Well, because poor people don’t vote.
For you that is. Hillary won 16 of those 17 primaries and you’re going to blame poor people? I’ve a thought, Bernie; how about you blame yourself, and not everyone else for not winning those primaries?
No, Senator. They just didn’t vote for you.
Bingo.
In France they vote on Sunday. I bet an increase of 10% if we did. Poor people too!
The turnout in this country has been very low for several election cycles, 2012 it was about 57.5% and 36% in 2014. So I’m going to guess that some affluent people aren’t turning out either.
Well of course it’s quite true that poor people tend to vote in lower numbers than people higher on the income ladder do. But that doesn’t mean that if more poor folks did vote they would necessarily have voted for Bernie rather than Hillary.
First it’s the South. Now it’s the Poors. Is there any group or region out there that isn’t picking on poor Bernie?
I’m really getting tired of his bitching and moaning. It’s the Democratic Party’s fault. It’s the fault of poor people. It’s the media’s fault. Is it ever his fault?
Precisely! She’s done rather well with lots of people who don’t have a lot of money.
What a crock. This man has no ability whatsoever to take responsibility for stupid things that he and/or his campaign say.
While it may be true that lower income people don’t vote as often, they do vote. Women, PoC, LGBT - these are traditionally the groups that make up lower income people.
And Clinton has been leading with all those groups.
Sanders never convinced those groups that Wall Street wasn’t the bane of their existence. Most of the groups that comprise lower income don’t really care or have the luxury to worry about about WS. If his message was so powerful, then what couldn’t he get a coalition together that went beyond predominately White, Independent men?
Clinton’s voter suppression tactics rely on advanced DARPA technology that enable her to prevent poor people from voting for Sanders and force them to vote for her instead. It’s a form of mind-control that’s beamed from secret squadrons of vans equipped with the microwave equipment that cruise poor neighborhoods on election day.
For those poor people who are naturally resistant to the mind beams, the tyrant corporatist Obama has lent Hillary his personal corps of jackbooted ACORN thugs to enforce voting discipline the old-fashioned way.
It’s always someone else’s fault. That’s definitely a quality I want in a president. I can’t wait for this thing to be over, even though it’s been over in my mind since 3/15.
I have an old "We’re going to have to work harder on getting our message out ________" hanging in the garage. I’d be happy to lend it to Sen. Sanders, because this blaming the voters thing is not working.
I am amazed to find out that the blacks in the South are overwhelmingly rich. I honestly had no idea that the wealth gap was so heavily tilted in the Black direction.
I do miss the good old days when they were controlling our minds with LSD instead of electronics. Good times gone by.
It would be interesting to see, overall, who won more votes among lower-income voters according to the exit polls. Of course that still wouldn’t prove that poor non-voters would have voted the same as poor folks who did vote.
Here’s a question for the Berniacs: Sanders message of political revolution supposedly calls for everyone to get out in the streets and demand justice. For reasons. That message doesn’t seem to be resonating with the very people who it SHOULD BE resonating with.
Why? What excuse de jour is being given now? Is it that the Berniacs just know better and the rest of us don’t?
EDIT TO ADD: @bluestatedon I read a diary over on DailyKos that stated that voter suppression caused Sanders to lose many parts of Brooklyn. And cause Clinton win. It’s just obvious.
I see Clinton’s Operation Correct The Record team is hard at work today.
Just a reminder, these primaries are proportional representation and some of these 50.1% “victories” are underwhelming.
This is the problem with ideologues on the left. They just cannot see how others, whom they think should be their natural constituency, might actually disagree with them. Sanders has been praised for his decades of consistency – but he has accomplished very little because he can’t get enough people to agree with him. Sanders policies are empathetic – but then he dumps on poor people, which seems like yet another degrading formulation – much like the the former slave states excuse. People of all economic, ethnic and racial groups did vote – but not enough of them for Sanders. Perhaps a problem with the messenger? The message? Nope – in his view, its the system. So we need a revolution…