2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary Clinton has a race problem — and it’s resurfacing at a dangerous time
According to a Feb. 16 CNN/ORC poll, a whopping 65 percent of South Carolinian black voters are planning to support Hillary Clinton in Saturday’s primary, while only 28 percent are planning to support Bernie Sanders.
The furor that broke out last night, however, may just shift the political winds.
In the middle of a $500-per-person Clinton fundraising event in Charleston on Wednesday evening, a young Black Lives Matter activist stepped out in front of the former secretary of state, turned toward the small audience, and held aloft a banner emblazoned with the phrase, “We need to bring them to heel.”
The protester, as she later explained, “wanted to make sure that black people are paying attention to [Clinton’s] record” by drawing attention to the racist rhetoric Clinton used in 1996, when she, as first lady, strongly supported the “tough on crime” method of governance, and successfully lobbied for a bill based on that method to be passed into law.
“They are not just gangs of kids anymore,” Clinton warned the public at the time. “They are often the kinds of kids that are called ‘super-predators.’ No conscience, no empathy. We can talk about why they ended up that way, but first we need to bring them to heel.”
The crime bill that Clinton advocated for is now widely regarded as a “terrible mistake,” and the demonizing language that she used to describe young people who belong to gangs (a group that, because of institutionalized racism and oppression, is majority black and Latino/a) would now be political suicide.
Since the ’90s, the Democratic Party — and Hillary Clinton along with it — has morphed from voicing demagogic, dangerous ideas about black children and supporting catastrophic crime policies to, today, speaking of how “we have allowed our criminal justice system to get out of balance,” and promising an end to the decades-long era of mass incarceration, which, of course, they hold much responsibility for creating.
But, despite Clinton’s sudden populist transformation, the memory of the American people isn’t quite so short and fleeting.
Americans remember that Hillary Clinton’s ‘90s policy stances punished those born into systemic racism and poverty by instituting mandatory minimums, eliminating rehabilitative programs for inmates addicted to drugs, implementing the three-strikes law (which Bill now admits “made the problem worse”), expanding the death penalty (which Hillary still supports), and building more prisons countrywide.
Indeed, the ‘94 legislation threw millions of black women and men into prison; in fact, throughout Bill Clinton’s presidency, the black prison population increased by 50 percent.
All of this spelled mass incarceration and mass disenfranchisement for the black Americans of South Carolina.
Today, due to felonies, one out of every 27 black voters in South Carolina is disenfranchised, and, although black people make up just 28 percent of the state’s population, they account for a devastating 62 percent of the prison and jail population, in no small part because of the draconian measures the Clinton administration, along with the strong support of its first lady, took in the name of being “tough on crime.”
And now, 20 years later, at the end of February 2016, Clinton finds herself being directly challenged by a young Black protester named Ashley Williams on her past rhetoric and role in creating America’s stringent criminal justice system, under which people are still being penalized today, including those in South Carolina.
http://www.salon.com/2016/02/26/hillary_clinton_has_a_race_problem_and_its_resurfacing_at_a_dangerous_time/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
bigtree
(85,999 posts)Hillary did not.
Sanders problem. This projection is amazing spin.
from his own website:
“Bernie Sanders’ strong record of supporting tough on crime legislation.”
SANDERS: STRONG ON FUNDING POLICE AND ANTI-DRUG PROGRAMS
Voted for Over $650 Million to Fight Crime. [Vote #104, 4/14/94, H.AMDT.499 on H.R.4092, passed 395-25, Sanders: Y]
Voted for $200 Million for Local Police Programs. [Vote #193, 5/26/93, H.R.2244, passed 287-140, Sanders: Y]
Voted for $1.8 Billion for Police Officers and $233 Million for Crime Prevention Programs. [Vote #571, 7/25/95, H.R.2076, Sanders: Y]
Voted for $30.5 Million for Anti-Drug Program, the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Program . [Vote #173, 6/20/01, H.R.2216, failed 212-216, Sanders: Y]
Voted for $175 Million for Public Housing Drug Elimination Program. [Vote #287, 7/27/01, H.R.2620, failed 197-213, Sanders: Y]
Voted for $9 Million for Anti-Drug Program, the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Program. [Vote #343, 6/29/05, H.R.3058, passed 315-103, Sanders: Y]
SANDERS: STRONG ON THE COPS PROGRAM
Voted for the 1994 Crime Bill that Created the COPS Program. [Vote #416, 8/21/94, conference report on H.R.3355, Sanders: Y]
Voted for $7.5 Billion for Cops on the Beat Program . [Vote #124, 2/14/95, H.R.728, failed 196-235, Sanders: Y]
Voted for Reauthorization of COPS Program . [Vote #232, 6/17/99, H.R.1501, failed 191-233, Sanders: Y]
Voted for $300 Million Increase to $1.3 Billion Total for COPS Program . [Vote #386, 8/5/99, H.R.2670, failed 208-219, Sanders: Y]
Voted for $11.7 Million Increase for COPS Meth Seizure Program . [Vote #233, 7/17/01, H.R.2500, failed 187-227, Sanders: Y]
Voted for $106.9 Million for the COPS Program. [HR 4754, Vote #330, 7/7/04; CQ Vote Report #330, 7/7/04; Houston Chronicle, 2/3/04; New York Times, 5/25/04; R 74-148; D 131-64; I 1-0]
Voted for $200 Million for Local Law Enforcement Including $100 Million for COPS . [Vote #244, 6/14/05, H.R.2862, failed 196-230, Sanders: Y]
Voted for $10 Million Increase in Funding for COPS Program . [Vote #248, 6/14/05, H.R.2862, failed 260-168, Sanders: Y]
https://web.archive.org/web/20061018180921/http:/www.bernie.org/truth/crime.html
CBGLuthier
(12,723 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)the ultimate expression of non-support.
Qutzupalotl
(14,317 posts)...while the Clintons supported it. But you knew that.
He only voted for the bill because it was bundled with the Violence Against Women Act. If he'd voted against the package, you'd probably call him anti-woman.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)
LuvLoogie
(7,014 posts)Forgive me for voting for it, but don't forgive Hillary for supporting it--because I was really against it. That's why I voted for it.
Hillary shouldn't have supported it, and Bill shouldn't have signed it. Congress made me do it.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)
PatrynXX
(5,668 posts)Human Shields meh can't cross them we might hurt someone. 
suddenly I don't feel safe around Hillary but then again I don't care. Terrorists out there today are a joke. compared to the ones in the political arrena.
John Poet
(2,510 posts)vote against the assault weapons ban, as well as the violence against women provisions-- both of which he supported. (So much for being in the NRA's pocket, right?)
LuvLoogie
(7,014 posts)Maxine Waters voted against the 94 bill. Do you suppose she is against protecting women and limiting assault weapons?
Milliesmom
(493 posts)Bernie has never spoken out against black people, Hillary has , the Violence Against Women he has spoke about many times and that was the only reason he voted for the bill, he was not happy about many things in the bill, but sometimes you have to vote against what you believe to get what you want, it's been that way for decades.
bigtree
(85,999 posts)...and this little nugget:
In 1995, Sanders also voted against a bill whose aim was to “demilitarize” the police. The Local Government Law Enforcement Block Grants Act of 1995, sponsored by Rep. Bill McCollum (R-Florida), called for establishing drug courts and prohibited local governments from purchasing tanks or armored personnel carriers.
Twenty-one years ago, Sanders was saying very much the same thing (as in this campaign) before voting for bills that caused the prison population to skyrocket...
Sanders went on to vote for the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (1994) and the Ominibus Crime Bill of 1994, a hallmark of Bill Clinton’s “tough on crime” agenda.
The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 passed the House just one week after Sanders made his impassioned speech, and Sanders voted for it. That act called for expanding the application of the death penalty on many more crimes, including large-scale drug trafficking. It also included a federal version of the “three strikes law,” requiring a mandatory life sentence for anyone convicted of a third serious crime.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)VAWA!!!
My how the subject changes.
iAZZZo
(358 posts)
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)or self-delete it.
I don't think I'm going to appreciate your brand of humor(?)/snark(?)/insightfully cogent commentary(?).
LuvLoogie
(7,014 posts)dr60omg
(283 posts)Go to the Thomas register of Congressional activity or look at what he DID say below
He did not vote for the bill ... he rallied against it and did not vote for it until certain amendments were placed into the bill
noiretextatique
(27,275 posts)But, I understand why he voted for it. I know why Clinton did too.
iAZZZo
(358 posts)yep
their narrative is of most import
'the narrative, the narrative.........' ("'the horror, the horror"
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)and of course, there was a reason he ended voting for the final (third version)... it is a big rider these people want to ignore, HAWA... this is normal practice in DC... why I wish we had clean bills. The only clean bills we have are CRs and postal office naming bills.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)take what clearly is a weakness of the Bernie campaign and declare it a weakness of HRC ... despite all evidence to the contrary.
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)a concern related to Black folks vis-à-vis HRC, and EVERY damn thing to do with Yah Bernie!!!
6chars
(3,967 posts)
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)...is that it included so many things. If he had voted against it, the charge would have been he voted against the Violence Against Women Act. He supported it largely for the VAWA portion of it, Hillary supported it because of superpredators. BIG difference.
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)Oh that's right it was the Queen who misspoke. 
cui bono
(19,926 posts)When did Hillary have a chance to "vote" on the bill? You are trying to imply that she voted 'No' when in fact, SHE WASN'T IN CONGRESS and therefore COULD NOT VOTE ON THE BILL one way or another.
.
No further reading of any of your propaganda necessary or warranted. You've just outed yourself as someone who cares not for the truth, but just for the smearmongering of a fine gentleman and the propping up of a neo-liberal corporatist who also likes to lie.
How some of you have the nerve... is beyond me.
.
brooklynite
(94,606 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)Arazi
(6,829 posts)The top Twitter feed means pretty much everyone under 25 read it.
The front page online news means many more did too
6chars
(3,967 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I will be nice and clue you in... TWITTER.
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)SillyPinkBunny
(3 posts)She did not refer to black teens as super predators, she referred to a problem with gangs. Gangs in the mid 90's were made up of white, black, Hispanic and Asian teenagers. Academics and criminologists claimed that we had to be worried about "super predators", however looking back, teen crime was already dropping in the mid 90's. The spike in crime earlier may have been related to lead exposure during childhood, which is why the lead exposure in Flint is so worrisome. It not only affect health and IQ, it affects the person's ability to manage anger. White, black, Hispanic or Asian.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)PatrickforO
(14,578 posts)The other 86% were persons of color. This is why 'super predators' us such a great racial dog whistle. Clinton can then say, "Well gangs were made up of white, black, Hispanic and Asian teens," and so this is NOT a dog whistle, while at the same time we all KNEW that in 1996 the term super predators when applied to gangs meant black. Just like Reagan's welfare queen. The average welfare recipient was white, but in everyone's mind she was black.
The Clintons are GREAT at using this technique, if you look back at the 08 primary battle with Obama.
It doesn't work in the long haul, though. Again, reference Clinton's loss to Obama. Now Bernie's turning it around too.
Response to SillyPinkBunny (Reply #5)
Name removed Message auto-removed
bread_and_roses
(6,335 posts)And any of us alive at the time who were appalled then by this and by the draconian "welfare reform" knew then that both were using racially charged code to broadcast exactly WHO was targeted.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)"Gangs" was dog-whistle for "young black men."
WillyT
(72,631 posts)
azmom
(5,208 posts)apology for her vile words. Hillary said her words were taken out of context.
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)But when someone confronts her with her own history, she does a social and political faceplant right off of her high horse.
Beowulf
(761 posts)it's up to his supporters to do that.
1. Bernie voted for the 1994 Crime bill.
That is true. However that bill was an omnibus bill containing several pieces of legislation. Bernie was quite clear at the time of his vote that he supported the Violence Against Women Act and the ban on semi-automatic assault rifles. He also expressed at that time his concerns about other parts of that bill, predicting, correctly, that its effects could be profound on the African American community. He continued to this day to be critical of those aspects of the bill. Hillary has never spoken against any part of that bill. She has condemned some of the results of the bill such incarceration rates, but she's never connected that to the bill.
2. Superpredators refers to gangs of all colors and ethnicities.
This is the beauty of using coded language. She can claim she never explicitly said superpredators meant AA youth, but there was little doubt to whom she was referring. The criminal case in the public consciousness at that time was that of the assault of the Central Park jogger. For those who may not know, the case concerned the assault and rape of a 28 year old investment banker in the early evening in Central Park by six young men, 5 black and one Hispanic. There were many theories at the time explaining why attacks such as this happened and what to do about it. It was in this climate that John DiLulio came up with the superpredator theory, that young men raised without morals because they were raised without fathers, would naturally commit such violent crimes and the only way to deal with them was to lock them up. DiLulio met with the Clintons in the White House for 3 hours explaining his theories. Like Reagan's "welfare queen" though never explicitly identified as black, everyone knew that superpredator meant black, with black in white conscious also including brown. Hillary knew what she was saying and how white Americans would understand it. To say otherwise is to strain credulity.
EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)LuvLoogie
(7,014 posts)Do you suppose they were unaware that it was an omnibus bill?
Beowulf
(761 posts)Bernie's reasons for voting for the Bill were questioned. I explained. What other congresscritters did and why is immaterial.
Bernie made it clear at the time there parts of the bill he really liked and felt were sorely needed. And there were parts of the bill he really hated and would ultimately be harmful to many Americans. What's not in doubt is that Hillary expressed support for the entire bill.
LuvLoogie
(7,014 posts)There wasn't one bill for Bernie and one bill for Maxine Waters (voted No) and one bill for Hillary (who didn't have a vote) and one bill for Presiden't Clinton.
Beowulf
(761 posts)You're suggesting he's a hypocrite? How so? He's been consistent in his message across the years. Had he voted no, you'd be challenging his sincerity over gun control and women's issues. All this does is deflect attention from your candidate's abysmal record on race. Now I'm finished with you.
LuvLoogie
(7,014 posts)for supporting the bill, while giving Bernie a pass arehypocritical in their criticism of Hillary.
On edit:
Was Maxine Waters' vote more or less principled than Bernie's? She voted No. Same bill. She supports Hillary.
Beowulf
(761 posts)Where did I say I agreed with Bernie's decision? My point is that it was a complicated, difficult decision and he explained himself. Hillary has expressed nothing similar. She has spoken favorably of the entire bill.
LuvLoogie
(7,014 posts)while Hillary is constantly made to walk the purity gauntlet here on DU.
Beowulf
(761 posts)And no one had to ask Bernie to make one. He just did it at the time of his vote. Clearly. Hillary could do this, too. It would probably help her greatly with trust issues.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)"No, I didn't say ..." before you could get to post the substance? LOL.
Nuance is the term used to explain how your candidate's affirmative vote, differs from you candidates opponent affirmative vote (if they had cast one); thereby, shielding your candidate from the parts of the bill that they voted for; but, are using to attack your candidate's opponent.
LuvLoogie
(7,014 posts)In congress, you get to write legislation, and you get to vote on legislation. There is no line item veto or crossing your fingers. Hence the poison pill designed to kill or nulify a bill.
Solidarity versus polital self interest versus the impact on your constituency versus the greater good.
Mistakes will be made, and sometimes they are fatal. Some claim the foresight and the impeccable judgment of their cadidate, and a right to say I told you so--in spite of their candidate's vote.
Motives in their own compartments, insulated and pure.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Is what I call it.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)you know, the low income ones that Bernie referred to.
"we are going to create millions of jobs for low-income kids so they’re not hanging out on street corners."
thereismore
(13,326 posts)
LexVegas
(6,070 posts)SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Guess those are ok with her.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)... Really appreciated them. 
LuvLoogie
(7,014 posts)CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)What you are trying to do here is immoral.
HRC and her supporters are suggesting that Sanders doesn't care about black people, and Hispanics too.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
As always with HRC and her supporters--you can't just tout the policies of your candidate. You have to stab and slash at your opponent with half-truths, disinformation and repeated talking points that you hope to hell will stick.
It's vicious.
LexVegas
(6,070 posts)CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)LexVegas
(6,070 posts)CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)on the internet can sink the Sanders campaign? Or even the Hillary campaign?
I think many keyboard jockeys like to imagine that they're at the epicenter of some big important political battle--doing damage to campaigns and spreading talking points that are actually changing the world.
This isn't important. We're not important people in Joe Klein's war room shaping opinion with our one liners and vents!
OMG!
LexVegas
(6,070 posts)CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)To suggest that the blathering on the Internet fomented the win--in any way--is a bit weird.
Response to CoffeeCat (Reply #75)
CoffeeCat This message was self-deleted by its author.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)..... They just need to do more of it.
PatrickforO
(14,578 posts)They won it because there was a lot of fear of gangs at that time. But look at the unintended (or intended?) consequences.
thereismore
(13,326 posts)
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)I don't think the "Hillary is a racist" meme will work any better than the hundreds of smears before it.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)They're speaking the truth--that the crime bill that she and her husband spearheaded and championed did great damage to the African American community in this nation.
It is fact that it led to mass incarceration rates that destroyed lives.
Bill Clinton apologized for the crime bill and also for the horrific consequences of it. Bill Clinton understands the facts.
Why don't you?
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)I know you don't do detail, nuance or subtlety, but I try to help.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)... that voters aren't buying in to this crap, doesn't it?
oasis
(49,392 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)We have a chance to avoid being saddled with her and her liability.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Cool story, bro.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Hillary is rife with liability and scandal. Shoes continue to drop. There will be more through the year and into November. I just hope we Democrats can make the right decision and avoid handing the White House to the repubs.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts).... from the left help elected Trump? Hmmm. I hope I am wrong, but that is the appearance I get from DU.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Sorry, I can't help you.
Response to MaggieD (Reply #33)
Name removed Message auto-removed
thereismore
(13,326 posts)And indeed, three days ago, Clinton stated that, “White Americans need to do a better job at listening when African-Americans talk about the seen and unseen barriers they face every day. Practice humility rather than assume that our experience is everyone’s experience.”
thereismore
(13,326 posts)TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)Neoconservative war hawks and Wall Street shills.
Laughing Mirror
(4,185 posts)Attributing the term super-predators to the lowest and weakest in society whose crimes come nowhere near in scope or magnitude to those of the real super-predators, the hawks and the shills, was no more than a classic case of projection on the part of Clinton.
oasis
(49,392 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)
JustAnotherGen
(31,828 posts)Response to JustAnotherGen (Reply #60)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)All the dog whistle stuff from the Clintons during his admin then during the 2008 campaign.
It's stuff like this that Hillary is getting a free pass on. Somehow, her black supporters are spinning it quite differently. But here it is. Some of the dog whistle stuff, anyway.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)She's "evolved." She "regrets" her previous stances. She has "apologized" for them.
The problem for Team Hill is that they do all of this work to obfuscate the issue and her stance on it...then she reflexively does exactly the same thing again on camera.
Really hard to misunderstand that. I'm sure it frustrates her team to no end.
