MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Bernie Sanders Blames Losses on Poor People Not Voting—But Poor People Weren't Voting for Him Anyway

Leftists don't own the poor even though they've done their best to keep them in poverty.

NBC NewsNBC NewsAppearing on NBC's Meet the Press, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who is running for the Democratic nomination for president, blamed his losses in states with the highest levels of income inequality on the fact that "poor people don't vote."

"I mean, that's just a fact," Sanders continued. "That's a sad reality of American society."

Sanders argued that increasing turnout among young people and the poor would change American politics. "If we can significantly increase voter turnout so that low-income people and working people and young people participated in the political process, if we got a voter turnout of 75 percent," Sanders argued, "this country would be radically transformed."

There's one major problem with Sanders' theory of voting. Poor people who did vote have rejected him so far. According to the Washington Post, in state contests where network exit polling was conducted, Sanders lost to Clinton among voters making less than $50,000 by 11 percentage points. He lost "middle class" voters ($50,000 - $100,000) by 9 points and those making above $100,000 by 21 points.

Sanders' argument is not a new one. Left-wing politicians often argue that poor people will vote for them and that when they don't, that that represents a vote "against their own interests." Rarely do such politicians talk about trying to educate voters. As Sanders posited, mere increased turnout would improve the prospects of left-wing candidates.

The view is astonishingly myopic, condescending, and dismissive of the poor. Perhaps poor people are not interested in policies like those Sanders espouses because most efforts to "reduce" income inequality destroy the prospects of upward income mobility for working Americans. The increased dependency on the state, the increased regulations, the increased taxes, all work against efforts by poor working Americans to improve their economic conditions.

Perhaps they are aware of this despite a generations-long effort by Democrats to propagandize the poor and lock them down as a voting base in places like Detroit and Baltimore, whose poor people have not enjoyed any relief due to decades of single-party rule. Were Republicans not so narrow-mindedly interested in culture wars and playing into the stereotype of them that Democrats have constructed, perhaps they'd do better among the poor.

Especially with the broad dislike for the Democratic and Republican frontrunners, the Libertarian party has a unique opportunity to demonstrate how their policies of limited government, and economic non-interference would create the best conditions for poor people to lift themselves out of poverty, without Sanders and government hangers-on like him profiting off a system of dependency and intervention that traps poor people in long-term poverty.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Rich||

    Left-wing politicians often argue that poor people will vote for them and that when they don't, that that represents a vote "against their own interests."

    "Not only do poor people not vote, they're also stupid. I mean, that's just a fact. That's a sad reality of American society."

  • silent v||

    That's a great example of the cognitive dissonance of the Progressives. They believe that the vast majority of voters are too stupid to know what is best for them at the same time time they believe it is important that everybody vote

  • Hidebehindyourcause||

    I'd want to ask him why black people don't vote for him either. Just to see what his response was.

  • Scarecrow & WoodChipper Repair||

    Other examples:

    High taxes reduce consumption of alcohol, tobacco, sugar, and other bad foods. High minimum wages increase consumption of unskilled labor.

    Businesses are greedy and think only of money. Businesses cannot see the increased profit in hiring unskilled labor at high wages.

    Guns are inherently dangerous and should not exist. The elite need armed bodyguards and government needs armed police.

  • Suicidy||

    They believe everybody should vote as long as the votes are properly rigged for the democrat candidate.

  • BYODB||

    Yeah, he's basically victim blaming right?

    I mean, they're poor because they don't vote for him, those dumb poor people! If only they weren't so lazy they could get up off their rears and get to the polls a job.

    Oh wait, I forgot, living wage. There we go, now it's all kosher.

  • ||

    Look, you can't help the poor if there are no poor. Why do you hate the poor?

    /democrats - what we think, not what we say.

  • Demoted Comment (Slammer)||

    "I'm going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that statue of Karl Marx."

  • gah87||

    Commulingus?

  • Eman||

    THE *****S WE ALL **** TOGETHER!!

  • ||

    the Libertarian party has a unique opportunity to demonstrate how their policies of limited government

    And they will be demonstrating that, once again, to the 1% of people who don't believe the following: But you can't vote 3rd party, else the greater of the 2 evils will win and this is the most important election ever! I'm moving to Canada if [x] wins this election!

  • Chip the Chipper||

    My boss is like this. "I can't believe that in November I'm going to have to vote for Donald Trump."

    Uhm, no you don't. I don't mind voting Republican in some years, but holy hell not this year.

  • GILMORE™||

    Good piece Ed.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Leftists don't own the poor even though they've done their best to keep them in poverty."

    Best byline ever.

  • Playa Manhattan.||

    I was just about to say the same thing.

  • lap83||

    agreed

  • John Voss||

    Conservatism has ruled in the South and yet we still have some of deepest pockets of poverty in the nation. I guess you would think that stupidity or laziness keeps us that way? I mean, after all, that is the conservative mantra. The reality is that conservatives have never delivered on any promises to invest in these communities and prey on the fact that they have less access to education and jobs because state and federal infrastructure spending is invested in the wealthier areas while they push fossil fuel industries who strip away the jobs as soon as the resources dry up leaving our land unusable. What keeps us in poverty and under the thumb of conservatism is some false promise of a place at the table for greatly religious obligations that have very little to do with self interest or the best interests of our own communities.

  • ||

    An objective look at those pockets of power will find that most are solidly under Democrat control.

  • Azathoth!!||


    An objective look at those pockets of power will find that all are solidly under Democrat control.

    FTFY

  • Tornado16nb||

    Curious how much do you make?

    Being a leftist...do you want fossil fuel industries or not? Why would fossil fuel comapanies stay in a location with no fossil fuels? where has this happened?

  • Suicidy||

    Of course he doesn't. This is just a another bullshit way to attack them.

  • Hidebehindyourcause||

    I'm not defending conservatives, but I've rarely heard one of them say that poor people are stupid or lazy. Maybe "get educated and make yourself valuable to employers" equates to it from a certain point of view, I guess.

  • Procrastinatus||

    Democrats have ruled the South for a long time, and unfortunately Democrats have always been economic populists, and way, way more socialistic 70 years ago than they were today. IF you want to know why the South has been so poor for so long, you should look at organizations like the Democratic Party, Southern Tenant Farmers Union and public works initiatives that have been so popular here. Here in Arkansas there were even Stalin type planned towns (like Dryess) built.

    Luckily Arkansans are forgetting these outdated economic ideals. We've seen Democrats absolutely economic powerhouses like Detroit, so it's obvious that your socialism isn't going to life us out of poverty when you actually bring entire areas into poverty. It's cute that you blame Conservatives for your economic failures though.

  • MarkLastname||

    As a matter of fact, education spending tends to be disproportionately high, not low, in poor urban communities. Detroit and Baltimore are swimming in education spending, and it has not helped, so your old 'we need more funding' argument is nonsense. You can't fill up a broken bottle by pouring more water into it.

    And what's your complaint about the fossil fuel industry? That they give you jobs for a little while then take them away? Whereas you'd be better off if they'd never given you any in the first place? Never mind that Texas is a perfect counterexample to everything you say. Texas is, relatively speaking, following a model of limited government and limited regulation, and, despite the oil crisis, it retains a lower than average unemployment rate, a higher than average growth rate, and an overall healthier economy than more 'liberal' states; what's more, this is despite significant in-migration of poor people from Mexico or from rust-belt states (like mine) that progressives have run into the ground.

  • Suicidy||

    That's an interesting strawman you've built John. And constructed of 100% disingenuous bullshit no less! You're also very intentionally vague so as to not not name anything specific that can be easily refuted of course. Maybe something like..........Detroit?

  • Radioactive||

    or Chicago or coming soon to a metropolis near you...NYC?

  • Austrian Anarchy||

    What happened to loading the poor up into busses, promising there is a pint waiting for them if they vote the right way, then passing out the booze at the end of the day? Sounds like Bernie has broken a sacred social contract if he didn't provide bus service and hooch.

  • Suicidy||

    Being the party of the poor only works if you keep most people poor.

  • Playa Manhattan.||

    "Poor All people who did vote have rejected him so far. "

  • ||

    Spoken like a true commie scumbag.

    "I mean, that's just a fact," Sanders continued. "That's a sad reality of American society."

    Poor Grandpa Gulag. 'They just can't see enlightenment. Wah, waw, wah.'

  • ||

    Maybe they saw Venezuela and Cuba and got enlightenment. So the issue is the opposite of what he thinks it is.

  • GILMORE™||

    Other media have commented on the fact that Sanders has polled badly among many of the groups he claims to be advocating on behalf of. Poor people, minorities, etc.

    Few have taken the extra step to point out how unbelievably patronizing their attitudes are towards the same people.

    They will moan on MSNBC about how much they care about "inequality" and "social justice".... yet will turn on a dime and scream at all the often-very-religious rural poor-blacks & whites and call them ignorant rubes for their opposition to mandated gender-studies in pre-school, or whatever.

    They want to "Help" these people from afar, while continuing to refuse them any voice of their own. The educated progressive-elite will lead them to the Promised Land whether they like it or not. Which apparently has lots more of that Public Housing they've been trying *to escape* for the last 3 generations, and gives lots more power to the Shitty Public Schools they've been victimized by for the same.

  • ||

    They will moan on MSNBC about how much they care about "inequality" and "social justice"

    They don't care about those things, they don't even know what it means, and they can't because it's meaningless babble. They care about socially signaling that they care about those things.

  • GILMORE™||

    I agree

    I think most people's politics (group A) are far more about "identity shaping" than any sincere interest in public policy.

    And i'm not sure the few who take a sincere interest in public policy (group B) are necessarily much better. Maybe for them its just a career-choice and they've stopped asking questions about whether any core assumptions actually make sense

    (*i'm thinking of the people who work in progressive think tanks and write white-papers saying things like raising the Minimum Wage will "Create Jobs" because garble garble garble studies show garble garble cite academic hack garble garble)

    basically, they're like lawyers as far as i can tell = people who make arguments for their paymasters and are less concerned with any objective reality compared to "how does X increase our power". Whether policy X actually achieves any of its purported goals is unimportant relative to whether it provides "a win" which yields more funding or advances their allies careers.

    The people who seem aware of 'the world as it is'.... (call them group C) ... witness the mass-self-hypnosis of group A... and also see how group B scumbags feed them horrible policies in order to gain power.... but are generally unable to actually do anything about either.

    So they froth and moan and constantly point fingers at the obvious reality and tear their hair wondering Why the Fuck Can't Anyone See How Stupid It All Is.

    Those people are *the worst* :)

  • ||

    Who paid you for this? Koch? Exxon? Out with it.

  • Tornado16nb||

    They want to help them from afar with other people's money.

  • ||

    All anyone has to do is a little critical thinking to dispel the notion that Berntard is going to bring about some great prosperity for all. Here is a guy telling them he's going to turn us into Sweden. A Scandanavian country with a very homogeneous population of less than 10 million people. Anyone who believes that would also believe that I can turn a pig into a cat by feeding it cat food.

  • Eman||

    "Anyone who believes that would also believe that I can turn a pig into a cat by feeding it cat food."

    I chuckled

  • Robert||

    Meoink?

  • Sevo||

    "Sanders argued that increasing turnout among young people and the poor would change American politics. "If we can significantly increase voter turnout so that low-income people and working people and young people participated in the political process, if we got a voter turnout of 75 percent," Sanders argued, "this country would be radically transformed.""

    Yeah, we'd have more free shit, less liberty and we could all live in poverty together.

  • ||

    You got it.

  • LynchPin1477||

    It's always someone else's fault. Personal responsibility is not part of Sanders' vocabulary.

  • american socialist||

    I'm with you, Ed. We're all going to make a zillion dollars a year one day so why not advocate for a 0% tax rate on current and would-be zillionaires so that non-zillionaires will reap the zillions in future beneficial tax rates. That's smart thinking for people making 30k/yr. those people are smart just like people voting for politicians because the baby-Jesus told them to.

  • ||

    That was just pure unadulterated stupid. There's no other way to say it. You just said nothing. Do you have something to say, I mean do you have a point? Or are you going to just ramble on with meaningless drivel like most of your retarded leftist comrades?

    I'm challenging you here to make a point. I don't think you can. I'm quite sure of this.

  • LynchPin1477||

    Don't bother. Tony (where has he been?) and Buttplug both argue with more good faith than amsoc.

  • Playa Manhattan.||

    It takes the sport out of it when he starts drinking this early in the morning.

  • Sevo||

    If you stand back, shooting fish in a barrel isn't all that easy. 'Way back.

  • BYODB||

    I'm pretty sure he's referring to when Sanders raises the minimum wage to 'zillions'. That's all I could discern.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Everything really is zero-sum with you, isn't it.

  • ||

    I can't wait until it explains to us exactly who is arguing for a 0% tax on zillionaires, which of course do not even exist. But let's say millionaires or billionaires. What is their tax rate now? I'm sure it's more than 0% and I haven't heard a single libertarian ever say that it should be zero. So yeah, exactly what you said.

  • Ted S.||

    What about ABC?

  • Dogs_stole_things||

    "Most economic fallacies derive from the tendency to assume that there is a fixed pie, that one party can gain only at the expense of another".

    "Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself".


    Milton Friedman

  • Shit Pyrate||

    Fuck Off AMSOC.

    And fuck your silver spoon too.

  • Suicidy||

    AmSoc can't even pay his mortgage. Stupid faggot cookie!

  • ||

    Sanders is the good kind of socialist. He wants us to be Sweden, not Venezuela. Think about that for a moment, how many times that good intention has went horribly wrong. Would any sane person want to take that chance with the lives of 350 million people? A well meaning sociopath maybe. Personally, I don't want a well meaning sociopath making that decision for me.

  • GILMORE™||

    Also = I don't understand Ed's alt-text ("foh"), but i think its a winner

  • Ed||

    "fuck outta here"

  • GILMORE™||

    i presume the "Get the____" is implied?

  • Robert||

    I'm still trying to figure out "cereal".

  • Haha, charade you are||

    Christ, how delusional and narcissistic is this guy? The sad thing is that the left is lousy with this same ideology.

    "Left-wing politicians often argue that poor people will vote for them and that when they don't, that that represents a vote 'against their own interests.'"

    Exactly! It is just like that despicable video that the DNC put out proclaiming that "the government is the only thing we belong to". Pff. As a libertarian, I proudly reject that slaver nonsense.

    Great article, Ed.

  • John Voss||

    He is absolutely correct. For many Americans just struggling to feed their families, voting seems like a futile effort since it never changes their circumstances. This is why Republicans consistently win in the South. Because many do not have the access to vote, the access to information and have been disenfranchised from a system that never works in their favor. As a Southerner from a poor, rural area, I understand how this game works. Politicians, pundits and preachers keep us in line but never deliver. Even media like this perpetuates distortions that only work against us. "Why bother?" is the response you will more often than not receive. This is what needs to change. We need education made more accessible in poor areas. We need infrastructure spending that states cannot afford to give or give to only wealthy and visible areas to provide jobs and income. We need to show people that are greatly invisible that they do indeed matter. Bernie is the only candidate who would do that without the strings of corporate dictates.

  • Sevo||

    "Bernie is the only candidate who would do that without the strings of corporate dictates."

    Hey! Bernie's got another sucker on the hook!

  • Eric Bana||

    Federal, state, and local spending on anti-poverty programs is well over $900 billion annually (excluding Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment benefits). If that money were divvied up among the poorest 25% of the U.S. population (80 million people), that would come to an average of a little over $11,000 per person, or more than $44,000 for a family of four in the bottom 25%. Again, that would exclude Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment benefits.

    Do you think the government really needs to spend more on anti-poverty programs, or that that money simply needs to be spent and used differently?

  • Aloysious||

    Politicians, pundits and preachers keep us in line but never deliver.


    snip

    Bernie is the only candidate who would do that without the strings of corporate dictates.

    So, just so I understand this correctly; corporate dictates control politicians, pundits, and preachers, which in turn control poor, rural Southerners?

  • GILMORE™||

    As a Southerner from a poor, rural area, I understand how this game works.

    Yet you just finished saying how no one else from poor rural areas understand how the game works.

    Your contempt (and ignorance) of everyone else's POV is exactly what this article was mocking.

  • american socialist||

    LOL. The board's biggest snob throws around accusations of snobbery. Awesome.

  • Sevo||

    american socialist|4.24.16 @ 4:56PM|#
    "LOL. The board's biggest snob throws around accusations of snobbery. Awesome."

    Poor commie-kid. Always the loser.

  • Shit Pyrate||

    Gilly is cool. Also I may have some minor throw downs with Sevo, but he is right. AMSOC you are a loser, that has never worked a day in your life.

  • Suicidy||

    Amd doesn't pay his mortgage.

  • ||

    "This is why Republicans consistently win in the South."

    Historically, hasn't the region been dominated by Democrats? If I'm not mistaken, Democrats held power the majority of the time; particularly in the 20th century.

  • BYODB||

    Yes, this is exactly right. Recall the North was Republican when it invaded.

  • ||

    "Bernie is the only candidate who would do that without the strings of corporate dictates."

    You sure bro? He may be 'less' so than Hillary but he's still a politician who would pimp himself:

    "Bernie Sanders (Democrat), $13.7 million. The left coast likes the leftist Sanders, with Google (26 donors) and Microsoft (15 donors) being his top sources of corporate money. Wells Fargo and United Airlines each had 8 workers donating to Sanders, while Princeton University had 5."

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/.....9992.html#

    Bernie definitely gets a lot from unions too. I don't know how being beholden to them is any better. Probably worse.

  • Hidebehindyourcause||

    Yeah union... big business... it's all the same because the politician in question still has to do things to gain their support.

    It sucks ass being poor, I was before, when I was younger. I had to make some serious and risky decisions (when you're married with a young daughter, taking chances always worries you) but fortunately it paid off and I'm doing much better today. I just paid my college loan off last year, finally. It was a bitch with my mortgage, and other things, but I got through it.

    I definitely understand why Bernie's message does interest some, but I just look at real-world examples of true democratic socialist countries and it does not look appealing, for anyone, rich or poor. Sweden isn't a true socialist country, either, despite what he claims.

    Socialism sucks the life out of citizens, and the government rules you. I'm a free spirit, and I want to be able to do well and take care of my family. Bernie wouldn't help me do that, nor can any government.

  • ||

    Sounds as though you got it right and congrats.

    No one cares about you except yourself. Bernie 'caring' about you is nonsense. Bernie cares about Bernie.

  • american socialist||

    Nice analysis, JV. I spent enough time in the South growing up to recognize that corporate interests had lined up with the town's racists so that they could pollute their town at will. If you got out of line and said companies should clean up their own shit or that people should be able to join a labor union you were mostly dismissed as a crackpot or a subversive.

    The town I spent my summers in was being polluted with PCBs that we're being spread all over town by the Monsanto plant while the town's leaders were concerning themselves with integrated buses that we're driving through town. It was the biggest racket ever, but try telling that to the people that lived there and they would start calling you an agitator and a communist.

  • Tornado16nb||

    So if you are against rackets why do you love some big government?

  • Sevo||

    american socialist|4.24.16 @ 5:05PM|#
    "Nice analysis, JV."

    Actually collection of lefty taking points and bullshit from end to end, exactly what you love.

  • Suicidy||

    I'm guessing maybe JV and AmSoc are the same treasonous douchebag.

  • notJoe||

    while the town's leaders were concerning themselves with integrated buses that we're driving through town

    What town and when? I'd enjoy looking up the party affiliation of those leaders. Or would you like to save us the trouble and just give us that info?

    For the sake of your (rather incoherent) diatribe I hope they weren't associated with the party of Wallace ("segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever"), Robert "Grandmaster" Byrd and the KKK...

    Nah. They must have been Rethuglicans.

  • notJoe||

    Per PBS American Experience:

    In the time leading up to the 1868 presidential election, the Klan's activities picked up in speed and brutality. The election, which pitted Republican Ulysses S. Grant against Democrat Horatio Seymour, was crucial. Republicans would continue programs that prevented Southern whites from gaining political control in their states. Klan members knew that given the chance, the blacks in their communities would vote Republican.

    Across the South, the Klan and other terrorist groups used brutal violence to intimidate Republican voters. In Kansas, over 2,000 murders were committed in connection with the election. In Georgia, the number of threats and beatings was even higher. And in Louisiana, 1000 blacks were killed as the election neared. In those three states, Democrats won decisive victories at the polls.

  • notJoe||

    But only (white) Republicans are racist.

  • BYODB||

    Where was this AmSoc, and when? I only ask because I wonder if you were old enough before 1979 to know what a PCB was.

  • LarryA||

    Because many do not have the access to vote, the access to information and have been disenfranchised from a system that never works in their favor.

    Maybe you don't count Texas as the south, but here if you make any connection to society, like a driver's license or accepting assistance from any of the usual programs, you have to actively avoid registering to vote if you don't want to be registered.

    Here in the middle of election season you also have to actively avoid campaign information in order to stay ignorant.

    If you want more poor people voting (along with the rest of us) then change the election laws so we have more choice than between the folks who want to restrict everything and other folks who want to restrict everything.

  • Will4Freedom||

    "provide jobs"

    How about making your own job? How about taking inventory of your likes and skills and market yourself? Got a pickup? Are you strong? Start a moving company. Like to bake? Sell fresh bread and pastries. Like to garden? Sell veggies. Good at cutting hair? Convert one room of your house/appt. into a hair studio. Know how to distill mash? Duh!

    But you can't do any of those self help jobs without the Government quickly stepping in and claim you're breaking some law, or regulation and need to spend big bucks to join the club.

    It is the very people who have been claiming to care about the poor who have been putting up barriers to the poor helping themselves. Vote for freedom.

  • Suicidy||

    Clearly that won't work. People need a government program to ensure employment.

  • Eternal Blue Sky||

    Why should I trust your opinion?? You made a post here saying that poor Southerners don't have the education or information they need to make informed decisions, and also identified yourself as a poor Southerner.

    Either poor Southerner's CAN get access to the education and information they need to make informed decisions and your assertion otherwise is wrong, or your ideas are probably wrong since you aren't smart enough and don't have all the information on the issue.

    Or are you stating that you're the one, the only, enlightened poor Southerner in the world?? Seems narcissistic if that's the case.

  • Brochettaward||

    Bernie Sanders just looks like if you met him in person, he'd have BO and bad breath.

  • Will4Freedom||

    "You don't necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or of 18 different pairs of sneakers when children are hungry in this country."

    But you do need to USE at least one.

  • sandraturner983||

    ​​Start working at home with Google! It's by-far the best job I've had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this - 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.

    +_+_+_+_+_+ http://WWW.Today30.com

  • sandraturner983||

    ​​Start working at home with Google! It's by-far the best job I've had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this - 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.

    +_+_+_+_+_+ http://WWW.Today30.com

  • sandraturner983||

    ​​Start working at home with Google! It's by-far the best job I've had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this - 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.

    +_+_+_+_+_+ http://WWW.Today30.com

  • PapayaSF||

  • Brochettaward||

    Who cares? Bernie was a Stalinist in his youth.

  • PapayaSF||

    As the article points out, these things often run in families: e.g. Obama. And perhaps I am more interested in the history of 20th century leftism than you are.

  • Suicidy||

    Another reason we need a return to McCarthyism.

  • ||

    Were Republicans not so narrow-mindedly interested in culture wars and playing into the stereotype of them that Democrats have constructed, perhaps they'd do better among the poor.

    Voters do not care about boring, inscrutable things like economic policy, which require research in order to form a real opinion. They care about what you think about sexual deviants, and whether people should be forced to interact with them or not. They also care about immigrants, one way or the other. Those are the greatest political issue of modern times. It doesn't matter where people rank those issues on surveys, what matters is, they vote overwhelmingly based upon those two issues.

    Write the above on a chalkboard 100 times until it sinks in.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    The Simpsons opening have gotten really political, haven't they?

  • Hidebehindyourcause||

    My wife's Hispanic and what we both came to realize is that the Democrats only care about how they're perceived by immigrants without actually doing much of any substance to help them. They (government) needs to get the fuck out of the way and let immigrants come. Democrats have no interest in getting out of the way of anything. They just want to sound better than the Republicans do about it.

  • Jack Napier||

    If we elect only democrats, then there will be no income inequality. No one will be poor. Therefor, we won't have to worry about the poor vote, the middle class vote, or the rich vote. Cause we'll all be equal!

  • Hidebehindyourcause||

    Exactly! There will be no more disease and affliction either, because unicorns

  • Tornado16nb||

    Progressives are really dumb for the most part i think. Others that are control freaks are the most concerning. Bernie strikes me as the latter.

    Corporations control the government! Give government more power!!

  • Akira||

    "Corporations control the government! Give government more power!!"

    No no, you're messing it up. It goes like this: The government is us, and corporations control the government (which is us) so we need to give ourselves (the government) more power to fight the corporations that have hijacked the government (which is us) and used our own power (or the government's power) against us (the government) so that we (the government) can fight the corporations that have infected the government (us) with their influence.

    It's so obvious. I mean, duh!

  • DavidS-T||

    HRC defeated Sanders in Mississippi by 82.6 to 16.5. http://www.nytimes.com/electio.....ississippi In Holmes County, which is almost 80% black, she got 92.9% of the vote.

    Obviously, all those African Americans in the Delta are living in the lap of luxury...

  • GILMORE™||

    some people accuse southern black voters of disliking sanders because "he's jewish"

    which i think there's probably *a little* of, but far less than they assume.

    I really don't think its that at all as much as the fact that the black vote in those parts of the country is "delivered" en-masse by local pols and by church leaders and union-reps etc. who are networked together into a far more cohesive "party structure" than you find in other parts of the country.

    They're monolithic by nature. They will always pull for the party establishment that they know will keep the favors rolling. Insurgent outsiders will always be at a disadvantage in those places.

    Of course, you just ADD the fact that Bernie is a new york jewish communist..... and well, it makes it that much easier to completely ignore him.

  • PapayaSF||

    People often vote for familiar last names, too. Relatives or not.

  • Azathoth!!||

    You'd think 'Sanders' would be ringing some serious bells then, no?

  • american socialist||

    I agree. Black people in poor Appalachia are too stupid to realize that they should align themselves with the party of Strom Thurmond. Poor White people that vote for politicians that are going to cut their social security benefits are smarter.

  • Tornado16nb||

    Curious but do you prefer they remain in poverty?

  • Sevo||

    "Poor White people that vote for politicians that are going to cut their social security benefits are smarter."

    Obviously smarter than lefty schmucks voting for Ponzi-schemes.

  • Suicidy||

    So they instead align themselves https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OIVB3DdRgqUth the party of Robert Byrd, the Grand Wizard.

  • AlgerHiss||

    Besides the corn stuck in Sander’s teeth, you know this guy smells really, really bad.

    You know, that smell when people put on clean clothes about every fifth day, and bathe once a week?

  • BigT||

    "You know, that smell when people put on clean clothes about every fifth day, and bathe once a week?"

    That's so European! We need to be more like Europe.

  • ||

    No one needs more than one pair of trouser, brah.

  • Radioactive||

    and you can always get one more day out of your briefs by turning them inside out!

  • Free Society||

    "If we can significantly increase voter turnout so that low-income people and working people and young people participated in the political process, if we got a voter turnout of 75 percent," Sanders argued, "this country would be radically transformed."

    Because poor people are so qualified to make economic, legal and political decisions for everyone else. They're so good at those types of decision making that they're poor. Makes sense.

  • Shit Pyrate||

    Speaking as a "Poor" I just want more control over my own money. Bernie can Fuck Off.

  • josh||

    http://www.politifact.com/trut.....dont-vote/

    the link above or a recantation of all the ways hillary stole the election is what you get when you ask a bernie supporter about the fact that the stats don't support the idea that poor people are sabotaging his, and their better future.

  • Radioactive||

    nothing plain or simple about his brand of idiocy. he's a zen master of bug shit nutty!

  • toolkien||

    Just gotta gut some buses moving and do the smokes for votes like they did in Milwaukee a few years back.

  • toolkien||

    Just gotta gut some buses moving and do the smokes for votes like they did in Milwaukee a few years back.

  • Uncle Jay||

    RE: Bernie Sanders Blames Losses on Poor People Not Voting—But Poor People Weren't Voting for Him Anyway
    Leftists don't own the poor even though they've done their best to keep them in poverty.

    I don't understand.
    Socialist policies in the People's Republic of Amerika has kept the poor in poverty for decades.
    Where is the poor's gratitude for the ruling elitist turds who have kept them down for years?
    You would think the poor would line up and vote for Comrade Bernie fifty or sixty times just so they can stay poor.
    What's wrong with these people?

  • Lorenzo Zoil||

    Says the Senator from the state where the trust fund hippie dropouts went to be free of the burdens of society. Clown.

  • ammythomas1256||

    http://www.eater.com/

    up to I looked at the paycheck saying $9968 , I be certain that my brother had been truly bringing home money part time on their computer. . there moms best frend started doing this for only about 18 months and at present cleared the debts on their house and got a great Porsche 911 . navigate to this site ......

    .............................................. http://www.MaxPost30.com

  • ammythomas1256||

    http://www.eater.com/

    up to I looked at the paycheck saying $9968 , I be certain that my brother had been truly bringing home money part time on their computer. . there moms best frend started doing this for only about 18 months and at present cleared the debts on their house and got a great Porsche 911 . navigate to this site ......

    .............................................. http://www.MaxPost30.com

  • Non-ideologue||

    The author asserts that "most efforts to "reduce" income inequality destroy the prospects of upward income mobility for working Americans. The increased dependency on the state, the increased regulations, the increased taxes, all work against efforts by poor working Americans to improve their economic conditions."

    Where is authoritative evidence that that is mostly true? It would be of great interest to see that data and unbiased analysis. As posited here, it's just one pundit's personal opinion. And, as unbiased data and analysis shows, pundits are wrong about 90% of the time: www.overcomingbias.com/2006/11.....edgho.html

  • sofiyataylor11236||

    before I looked at the check that said $6457 , I didnt believe that...my... neighbours mother had been actually erning money part-time from there labtop. . there aunts neighbour had bean doing this 4 only 12 months and resently took care of the debts on their apartment and bourt a top of the range Porsche 911 . navigate to this site...

    Clik This Link inYour Browser.......
    ++++++++++++++++++ http://www.MaxPost30.com

  • sofiyataylor11236||

    before I looked at the check that said $6457 , I didnt believe that...my... neighbours mother had been actually erning money part-time from there labtop. . there aunts neighbour had bean doing this 4 only 12 months and resently took care of the debts on their apartment and bourt a top of the range Porsche 911 . navigate to this site...

    Clik This Link inYour Browser.......
    ++++++++++++++++++ http://www.MaxPost30.com

  • AnnaTiffany||

    I'm making $86 an hour working from home. I was shocked when my neighbour told me she was averaging $95 but I see how it works now. I feel so much freedom now that I'm my own boss. This is what I do,

    ------------------- www.Profit80.com

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online