This blog is dedicated to the memory of David Weintraub, who took on insidious astroturfers and won.

Friday, October 30, 2015

Uncle Don Lemon in Hot Water


In the above clip, CNN's Sunny Hostin and Don Lemon disagreed over what actually took place when a deranged cop manhandled the teenager refusing to get up from her seat. Will Lemon be fired? Should he? Benjamin Dixon went on the Dr. Boyce Watkins Show to discuss this current event.


Of course Lemon should be fired. Though will he? Fareed Zakaria and Brian Williams weren't fired for plagiarism and other unprofessional conduct. I remember Imus perhaps getting canned back in the day, but that memory is foggy. I don't imagine a right winger like Lemon is in any authentic hot water. I agree with Watkins that the bottom line for these networks is ratings and that perhaps Lemon is the Black man's version of a Bill O'Reilly.

Sunny Hostin should quit that network. She is often on as the counter mouth to sleazebag ex-cop Harry Houck. I am done with CNN. I've been done with them for quite a while. When I need a cable news fix, I now go to MSNBC. And they are nothing special either, but at least they are to the left of CNN.

Herbert Marcuse explained in Repressive Tolerance how the media props up the status quo.
Within the affluent democracy, the affluent discussion prevails, and within the established framework, it is tolerant to a large extent. All points of view can be heard: the Communist and the Fascist, the Left and the Right, the white and the Negro, the crusaders for armament and for disarmament. Moreover, in endlessly dragging debates over the media, the stupid opinion is treated with the same respect as the intelligent one, the misinformed may talk as long as the informed, and propaganda rides along with education, truth with falsehood. This pure toleration of sense and nonsense is justified by the democratic argument that nobody, neither group nor individual, is in possession of the truth and capable of defining what is right and wrong, good and bad. Therefore, all contesting opinions must be submitted to 'the people' for its deliberation and choice. But I have already suggested that the democratic argument implies a necessary condition, namely, that the people must be capable of deliberating and choosing on the basis of knowledge, that they must have access to authentic information, and that, on this basis, their evaluation must be the result of autonomous thought.
That gets to the crux of how the media props up the status quo. Both sides are always to be presented no matter how ridiculous. And here's one more excerpt:
UNDER the conditions prevailing in this country, tolerance does not, and cannot, fulfill the civilizing function attributed to it by the liberal protagonists of democracy, namely, protection of dissent. The progressive historical force of tolerance lies in its extension to those modes and forms of dissent which are not committed to the status quo of society, and not confined to the institutional framework of the established society. Consequently, the idea of tolerance implies the necessity, for the dissenting group or individuals, to become illegitimate if and when the established legitimacy prevents and counteracts the development of dissent. This would be the case not only in a totalitarian society, under a dictatorship, in one-party states, but also in a democracy (representative, parliamentary, or 'direct') where the majority does not result from the development of independent thought and opinion but rather from the monopolistic or oligopolistic administration of public opinion, without terror and (normally) without censorship. In such cases, the majority is self-perpetuating while perpetuating the vested interests which made it a majority. In its very structure this majority is 'closed', petrified; it repels a priori any change other than changes within the system. But this means that the majority is no longer justified in claiming the democratic title of the best guardian of the common interest. And such a majority is all but the opposite of Rousseau's 'general will': it is composed, not of individuals who, in their political functions, have made effective 'abstraction' from their private interests, but, on the contrary, of individuals who have effectively identified their private interests with their political functions. And the representatives of this majority, in ascertaining and executing its will, ascertain and execute the will of the vested interests, which have formed the majority. The ideology of democracy hides its lack of substance.
     In the United States, this tendency goes hand in hand with the monopolistic or oligopolistic concentration of capital in the formation of public opinion, i.e., of the majority. The chance of influencing, in any effective way, this majority is at a price, in dollars, totally out of reach of the radical opposition. Here too, free competition and exchange of ideas have become a farce. The Left has no equal voice, no equal access to the mass media and their public facilities - not because a conspiracy excludes it, but because, in good old capitalist fashion, it does not have the required purchasing power. And the Left does not have the purchasing power because it is the Left. These conditions impose upon the radical minorities a strategy which is in essence a refusal to allow the continuous functioning of allegedly indiscriminate but in fact discriminate tolerance, for example, a strategy of protesting against the alternate matching of a spokesman for the Right (or Center) with one for the Left. Not 'equal' but more representation of the Left would be equalization of the prevailing inequality.
There you have it. Go up and down the CNN roster and look at the top of their list. They are excessively to the right and it's not just about Don Lemon. They do not mirror the society at large. They are folks who have been indoctrinated and who pass such qualities onto the passive listener objects who follow them.


Don Lemon is clearly a piece of shit Uncle Tom. There is no tolerance for the woman in the background who might actually have the majority opinion. Don Lemon might as well be a white man, same as Clarence Thomas or you name the Uncle Tom.

24 comments:

donkeytale said...

Thank you thank you for some substance around which we can cuss and discuss and not fall into stale fake lefty whine fests about tangential things than cannot be changed without a major paradigm shift of unprecedented proportion.....we haven't had that spirit here since the 1775.

Marcuse must be put into context and herstorical perspective. Like we have done with McLuhan his message needs an update...he is still valid too but the society around us is far far different in nearly everyway since the 1960s.

Marcuse was also a Marxist radical calling for revolution. He was a mentor to the New Left which happens to be the last massively insurrectionist movement in the US.

Not to be confused with "Bernie's political revolution" which I think vaguely means electing him plus a filibuster-proof majority of left-leaning Senators and an effective voting majority in the US House.

The chances of Bernie winning are far better indeed than the chances for a lefty Congress. Bernie's win or even a close loss in the primary are still significant actions in the history of class struggles. Make no mistake.

But street actions such as OWS and BLM vitally push issues sphere left and give relatively mild leftwing pols like Bernie room to articulate terms in a leftist way which hasn't been seen in the US since the early 70s.

However, the chances for Presidit Sanders to say change the income tax marginal rates back to the Carter era and increase taxes on SS and Medicare to expand those programs are exactly, precisely 0.

The breakdown of the US demographically is such that the GOP will easily retain at least a filibuster in the Senate no matter what. Goodbye socialist legislation. Presidit Sanders meet Presidit Obama.

No the only change you can believe is either the inch at a time as required by the US system (except once there is a cataclysm, like during the Great Depression maybe),or to define a "political revolution" as Marxist Marcuse would describe it not the way Library Socialist Bernie would describe it.

The gist of Marcuse is that the system is set for rule by the rich and the media is part, a large part of the process of maintaining the status quo.

However, the media cannot be changed first by waiving some magic thing fake leftist wand and saying "hocus pocus."

No, the media will not change. It will reflect the status quo says Marcuse which means precisely what I have been preaching: the media reflects the sheeple. The sheeple also protect the status quo. Look at the voting preferences. 20% of the country are liberals and the rest are moderate to conservative.

And he has no cure for the Media. It is what it is. The only cure for the media is to change the status quo and that will not be by ballot measures because the political system also reflects the status quo.

It will be by a "political revolution." Bernie will surely need to better define and communicate what he means by that term.

I doubt it means what both Marcuse and donkeytale know what an effective definition would be in order to change the status quo.

Doubt that Marcuse, like Counterppunch, would have much regard for Bernie, the Marxist interpretation would mean he is a social democrat, or also a slightly more left-tolerant supporter of the status quo.




donkeytale said...

Things do not exist in isolation. All things exist only in relation to all other things. This is true of the media in our so-called liberal democracy.

You said it yourself, the main purpose of CNN is to drive ratings. That speaks for all media. The sheeple want the election spectacle and so it goes. The media will deliver what the sheeple want of the media dies on the whine.

socrates said...

Whatever, dude. You continue to periodically attack me in a personal way. It is quite ridiculous seeing that I know exactly who you are and believe I even found a picture of you. You're going to question my academic background? Do I need to scan and upload my diplomas? I found one url in which your degree is listed as being in business administration or wtf, not academics. Another one seems to show that you are a wealthy man. How can I get it through your thick skull to stop getting too personal with me? I never said you supported the media. I didn't write too well the last week for comments. I should have added the word idea, that you support the idea of a media which does not manipulate or outrageously influence masses of people.

Then you mention some tool fairleft who is dead to me. I don't give a rat's ass about him and ultimately yourself if you continue to troll me.

Hillary was upstaged last night by Black Lives Matter:

http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2015/10/30/protesters-chanting-black-lives-matter-interrupt-hillary-clintons-atlanta-speech/

I wrote comments yesterday and then deleted them. You truly pissed me off. My plan moving forward is to basically ignore you.

donkeytale said...

OK great. See you. Bye

socrates said...

Yes, let's end this nonsense now which always goes back to the same bad feelings. Let's end on the high note of what we accomplished over the Summer into Autumn.

If you want to stay on and add entries and non-personal comments, then fine, but there doesn't seem to be much value lately in us interacting directly.

You just couldn't figure it out to leave my personal life journey out of it. What makes you think I'm obligated to read your put downs? Do you take pleasure in verbally abusing me?

Why are my academic credentials a target and yours aren't? You know the only way I can fight back against that is to out you. And you know I don't want to do that. So you take advantage of that inequality.

donkeytale said...

Agree my friend. Absolutely it's been a great run, really all the way back to 2009.

And to think we are going out over some misunderstanding and unclear writing about the media. Both having bad weeks I guess. LOL. I was for sure.

I'll admit you got under my skin and I was flashing back to 2012 FDL daily battles, but it's really just another sign that it's time for me to get into that 12 step blogging addiction program. 12 step thingie works well for my other addictions...

I have great respect for your intellectual abilities and have no doubt about your degrees. I have always been a great fan of your writing and always will be a reader.

I appreciate the offer to keep posting here and may take you up on it. Maybe when Bernie wins the nom...

BTW, for the record as I know it surprised you because of my anti-school ranting, my degree was earned late in life (40 something)in one of those "life learning" thingies where you attend class one night a week for 2 years, some classes and a research project for the major credits and then write essays to get the rest of the credits along with CLEP and anything out there still transferable. I think I transferred like 24 credits from back in the day. Writing of course was a snap. So it was a suspect degree but from a real, prestigious school.

It is true I always hated college and never graduated in any normal sense as a kid, that is why "business degree". Only one offered in the program. My own preferred field would probably be herstory or philosophy.

If you took it that I was verbally abusing you that wasn't my intent but I can see it was a rough comment. Really got tired of your mischaracterisating my view of the media that's all and went off momentarily. Probably shoulda deleted. And now I See it was a communication error on your part. Jeesh. Sorry again.

socrates said...

I became full of myself and was writing half-formed sentences and basically acting like a know-it-all. I wasn't fixing typos. I was making indulgent digressions. Then to top it off I made corny jokes about said digressions.

I think you sometimes forget that I don't have the power of anonymity you do. Certain things trigger me. I now feel guilty with terrorising you. Not my intent. Even though we agree on many things, we sometimes end up in John McEnroe styled family arguments.

I don't mind you attacking my ideas.

The thing about academics triggered me.

Like Brynaert, and yourself and well to all the supertrolls, we are not the best people to go after. I guess I ultimately served some purpose along with Mike Stack. But most certainly I bloodied Rauhauser in a literary sense. Even Grouchie learned the hard way not to f with me. It's a weird fricken story.

I have gotten a tweet from Benjamin Dixon. I messed up and went to Twitter today. Elon and Imani Gandy both have me blocked, but I did end up getting trolled by some of their stans. I hate that word. It refers to someone as a stalker fanatic. It is some BubbleBoy Freak new age word like intersectionality is another one.

I can see clearly now the rain, wait, I can see clearly in my empty Alan Watts' type mind all the warts on this society. Of course putting it into words is quite the challenge.

I didn't like when you told me to lay off of fieldnegro. The more I think about, the more outrageous it seems he co-opted Malcolm X's schtick.

I watched a video of H.A. Goodman on with Ben Dixon. It was quite enlightening. He is definitely one of us in regards to zeitgeist sniffing.

Weber combined both Durkheim and Marx. There are both cultural and economic components. Why exclude either?

Kant said to take the best of both Descartes' rational world and Hume's empiricism.

Yin-Yang.

Ben said he checked out my timeline and found it curious how quiet people are about BLM and Hillary. That just happened a couple days ago. There is something to how events or scheduled events on Friday do not have the impact if it happened during a week day or night.

I am now rambling, but the hypocrisy of the #BernieSoBlack crowd is now on full display. One guy said something about how he loves that #BernieSoBlack is still annoying some people. It wasn't that. It was an update to the story.

Funnily enough, one of two BLM Seattle protesters was all behind Elon when someone like me I'll put it tweeted out to them uhm, so wtf just happened with Hillary and BLM. Elon called him a d-bag and that stan word.

Elon of course was the guy in cahoots at the first protest in Phoenix.... which was a good one. Dixon is a smart guy. He was prescient and said the first one helped Bernie. He said to paraphrase wtf about Seattle that is funnily. Today's word of the day is funnily.

Anyway, sorry to lash out. We all need our space at time. Some of us are very sensitive. I too will try to attack your ideas (if you post) and not keep going back to Nader, Carlin, and king of contrarian related put downs.

I am in a post-life world. I am a dead man floating. We all are. I'm just saying no one should be let off the hook for voting for Hillary because they hate Fox News and Hillary is the best at saying Republicans suck and are garbage and I feel your pain with Fox TV and right wing numbnuts.

socrates said...

I meant maybe myself and Stack were patsies who served some purpose for mysterious assholes. Rauhauser was obviously working for some dumbass military intelligence project which netted them Chelsea and Barrett. Maybe a scumbag like Rauhauser doesn't care that his ugly soul is now forever etched on electronic stone in this Bubblefied data collection mechanism medium something.

donkeytale said...

I think yin and yang is the answer to everything.

Or jin and jang as they say in Korea.

I think the symbol's in their flag in fact. Interlocking schtick.

I guess I'm pretty burned out on the election nonsense. I may be the reincarnation of Marisacat.

I'm feeling rather sardonic these days. I need to chill and gather some perspective. One of my old classmates from high school and even a bit of college passed away today. Some people you would think would live forever blessed as they are in so many ways. And yet, here a good one leaves while the wicked remain intact.

Yay the udder randomness of existence and the void.

Does anything actually exist or are we simply re-creating somebody else's dream for them from the void.

donkeytale said...

I think there was one too many voids in that comment.

donkeytale said...

Even though I always check the box that I am not a robot, sometimes I wonder.

Am I lying to Google?

donkeytale said...

But this means that the majority is no longer justified in claiming the democratic title of the best guardian of the common interest.

This statement of course is true. But wtf? Majority reules, or in this country anyway, money walks and bullshit sqwuaks. Or something

What does "justification" have to with anything?

Marcuse argues for the overthrow of society.

An audacious speaker in his day. Great man.

donkeytale said...

I didn't mean "speaker" in the sense of giving a speech but more his rhetorical schtick. Writer.

donkeytale said...

I belonged to a group of hard core Marxists in 70-71. Those guys were not intellectual Marxists. Basically, they wanted a revolution to happen. But only 1500 members.

None of whom were militarily organized.

But they didn't grok Marcuse. Marcuse existed solely for the youthful revolutionaries of the day, which was a larger but totally disorganized hodge podge. These old skoolers were more like radical communist unionists, practical minded men, hammer and sickle types. Real men. Little did they know that 10 years later unions would be dead.

The Amerikkkan working man is now a scab and hails largely from Mexico. This is the resentment fueling Trump. It is misplaced but legitimate anger.

donkeytale said...

OK, went to your twitter feed and noticed the hint of a podcast may be in the Frito cards? That would be cool. Also, applaud the Lenny Fritos name change.

WC was grateness of a kind that makes no sense to the postmodern sensibility, but makes perfect sense to those of us who are timeless in a pre-code sort of way.

The man versus ape conundrum, or the duality of existence wherein I find myself trapped seemingly for all of this life if not all the others to come.

Is Jesus the way or did Buddha teach it first?

Maybe I require a stint as someone's faithful lap dog to get my head straight.

I can only hope to become a future Sharapova's pet and not someone who ties dogs to the railroad track for kicks.

socrates said...

I hope you saw the tweet saying donkeytale is greatness, period. It wasn't a love siren. It was probably to alleviate some internal guilt. I do feel shame at times. And I can also relate to your fear that even with all this awareness and so-called chilling out with Buddha, how can we know wtf will happen in the next life?

Say I really was Lenny Bruce. That didn't work out so swell.

Even if I could prove I am him, what's the point? I am greatness? If I am so great, then why did my greatness turn out the way it did as me in this life? I am not complaining, just reflecting. Everything is relative and things turned out great for me this life no matter how I slice and dice it. And I imagine you feel the same about your life this time.

I need to lose about eight more pounds before going on camera. It sounds like an easier and natural progression to writing. But it is also a terrifying prospect. It's not that I would be afraid to show myself. In fact, that would be the best part of it. These words leave too much to the imagination.

What is the end game? I do not believe there is any proof that birth/rebirth ever ends. One hears of some eventual get out of the earth pool, it's time to go to the advanced cosmos or wtf.

I guess the pain is in the ego. All life is misery? Darn, I'd have to prepare good for a podcast. If it happens, it won't be for many months. I'd have to buy one of those Benjamin Dixon styled microphones. I'd need to shave and make myself presentable. Most of all, I'd need some material. I do no believe in anyone simply winging things.

I'd need to figure out a phone line and how to set it up so it is safe.

Let's face it. This blog will never get consistent daily clicks unless we produce like over the Summer.

But like you said, this is Google and apparently at least here our junk will be preserved.

Maybe we should have a little faith and not be paranoid of being assholes in the next life. That we worry about that means we have evolved. I look at it that we are a strain of plant but human, evolved already to an incredible point, as have even the most dumbfuckish of humans. I am not saying I am greatness for a soul. The soul must be equal. This ego thing is what it is. It is the strain of soul. There is sativa and there is incubus? I think it's like that. So we have something in us that we will never lose, the evolving of knowing Black is beautiful, love is real, the world is corrupt, things seem rigged, pot is a good thing, on and on.

(continued)

socrates said...

I love Bernie because he tried. I think he nailed the forum last night. I am hoping this coronation and media cynicism backfires. A lot of the polls if you look closely are rigged and incompetent. There is some truth to them, but if those reporting the polls can't explain in detail wtf they represent in margin of error reality, they are pointless.

I do know it seems fact people in California were less likely to vote if the election was already called. I think the same thing is going on in general right now and it is referred to as a coronation.

I think those who call Bernie a sheep herder for Hillary and DINO's have given up and are cowards as you referred to Marisacat's form of leftier than thouism.

The zeitgeist is composed of every eligible voter. I do like the idea of automatic voting rights as long as someone is 18 and still breathing. Ex-felons should be allowed to vote everywhere. That is outrageous they are not allowed to in some states.

The zeitgeist includes the Chris Hedges who distort and claw at Bernie Sanders. It includes people like me who are so far to the left, they are unsure what to do if Hillary beats Bernie. I do know one thing and this internet has taught me this: Simply ranting and blah blah-ing on behalf of the Democratic Party has not worked. And this is why some Republicans and many Independents are voting for Sanders. The former is tough to wrap one's head around. People leaning right are willing and want to vote for someone who is a democratic socialist. Something bad did hppen with the Obama years in regards to wackadoo right wingers taking over congress. It is easy to say Obama as a centrist was blocked at every angle by right wing nutjobs. But I see Bernie's point that Obama and the DNC (I guess it is no longer DLC) fucked up. I don't understand why weird people are dominating local and state elections across the country. Or maybe I do and it's called paid fakes and useful idiots.

(I'm done)

socrates said...

I caught 538 wrong on something. From after the first debate, October 14th three or so weeks ago:

"Sanders has won plenty of support from white liberal Democrats, but not very much from Hispanics, African-Americans or white moderates."

But, but, but an NBC poll from the 13th-15 Bernie is within the margin or error of a tie, though on the low end of that.

And I guess I'm doing a gotcha Silver couldn't have known about. But still.

And maybe I missed it, but there are a lot of libertarian/independents voting for Bernie who I doubt Silver knows about. Aren't a lot or most of these polls for registered Democrats? I hope Bernie wins. Myself and H. A. Goodman will be on top of the zeitgeist. We'll share the kudos and vindications.

It would be a massive victory for the zeitgeist sniffers.

socrates said...

That NBC poll is very interesting. It is outdated of course as we hit the 5th inning or wtf.

There are a lot of people who lean independent. I am going to guesstimate that Bernie will be around ten points back within a month. I think people are nuts if they think Bernie is a sheep herder and is not going all out for total victory.

Does Silver know how many independent votes are going to Bernie? He has the millennial vote. Apparently he is closing into a tie with Hispanics.

SC is a cruddy redneck state which hasn't voted for a Democrat for President since Carter. They have nine cruddy delegates.

donkeytale said...

I'm not sure what poll you mean. I googled NBC poll and found a WSJ/NBC poll three days old that shows Carson beating Trump and Hillary too, mainly because of independents.

The key takeaway from any Silver commentary at this stage: polling doesn't really matter because the results of the opening primaries will have greater impact as people begin to start thinking about elections only then and are influenced by these early results.

The other big takeaway: national polls are meaningless for primaries as the reules in each state differ. Some may be proportional by votee, some may be proportional by congressional district. The delegates are divvied up differently. I think most of the GOP are winner take all but not the demotards, although don't quote me on that.

A third thing to remember is that independents tend to be more rightwing leaning these days as so many sheeple are fed up with the GOP. GOP membership is at or near record lows. That doesn't mean these loosers have automatically turned into Bernie supporters. No, they seem to be expressing their love for Carson primarily and Trump too.

Frankly, I'm holding back on the election coverage because I'm busy these days and also bored with it, as it is still so early, and I'm still of the belief Debates just don't matter in the long run. I think most Amerikkkans who aren't news/political junkies (probably 90%+ in fact) simply aren't paying attention at this stage other than to the Trump trainwreckage on the GOP side.

Also, I personally don't get the success of Maddow. I just don't think she brings much to the table other than her weird butch look. Her schtick is weirdly bland. I did read a few summaries and mainly she threw softballs. Not impressed with her, she simply doesn't hold my attention. I admit I am ADHD when it comes to TV. If it doesn't grip me immediately I'm done and off to something else.

Butch is mainly an east coast thing, I get that, but it doesn't make mine move, although there is nothing wrong with lesbianism and I understand that butches are people too.

donkeytale said...

The polls that tend to matter from my memory of 538 in the past cycle is when they start going state by state and polling "likely voters" that includes independents. I think in some primaries, like Texas independents can vote in the primary but not in all states. I should probably google this point before I express because it may not be true. In the past I haven't bothered voting in the Texas primary for oblivious reasons but will definitely be pulling the Bern handle this year.

Texas may be a meaningful primary state for the Demotards for once and the demographics favour Hillary too.

SC is a cruddy redneck state but as a Bern supporter you probably shouldn't come across as an elitist east coast white liberal in public as you will hurt the Bern's outreach to this demographic.

In fact, I grok a lot of resistance at least on Twitter to Bernie among the minourity voters he needs so badly simply because of the dismissive attitude towards those voters by his legion of white supporters.

Politics is about winning. Idealists of both the left and right seldom grok this plain fact. Sometimes the smart thing to do is try to relate with sheeple, walk a mile in their shoes, etc. and empathize.

You can always go back to hating on them post-election.

SC is a cruddy redneck state that also has a very large African Amerikkkan population who mostly voter demotardic.

The coastal parts of the state are stunningly beautiful. Not sure about the inland parts although I expect they are the most conservative redneck elements.

donkeytale said...

I'm pretty sure Texas went for Hilliary over Obama in 2008.

Austin of course is liberal. South Texas including San Antonio also tends to Demotardic because of high Hispanic content but more moderate-conservative Dems.

Houston is also largely Demotardic because of multiracial demographic. Liberal Blacks are a significant population as are Asians to go along with the usual latino elements.

In fact Asians score higher than whites on education levels, SAT scores, hard work, entrepreneurialism and income and are fast growing. They would seem to be GOP leaning based on these characteristics .

Yet they are trending demotardic more and more. They also believe in the efficacy of a strong safety net. I think I read something about this somewhere recently. You would think they would trend to the GOP side because of theur relative wealth but nope. They are too smart apparently to follow the GOP looser herd.

Another thing white progressives seldom grok is that for immigrants elections have practical considerations. WHen Trump goes on and on buffoonically about Mexicans ad the border he is indirectly threatening Asians too, many of whom are also here illegally and worse than Mexicans, if they are forced back to their home countries will be treated as criminals when they return.

This is one reason I tend to remind people that minourities will prefer to vote for the candidate they see as the one with the best chance of keeping the GOP out of the white house. regardless of how liberal or cool that person is to white progressives, who face no such daily obstacles.

Well-educated whites have all the relative advantages and seldom consider that minourities, even better educated and wealthier Asians for instance, have more reason to fear the Amerikkkan electoral outcome and will vote defensively moreso than anything. And this has NOTHING to do with whether they personally like one candidate over another.

Just win baby

donkeytale said...

At the end of the day, Bernie must assure minourity voters that he can win the general election.

Progressivism is a luxury for many minourity voters not a necessity.

This seems counter intuitive to most whites. However, most whites spend very little to no time, especially intimate time, getting to know and truly understand what motivates minourity voters.

Up there in lily white hippiefied Vermont Bernie can be classified "most whites." He stumbled out of the gate and has been playing catch up since day one.

He is smarter than most whites and has made adjustments but he still needs to gain more ground. It seems he is doing better relatively in attracting latinos rather than Africkkkan Amerikkkans, but the latino demographic is notoriously difficult for pollsters to pin down as "likely voters."

donkeytale said...

This series of comments seems to have "dairy" written all over them. I may post an edited version.