• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Who is feeling the Bern

dismal

Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Messages
10,329
Location
texas
Basic Beliefs
none
Poll: white Democrats are feeling the Bern

Nationally, Clinton is still clearly in front among Democrats and Democrat leaners, according to this week's NBC News/SurveyMonkey Weekly Election Tracking Poll, which was conducted online — she leads 53 to 36 percent. But the crosstabs of the poll reveal three main demographic fault lines between Clinton and Sanders supporters: gender, age, and race.

Interestingly enough, Sanders is actually winning white Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters in this poll — 46 percent of them pick him, and 44 percent pick Clinton.

Yet Clinton remains well ahead due to her overwhelming support among nonwhite voters. Seventy-three percent of black Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters say they support Clinton, and just 12 percent support Sanders. The numbers among Hispanics are 61 percent for Clinton and 27 percent for Sanders. And people who said they were of another race supported Clinton over Sanders 59 percent to 30 percent.

http://www.vox.com/2016/1/15/10770524/who-supports-bernie-sanders

According to this poll support for Sanders skews to young, white and men.

The penis/vagina thing may help explain the male/female split, but given both Hillary and Bernie are old and white, what explains the large differences in support by age and race?
 
The penis/vagina thing may help explain the male/female split, but given both Hillary and Bernie are old and white, what explains the large differences in support by age and race?
Well she is married to the first black president.
Also, she knows how to pander to them.
 
White males tend to be better educated than the population on average and have the careers which reflect that, so it's more likely that they've lost out on good paying jobs to AA policies which promoted less qualified women ahead of them because of some company's diversity policies and are harbouring a deep-seeded hatred towards the entire gender as a result. The blacks are probably figuring that a white man being in charge of all the country's cops is slightly more likely to give the order to have them shot than a white woman would, so they're just playing the odds there.

I don't know what the hell the Hispanics are thinking. The lazy bastards are probably just drunk and gave a random and meaningless answer.
 
Young people don't piss themselves when they hear the S word.
 
One possible factor in both race and age is idealism vs. pragmatism.
Young people are more likely to support an implausible ideal than a pragmatic compromise. They will support Bernie even if it means losing to the GOP, just as they supported Nadar and helped Bush defeat Gore. Perhaps in part because they are still naive enough to think that the individual matters more than the party (they don't). Also, white liberals can better afford to support an unrealistic ideal, because if Bernie gets the nomination and the GOP wins as a result, they are a lot less fucked by the racist and xenophobic policies of the GOP than than minorities.
Put these together and Bernie supporters will skew young and white.
 
Most likely minority voters sense that Bernie is rooted in a much older left, a paradigm that has has fallen out of favor since the 1960s. In this tradition it is white paternalism, opposition to working class based oppression, and utopian democratic...often tinged with lyrical affection to "green" romanticism.

Hillary, however, understands that left populism based on gender, race, and ethnicity are where the new votes are. In the newer tradition the victim class is expanded to include just about anyone with some kind of "different" identity - most them more important than class: not only women and blacks, but also Hispanics, Muslims, gays, transgenders, disabled, teachers, government workers, immigrants, etc.

Under the newer paradigm, the 500K a year white woman executive who has hit "the glass ceiling" is a victim, just like the lettuce picking immigrant field hand.

Bernie, one senses, does not buy it. And as long as people buy the modern formulation, Hillary benefits.
 
One possible factor in both race and age is idealism vs. pragmatism.
Young people are more likely to support an implausible ideal than a pragmatic compromise. They will support Bernie even if it means losing to the GOP, just as they supported Nadar and helped Bush defeat Gore. Perhaps in part because they are still naive enough to think that the individual matters more than the party (they don't). Also, white liberals can better afford to support an unrealistic ideal, because if Bernie gets the nomination and the GOP wins as a result, they are a lot less fucked by the racist and xenophobic policies of the GOP than than minorities.
Put these together and Bernie supporters will skew young and white.

Supporting a challenger candidate in the primaries, who may or may not be less electable than the bland heiress apparent, is very different from supporting a third-party spoiler candidate in the general.
 
One possible factor in both race and age is idealism vs. pragmatism.
Young people are more likely to support an implausible ideal than a pragmatic compromise. They will support Bernie even if it means losing to the GOP, just as they supported Nadar and helped Bush defeat Gore. Perhaps in part because they are still naive enough to think that the individual matters more than the party (they don't). Also, white liberals can better afford to support an unrealistic ideal, because if Bernie gets the nomination and the GOP wins as a result, they are a lot less fucked by the racist and xenophobic policies of the GOP than than minorities.
Put these together and Bernie supporters will skew young and white.

So you know that Clinton is a substandard human being and now are telling us to be "practical" and support her. Her foreign policy is as fanatical as Bush. She has been on the board of directors of Walmart. She is a standard politician...that makes her a substandard human being. You can talk compromise, but you should be looking at reality...this woman is of the same cut and attitude as Margaret Thatcher. and amazingly, more corrupt. I am glad to see her feeling the Bern. Our world is shifting under our feet with environmental problems that are only getting worse. Clinton's cold war politics and corporatism is part of the momentum of increase of environmental problems. Bernie has a lot of good answers and can make a difference. Clinton would just give us more of the same stagnation in regard to environment and financial crimes...allowing them to continue. May Hillary feel the Bern all the way to no more chance of her becoming president.
 
One possible factor in both race and age is idealism vs. pragmatism.
Young people are more likely to support an implausible ideal than a pragmatic compromise. They will support Bernie even if it means losing to the GOP, just as they supported Nadar and helped Bush defeat Gore. Perhaps in part because they are still naive enough to think that the individual matters more than the party (they don't). Also, white liberals can better afford to support an unrealistic ideal, because if Bernie gets the nomination and the GOP wins as a result, they are a lot less fucked by the racist and xenophobic policies of the GOP than than minorities.
Put these together and Bernie supporters will skew young and white.

This sort of assumes the answer as I don't think many of Bernie's supporters view him as implausible. If the issue is implausibility the question then becomes why certain groups find him more implausible than others. Bernie supporters are always talking about how he polls better than Hillary in matchups with Republicans, which suggests they would view his biggest challenge as getting past Hillary. Whatever implausibility exists must lie within the Obama coalition because obviously there were enough of them to make electing a president possible twice.
 
One possible factor in both race and age is idealism vs. pragmatism.
Young people are more likely to support an implausible ideal than a pragmatic compromise. They will support Bernie even if it means losing to the GOP, just as they supported Nadar and helped Bush defeat Gore. Perhaps in part because they are still naive enough to think that the individual matters more than the party (they don't). Also, white liberals can better afford to support an unrealistic ideal, because if Bernie gets the nomination and the GOP wins as a result, they are a lot less fucked by the racist and xenophobic policies of the GOP than than minorities.
Put these together and Bernie supporters will skew young and white.

Supporting a challenger candidate in the primaries, who may or may not be less electable than the bland heiress apparent, is very different from supporting a third-party spoiler candidate in the general.

It is not very different. Regardless of whether Bernie could actually win a general, the storyline has been that he cannot, and most people believe the storyline. Odds are that a large % of those saying they support Bernie over Hillary, think she has a better chance in the general but support Bernie anyway. If that is true, then it is highly similar to the idealist leftists who supported Nadar in 2000.
In both cases, there were/are people whose values and interests are notably more aligned with one of the two parties with any chance of winning (the Dems), and thus with the candidate most likely to lead to a win for that party, even though the candidate themself is less ideal in their view than others within that party. Pragmatic realism would motivate supporting the less than ideal candidate that can win for the preferred party, rather than voting with ideals that would only aid in one's preferred party losing. If one thinks that Bernie is less likely to win the general, then supporting him in the primaries is essentially the same as voting for Nadar was for many liberals in 2000 (the vast majority of whom realized their error by 2004 and voted for Kerry rather than Nadar).
 
One possible factor in both race and age is idealism vs. pragmatism.
Young people are more likely to support an implausible ideal than a pragmatic compromise. They will support Bernie even if it means losing to the GOP, just as they supported Nadar and helped Bush defeat Gore. Perhaps in part because they are still naive enough to think that the individual matters more than the party (they don't). Also, white liberals can better afford to support an unrealistic ideal, because if Bernie gets the nomination and the GOP wins as a result, they are a lot less fucked by the racist and xenophobic policies of the GOP than than minorities.
Put these together and Bernie supporters will skew young and white.

So you know that Clinton is a substandard human being and now are telling us to be "practical" and support her.

I'm not telling you to do anything. I am explaining one reason why whites and minorities may be more willing to support a less than ideal candidate in Hillary compared to young whites are. Some Bernie supporters may share your view that a Dem victory under Hillary would be "just as bad" as any GOP victory. But most do not. They are just more willing to gamble a loss to the GOP in order to have a shot at a more ideal candidate.

Her foreign policy is as fanatical as Bush. She has been on the board of directors of Walmart. She is a standard politician...that makes her a substandard human being. You can talk compromise, but you should be looking at reality...this woman is of the same cut and attitude as Margaret Thatcher. and amazingly, more corrupt. I am glad to see her feeling the Bern. Our world is shifting under our feet with environmental problems that are only getting worse. Clinton's cold war politics and corporatism is part of the momentum of increase of environmental problems. Bernie has a lot of good answers and can make a difference. Clinton would just give us more of the same stagnation in regard to environment and financial crimes...allowing them to continue. May Hillary feel the Bern all the way to no more chance of her becoming president.

All this same "just as bad" nonsense was said in 2000 by Nader voters, who quickly realized how stupid they were and just how much worse Bush and GOP was than any Dem would have been. Thus by 2004, 80% of them switched away from Nader and voted for an less ideal "standard politician" in Kerry. Unfortunately, fear and mindless patriotism pushed too many swing voters toward Bush.
 
One possible factor in both race and age is idealism vs. pragmatism.
Young people are more likely to support an implausible ideal than a pragmatic compromise. They will support Bernie even if it means losing to the GOP, just as they supported Nadar and helped Bush defeat Gore. Perhaps in part because they are still naive enough to think that the individual matters more than the party (they don't). Also, white liberals can better afford to support an unrealistic ideal, because if Bernie gets the nomination and the GOP wins as a result, they are a lot less fucked by the racist and xenophobic policies of the GOP than than minorities.
Put these together and Bernie supporters will skew young and white.

This sort of assumes the answer as I don't think many of Bernie's supporters view him as implausible. If the issue is implausibility the question then becomes why certain groups find him more implausible than others. Bernie supporters are always talking about how he polls better than Hillary in matchups with Republicans, which suggests they would view his biggest challenge as getting past Hillary. Whatever implausibility exists must lie within the Obama coalition because obviously there were enough of them to make electing a president possible twice.

You just love to hurt yourselves and others don't you? You want to spoon feed us a word and not let us ever think about making necessary changes. Sanders' policy recommendations are sound, logical and socially responsible. That is a long way from implausible. You may also be of a mind to say that it is implausible to attempt to wean a drug addict off his drugs, but it does happen and will only happen if good people make the effort. You are so mired in self pity and defeatism you only seem able to ally yourself with outright grafters, telling us that we must be "reasonable." You don't really mean reasonable; you actually mean SCARED.:hobbyhorse:

For Bernie to become president is admittedly an uphill battle against a huge Democratic Party and Republican Party billionaire brigade. He has received donations from more supporters than ANY CANDIDATE in history and has a pretty good war chest. His ideas are best for the country considering the motley lot he is facing and there is a possibility he can make it. My question is not so much about Bernie in the election as it is about the huge bureaucratic and military industrial corporate congressional complex that has seized power in America, It is absolutely ruthless and not afraid to lie and to kill if needed for its purposes. Can Bernie and his staff keep the boilers stoked to make some headway against that? That really depends on how sincerely his supporters back him. I feel Obama had a lot of strong backing at the start of his term of office but he deserted his supporters instead, chasing favor in the financial and military industrial sectors.
Financial reform proved impossible with ex Goldman Sachs execs dominating his financial policies. His supporters noticed and so did the white Republican office seekers who went on a racist attack on his administration. They essentially wiped out any good the man might have done, but it was with the help of his spinelessness. I don't think we would have that problem with Bernie. He seems to be in possession of the FDR playbook and to quote Roosevelt regarding the uber rich...."I welcome their contempt."

What Bernie represents in American politics is that honesty is the best policy. Something most politicians shine on as they load up their saddlebags for their eventual getaway.;)
 
This sort of assumes the answer as I don't think many of Bernie's supporters view him as implausible. If the issue is implausibility the question then becomes why certain groups find him more implausible than others. Bernie supporters are always talking about how he polls better than Hillary in matchups with Republicans, which suggests they would view his biggest challenge as getting past Hillary. Whatever implausibility exists must lie within the Obama coalition because obviously there were enough of them to make electing a president possible twice.

You just love to hurt yourselves and others don't you?

Thread is not about me.

Also, learn to fucking read what people actually write and if you must respond, try to make it relevant to what they actually said.
 
You just love to hurt yourselves and others don't you?

Thread is not about me.

Also, learn to fucking read what people actually write and if you must respond, try to make it relevant to what they actually said.

You don't get it do you? You think Bernie's campaign must be backed by the Democratic Party machinery. It clearly is not and that outfit has hardened itself because they are the same "load your saddlebags with money" politicians Bernie is opposing. Implausible to them...YOU BET! Inimical is a better word.
 
BTW, current polls of head-to-head against GOP candidates, greatly over-estimate Bernie's chances.

Bernie and Hillary have been playing softball with each other and the GOP has said very little about Bernie in contrast to their 24 hour attack machine against Hillary that has been operating at full steam for 23 continuous years. The GOP will have nothing but tired old news against Hillary in the general, the same attacks she has faced since being First Lady. In contrast, the attacks against Bernie will be like nothing he has ever faced in his political career, and the drumbeat of "socialist" and exposing the details of his objectively extreme economic proposals will scare of many of the swing voters currently willing to say they would vote for him because they have heard almost no concerted attacks against him and know little about his policies yet other than his personable, honest likability.
 
You just love to hurt yourselves and others don't you?

Thread is not about me.
WHO says?

Anywho, I'd suspect the male-female divide is probably pretty obvious, as probably more women will be leaning towards Hillary just because more of them think it would be nice to see a woman president.

Younger-older divide is probably idealism more than anything as already suggested.

The Hispanic poll trending strongly for Hillary is interesting...not really sure...and would have to read up on it to have an opinion.
 
Thread is not about me.

Also, learn to fucking read what people actually write and if you must respond, try to make it relevant to what they actually said.

You don't get it do you? You think Bernie's campaign must be backed by the Democratic Party machinery. It clearly is not and that outfit has hardened itself because they are the same "load your saddlebags with money" politicians Bernie is opposing. Implausible to them...YOU BET! Inimical is a better word.

Advice: not taken.
 
I'm feelin it.

df9865d0024c547196a56768324f4435.jpg


Bernie supporters are always talking about how he polls better than Hillary in matchups with Republicans, which suggests they would view his biggest challenge as getting past Hillary.
Basically, this. Considering the witless idiots they have running in their field -- and considering their strongest candidate is still Donald Trump of all people -- it's pretty much just a question of deciding "Who gets the right to crush the Republican candidate in the general election?" In that sense, it really IS just a question of Bernie vs. Hillary.
 
What are these attacks republicans can throw at Bernie?

It's not going to matter. Independent voters can't stand Trump.

If you think Bernie is doing ok now, just imagine him with the backing of the democrats post primary
 
Back
Top Bottom