= new reply since forum marked as read
You may need this 
I can't say what I really want, but I would definitely say it to your face.
A person with an unimpeachable and decades-long civil rights record can't "reach out" any more than their record itself does. That voting group was clearly never on the table for Bernie, due in large part to its obvious loyalty to the Clinton name.
I'd also speculate that the other big reason was that the AA voting community simply isn't nearly as far-left as Bernie (and a goodly percentage are conservative, not just less-liberal). That contingent isn't likely to accept any Republican (since that party contains so many racists and doesn't fight for issues important to them). The more-conservative Democrat is the obvious choice.
Do I think economic injustice should be at or near the top for every non-1%'er voter, regardless of race. Of course. What progressive wouldn't think that? Not my call to make, though..
In any case, I have to reiterate: the AA vote (jury's out on the Latino vote) was never on the table for Bernie in the first place. Kinda like the young voter demographic isn't for Hillary, regardless of how hard she might try. They don't trust her. It's fucked up that the candidates would seem to have to pick one (and only one)...but it sure looks like that's the way it's gone. 
... Nate could have just asked me and saved himself some time.
