My diary is partly a reaction to this diary: www.dailykos.com/…
claiming social conservatives (you know: older women) support Clinton and that therefore Sanders is losing the primaries. For the other part this was a diary long in the making so to speak.
For some time Sanders’ supporters have claimed they represent the true progressives (from which comes the accusation they act like purists). Clinton supporters are usually denounced as establishment shills, or centrist democrats.
Yet when you look at the demography of who supports who a very different picture emerges.
Sanders support is mostly strong in one demographic group: young white males. Clinton however has the strongest support among women, older people, black voters and Hispanic voters.
In short: women and minorities overwhelmingly support Clinton.
Why is that? Why would for example black voters or women support Clinton over Sanders?
The answer lies imo in the fact that Sanders is a progressive when it comes to economic issues (class struggle, the 1%, campaign finance reform etc) but is tone-deaf when it comes to social issues.
Social issues like structural racism, reproductive health issues (abortion), women’s rights, gun victims rights, gun control etc.
In a way a lot of this can be explained by his socialist background. For socialists, social issues pertaining to race and sex have always had to take a backseat to economic issues.
I’m old enough to have experienced a lot of this first hand when in the seventies the feminist movement expected to gain support from white socialist males, but instead we were told to take a backseat: “first we’ll solve economic issues and then we’ll talk about gender inequality and/ or racism”.
Sanders is no stranger to this picture. Although no one should doubt that he supports women’s rights or gay rights (his record shows this), he’s never made these issues the core of his message. The core of his message is about economic inequality, the 1% and wall street.
When confronted with questions regarding abortion, he dismissed these by stating that Planned Parenthood is establishment.
When Trump said women should be punished for abortions, Sanders called this discussion a distraction. He literally said such discussions were a distraction from "a serious discussion about the serious issues."
Yep you read that right: the fact millions of women may lose the right to choose whether or not to have an abortion, is a distraction. In suggesting that, Sanders was not acting as some male chauvinistic pig, he was acting as a socialist.
He does believe issues pertaining to women’s rights or structural racism are a distraction from his core economic message.
For socialists, economic equality will solve anything and everything. That is why Sanders failed to make a serious appeal to black voters early on in his campaign. He truly believes that when we fix wall street and when we remove economic inequality, we will have solved every other issue as well.
Ofc solving economic inequality will benefit a lot of black people as well, but breaking up the big banks does exactly nothing to prevent the police gunning down young black people.
Racism is structural (a point which Clinton has repeatedly made) and not economic by nature alone. We can break the big banks, but does that silence the racist monster we have inside ourselves? Or does it remove racism that is at the core of every structure and aspect of our society?
During his entire career Sanders has been tone-deaf to racism, and although he did demonstrate in the 60s, he never stood out as senator or as member of congress fighting against racism. The famous quote by John Lewis: “I never saw Sanders at civil rights events”, most likely describes exactly why Sanders never gained the support of the black community.
And that is not because he is a bad person, but because he is a socialist and therefore tone-deaf to other issues than those that are economic by nature.
Or, as Gregory Meeks put it when the Congressional Black Caucus endorsed Clinton:
“He has been a leader and a fighter for the socialist party and socialism. That’s who he’s been and he’s true to his word in that regard,” he said. “But socialism and/or dealing with class does not mean … that you can eradicate racism.”
It is exactly because Hillary Clinton is the true progressive when it comes to issues of gender and race, she has won the support of women, gay people and minorities.
Example: her life-long struggle for reproductive rights of women, not just in the US but worldwide. Her recognition that human rights are women’s rights and vice versa.
For Hillary Clinton women’s rights are not some by-product of a more important message, for Hillary Clinton women and gay rights are at the core of her politics and program.
Most recently this was demonstrated in her campaigning with the so called “mothers of the movement”. Clinton has the overwhelming support of gun violence victims. Not just from the black community but also from the families of Sandy Hook etc.
Today she again demonstrated understanding how vital these issues are when she spoke to the Trayvon Martin Foundation about gun control: miami.cbslocal.com/...
She understands that gun control will be one of the defining issues of the next election, where Sanders is tone-deaf when it comes to gun control. Not only has he voted against the Brady Bill and other gun control laws, he has even repeatedly refused to meet with the families of gun control victims.
Just as he has recently refused to meet with Aids patients. And although his stand on gay rights should not be questioned, there are also examples where he simply didn’t think gay rights were important when compared to other (economic) issues.
So, to conclude my diary: the reason why Sanders lost the primaries is because he failed to see the importance of social issues like reproductive healthcare, women and gay rights, structural racism and gun violence.
He certainly is a progressive when it comes to economic issues, but on social issues: not so much.
And THAT is why women and minorities overwhelming support Clinton over Sanders.