of resisting what is a real movement. A movement for the better.

Maybe you haven't been paying attention, but the status quo isn't working out that well.

[mac56]

56. ^ THIS ^

[DanTex]

106. Except we're not talking about the leaders here, but the followers.

As Hillary-haters like to constantly remind us, Hillary is much wealthier than Bernie, she vacations in the Hamptons, etc. You are quite right to point out that Hillary's wealth is not very relevant, after all, FDR and JFK and LBJ were wealthier still.

But I think it is noteworthy that Bernie's supporters are generally wealthier and more privileged than Hillary's.

[Bonobo]

108. Everyone is a leader and an agent of change, Dan.

You should really try to be one too. Stand up for your principles with courage. If they are not your principles, though, that's another matter.

This is why you cannot focus on anything but attacks on millions of enemies you've created in your mind.

You can't deal with the fact that you are advocating against the candidate that most closely represents your beliefs?

[DanTex]

113. Discretion is the better part of valor.

Sure, being the realistic and cynical isn't sexy, and you get to lecture me about "courage" and so on. And it is encouraging to see so many people coming out to support Bernie's progressive message.

On the other hand, it's hard to deny that a lot of Bernie's internet support (not just DU, but Kos, twitter, HuffPo, etc) is mainly focused on attacking Hillary, often about dumb things like the email "scandal". And this is unfortunate, because after all the sound and fury, Hillary is going to be our nominee, and then it's either her or a Republican.

And, contrary to what some Bernie supporters insist, there is a huge difference between Hillary and the GOP.

[Bonobo]

131. Sanders supporters are...Sanders supporters are...Sanders supporters are...Sanders' supporters are

"THEM"

[DanTex]

136. Too bad, we seemed on the verge of having an actual substantive discussion.

[Bonobo]

139. I'm just repeating back what I keep hearing from you over and over and over. nt

[Fast Walker 52]

143. people are against Hillary because she's a centrist Dem with a disturbing record on many issues

It bothers me a great deal what a hawk she is, her support of the national security state, plus her connections to bankers and to the elites. Why shouldn't we care about that?

[stupidicus]

156. see, that's what almost everybody thta says "they're the same" refers to

and the stuff he top posted (garbage) is nothing but a distraction from that since it's a loser one does a Bernie/HC pro/con list

[0rganism]

291. since discretion is the better part of valor, and cowardice is the better part of discretion...

... let's all bravely hide in the broom closet until 2017.

(to paraphrase Douglas Adams)

[Ken Burch]

148. Most Bernie supporters aren't "Hillary haters". We're principle-defenders.

There is nothing egalitarian, pro-worker or anti-racist about supporting the least-progressive candidate.

[artislife]

394. You post Hillary Haters like it's a bad thing....

[Ed Suspicious]

114. AMEN!

[Fast Walker 52]

138. exactly-- plus better off folks have easier access to new info and ideas

I'm reasonably well off and a Bernie supporter. I expect my taxes will go up significantly if he's elected. But I'm willing to do that because I think his policies will lead us to a stronger more hopeful future.

[Puzzledtraveller]

210. Thank you Bonobo!

[840high]

301. ...^ that

[Flying Squirrel]

319. Horseshoe?

I think you spelled that wrong.

[Bonobo]

320. Thanks!

[okasha]

340. You just made the economic equivalent

of "the white man's burden". argument.

Talk about clueless.

[bvf]

22. Good god, what a reach.

[djean111]

23. So, as a decidedly non-wealthy white woman, I should not be supporting Bernie? Damn the issues?

Oh, wait - this is another "You better support Hillary or the GOP will win!!!!" OP, with graphics and all.

[beam me up scottie]

30. It's also racist and sexist.

He's branched out.

[riversedge]

50. No one said that at all...

AS we know--Bernie is gaining support.



https://today.yougov.com/news/2015/07/27/sanders-trails-clinton-even-among-liberal-democrat/

Most Democrats, including self-described liberals, want Hillary Clinton to be their party's candidate in 2016, not Bernie Sanders

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders has gained support in the last few weeks, particularly from liberal Democrats – and about half of all Democrats identify themselves that way. But he continues to trail frontrunner Hillary Clinton in the latest Economist/YouGov Poll, even with liberal Democrats, and even when the race is limited to those two candidates.

[djean111]

89. I don't base my support of any politician on what herd someone else has decided I belong to.

IMO, the minute a politician divides voters up into "demographics", they start pandering like crazy.

[Warren Stupidity]

25. Thank for sharing The Daily Horseshit. nt.

[Warren DeMontague]

34. ....I'm so glad I decided to swing by sillytown this weekend. and by that I mean, GD:P

speaking of capital-f Fun!

[GoneFishin]

26. I know I am only on DU because my JetStream is in for service, so flying to my Villa in France is

is out of the question. First class is so Eeew. And chartering a jet that someone else's butts have been sitting in, well, just yuck.

[Warren DeMontague]

32. I'm busy driving my volvo from Klan Rallies to Grateful Dead shows, myself.

but it's a VERY nice volvo.

[GoneFishin]

35. Don't get any granola stuck in the upholstery.

[Warren DeMontague]

39. or as I like to call it, granholstery.

Nothing like the crunchy taste of nuts, nougat, and sun-soaked tan pleather. Mmmmm.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

362. And don't get a Birkenstock stuck under a floor mat.

You really shouldn't drive with those things, yanno.

[beerandjesus]

150. Post of the day!!

Hahahaha!!!

[zappaman]

201. Good Lord NOOOOO!

Not the ones with no Phil and John Mayer!!!!

Please tell me you're not going to those!

I used to drive a volvo wagon to shows waaaay back when.
Dependable and could fit a dozen if you squeezed...

[Warren DeMontague]

229. and miss "your Bobby is a wonderland"?

Last edited Mon Aug 24, 2015, 05:24 PM - Edit history (2)

I'd see just about any iteration with those guys (meaning, Bob, Phil, Billy and Mickey, plus Jeff Chimienti who I think is real fun to watch) but no, I'm not about to haul out to the East Coast to see John Mayer.

I'm not a fan (to say the least) but, then, I'm not gonna waste a bunch of time hatin' on the thing, either- if that's who they want to play with and they're having fun, good for them. And who knows? Maybe I'll change my mind about him down the road.

***edited to add; I guess they added a couple dates at the Bill Graham in SF, in December. That's more of a possibility, but still unlikely. If they came up to the Crystal Ballroom, I'd be all over it, I mean, why not: I like Bob, and frankly having Mickey and Billy back adds a totally cool energy. i was never a big fan of drums back in the Jerry days, but the FTW drums were fucking beyond belief.

[beam me up scottie]

28. Funny you mentioned SS since your candidate wants to "tweak" it.

While both Bernie and OMalley want to protect and increase it.

Watching a HC supporter lecture others about privilege is truly cringeworthy. We know what she represents, and it's not the underprivileged.

You are getting desperate, Dan and if I thought anyone who mattered would be taken in by your disgusting op I would explain what I have to lose and why I'm not supporting Hillary.

But I doubt I'm the only one who stopped paying attention to your manipulative tactics a long time ago.

So enjoy your thread and remember it and all the others fondly when you wonder what happened to your credibility.

[leftofcool]

37. I think the chart says it all.

[beam me up scottie]

46. What does it say?

[Mnpaul]

88. To me it says

46% of Hillary supporters reported a family income over 80k while only 27% of Bernie's supporters reported that level.

[beam me up scottie]

96. You win the internets!

And here we thought the only experts in spinning data worked for Fox news.

Quite a few putting in overtime on DU it seems.

[Recursion]

124. But that's not true

46% of Democrats with income > $80K support Clinton. That's a very different question.

[840high]

302. ...+1

[DanTex]

44. LOL. So now posting poll numbers is "disgusting".

Nothing like wealthy white males telling the "underprivileged" what's good for them.

[Warren DeMontague]

48. oh the drama.

BMUS is a wealthy white male, now?

[beam me up scottie]

60. Didn't you get the memo?

I've been lying all this time.

[beam me up scottie]

49. What's disgusting is watching another HC suppoter exploit race, gender and class issues.

Because it's all a game to some.

[DanTex]

53. Poll numbers are poll numbers. It's not my fault that Bernie's core support comes from

wealthy white males.

[beam me up scottie]

57. Keep it up.

You're turning more people off to Hillary with every post.

[DanTex]

59. LOL. Right, because you were on the fence right up until you read this.

[beam me up scottie]

61. No but others are and they're paying attention.

Trust me, it's not a pretty picture.

[DanTex]

62. "Trust me." LOL. This keeps getting better!

[beam me up scottie]

65. You've already been called out for calling me a wealthy white male.

Think that's a coincidence or are people getting tired of your games?

[DanTex]

68. Yeah, "called out" by a Hillary-basher. I'll take that as a compliment.

But you're right, if I keep making factual posts, I'm probably not going to win over many of the delusional Hillary-haters. There are always tradeoffs.

[beam me up scottie]

70. Who bashed Hillary?

Factual?

You keep using that word...

[DanTex]

72. Who called me out? (hint: it's the same person)

And yes, poll numbers are factual. But I forgot that poll trutherism is a requirement for entry into the Bernie worshipper's club.

[beam me up scottie]

74. How do you know they bashed Hillary?

How about posting some of those facts you claim you're so good with?

Prove it.

[DanTex]

75. Because I've read his posts. Are you really trying to pretend that Warren DM

isn't firmly in the Bernie camp? Down the rabbit hole we go...

[beam me up scottie]

76. Post proof that he supports Bernie.

[DanTex]

79. You're serious? OK, for example...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6622898

[beam me up scottie]

81. Fail.

Try again.

[DanTex]

83. LOL. I guess you're committed to fantasy. Have fun.

[beam me up scottie]

92. The irony is if he does decide to back Bernie it may be because of folks like you.

He's been asking for info about Hillary and all he gets are more ops bashing Bernie's supporters.

When was the last time you posted anything of substance about your candidate?

[Warren DeMontague]

93. If I'm gonna vote for Sanders in the primary, I'll just say it.

Jesus, some people need new fucking hobbies.

My reply to agschmid there was in response to a post saying "sanders wont be able to work with a republican congress"- point being, yeah, like any democrat will. Sort of like "but he's a socialist".. And? They think everyone who wasnt on Ayn Rand's rolodex is a socialist.

That you took the time to go hunting for that, geez... i'm flattered, I guess.

However even if I was a dedicated Sanders supporter (still undecided, actually) that wouldnt make me a "hillary basher", and even if I WAS a "hillary basher" (as opposed to just a sanders supporter, although it sure seems a lot of hillary people are deeply resentful that there is ANY sort of primary process going on, at all) that STILL wouldnt change the fact that you called BMUS a wealthy white male.

.....which is fucking reeeeeeee-diculous.

[DanTex]

95. The Hillary bashing part is even more obvious, for example.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=540793

As for the "time to go hunting", there's this thing called "google"....

And, no, I didn't call anyone individually a wealthy white male, I called Bernie's core of support wealthy, white, and male. Which it is.

[Warren DeMontague]

99. Yep. I stand by that OP, too.

It's called a primary process- why is that so threatening? Im sorry, she can't just have the nomination automatically and be done with it. The party has to vote for her. That's how it works.

And one of the big selling points for her has been how tough she supposedly will be under the inevitable right wing attack machine.

So you think you see that, there? i don't. Ruth Marcus didn't. The Washington Post didn't. Trying to blow off the email stuff with snapchat jokes, isnt really cutting it.

Apparently endlessly bashing the supporters of bernie sanders for their supposed demographic deficiencies (or the cars they drive, types of lettuce they eat, music they listen to, whatever) is fine, but GD: P should be free of ANY criticism (i.e. "Bashing&quot of Hillary Clinton, eh?

Also, pro tip, if you want to see whatever allegedly offensive thing Ive written lately on DU, use the DU search function. Or ask my many "fans", or shit, ask me directly- i'm usually an amicable sort.

If you use google, you're going to get this drunken monkey puppet in a wrestling helmet.

[DanTex]

103. That's fine. Nothing threatening at all.

But it's clear that you are in the Bernie camp, whether or not you claim to be "just leaning", and also you're bashing Hillary about the email nonsense. So I'm not too worried that Hillary is going to "lose your vote" because I happened to post some poll numbers you didn't like.

[Warren DeMontague]

109. Actually, i have no idea about the email nonsense specifically.

I think she or her staff may have displayed bad judgment- keeping work and personal email separate is pretty basic shit, for one- AND i think that the clinton reflexive impulse to hide stuff from potential opponents, while understandable, may be coming back to bite her on the ass.

But my OP, and the Marcus piece, aren't about "the email nonsense", they're about her -clearly- poor handling of it to date.

I've liked what Bernie has had to say so far, and I have felt Hillary's campaign has lacked substance, but there is certainly still time for any candidate to earn my primary vote. Very little interests me less than DU "teams" or long-running grudge matches, and they dont influence my vote much, if at all.

[MoveIt]

212. The OP Par for the course with this divisive shit stirring "supporter"

27 members have recommended this thread (displayed in chronological order):

And you will know them by their Recs

[840high]

304. I saw who they are. As expected.

[Eleanors38]

282. Well, the guns thing didn't work.

[beam me up scottie]

284. Yet they bring it up every day - they're not exactly it getters.

All they know how to do is deploy the bat squirrel as a distraction.

[4Q2u2]

172. Was it not Obama who Schooled Hillary on Social Security in 08

Has her position changed?

She was protecting the top 2% when she was against getting rid of the max payroll deduction of SS.
Getting rid of this provision would be more equitable and bring in line top earners with all other SS payers.

[beam me up scottie]

173. She won't tell us what her position is.

That's the problem. We're just supposed to trust her.

[artislife]

396. ^^^this.

[sufrommich]

31. Well said. nt

[blackspade]

40. The central premis of your thesis is not backed by this poll.

No one who is not in the top 10% can 'risk' a GOP win.

[Warren DeMontague]

52. Hillary's people also tried to say that nominating Obama would be risky in the general, in '08.

Guess this spares them the trouble of coming up with a new strategy.

[leftofcool]

42. Good post, Dan.

I know that people around where I live do indeed care more about what policies can actually get passed than pipe dreams.

[spinbaby]

47. Could it be...

That older, wealthier, and male is more likely to have Internet access? Because we all know what great coverage Bernie has been getting on TV

[mac56]

67. ^ THIS ^

[retrowire]

55. Another vote for Hillary or the GOP will win topic

my counter point to this is.... So?

[zazen]

58. and the demographic of Hillary's donors are wealthier and more male than Bernie's

[Rosa Luxemburg]

185. Certainly!

[tecelote]

63. Keep pushing this point please!

The more you focus on it, the more it will change.

Bernie will blow past this before the primaries because he is stronger on civil rights than any other candidate.

His long proud record proves it.

[Robbins]

64. time for some reality

I am disabled american who relies on SSI,medicaid,and food stamps among others and I say there is no difference between her and gop on several issues.she is corporate free trade loving war monger dem.

Free trade bills are destroying unions and working class

all this endless war will cause cuts to social safety net.Bill Clinton hurt social safety net with wellfare reform.

Hillary prased henry Kissinger while Bill Clinton pals around with both bushes.

Clinton supporter McCaskell attacked bernie for wanting to expend things like Social security.

for me there is only one choice and that is Bernie.

[beam me up scottie]

66. Thank you Robbins.

I used to think ignoring this kind of op was the way to go but now I realize that more folks need to speak up.

[Scuba]

73. /\_/\_This right here_/\_/\

[DanTex]

80. When it comes to SSI, medicaid, and food stamps there are huge differences between

HRC and the GOP. Actually there are huge differences on basically all issues, but these in particular make the contrast stark: the GOP wants to cut/privatize them.

[beam me up scottie]

84. Hillary wants to "tweak" SS.

Not increase it like Bernie.

There is a big difference.

[DanTex]

86. Yes, by increasing benefits to lower income seniors and women.

On the other hand, the GOP wants to cut and privatize it.

Yes, the difference is huge.

[beam me up scottie]

94. That's not what she meant by tweaked.

Yes, the difference is glaring.

People know who they can trust.

[merrily]

120. Sounds like a first step toward making OASDI needs based, which Republicans have indeed sought.

[Bohunk68]

169. Being on SS, I am very keen on keeping up with

proposals of candidates. I have yet to hear ANYTHING at all from Hillary on exactly what her "tweaks" would do with SS. Are you on her staff and have information that can be shared?

[short circuit]

164. Not tweak.

Enchance. And we don't know what the word means from her.

[beam me up scottie]

165. She's the only one who won't give details.

Bernie and Martin have gone on the record but as usual Hillary is checking which way the wind's blowing.

Why should we trust her?

[short circuit]

166. Exactly.

Makes me nervous when it involves my only source of income.

[Ed Suspicious]

134. I am right there with you.

[840high]

305. Bernie.

[whatchamacallit]

77. Those fuckers!

[Divernan]

78. $$$+Bernie supporters=noblesse oblige;$$$+HRC=limitless greed

There are some people of significant wealth who care about the future of this planet and all of its inhabitants - ya know - the Golden Rule & the Seven Works of Mercy -
To feed the hungry.
To give drink to the thirsty.
To clothe the naked.
To Shelter the Homeless
To visit the sick.
To visit the imprisoned
To bury the dead.
Bernie Sanders would be their candidate.

Then there are others of great wealth who are addicted to accumulating ever more wealth - ya know, the kind of people who, even if they quickly accumulate say, oh, I don't know, more than $50 million in 10 years, still bitch that they aren't REALLY wealthy, because they like, you know, still pay regular income tax. They will contribute vast amounts to make sure they get a corporate/Wall Street friendly candidate, and that most certainly ain't Bernie Sanders.

[shenmue]

100. Hilarious

[Bonobo]

82. You often talk about "Hillary-haters"... Right?

Well, think about it: IF there are Hillary-haters, they only hate one person.

You Hillary supporters apparently hate MILLIONS of us!

[Demeter]

119. Good point!

Let's win them over with the best candidate since FDR! And the votes to back him up!

[MrMickeysMom]

85. Divisive Bullshit

I'm gonna to something you'll read downstream from Robbins -

Free trade bills are destroying unions and working class

all this endless war will cause cuts to social safety net.Bill Clinton hurt social safety net with wellfare reform.

Hillary prased henry Kissinger while Bill Clinton pals around with both bushes.

Clinton supporter McCaskell attacked bernie for wanting to expend things like Social security.

for me there is only one choice and that is Bernie.

[DanTex]

90. Yes, the Hillary bashing in that post is both divisive and bullshit.

[MoveIt]

328. Feigning ignorance

it's what HRC Supporters do.

[Babel_17]

87. Wealthier, so the most willing to raise taxes on themselves? Cool!

Regarding Social Security, many HRC supporters were disappointed when she opposed raising the caps on income subject to SS tax. "a trillion-dollar tax hike" is one way she referred to it.

Thankfully we have Senator Sanders, Warren, and O'Malley, currently favoring raising the caps. By supporting them we might get Secretary Clinton to eventually commit as well.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/08/12/clinton-is-open-to-raising-social-security-taxes-on-six-figure-earners/

CLAREMONT, N.H. -- What to do about Social Security is one of the most important questions that Hillary Rodham Clinton has yet to answer as she lays out her economic agenda for primary voters.

Democrats in Congress, along with other contenders for the party's presidential nod, are saying that a costly increase in benefits is necessary, given how few workers are able to save for retirement.

So far, Clinton hasn't embraced the liberal prescription for Social Security, but her views could be changing. At a town hall here Tuesday, she said she'd be open to a Social Security tax increase proposed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), her radical rival in the primary.

During the 2008 campaign, Clinton had flatly rejected such an increase. Her comments this week could suggest that she has warmed to the idea, or that she is responding to a broader shift to the left among Democrats.

As the primaries moves forward and Sanders begins to appeal to voters of a less wealthy demographic in those areas, that chart will show different numbers.

If we were to show a cart based only on where the early primaries were held, I suspect the chart would be different as that would show Clinton's support amongst a better off demographic. Sanders, being in part an insurgent candidate, has concentrated his campaigning in these early primary states. So his support is inevitably disproportionately skewed to that demographic. Were the early primaries in states more like, say, Kentucky, I think we'd see much different numbers.

Why our party chooses that demographic for our early primaries is perhaps a question for DWS at the DNC.
It's an excellent question, imo. I think Senator Sanders would to love address primary voters in areas that are less well off. Perhaps we can have more town hall meetings and debates in front of them? But no, not according to DNC and its head, Clinton ally Debbie Wasserman Schultz, we won't be having a more robust schedule that could have that.

[dreamnightwind]

140. Well done, thanks - nt

[BainsBane]

331. Does Sanders propose raising INCOME taxes on people who make $80K a year?

Your entire post is about Social Security, which is a federally run pension program. I support raising the caps, but if it becomes mere taxation, it is doomed as a program. The entire raison d'etre for the program is that everyone pays in and everyone receives benefits.

How about income taxes? I hear a lot of talk about the rich and the 1 percent, but then when a DUer posts a poll we hear all kinds of angst about how $500k a year or $200 k a year really isn't that much, when in truth it is 4-10 times more than the average income and the former is actually 1 percent, while the latter is upper 5 percent.

Yet you ignore income taxes in favor of what you clearly want to be a flat tax, which is in fact regressive.

Would you support a progressive income tax system that raises marginal and effective rates on the household incomes of $80k a year or more? Has Sanders proposed such an increase?

[Babel_17]

334. Huh? Where do I talk about a flat tax?

My first point was in the post title. If Sanders is elected then his wealthiest supporters risk paying more in income taxes.

It was HRC that referred to raising the caps as a tax hike. See the video or google the quote. But anyway, yeah, raise the caps.

If it takes higher taxes to beef up programs like the ACA (or single payer) then I support higher income taxes for the upper brackets. But I'd suggest taxing speculative stock market trades, cuts in the defense budget, taxing the umpteen billions in off shore havens, etc., first.

Really not sure where you see in my post a suggestion of a flat tax. (hint)

You also say "Your entire post is about Social Security".

Lol, seems like you ignored this half of it.

"As the primaries moves forward and Sanders begins to appeal to voters of a less wealthy demographic in those areas, that chart will show different numbers.

If we were to show a cart based only on where the early primaries were held, I suspect the chart would be different as that would show Clinton's support amongst a better off demographic. Sanders, being in part an insurgent candidate, has concentrated his campaigning in these early primary states. So his support is inevitably disproportionately skewed to that demographic. Were the early primaries in states more like, say, Kentucky, I think we'd see much different numbers.

Why our party chooses that demographic for our early primaries is perhaps a question for DWS at the DNC.
It's an excellent question, imo. I think Senator Sanders would to love address primary voters in areas that are less well off. Perhaps we can have more town hall meetings and debates in front of them? But no, not according to DNC and its head, Clinton ally Debbie Wasserman Schultz, we won't be having a more robust schedule that could have that."

[fbc]

91. Here's why you are interpreting that poll incorrectly.

You assume that people who say they would vote for Hillary are "Hillary supporters". That's not the case at all. A large part of those people who would vote for Hillary today are low information voters who pick her because of name recognition, and also tend to be from lower income brackets.

In general I think this is the biggest mistake people like Nate Silver are making right now. You can't treat polls taken many months before an election, before a single debate has even happened, as if respondents checking a box indicate they are actual supporters.

[jimlup]

97. Correlation is not causation /nt

[shawn703]

98. Sounds like a bit of nervousness is starting to settle in

I didn't think it was close enough to the primaries to act this desperate. No mention at all in the OP about how HRC's positions on health care or Social Security are better than Bernie's (wonder why?) just more typical race baiting. Their playbook never changes.

[JackInGreen]

101. So this is the new line of shit

Keep piling it on. You only make us grow.

[ibegurpard]

110. It's not new

The "supporters" insults have been out there for quite a while now.

[JackInGreen]

115. Oj I meant this exact tac

They've been hitting us for a while true, but 'it's mostly magoo, not for you' is cute.

[Vinca]

105. Wow . . . what an impressive sampling.

Did they poll people standing in line at the cold drink concession? Give me a couple of hours and I can come up with data that shows the exact opposite.

[Babel_17]

137. When the first primaries are actually held

When the first primaries are actually held we'll see what demographics actually come out to support Sanders, and which demographic supports their candidate by way of a checkbook.

When we look at how much money gets spent vs. how many people actually show up to attend the rallies, we'll see more exactly which candidate is supported by what demographic.

How much money will Sanders spend per vote? How much will Clinton? There's the answer as to what demographic supports each one.

Btw, I wonder if anyone is keeping tally as to what the respective campaigns have spent so far. How much per percentage point in the polls has Sanders campaign spent vs. what Clinton's campaign has spent? And of course HRC started with a huge advantage in name recognition.

[cherokeeprogressive]

107. I support Bernie Sanders because I can "afford" a republican.

Idiocy.

[rock]

111. Hey Dan

What I find even more telling than your table of statistics is the replies you got to your OP. I see no reason to characterize them myself, as they speak pretty much for themselves. Keep up the good work!

[Gman]

117. And this is why there is a ceiling to Sanders' poll numbers

Which he cannot overcome. He's proving to be a rather monolithic candidate with limited support. The bigger threat to Hillary is from seasoned, more savvy candidates including Biden.

Sanders is more of annoyance than anything.

[Demeter]

122. With the election more than a year away, there's no talk of ceilings

But one could point out the shrinking floorspace that Hillary's facing daily....

[Gman]

125. There's no talk because no one is analyzing it like I have

Their thinking hasn't progressed far enough.

[ibegurpard]

130. careful your paternalism is showing

"No one has analyzed it like I have"?
Jesus...

[Gman]

133. That's not mine to worry about.

If this hurts someone's feelings, I couldn't care less.

[onehandle]

142. The Primary election begins in 6 Months.

Projecting along the lines of Hillary's competitors' numbers puts her at risk in about 2018.

[ibegurpard]

123. Biden?

OK...

[Gman]

127. Should he choose to enter

[ibegurpard]

128. again

OK...

[eepatt]

118. What is the point?

I have looked at the responses to this post until my eyes have glazed over. I am reasonably sure I will vote for the Dem candidate in the general election. Until a few months ago, I assumed that I would be voting for Hillary because, as standard, conventional candidates go, she is capable and relatively sane. Moreover, frightened repubs have vilified her forever, so she must be pretty good. However, she is a conventional candidate. Her campaign will be of strategy, advertising, counting big donors to pay for expensive media. Then Bernie decided to run. All of a sudden, policy, not media, became both important and obvious. Bernie supporters are there because of policy issues, not campaign strategy. It looks like almost all these many posts are arguing about interpreting this polling data. I think we should be talking about policy proposals and not who supports whom. Money in politics is the root of most of what is wrong in the world today and that is why I support Bernie.

The data is interesting, but the poster's interpretation about privileged white males appears to be fantasy. Are not privileged white males the core of right wing voters? Let's look at policy, not demographics.

[MannyGoldstein]

121. Hillary's net favorability numbers are growing more negative,

and the FBI demanded her computer servers.

And she's never won an important fight or difficult election.

Sounds like a shoo-in for the general election.

[DanTex]

129. She's not a shoo-in, only a small favorite in the GE.

All the more reason that the Hillary-bashing is counterproductive. Because losing the GE would be really bad.

[ibegurpard]

132. Hillary bashing is unavoidable

It's what happens when you push a baggage-laden candidate with a number of bad policy decisions on her record on everyone.

[rock]

155. "baggage-laden"

Conservative meme. Though they have tried to heap baggage on her, nothing has stuck. Just like her husband (except for a dalliance with an intern).

[ibegurpard]

168. Bill has plenty of policy baggage

To answer for.

[beam me up scottie]

135. You think your bashing of Sanders' supporters is productive?

You're turning us off from your candidate in droves.

When was the last time you posted anything of substance about Hillary that wasn't in a flame bait op attacking someone else?

Oh the irony...

[MannyGoldstein]

149. So, hoping the Republican candidate is more disliked than Hillary

is the safe strategy here? That's what you're thinking?

[totodeinhere]

220. But many of us believe that Bernie would actually be a stronger general election candidate.

And if that were the case then by your logic we should be supporting Bernie, right?

[Ed Suspicious]

126. Polls don't confirm, they support. And they support all sort of bullshit analysis when you don't

read them too closely.

[Ken Burch]

141. Sanders now runs ahead of several GOP candidates in the polls.

Thus the "we HAVE to nominate HRC or we can't win" meme is totally discredited.

[ion_theory]

145. This show exactly why these stats are pointless

I could easily argue that the issue is woman striving for a female president that they are willing to compromise on true liberal positions (I don't necessarily believe this). My main argument against Hillary is not that she is the same as the GOP, but she isn't dissimilar enough.

[stupidicus]

157. and that's the case alrighty

and one HC supporters are impotent in the face of.

That's why we have such a rinse/repeat of garbage posts like the top post

[jalan48]

147. Yes, and as we know, old white males are responsible for all our woes. So, vote Hillary!

[onehandle]

151. The same core demographic of President Nader and President Dean...

...if not the exact same people, at his 12-20,000+ person 'super-rallies.'



Look familiar to anyone?

Nader drew 100,000 to rallies in less than a month. And this was 15 years ago.

[leftofcool]

163. +1

[artislife]

398. One time.

Not city after city after city after city after city after city....across this great land of ours. Look it up, I did last week to prove a point to a h supporter.

[zentrum]

152. Probably true because...

….the way the system has been rigged to purposely undermine and undercut working people, it's the more educated, less MSM dependent, that can do the economic and social analysis that is necessary in order to have an initial understanding of why the 99% is so f&*cked over.

This is because of the 40 year beat down of the FDR approach to government, community building and education. Bernie is a great leader and is here because the re-empowerment of working people needs to be a movement. It's not unusual that it's lead by an educated minority.

Bernie's campaign will educate, broaden and not go away. Clinton is expounded more left of center rhetoric because of Bernie, because of us Bernie supporters.

The harmful prison reforms and welfare system reforms and trade deals, which have so hurt minorities and women and poor people, enacted under the Clintons could never have happened under a Sander's administration.

Plus she voted for the war in Iraq which is still harming us and the world badly. Bernie voted against it.

I for one am a woman who supports him as do all the women (and men) in my very diverse family.

[HFRN]

153. sounds like white males have figured out what Clinton's NAFTA, MFN-China and H-1b visas did to them

would be my guess - (speaking for myself, as a white male, that's why I am for Sanders and NOT Clinton - I know full well what Clinton neoliberalism did to people like me)

which is a problem is you view them as just a demographic group, rather than 'The Enemy'

also suggest problem in the general election for Hillary, which undermines 'Electability' which is one of her few 'Themes'

[thesquanderer]

154. Your post seems to assume that Sanders can't beat a Republican in the general

Since some states are going to go dem or repub no matter what, what matters is how the canididates match up in the swing states.

Check the thread at

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251522986

It's still very early, obviously. But if electability in November is your main reason to select a candidate, as primaries approach, keep an eye on matchup polls in the swing states, that will be the biggest indicator of electability.

[Android3.14]

158. Why do HRC supporters run away from the issues?

Mr. Sanders is the only candidate who will fight in a legitimate fashion for issues important to Democrats.

[svpadgham]

159. I can read this poll and point out

That more men and women view Hillary in an unfavorable light. Men: 43% favorable/50% unfavorable
Women: 43% favorable/49% unfavorable
With very few "unknown," 6% and 8% respectively.
Sanders has a huge percentage of unknown across all demographics. Once the name and positions are better known, I'm sure there will be a considerable spike in favorability.

[stupidicus]

160. that reads like a leap of logic/in reason right off of the honesty cliff

maybe you should finance a poll and ask them if your ____ reason for their support is valid, no?

ANd where all of these people claiming that there are no diffs between HC and the GOP? Methinks, and as many of the comments here show, that you're conflating the sentiment (and those that say "the same" likely share it) that she isn't lefty enough/too righting in too many ways, with the denotative meaning of "identical".

Exactly what priviledge allows you to so grossly and shamelessly misrepresent the pov of millions of Americans?

[WI_DEM]

161. obviously to win the nomination Bernie is going to have to expand his base

to include African-Americans, latinos and more women and poor people.

[ZombieHorde]

162. The data doesn't support the conclusion.

The conclusion would require polling, which would be a different set of data.

[randr]

167. So far

Bernie can only gather momentum; the verdict is still out on Hillary; Biden may have waited too long.

[striegl]

170. What supports your claim?

I'd like to know what process you used to extrapolate from the data that the older wealthier white men are less concerned about the ACA or SS and more about the policies that only impact their wealthy lives.

Choosing a candidate for me and I believe most people should be looking at how they have voted in the past. Showing a track record of progressive values is a better measuring stick than just listening to what a candidate says today. What you're saying is -Don't look at Hillary's past just listen to what she is saying today. Not a good way to choose a candidate.

I am an older white guy and my income puts me in the top 20%. I have always voted for progressive causes. I have voted to raise taxes on myself. I have voted for universal single payer healthcare. I have voted to strengthen SS and believe it should be expanded.

I'm going to support the candidate that best supports the things I believe in and the candidate that has a track record of supporting those issues.

Here are some facts that I do know.
1. No one today (even Nate Silverman) knows what is going to happen in 2016. People can make educated guesses based on the information they have today but it's still only a guess.
2. At the same point back in 2007 no one thought Obama had a chance. Everyone was saying that Hillary had already locked up the nomination.
3. Polls at this point are more about name recognition than anything else and if the election were held today Hillary would win, but it would be a based on her name not her policies. As we get closer to the Primaries and people start looking at the candidates you will see different Polls and results than today.

I am in no way claiming Bernie can or will beat Hillary in the Primaries, but everyday he gathers more support and looks more like a viable candidate. As long as that keeps happening I'm going to support him. If Hillary does win the nomination, I will then support her and vote for her. But I won't be happy about it because her track record doesn't show me that she supports the same things as I do, ACA, SS, etc.

[pinebox]

171. Sure.

"Rattling on about how there's no difference between Hillary and the GOP is not only ignorant, but it reflects quite a bit of privilege. And so does entertaining the delusion that a self-described socialist is going to be able to beat the GOP in the general election."

Sure. Let's take a look at a few things shall we?

First, why is it so hard for American's to understand the differences between "Socialist" and "Democratic Socialist"? Canada and Germany are not the former USSR.

Let's compare HRC's donors with Sanders. Notice anything? If you don't, then you may very well be part of the problem. Who are we looking at here with HRC's donors? HRC or Jeb Bush? Who was pro TPP, NAFTA, "sanctity of marriage", voted for the Iraq war, KXL, and not for raising the minimum wage nationally? It's not Sanders.



Hillary is a polarizing figure who voters don't trust. You know you have problems when your support is wavering in the 30% range on being trustworthy and honest http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/20/yes-its-a-major-problem-that-two-thirds-of-voters-dont-think-hillary-clinton-is-honest-or-trustworthy/ Do we really need to talk about how Bernie is having a huge crowd count at rally's? People are "getting" his message and he hasn't near the amount of baggage that Hillary does. A new voice with new ideas equals a path forward.

Let's take a look at this as well and the very stark differences between HRC and Sanders. If you notice in the article, the meme is also fact checked. http://usuncut.com/news/this-meme-reveals-the-stark-difference-between-bernie-and-hillary/



Bernie is pushing HRC to the left but many of us feel it's not due to her choice but rather that it's out of necessity. The country has changed, she has not.

[Vinca]

174. Good chart.

But, to be fair, she won't tell us where she stands on TPP or Keystone until after she's elected. Which is a good reason not to vote for her IMHO.

[beam me up scottie]

175. Ouch!

That's going to Bern!

Nicely done.

[DanTex]

178. The "owned by banks" meme has been debunked many times.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1107&pid=12458

First, why is it so hard for American's to understand the differences between "Socialist" and "Democratic Socialist"?

Well, they don't. It doesn't help that Bernie actually says "I'm a socialist".

As for the rest, yes, Bernie is further left then Hillary, although his record is not without blemishes either (e.g. gun control, F35). But since Bernie has virtually no chance of beating the GOP (in fact, he has very little chance of even getting the nomination), it doesn't matter. And even if he were to win, with obstruction from the GOP, the outcome wouldn't be very different than with Hillary as president.

[pinebox]

182. Debunking your debunk with a fact check

Now I'm going to go ahead and debunk your fact check of Hillary is mostly owned by the banks, which you cite as being not true.
Politifact says otherwise. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jul/07/facebook-posts/meme-says-hillary-clintons-top-donors-are-banks-an/

Well what do you know!

"For Clinton, we found a high degree of similarity with the meme when we checked the database on July 6.
Clinton’s top 10 cumulative donors between between 1999 and 2016 were, in descending order, Citigroup ($782,327), Goldman Sachs ($711,490), DLA Piper ($628,030), JPMorgan Chase ($620,919), EMILY’s List ($605,174) Morgan Stanley ($543,065), Time Warner ($411,296), Skadden Arps ($406,640), Lehman Brothers ($362,853) and Cablevision Systems ($336,288)."

On your assertion Sanders actually says "I'm a socialist", this.

Even when Sanders ran for mayor of Burlington in 1981, “Bernie never mentioned the word ‘socialist’ in his campaign,” according to Greg Guma, a longtime Sanders watcher and the author of “The People’s Republic: Vermont and the Sanders Revolution.”
When he won, though, it wasn’t Sanders’ choice anymore.
“The media probably made that label stick,” said Alan Abbey, who covered Sanders at the time for the Burlington Free Press. “It makes for good headlines.”
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/14-things-bernie-sanders-has-said-about-socialism-120265.html#ixzz3jk8uvCmJ

No chance of beating the GOP candidate? I don't always agree with Ann Coulter, but when I do it's certainly this;
"If you ran Bernie Sanders, it would be much tougher to beat him than Hillary. He cares about the American working class. Hillary doesn't, she's like the elected Republican. She cares about the Chamber of Commerce."
http://rebrn.com/re/ann-coulter-if-you-ran-bernie-sanders-it-would-be-much-tougher-t-117821/

Hillary as the nominee would ensure the GOP base shows up in droves. They can't stand her. To them, Hillary is what Palin is to liberals. It's funny though, they thought that in this stage of the election, Obama wouldn't win either and that Hillary was thee candidate. Remember that.

[DanTex]

187. 3.4% of her donations come from bank employees. None of them come from banks.

So that pretty much takes care of the "owned by banks" lie.

Next, "I am socialist and everyone knows that." So that's two down.

Ann Coulter? LOL.

[pinebox]

339. Bank employees?

You mean like the CEO's of BofA and Goldman Sachs? Again, politifact http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jul/07/facebook-posts/meme-says-hillary-clintons-top-donors-are-banks-an/
But hey! Don't let facts get in the way of your blind ideology of supporting a sell out candidate.

As far as "socialist". Ahh yes, that whole context thing. Are you able to tell us the differences between a democratic socialist and a socialist?

Ann Coulter is correct in her assertion that Hillary would bring out the GOP base in droves. Hillary to cons is what Palin is to liberals. #TrueStory

[JTFrog]

203. Cute nickname.

In fact, that would be a really cute nickname for a zombie to use after being tombstoned.

Should be on the top ten list of DU zombie names.

I don't think using Ann Coulter as a source would make the top ten though. That's just boring.

[pinebox]

338. You like that?

And now you know

[OnyxCollie]

204. A contribution from Greenberg Traurig, Jack Abramoff's old law firm.

Isn't that special?

[Fast Walker 52]

211. welcome to DU!

[Babel_17]

219. Our party's establishment has been behind Secretary Clinton

She's been THE candidate in most Democrats minds so far. As the primaries unfold and people learn they have other options that will likely change, imo.
This is why there's been low key talk of getting Biden to run, imo. If the party sees Clinton as losing to Sanders, or considering withdrawing, our party's establishment would then feel more comfortable with Biden, as opposed to Sanders.
The thinking being that if they got behind him, and possibly President Obama also doing so (even if at a remove), then they could prevail over Sanders.
The Democratic party has a pretty amazing machine for getting out Democratic voters, and so far much of that apparatus has tacitly been either supporting Secretary Clinton, or leaning her way.
It will represent a reversal of fortunes, or at least cause some chagrin/embarrassment, for many should Senator Sanders win out in the end.

The next couple of months will actually be high stakes politics. Ordinarily there's not that much excitement this early in the season. So I view these polling numbers favoring Clinton as being softer than they would otherwise appear.

[m-lekktor]

287. excellent post! nt

[Romulox]

177. The OP = white male. nt

[orpupilofnature57]

179. Statistics lie when they skew the reasons, and that's when liars use them .

[jeff47]

180. You know, they left out the most important question: What brand of car do they drive. (nt)

[Autumn]

181. Wrong chart? Hillary gets 47% of the males, Bernie gets 26% of the males,on income

Hillary gets 46%of the 80+ income and Bernie gets 27% of the 80+ . In fact Hillary get's a higher percent than Bernie in all categories according to your chart. It looks like you have that reversed. Hillary's supporters are wealthier, whiter, and more male than Bernie's. Did you post the wrong chart? That one does not support what you are saying.

[Recursion]

349. You have it backwards

More males and rich people support Clinton than Sanders because vastly more people support Clinton than Sanders. A greater share of Sanders' supporters are affluent white males than of Clinton's supporters.

It's like how O'Malley's support is almost entirely from the mid-Atlantic right now, but that doesn't mean he's leading in the mid-Atlantic.

[Armstead]

184. Um, the reallllly wealthy white men want Hillary or Bush (or some othr rw Repub)

As usual, using identity stereotypes to ignore the most important fact.

First it is total bullshit to characterize Sanders support as coming from as wealthy people with nothing to lose by a GOP victory, Actually, it's TOTAL bullshit.

But aside from that it's a distraction because the Big Buck Oligarchs want anything BUT a President Sanders. A populist progressive is their worst nightmare.

[DanTex]

188. The poll numbers are what they are. I didn't make them up.

And you know that if it was Hillary with the more wealthy white male support, Bernie fans would be posting this every day. But I post some inconvenient facts, and suddenly everyone freaks out.

[Autumn]

191. So why in the chart you posted does Hillary have higher numbers than Bernie in wealthy white males?

47% is higher than 26% and 46% is higher than 27%. Or am I reading your chart wrong?

[DanTex]

192. Yes, Hillary is ahead in all the subgroups.

But her lead is smallest with whites, men, and >$80K. That's where Bernie has his highest numbers.

[Autumn]

194. So Hillary's supporters are wealthier, whiter, and more male than Bernie supporters.

Okay got it. Hillary supporters are wealthier, whiter, and more male than Bernies. Did you make a mistake in your OP? Because you and your chart say different from what you posted. I'm sure it was a mistake Dan.

[beam me up scottie]

196. * THAT * was awesome.

You so totally rock, Autumn!

[DanTex]

197. Umm, no. Hillary has more supporters in every group.

She has more white supporters, and also more black supporters. More rich and more poor. Etc.

But, the key point is that Bernie's support is greatest among white, male, and wealthier voters.

For example, he gets 30% of whites and just 6% of blacks. Hillary gets 45% of whites and 58% of blacks. Bernie's supporters are whiter.

[Autumn]

199. So to be clear, Bernie's supporters are NOT wealthier, whiter, and more male than Hillary's

Just want to be clear here.

[DanTex]

200. Yes, they are. There just aren't as many Bernie supporters as Hillary supporters.

But, yes, the average Bernie supporter is whiter, maler, and wealthier than the average Hillary supporter.

[Armstead]

193. NO you are oversimpliufying and mischaracterizing and baiting

What the response is to the complete falsehood of your portrayal based on the samplings of a poll, selectively using data to make a ridiculous talking point.,

Your characterization of a crew of fatcats sipping their martinis on the veranda saying "I really like Sanders because he is going to help us rich people" is totally off base.

As is you characterizing of a bunch of aging hippy trust fund babies (how else would they be so wealthy?) laying around saying "Hay man. Like I think Sanders is groovy. I don't care who wins, as long as my trust fund is safe."

If you went to a few Sanders rallys, or look at who is out at public events handling out leaflets, you might see otherwise.

[DanTex]

195. The poll breakdowns by demographic are clear.

Sure, the reasons why Bernie's strongest support comes from white, male, and wealthier voters are arguable. What's your explanation?

I didn't say anything remotely resembling "I really like Sanders because he is going to help us rich people". He's obviously not in this to help rich people (neither is Hillary).

As is you characterizing of a bunch of aging hippy trust fund babies (how else would they be so wealthy?) laying around saying "Hay man. Like I think Sanders is groovy. I don't care who wins, as long as my trust fund is safe."

Yeah, more or less. Although it's more like "I think Sanders is groovy, and if he loses to the GOP, hey, I've still got my trust fund". People without that proverbial trust fund can't risk a GOP presidency.

[Autumn]

189. In the chart posted I'm seeing Hillary with higher percentages in wealthier,white, males

than Bernie. New math ,need more coffee or I'm really ass backwards. Or something else totally.

[PowerToThePeople]

186. Hey look, a flame bait OP.

Trashcanning this shit.

[Hiraeth]

190. I love the smell of napalm in the morning.

She said as she drank her coffee.

[workinclasszero]

202. "Because wealthier white males, being the least vulnerable group in our society, have the luxury of

....being able to risk a Republican presidency."

This is how I've seen this election all along. If the democratic party snatches defeat from the jaws of victory and allows a neo fascist like Trump or a dominunist teahaddist nutcase like Cruz to be elected president it will be the worst thing that ever happened to every PoC, every working class person, every woman, evey poor person in this country.

It will be an unmitigated disaster. It will mean war with Iran ASAP and we all know who fights the wars in our wonderful, rich republican free military, right?

Also President Trump will be busily setting up his police state to ID and deport all brown skin people, while carpet bombing the Mexico-US border.

And of course social security and medicaid/medicare will be killed dead, the goal of every republican scumball since the day it became law.

And all of this means zero to the well to do, white liberals who have the funds, the bank accounts, live in the right places, with fat 401Ks.

Willing to roll the dice on my and my family's future, secure in the knowledge that if it don't work out..oh well.

Sucks to be you(me) friend.

[Vattel]

205. Your explanation of the poll numbers is woo.

The idea that Bernie is currently getting relatively more support from wealthier people because such people are better able to weather a Republican presidency is unsubstantiated.

[nadinbrzezinski]

206. More divisive crap

clean up in aisle 5...

[Sancho]

207. Nice post...my theory is we are looking at a 21st century version of Archie Bunker...

rail against Wall Street, hate big corporations, love guns, white, self-centered...but not able to accept wholesale social justice...so they stick to economics and go for Bernie. Bernie may be "pseudo-Democratic", but they don't care as long as he says something they like!! The Clown Car are too crazy, the Tea Party has no traction, they really don't want a woman as President, and Bernie is just enough anti-big corporation and pro-gun and not too progressive on immigration; so Bernie fits the bill.

I've seen this in several polls, and watched the crowds in "red" parts of the country. I'm sure it's not ALL of the Bernie supporters, but some number of his followers come from that demographic. Thanks DanTex.

Here...have fun and let me know what you think of my theory.

[Babel_17]

208. The Big Lie

Wow, Sanders supporters being like Archie Bunker. This is a great example of The Big Lie in action. You never concede that it's hyperbole, instead you go bigger.

Btw, in 2008 Clinton was said to have more supporters that "love guns".

Remind me of Archie Bunker's stance on Jews, and the war in Viet Nam, war in general, and socialism. And I can't ignore how Sanders has been fighting for the rights of immigrant workers for decades.

[Sancho]

233. Wow yourself - you should talk to immigrants here and look at polls...

Maybe you should watch the videos and listen to some of what Archie actually says sometimes. There are some quotes in there that could have come right from Bernie!

I doubt that the Archie Bunkers are not on DU, but they show up in the polls (as conservative Bernie supporters) and attend his rallies. Who knows how many? They are one reason for the white/employed demographic described in the OP.

Since I see immigrants (lots of them) daily - just five minutes ago with someone from Argentina - I talk to them. They don't really like Bernie. One thing they don't like is the fact that Vermont does not have tuition equity for children brought to the US who are undocumented.

NY and Maryland have tuition equity, for example, so Hillary and O'Malley are more popular.

[Babel_17]

245. Please give me some quotes from Sanders that sounds like Archie Bunker

Please, continue with this line of argument.

Edit: Or, if you don't mind, give me a quote from Archie Bunker that sounds to you like it could come from Senator Sanders.

[Sancho]

246. From #234

in the videos, Archie says things like,

"I am sick of Washington and those Congressmen." In lots of the shows, Archie complains about the government.

"This thing with big energy corporations. It's a conspiracy. Big corporations make billions and billions of profits." Archie also carries on over big corporations that control the economy and tell everyone what to buy.

"Send me your "poor" (he lists a bunch of immigrants), but they can stay in their own sections- That's what makes America great!" This is a little more subtle. Some of the communities in the NE and midwest are pretty much all white, so the appearance is that they "support" other immigrants, but as long as the immigrants aren't in THEIR neighborhood.


Sorry, that was the 1970's version, but I see a 2015 version that taps into the same themes that Bernie expresses in every speech! Yes, Bernie's motivation is different as an economic socialist, but to these blue collar "white" folks he sounds like one of them. Actually, Ed Schultz also sounded that way: hunting and fishing; at first he was in favor of the pipeline because of the jobs (an changed his mind), and he played football.

I think a subset of the poll data and Bernie crowds are the new Archie's: white, male, working, hate Washington, have guns or at least think guns are ok, outdoorsmen, conservative, not really in favor of a path to citizenship for the undocumented, in favor of college (an upperclass value), and anti-Wall Street and anti-corporations. Those are modern Archie Bunkers - not really able to define "progressive" and don't care if the candidate is an independent on the Democratic ticket. They just care about their issues, and like the way Bernie sounds.

[Babel_17]

247. Ok, thanks (nt)

[Fast Walker 52]

209. I know a lot of people enthusiastic about Bernie and none are close to the Archie Bunker mentality

there may be some people like you say who are tricked into falling for a progressive and socialist message, but if so-- good.

[Babel_17]

217. And many of them originally wanted Senator Elizabeth Warren

Her gender didn't make them hesitate an instant in getting behind the idea of her running. I forgot to mention that before.

[Sancho]

237. That's not the subset I'm referring to...

I'm talking about the subset of white, conservative, males who show up in the polls and at some of Bernie's rallies.

I don't think anyone knows what the proportion is, but the group adds numbers to Bernie's support.

[Armstead]

250. How awful! Working class supportt for a Democratic candidate

[Armstead]

214. I have to admit. I really admire the creativity of some of you people.

Your theory takes some 1/10th truths and creates a brilliant tapestry of misrepresentation, misdirection, broad brush generalizations and lack of appreciation of both contemporary and older history.

Brilliant, If I were a professor of Fiction 101 or Propaganda 101, I'd give you an A ++.

[Sancho]

234. Well the polls show a white, conservative, male Bernie supporter coming to rallies....

actually, it's been a subset in several polls.

in the videos, Archie says things like,

"I am sick of Washington and those Congressmen."

"This thing with big energy corporations. It's a conspiracy. Big corporations make billions and billions of profits."

"Send me your "poor" (he lists a bunch of immigrants), but they can stay in their own sections- That's what makes America great!"

Sorry, that was the 1970's version, but I see a 2015 version that taps into the same themes that Bernie expresses in every speech! Yes, Bernie's motivation is different as an economic socialist, but to these blue collar "white" folks he sounds like one of them. Actually, Ed Schultz also sounded that way: hunting and fishing; at first he was in favor of the pipeline because of the jobs (an changed his mind), and he played football.

I think a subset of the poll data and Bernie crowds are the new Archie's: white, male, working, hate Washington, have guns or at least think guns are ok, outdoorsmen, conservative, not really in favor of a path to citizenship for the undocumented, in favor of college (an upperclass value), and anti-Wall Street and anti-corporations. Those are modern Archie Bunkers - not really able to define "progressive" and don't care if the candidate is an independent on the Democratic ticket. They just care about their issues, and like the way Bernie sounds.

[Armstead]

249. And I hope he does attract people

I remember -- before it became politically expedient to forget it -- the book "Whats the matter with Kansas?" and Democrats on DU and elsewhere were agonizing why the working class kept voting against their own self-interest by voting for the GOP. "How do we make them realize they should be votng Democratic?>"

But I guess, that is passe now, and the only people we want voting Democratic are those who fall into a narrow spectrum of "politically correct" who follow the exact beliefs on all issues of a pre-approved template. (And that has to be a Clinton template.)

I suppose now that we actually have a chance to win some people over, we want them to go away. Let the great unwashed masses stick with the GOP because we don't a coalition with people who don't agree with us on everything anymore.

Which, of course, is an exclusionary tactic that is going to guarantee the dreaded GOP winning yet again.

[MuseRider]

288. Exactly

and like I said to another poster who brought this same topic up, Bernie is the last person I would ever worry about changing his policy based on the stuff the others might come up with. Once won over they are going to have to learn to live with it. Mostly I bet they end up wondering what took them so long. I simply do not see Bernie encouraging more private prisons just because some of his supporters think that is a dandy idea.

[MoveIt]

215. A Rovian shit-sandwich served fresh!

Gotta love having "allies" like you

How many PUMA lies does it take to get to the coronation? Lets watch DU and find out!

[totodeinhere]

222. That's ridiculous. Trump has the Archie Bunker vote lined up.

n/t

[artislife]

223. Only if Archie had moral and ethical values

Big "lame" on this meme.

[Sancho]

239. Archie had values and morals - they were just not progressive ones!

Likely, almost as many Americans have "conservative values" and call themselves Republicans. I don't think their values are very good, but they certainly exist.

I think the way Bernie attacks Washington, Wall Street, etc. actually taps into the same ideas as some of those conservatives. They like Trump for the same reason - he attacks the status quo.

[artislife]

241. I just meant the comparison of Bernie and Archie nt

[Sancho]

242. I think we all agree that Bernie has progressive values...

so I would not think of him as "Archie".

I'll looking at the demographic descriptions of polls and trying to figure out why some groups support Bernie. It's just something I noticed (at least here in the South).

[Warren DeMontague]

244. There's not enough cool story to cover all the cool story bro in this cool story, bro.

[SMC22307]

298. It may have originated from DU's favorite, the banned Spamdan.

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/main/2015/6/17/on-chasing-the-archie-bunker-voter

The comments are delightful... attacks on Sanders and Warren. No agenda there, Un-huh.

[artislife]

303. ugh...

[SMC22307]

312. What is driving this vitriol? What is it -- EXACTLY -- that Corporate Dems want so badly?

My guess is privatization of Social Security for their Wall Street buddies. Sanders will fight it; Hillary won't. Hence the increasingly nasty and coordinated attacks on Sanders (and Sanders' supporters) from all these shit no-name blogs.

[artislife]

313. I was struck by the thought

Who are they backing?

Because they "seemed" to be even "more" left than Bernie, but there isn't anyone more left than Bernie running.

Then I thought, they aren't more left at all....

They are pretty nasty and vile blogs, that is true.

[ReallyIAmAnOptimist]

213. Trolling drivel.

Bernie started with little name recognition, hence the steady growth in his popularity (and all driven by word of mouth and social media, with no help or worse from the mainstream media).

But those of us that support him do so because he's the only candidate that offers the chance of actually addressing fundamental change in the direction of social and economic justice.

HRC offers nothing but a continuation of (and even strengthening of) the current domination of the corporate ruling class. To believe otherwise requires ignoring reality.

[MellowDem]

216. And because they're more liberal...

Clinton's base is more conservative, and this reflects the demographic and ideological breakdown of the Democratic Party.

If only lack of privilege and race could determine what makes for good policy. But it doesn't, and that's a fact.

If you think voting for anyone but Clinton is a matter of privilege because she is the best chance at stopping a Republican win, then I'd say voting for Clinton is the ultimate privilege, because it means you're OK with the status quo, which currently perpetuates and advances privilege.

[JustinL]

218. the same argument was made against Obama in 2008

Hillary supporters pointed to polls showing that higher-income whites supported Obama while lower-income whites supported Hillary. The difference is, in 2008 Hillary supporters conveniently left black voters out of their analysis.

I'm hoping that, after 7 years of reflection, the 2008 proponents of this argument can explain why black voters supported Obama in the primary. Is it that black voters more accurately assessed Obama's general election prospects than lower-income white voters?

[totodeinhere]

221. Actually running a candidate in the general election who could get more white support would be

a good thing. I could foresee Bernie drawing more white voters while continuing overwhelming support from minorities. Minorities are not going to vote for whatever right wing idiot the Republicans put out there. If Bernie gets to the general and could draw a majority of white voters for the first time since 1964 that would be an historic accomplishment and go a long way toward uniting this country.

[TBF]

228. 2000 people who read the Economist?

That's your unbiased info?

[Autumn]

236. Hell I'm still tryin to figure out how Hillary's percentages that are

all higher across the board than Bernie's percentages translates into

Sanders supporters are wealthier, whiter, and more male than Hillary supporters

[TBF]

294. Right - and who do we think reads the economist?

This OP has all kinds of crazy in it ...

[BainsBane]

235. I've noticed that for some time. This may offer some insight as to why.

Ordinary workers won’t rise up against ultras because they take it as given that “the rich get richer.”
But the hopes and dreams of today’s educated class are based on the idea that market capitalism is a meritocracy. The unreachable success of the superrich shreds those dreams.
“I’ve seen it in my research,” says pollster Doug Schoen, who counsels Michael Bloomberg and Hillary Clinton, among others. “If you look at the lower part of the upper class or the upper part of the upper middle class, there’s a great deal of frustration. These are people who assumed that their hard work and conventional ‘success’ would leave them with no worries. It’s the type of rumbling that could lead to political volatility.”
Lower uppers are doctors, accountants, engineers, lawyers. At companies they’re mostly executives above the rank of VP but below the CEO. Their comrades include well-fed members of the media (and even Fortune columnists who earn their living as consultants).
Lower uppers are professionals who by dint of schooling, hard work and luck are living better than 99 percent of the humans who have ever walked the planet. They’re also people who can’t help but notice how many folks with credentials like theirs are living in Gatsby-esque splendor they’ll never enjoy.
http://business.time.com/2009/02/04/the-revolt-of-the-lower-upper-class-begins/

[Kurska]

238. Hooray for circular firing squad identity politics.

Lets just run this party into the ground. Black vs. white, white vs black. Who cares if we combust the entire left in flames as we squabble over racial identity instead of real solutions to problems, including institutional racism.

[Warren DeMontague]

240. Kurska, you're just saying that because you're an "21st Century Archie Bunker" type.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251542288#post207

sure, a Gay 21st Century Archie Bunker, but an Archie Bunker nonetheless!

[Kurska]

243. Me Archie Bunker, no way.

?t=1m9s

Starts at 1:03ish

I wish I had that singing voice.

[CanadaexPat]

248. That's a bit of a non sequitur.

I believe Hillary is a bad campaigner and cannot win for that reason. Policy differences aside, I want a winner and she's not it.

[Warren DeMontague]

251. I'm not a sanders supporter, but I'm all male.

You don't get any more maler than me.

[whathehell]

252. Oh, hell then, fuck em..

Who needs their votes?

[Number23]

254. I don't know if I agree with the editorialized bit of your OP, but judging by the screams and wails

this OP elicited, it's plain as hell you've struck an already tingling and painful nerve. So maybe you're onto something.

[Warren DeMontague]

256. Who is screaming and wailing?

If Sanders supporters are really all self-satisfied rich white dudebros who have no actual skin in the political game, as repeatedly asserted here, they're probably just sort of chillaxing on their yachts laughing at all this.

[Number23]

257. That would be far more preferable than racing up and down this thread accosting every single person

who dares to post in it.

[Warren DeMontague]

258. I have the sound turned down on my gold-plated ipad, so maybe I missed the wailing.

If someone responds to me on a message board and I dont agree with them, are they "accosting" me?



I'm wondering if it's appropriate to file charges.

[Number23]

259. They probably are but it depends. Are they disagreeing with you on a valid, intelligent point

or doing a panicked race to try and shut you up from agreeing with things like facts and numbers that prove something they truly and DESPERATELY do not want to hear or believe?

[Warren DeMontague]

261. If the 'valid' point is "many sanders supporters are white men, therefore they're Archie Bunker types"

Well, I'm not sure I'm prepared to deal with that level of highly intellectual fact-based reasoning.

Oh, Im sure there's a very important point here, somewhere.

Also, if you're going to define someone having a different opinion as "being accosted", maybe hanging out on an internet discussion forum isnt such a good idea.

[Number23]

262. Which is not even close to what this OP is about. Are we done yet or is there something else you

need to scream about?

[Warren DeMontague]

263. This isnt screaming. Is it "accosting"?

I dont agree with you. Is that a crime?

[Number23]

265. You seem to think that I need your agreement or disagreement when I couldn't care less about either

And you did nothing but beautifully illustrate the wailing that I mentioned when I first entered this thread in the response I posted. Which if you remember, was to the OP.

I don't know what you hoped to gain from this but I hope you got it. I certainly got my point proven, so thanks.

[Warren DeMontague]

267. Well congratulations on winning an argument with yourself.

And proving a point to yourself that you had already was true, based upon totally arbitrary criteria.

[Number23]

270. I didn't come in here to argue with anyone. I responded to the OP and got something stuck on my shoe

But judging by the replies, looks like ALOT of people in this thread had that happen.

[Warren DeMontague]

271. Aw, a personal insult.

Maybe you shouldnt take the internet so seriously. Its not good for people to get all worked up like that.

[Number23]

275. Relaxation advice from you. Since you've not shown any desperation on this topic whatsoever.

Maybe on your 50th post in this thread, you'll finally be able to take the sting away from those poll results.

And someone who sees a personal insult in my really benign post is not really the kind of person I'd be taking Internet etiquette advice from, thanks. Maybe you're the one that needs to back away from the Internet for a day. Or 60.

Done screaming, accosting and -- most obviously -- panicking yet?

[Warren DeMontague]

277. Nope.

Like I said, you seem tense. Perhaps you are projecting that onto me?

If you dont want to read my posts, you can always hit the ignore button.

[ibegurpard]

264. you mean like Hillary's growing negatives?

[Number23]

266. I can see you guys are really agitated. I didn't see anyone screaming in this thread about Hillary's

negatives but if you think you saw that, then by all means, keep on. Her supporters will likely be touched by all this concern.

[ibegurpard]

268. They should be touched about it.

And screaming is usually denoted with all-caps FYI

[Number23]

272. I think that posting more times than the OP did in a thread about poll numbers could

easily be construed as screaming.

And it is pretty fucking funny too.

[Warren DeMontague]

269. You seem tense.

Im not sure why. I mean, Hillary has it in the bag, so it should be happytime, right?

[Number23]

273. I just tried counting your posts in this thread and stopped at 20. And yet, *I* seem tense?????!

[Warren DeMontague]

274. Yeah, actually.

I'm not sure why number of posts means anything, although I guess pulling arbitrary metrics out of thin air and pretending they mean something profound is kind of the theme, here.

Like I said, I'm chillaxing on my yacht with my gold-plated ipad, watching my short-selling hedge fund rake in tens of millions off the collapsing 401ks of hard working plebians. What else am I going to do, give "jeb" my bichon frise another juicy piece of kobe beef? He's already fat.

[Number23]

276. I'm sure this is all pithy and wonderful in your head. But in addition to be incredibly unnecessary

I also find this beyond boring and the level of desperation you're exhibiting in this thread is also kind of depressing.

So you have the last word, dear. It seems as though it is INCREDIBLY important, damn near critical, for you to do so. And if it helps you sleep better tonight and digest this latest bout of painful information better, then I'm happy to help.

[Warren DeMontague]

279. YES! THE LAST WORD!

I WIN! I WIN! I'M THE WIZ! NOBODY BEATS ME!

...now, see, that is "screaming".

[Babel_17]

283. You call that screaming?

This, this is screaming!

[TheFarS1de]

292. Well played ...

at least I got some entertainment out of this thread thanks to you , it needed SOMETHING other than OP's flogged horse of an argument .

[SMC22307]

309. It was almost painful to watch Warren's sparring partner...

try to keep pace with his irreverence. Almost. Highly entertaining, though.

[beam me up scottie]

321. Warren is one cool cat.

[840high]

307. Some of us simply don't like misinformation.

[Number23]

314. I know. All of those numbers that are RIGHT IN THE OP definitely point to a

deliberate attempt to misinform.

I honestly don't know what's more hilarious. The folks breaking into a sweat pretending that this OP is "horseshit" or misinformation or the folks high fiving the dude screaming up and down this thread as if he won some sort of victory after I grew bored with his idiocy (I bet his keyboard was sweaty as hell after his "participation" in this thread) and walked away. I know that victories are in short supply for a certain crowd so I understand the effort to pretend so desperately that this was one of them.

I mean, it's just precious. 'Cause nothing proves "I'm not upset about this thread" better than posting 78 times within it and arguing over fuck all in an attempt to prove how non-upset you are.

[JustAnotherGen]

322. I can't believe I just served on a jury for this post

ETA - 7 to ZERO - leave it.

[Bobbie Jo]

329. Oh I do

If you can't shut someone down with your words and a swarm of me tooo'ers, shut them down with a jury.

Typical.

[Number23]

330. Well, they gotta keep their little "victory" party going, don't they??

They have so terribly few, you know. Hence the little soiree because someone "won" an exchange simply by having the other person leave after seeing their very panicked, pointless and beyond numerous responses to everyone who so much as stepped a toe in this OP.

And now you've gone and taken yet another ever so rare and even more precious "victory" from them. For shame, JAG. For shame.

[haikugal]

358. You wish...bringing thought and data to the discussion is characterized as screaming and wailing?

In your dreams...

However...I think you expose a truth here. There are a few who live for those kinds of mischaracterizations for the ego rush they get.

Please, continue.

[Number23]

366. Yeah, this post is so insignificant and wrong you are still reading and replying to it A MONTH LATER

Nothing says "I got spanked HARD" better than wailing about it over a month later.

[haikugal]

367. Spin, spin, spin....I just found this thread...I'm always late but I eventually get there...lol

Here, you need this....

Go Bernie Go!!!

[Number23]

368. Why are you posting a song called Black as Night to me? What makes you think I'd click on

anything that you've sent me?

And calling your wailing about a month old post is not "spin." It's exactly what you're doing.

[haikugal]

369. I don't care what you think but it is sad you can't get past a color...

Damn...I thought you could do with a bit of joy and hope...

You are very lost.....

[Number23]

370. And you are as uninteresting as you are late to this party.

I don't know who you are but thanks for being ever so concerned over my amount of "hope and joy."

[haikugal]

371. Pathetic human...

Ah ha, ah ha....

[Number23]

372. I don't know what's funnier. You coming after me with this foolishness a month later

or actually thinking that your incredibly boring and childish insults are in any way hurtful.

[haikugal]

374. You don't understand that I said what I did

And it has nothing at all to do with "coming after you" anymore than the song title with the word "black" in it had to do with you...

However, your response, odd as it is, has nothing to do with anyone else...just you.

If you weren't afraid to click on a YouTube song you'd have a better understanding...but, it is what it is.

[Number23]

375. If clicking on a Youtube link is what I need to better understand you then I'm happy not

understanding you. And you judge my responses odd and here you are jumping into this thread with your nasty childishness a month later.

I never said one word about the word "black" having anything to do with me. This entire exchange is as incredibly stupid and confounding as it is unwanted.

I've got no interest in you or understanding you. Hopefully you'll understand that and deal accordingly.

[haikugal]

376. You inferred I intended something by posting a YouTube with the word "black" in the title..

You did that, not me....I sent you a gift imo but you are too into your spin doctoring to accept it. No matter...please proceed.

If you are so disdainful of interaction...I have to ask why you're here.

[Number23]

377. I inferred no such thing. Could you take this conversation you're obviously having with yourself

and do it with some other person?

I don't want your "gifts" or anything else from you. Your attention is bizarre and completely unwanted.

[haikugal]

378. You're here spinning like a top

All over this thread....enjoy yourself, and your echo chamber!

[Number23]

380. You mean this "echo chamber" right here? The ones built by you and your little buddies who all seem

to behave as childishly and irrationally as you do?

Not one post you've made has made any sense or served any purpose. But I get the feeling, that's exactly what you're going for.

[Jamaal510]

285. I can't speak for

Because wealthier white males, being the least vulnerable group in our society, have the luxury of being able to risk a Republican presidency. People who can't afford, for example, to see ACA repealed and SS privatized are less keen on punishing Hillary for the IWR vote over 10 years ago. They care less about the ideological crusades and personal animosity, and more about what policies actually get passed and direct impact on their lives.

BS supporters, but this probably rings true for people who support 3rd parties. I think they feel as though they have no or little skin in the game between the 2 major parties and don't like how things are going on a small handful of issues, so they're able to do "protest votes". Other people have more at stake and see things as a matter of keeping the 1 party they see as doing things to them from getting into power.

[108vcd]

286. let's be honest here

those who have less time to spend (lower income) on political elections over a year down the road, will generally support the establishment candidate

african americans generally support Democrats by a large margin, so it's no surprise they would support the one with the most name recognition to date

women will most likely vote for a woman candidate


as a Bernie supporter (37 white male), I am in no illusion that he is a long shot, but it doesn't mean Clinton is a better candidate, maybe just the most electable

[TBF]

295. "women will most likely vote for a woman candidate"

Did you check with the women in your life on that one? For example, I wouldn't vote for Sarah Palin for dog catcher ...

[840high]

308. I'm a woman - Go Bernie.

[SMC22307]

311. Hillary's my last choice.

Out of the Big Three, at least.

[djean111]

323. I am a woman, and I do believe it is time to lay that women-will-vote-for-women meme

to rest. Please. It is kind of insulting, really.

[Blue_In_AK]

346. Hey, guess what?

Women are as capable of independent thinking as men are. I get pretty sick of the assumption that women will be voting for Hillary because of her gender.

[haikugal]

363. I'm tired of it as well...

Thanks Blue!

[HassleCat]

293. You're probably correct

More of the people who support Clinton are happy with the way things are, or at least concerned about protecting what they have. I'm not sure Clinton would leap to the defense of everything her supporters want, but we're a timid country these days, so voting for Clinton may be the safest course of action. Voting for Sanders is riskier. I'm voting for Sanders, but I can see why people are afraid.

[Gormy Cuss]

296. Is Sanders proposing a repeal of ACA or privatizing Social Security?

Neither sounds like him. In fact, I'd trust him to preserve the latter and enhance the former.

[noiretextatique]

297. There is an exception to every rule

Black female not wealthier Sanders supporter.

[haikugal]

364. Well....

According to some that makes you the exception that proves the rule. That's because those same few think they make the rules..

Welcome to the revolution...United we stand!

[noiretextatique]

387. gotta love a haikugal

as a (former) poet i've seen you around, but haven't formerly introduced myself. welcome, comrade

[haikugal]

389. Woot!!

Let's head out to the deck and watch the eclipse!

My son was writing poetry in nursery school...awesome stuff. I like to play here but haven't done anything serious in years....happy to meet a fellow traveler noiretextatique!

[ecstatic]

300. I thought there'd be more of an age gap

With a lot more seniors supporting Bernie. Interesting info.

[SMC22307]

310. I'm OK with that. Especially if they're anything like the men in my family.

Korean War Veteran. Civil rights marcher (Don't like it Imani? Tough shit.). Musician. Civil engineer. Jet mechanic. Electrician. Economist. Some with advanced degrees, some without. All Democrats.

And as stated elsewhere in this thread, the poll numbers don't mean what you seem to think they mean. But do go on...

[840high]

315. Here you go.....

from DailyMail - with puctures

Supermodel Brinkley arrived for Mrs Clinton's fundraiser at Water Mill, in the Hamptons, NY, amid a parade of six-figure cars including two vintage Mercedes and a series of convertibles. Brinkley, 61, was the most glamorous guest at the home of apparel magnate Artie Rabin and his wife Selma. The evening event, on Saturday, was to raise funds for Mrs Clinton's campaign, which she says will 'shuffle the pack' in favor of the middle classes. But it had a distinctive one per cent flavor, with a series of foreign-made sports cars being the favored way to arrive, including (clockwise from top) a Porsche Carerra, a Jaguar XKR, and Ferrari.

[Beacool]

316. The Daily Mail is a RW rag, in case you haven't noticed it.

They continually attack Democrats, read the comment sections.

As for the fundraiser, so what? It costs a fortune to run a presidential campaign. Should the Democrats be at a disadvantage when facing the Republican nominee?

[840high]

317. Those pics will be on other sites, too. The

rich love Hillary.

[Beacool]

318. Good, then she'll have enough money at hand when she's the nominee.

Republicans tend to out-raise Democrats.

[romanic]

324. So what?

And this:

Rattling on about how there's no difference between Hillary and the GOP is not only ignorant, but it reflects quite a bit of privilege.

Make no sense at all; and believe me what the fuck doesn't qualify as "quite a bit of privilege" these days on DU? Get over yourself OP.

[eridani]

333. So why aren't the banksters giving him all their money?

You'd think they'd be interested in their target demographic.

[lumberjack_jeff]

341. Everything after "Why?" is bullshit.

Sanders appeals to those who carefully follow modern politics. He can't rely on the celebrity status enjoyed by Trump and Clinton.

As Sanders becomes more familiar... once he wins Iowa and New Hampshire, he will pull ahead.

But my basic reaction to your post is "Good"

We need to do a much better job getting the votes of men, and especially white men, because a) they vote and b) married women tend to vote indistinguishably from them.

I think that the degree of projection implicit in your post, "we don't have the luxury of losing the election" is fairly high. Your post is exemplary of a really toxic element of DU rhetoric; he's a white man, so he's immediately suspect, as are his supporters.

If you really wanted to win elections, you wouldn't have the luxury of this particular bias.

[YoungDemCA]

343. IOW, we need to tap into the demographic that Trump appeals to

Forgive me for thinking that you're asking for Democrats to compromise on issues of social justice all in the name of some "populism" that would be most appealing (and most beneficial) to white men.

"he's a white man, so he's immediately suspect, as are his supporters." No. No one is saying that.

[haikugal]

365. It's called racism and misandry....

Thanks for your comment lumberjack_jeff...very astute!

[restorefreedom]

344. we all know how reliable polls are

look at who and how each campaign is funded

big wealthy donors giving huge amounts vs a people powered campaign

i'll go with the people power

[uponit7771]

345. +1

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

348. I'm white, I'm 71, I'm a Socialist, and I support Bernie. I'm ever so sorry.

However, I'm not wealthy, I'm not punishing Hillary for her IWR, but I'm not voting for her because of it...and a number of other reasons.

[cantbeserious]

353. No Apology Necessary - Many Feel The Same

eom

[whatchamacallit]

350. Which obviously invalidates them

[DanTex]

352. Not at all. Wealthy white men have just as much of a vote as anyone else.

[cantbeserious]

351. Ever More Bernie Bashing

eom

[Kang Colby]

354. Frat boy factor....

"Hey bro, vote for Bernie cuz free pizza for life, it will be awesome bro."

[upaloopa]

355. Hillary leads in the 18-29 category which debunks the myth that Millennials support Bernie.

[SwampG8r]

356. Is it Bernie is a racist week already?

At least the Bernie is a pervy old man threads are funny
Hillaries supporters are as out of touch with what works as she is

[DanTex]

357. That's an odd reaction to some simple polling data.

[redstateblues]

382. Thanks for your post DanTex. I love how you get Sanders supporters

Foaming at the mouth when you post numbers they don't like and then they call them smears. A lot of victim mentality lately.

[beam me up scottie]

373. This is a repeat, but it is cycling again.

[romanic]

359. So fucking what?

[DanTex]

360. So nothing. Just a factual observation. A lot of people seem to think that Bernie is the

favorite of poor and working-class people while Hillary is the more favored by wealthier people, but it's exactly the opposite.

[romanic]

361. Nothing indeed.

:I

[CanadaexPat]

379. Nominating Clinton is the surest way to a Rep Pres

[bettyellen]

381. And we see OPs in GD now how we should get under the bus for them to reach RWNJs.....

Fuck that noise. I know exactly where it's coming from.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7204545

[AtomicKitten]

383. And we're better looking too.

[workinclasszero]

384. Bernie is the white male upper middle class

Status quo power structure candidate.

They think PoC, women and the working class owe them the votes just because.

[noiretextatique]

390. and HRC is just plain old folk?!

your comment is either naive, disingenuous or completely insane. i suspect the latter.

[workinclasszero]

391. LOL whatever

At least I got a laugh out of your reply.

[noiretextatique]

397. wish i could say the same

your post is just silly, but not in a fun way

[TeddyR]

385. So

Why does that matter? I don't really care what a candidate's supporters look like, or how much money the supporters make. I care about a candidate's positions.

[DanTex]

386. Some people were under the impression that Bernie was the preferred candidate of poor and working

class people. That falsehood came up so often that I thought it was worth making an OP with the facts. If you don't care about a candidate's supporters, then this information doesn't matter to you.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

388. things are changing

that poll was up to Aug 4th

[artislife]

392. What demograph are you?

Because if you ever read the posts by the Bernie supporters you would find us to be not only white males, but females and minorities, too. I give no credence to these polls. I think their too old school to actually matter much this early----yes one year from now--to mean jack.

I don't even think you thought this up, your OP doesn't sound as rambly as it normally does.


And 10 years ago, we gave the government of this country our trust and then they took our privacy, our money and for many, our lives. So no, it isn't like the bills she sponsored, which were bullshit little bills. Look them up. Renaming a post office, and other bs. I was so unimpressed that I couldn't commit them to memory. But the crap she ushered in along with the others, changed this country. Our country was hijacked.

We all lose, hell---we all have LOST. We are just mounting a comeback.

[slipslidingaway]

395. I just want my Volvo ...

in the meantime we just looked at the new HC benefits from my husband's plan for retiree benefits from a Fortune 50 company. They are now labeled bronze, silver, gold etc. and to keep a spouse appears to be an additional $1200. per annum. Still need to make calls to finalize details, more interested if our current cancer is 'in network.'

[John Poet]

399. I'm here to collect my Sanders money.

There seems to have been some mistake.
Sanders supporters, of whom I am one, are supposed to be wealthier.

So I guess you better send me a check.

Send the bread. PDQ.

[Art_from_Ark]

400. More stupid Bernie-bashing shit

[djean111]

401. OMG!!! They have run out of memes! Thank goodness no one swiped the recycle bin!

Although, granted, it is very Green-thinking to recycle. And recycle. And recycle.

Bwahahahaha! That is a hearty laugh, because I am a rather impecunious woman, and I support Bernie.

[Vattel]

402. Your explanation is pure speculation. There is a little thing called evidence that would be nice.

[Gothmog]

403. Thanks for posting this