I thought that was problematic, but given the rest of the fieldā¦ he didnāt at least say āwhite lives matterā and heās taken on a publicity person conversant in these issues (race/economics are parallel issues, not the same). I hope that he takes this in the right direction. But of course, weāll see.
In context, Iād say drowning people out as a public discourse tactic and favouring slogans over solid and realistic proposals for change are much more problematic.
I do believe he has solid proposals, though, at least more so than other candidates:
Again, I think he might not be getting right, but heās making an honest effort, which really is more than we can say about the rest of the packā¦ It maybe not be enough for you or @dragonchild12 or others, and thatās fine. Nor do I think that the black lives matters folks shouldnāt be showing up to his rallies to interrupt. They should - THATāS ACTUALLY REAL DEMOCRACY IN ACTION. I have no criticism for them on thisā¦ This issue needs all the traction they can get. My hope is that they push him to make real engagement with the black community on this and any number of issues. I suppose time will tell on that point.
Yes, I agree Sanders didnāt handle that incident properly at the time, nor did some of the BLM. I mentioned this already up here:
Itās a large thread, so you may have missed it, I dunno.
I was talking about the protesters - BLM is a hugely important movement and in both of these events they were invited to participate, but turning up to events and demanding that people shut up and listen to you is not particularly democratic. It may be disrupting the concept that the person at the front should be listened to in awed silence, but it isnāt replacing it with anything more positive. Where Sanders is apparently the only candidate that gets this treatment, it doesnāt say good things about the specific people who interrupted him.
Agree. From my perspective, it looks like the Black Lives Matter movement surveyed the field, found only one candidate who would likely listen to them. They challenged Sanders on his strength, his populism, to broaden his platform to include BLM. And to his credit he is.
If I were in the decision-making of BLM, I wouldnāt have targeted Clinton either at this stage, as she had no reason to listen. Now we can watch as Clinton again needs to dance to the left.
Seems well played by both sides.
I think they go after Sanders because they know that, unlike the other candidates, they will get some traction with him. I fully stand with the movement, because itās important. Because, yes, this is what democracy should look like. When youāre young men and women are being shot for NO REASON, this is what democracy does and should look like.
Also, what @funruly. Plus I want to add that likely the only thing theyād get at a Clinton rally is shouted down and escorted out by the copsā¦ her response would not be to hire someone who will specifically try to educate the candidate on these issues and talk directly to that community. Which, after a problematic statement, is what he did.
Wow, I can get used to seeing Symone D. Sanders testify like this over the next year.
Itās certainly making a more dynamic discourse, and Iām pleased to see the positive response from Sanders and the event organisers. Thereās a definite sense in which control of the discussion has to be taken rather than given, and merely having a candidate who claims to stand for what you stand for is not enough. Sanders is running on the basis of a grassroots movement, and this shows that itās not just money that people are contributing to the campaign.
[quote=ājsroberts, post:300, topic:59394ā]
Sanders is running on the basis of a grassroots movement, and this shows that itās not just money that people are contributing to the campaign.
[/quote]Unfortunately, the BLM may end up with the bad end of this deal and I really donāt want that to happen (see below). The only winner in the end may end up being Hillary Clinton and her billionaire donor who funded the BLM. Unlike Sanders, they will very likely throw the BLM under the bus if sheās elected. Similar to what the Koch brothers did to the Tea Party grassroots people as they increasingly influenced politicians via astroturf money, etc. as well.
[quote=āMindysan33, post:298, topic:59394ā]
I think they go after Sanders because they know that, unlike the other candidates, they will get some traction with him.
[/quote]If thatās the case, I think it would be very wise at this point for the BLM leaders to be honest and transparent and say that very explicitly.
Some of the BLM movement may be counting on Hillary Clinton to win and fear challenging her, however, theyāre losing some Sanders supporters in the process (including many blacks). Thatās not good for the Black Lives Matter movement. Itās creating solidarity issues at a critical time in the BLM movement.
Not including any criticism towards Clinton by the BLM is a rotten strategy especially now that everyone is finding out that the BLM movement was funded by a Hillary Clinton billionaire campaign donor.
The dire problem with that strategy is Sanders supporters are increasingly tiring of a focus thatās only on Sanders especially when it includes baseless attacks such as saying his supporters in Seattle were āwhite supremacist liberalsā along with other vicious hyperbole such as Sanders is āignoring the plight of black peopleā.
The problem is the BLM is justifiably appearing to Sanders supporters as a group thatās giving Hillary Clinton a pass while attempting to derail his campaign in order to have her win.
BLM is losing support due to this fact and this includes many blacks (see above).
A long time ago a big lie was propagated by marketing agencies thatās still being repeated today that āall publicity is good publicityā. Thatās untrue. There is such a thing as bad publicity and it can have devastating effects even for great causes.
The BLM at the very least needs to start releasing statements against Hillary Clinton and also attend her events and make some noise there. Otherwise, they are going to begin to lose support and thatās a damn shame because most of Sanders supporters support the movement, but not their increasingly partisan tactic of focusing on Sanders and Sanders alone.
Add to that the recent hyperbole and lack of transparency I mentioned above to @anon61221983, and the BLM may start to lose ground despite all the billionaire astroturf money that was put behind it. Kind of like how the Tea Party spun out of control after the Koch brothers increasingly pulled strings behind it.
I support Black Lives Matter, however some of their tactics are equivalent to shooting oneself in the foot and Iām not alone in that opinion, by far. The billionaire can continue to throw money at BLM and Hillary Clinton, but it wonāt persevere if itās found have an opaque agenda against Sanders and a promotional platform for Clinton.
History has shown us that true grassroots movements donāt function very well for progressives once they become corrupted by billionaires. And, the longer the BLM appears like itās in the pocket of a billionaire by giving Hillary Clinton a pass, the weaker it will become.
I want the BLM movement to gain strength. However, an opaque, anti-solidarity angle isnāt going to accomplish that very goal well.
The negative reaction on Twitter and other social media by POC against BLM is strong right now. I mentioned a small sampling in one of my previous posts and please observe just one example of many on Facebook now as well:
Look at the top-voted comments there. Billionaire money isnāt going to white-wash that negative reaction from both POC and others.
This was posted only 4 hours before my screenshot and itās already hitting almost ONE MILLION views: Seriously read the top comments.
(click on image to enlarge - may have to click twice & scroll it)
EDIT:
I just checked it again at about 3:17 PM Denver, CO time. Itās now rapidly heading towards two million views in just a matter of hours. Currently near 1.8 million.
Final update: 6:50PM ā¦
Now up to about 3 MILLION in a matter of hours.
The POC are still at top and vastly positive for Bernie and vasty negative for the BLM.
/END EDIT
This is bad for the BLM. This is bad. It sadly seems tragically similar to astroturf-esque mistakes. Honesty and transparency with a heaping of good strategy is the way to go. This BLM move that leaves Hillary without criticism to is going south fast.
I think thereās a lot more POC supporting Bernie Sanders than much of the establishment realizes and perhaps some here at Boing Boing do as well. I donāt think some of you realize just how incredibly effective our truly grassroots outreach into urban communities has been already. Weāre moving and growing much faster than I think some of you can imagine (and certainly beyond the establishment bean-counters expectations).
[quote=āfunruly, post:297, topic:59394ā]
Now we can watch as Clinton again needs to dance to the left.
[/quote]Pandering to the left by Clinton and what Sanders is doing are two radically different things.
Interesting. I saw this today. Any thoughts?
Interesting. One of the commenters pointed to the fact that the two protesters are from the group āOutside Agitators 206ā. Hereās their press release on the issue:
https://outsideagitators206.org/blog/seattle-says-bowdownbernie/
This city is filled with white progressives, which is why Bernie Sandersā camp was obviously expecting a friendly and consenting audience for todayās campaign visit. The problem with Sandersā, and with white Seattle progressives in general, is that they are utterly and totally useless (when not outright harmful) in terms of the fight for Black lives. While we are drowning in their liberal rhetoric, we have yet to see them support Black grassroots movements or take on any measure of risk and responsibility for ending the tyranny of white supremacy in our country and in our city. This willful passivity while claiming solidarity with the āŖ#āBlackLivesMatterā¬ movement in an effort to be relevant is over. White progressive Seattle and Bernie Sanders cannot call themselves liberals while they participate in the racist system that claims Black lives. Bernie Sanders will not continue to call himself a man of the people, while ignoring the plight of Black people. Presidential candidates will not win Black votes without putting out an explicit criminal justice reform package. As was said at the Netroots action, presidential candidates should expect to be shut down and confronted every step along the way of this presidential campaign. Black people are in a state of emergency. Lines have been drawn in the sand. You are either fighting continuously and measurably to protect Black life in America, or you are a part of the white supremacist system that we will tear down in the liberation of our people.
I think the article makes some good points, but still doesnāt grasp our 2015 grassroots dynamic like most of our establishment, corporate media.
Thereās also a lot of other flaws that border on outright bullshit. For example, the NYT makes a big to-do of the amount of blacks at Sandersā events.
Um, why did they pick 2012 when Obama had much more name recognition? They should be comparing 2007 with his first run against Hillary.
And, what the NYT doesnāt mention is that Obama had mostly white people show up to his earlier events as well:
Hereās 2007, Mr Obamaās open-air rallies draw huge (mostly white) crowds. Nevertheless, as the year wears on, Hillary Clinton stubbornly clings to her 20-odd per cent poll lead.
- source
This is Texas in 2007 with basically the same percentage of blacks that Sanders had.
Also, the NYT isnāt taking into account the much more pervasive presence of online social media. Thereās many blacks that show support for Sanders on Facebook and Twitter thatās going to catch the establishment off-guard.
Unfortunately, I donāt have further time to take this article apart, but it does have critical flaws. Frankly, I think the media is headed for a lot of embarrassment as time goes on. The NYT has been spelling doom and gloom for Bernie Sanders from the very beginning and being proven increasingly wrong as time, massive crowds and support builds for Sanders despite their incessant naysaying.
Speaking ofā¦ crowds:
So, Sanders got 15,000 people the other day in Seattle after the BLM fiasco. Well, 24 hours later Bernie is greeted by:
Bernie Sanders packs 28,000 people in sports arena
https://berniesanders.com/press-release/bringing-people-together/
How long before 40-50,000 people? How long before the corporate media has to finally admit Bernie Sanders can really win the White House? The media doesnāt want to talk about it, however in states where Obama drew large crowds before 2008, it reflected later wins for him. I mean, they can shrug off 28,000 people this early in the race, I suppose, but itās increasingly looking like denial.
FOLLOWUP:
Part of my response from yesterday: (emphasis mine)
[quote=āCowicide, post:305, topic:59394ā]ā¦ Frankly, I think the media is headed for a lot of embarrassment as time goes on. The NYT has been spelling doom and gloom for Bernie Sanders from the very beginning and being proven increasingly wrong as time, massive crowds and support builds for Sanders despite their incessant naysaying.
Also, the NYT isnāt taking into account the much more pervasive presence of online social media. Thereās many blacks that show support for Sanders on Facebook and Twitter thatās going to catch the establishment off-guard.
[/quote]
Now todayā¦
Cue yet another massive rally for Bernie Sanders with nearly 30,000 people in a packed stadium except now itās got a diverse crowd mixed with people of color (see below).
Now, some have been questioning my premise that Sanders has a lot of black supporters and other POC. The reason I know he has them is due to the fact that Iāve been activitely researching the matter by looking at his social media support using time-tested methodologies.
Why would I be using my own research?
Thatās due to the fact that the corporate media is very much relying on half-assed polling figures while behaving actively hostile and biased against the Sanders campaign. The corporate mediaās actions have destroyed a lot of their legitimacy on the matter.
So, do some think my methodologies are wrong, perhaps? Wellā¦ something just happened that proves me right:
A more diverse crowd of about 30,000 people just showed up to his latest rally:
Quote: (emphasis mine)
" ā¦ The crowd was noticeably more diverse than those at recent Sanders rallies in Portland, Seattle and other majority white cities ā Los Angeles is majority-minority, with about 44 percent of its population Latino.
Those who came to āFeel the Bernā ā a popular chant among Sanders supporters ā were white, Latino, black and Asian. There were young hipsters and graying hippies. Some wore black T-shirts with red hammers and sickles, others wore black T-shirts that read, āBlack Lives Matter.ā They sang along as the loudspeakers blasted songs by Willie Nelson, Tracy Chapman and Neil Young. ā¦ "
Iāve said it many times before and Iāll say it again. Bernie Sanders has vastly more support from blacks and other POC than the corporate media has any clue of. And, frankly, even if they did perform proper research and knew what I knew, theyād likely shelve the information.
We shouldnāt fall for the corporate media hype against Bernie Sanders.
And, take a long, hard look at that picture of just his latest stadium-packed crowd. Isnāt it fair to say that the corporate media has been proven resoundingly wrong that heās been a āfringe candidateā?
Why should we trust a repeatedly, provably wrong and discounted corporate media for our information on whether or not Bernie Sanders has a large following and can win or not?
Yet more support:
That was great, thoughtful, and from someone who was there and had a specific stake in the event and state/local politics. Thanks for posting. I too think everyone should read it.
I ask you all to read this whole thing. (Itās now at 7 million views since yesterday)
Please read all the comments and look at who they are from. The overwhelming majority are people of color against what the BLM organization did to Sanders that day.
After the protests, several people came up and wanted to talk. Many were furiousāsome white people said they no longer support BLM. Others said they do support it but this erodes their support.
Most blacks and other POC feel the exact, same way about it. That was a bad day for the BLM organization on multiple levels.
Hereās what I would love even more: for the Sanders campaign and BLM nationally to sit down and talk about an agenda on racial justice that he can use his presidential platform to help move. Imagine rolling out that agenda and inviting black people to talk about it on stage with him.
I think thatās a great idea. However, after this last stunt, Iām not sure the BLM organization is the one to do it alone. I think itās perhaps time to look at some other grassroots movements that also fight against police brutality and invite them onto the fold as well. If the BLM organization continues its present course and crashes, we really shouldnāt allow it to stall the overall movement against police brutality and racism.
Bernie Sanders Hires #BlackLivesMatter Supporter and Criminal Justice Advocate Symone Sanders as Press Secretary.
@funruly, of course, posted the video of her speaking at Sandersā rally here:
Bernie Sanders brought the BLM into the fold in a very inclusive manner by making a BLM activist his Campaign Press Secretary and the thanks he got from others in the BLM organization was partisan, vicious lies against himself and his supporters.
With progressive friends like this, who needs corporatist enemies?
Unless the BLM organization wants people to question some of their motives and erode themselves into oblivion, I would suggest that they knock off the partisan lies against Sanders and his supporters and stick with facts and constructive criticism in the future.
Also, remaining absolutely silent on Hillary Clinton is getting increasingly suspect. This open letter has been unanswered for far too long:
Read the top comments at this video here and the video on the BLM stunt is good as well:
I think most further discussion of the BLM organization should be put into a separate, new thread before this thread goes too far off-topic. They are just one issue of many dire issues affecting all Americans in this country and the world. Sanders supports the BLM and most of the BLM supports Sanders. Hereās part of Sandersā plan to fight police brutality, etc.:
Racial Justice - Bernie Sanders
The BLM has done a lot of good, but they screwed up the other day. However, many Sanders supporters (including me) still support the BLM organization overall despite their screw up. If the BLM continues to ignore Hillary Clinton while attempting to use Sanders and his supporters as a punching bag with vicious, partisan lies, then my support (and many others) will erode and it will be time to advance other groups that are against police brutality in their place.
The rest I would say about this is already said here:
Here he is! 
He wasnāt satisfied acting as an advisor to Sanders, so heās thinking of running against him now. Similar to some within the BLM organization, Lessig thinks his one issue is more important than all other issues. I guess Lessig and the BLM will have to fight that out. Proper strategy hasnāt always been Lessigās strong suit:
In other news:
andā¦
Bernie Sanders surges ahead of Hillary Clinton in N.H., 44-37
