Support NeoGAF

[Father_Brain]

Man, I don't believe this, but if I did, I would probably troll Clinton supporters a lot less so that I didn't get stuck with another four years of Trump because of my shitty message board posts!

Well that's nonsense

On the other side of the pond, we've just seen center-left elites engage in a two-year campaign to undermine and destroy the democratically elected leftist leader of their own party.

So I really don't think I'm being too cynical here.

 

[mlclmtckr]

Sure it is when they are actually on the left.

I mean you called me one once based on fuck nothing.

Pigeon was called one repeatedly.

So I'd say that it is pretty well used illogically, at least around here.

You know that there is no actual platonic 'centre' right

Centrism is a range of beliefs and its boundaries are entirely subjective

If someone wants to support imperialism and think capitalism is really lit and also consider themselves some kind of radical leftist no one can stop them. But a pacifist communist is going to consider them a centrist.

I don't know why people take it as some kind of horrendous libel when all it means and all anyone should ever take it as is "person who is more moderate than me"

Edit - like a Marxist Leninist would consider me a revisionist centrist neoliberal shill. Which is fine with me because I am indeed more moderate than them. I don't know why it's such a slur for liberals.

 

[GoldenEye 007]

On the other side of the pond, we've just seen center-left elites engage in a two-year campaign to undermine and destroy the democratically elected leftist leader of their own party.

So I really don't think I'm being too cynical here.

I'm sorry, but Europe is on a completely different playing field and has zero do with American politics.

 

[eBay Huckster]

so, i love me a good relitigation and all, but why is someone who lost the only challenging election of her life by 30 points the face of Our Revolution in the first place?

Sure it is when they are actually on the left.

I mean you called me one once based on fuck nothing.

Pigeon was called one repeatedly also based on fuck nothing.

Many others have been baselessly called one around here

So I'd say that it is pretty well used illogically, at least around here.

shit, i got called one yesterday (fake edit: on facebook, not here) for saying we should gradually move to single-payer rather than upending the entire health sector all at once

 

[mlclmtckr]

Those people aren't the ones using it to smear anyone critical of Bernie in shitposts on GAF.

On the other hand post 689

 

[pigeon]

I clap am clap not clap on clap the clap Bernie clap train clap you clap insipid clap basic clap smug clap lib

Neoliberal is a word with an actual definition and refusing to engage with the concept is just sticking your fingers in your ears because you can't stand your bubble being encroached on in any way

People who are much smarter and more thoughtful than either of us have written intelligent, influential and important treatises on what neoliberalism is and what it entails. You calling it a Bernie stan buzzword is willful ignorance.

I mean, I think this is literally the problem, though. Neoliberal does have a specific meaning. It's not clear to me that the people accusing others of being neoliberal have a clear understanding of that meaning or sufficient evidence to ascertain that the person they're talking to actually adheres to those precepts. That's exactly what makes it a slur instead of a meaningful critique.

 

[shawnbuddy]

On the other hand post 689

I know you're very proud of what you think is some gotcha, but I was not saying only liberals can be on the left in that post. Just that by definition liberals in the US are on the left. It's not exclusive.

 

[eBay Huckster]

On the other side of the pond, we've just seen center-left elites engage in a two-year campaign to undermine and destroy the democratically elected leftist leader of their own party.

So I really don't think I'm being too cynical here.

to be fair, that's Labour's power dynamics (I *think* that's who you're talking about?), which don't exactly have an analogue over here

Spoiler

though I guess the Thousand-Year Clinton-Bernie War is kinda-not-exactly one, if we're assuming the Dems are becoming something like an informal Lib-Lab coalition

 

[Mael]

I mean, I think this is literally the problem, though. Neoliberal does have a specific meaning. It's not clear to me that the people accusing others of being neoliberal have a clear understanding of that meaning or sufficient evidence to ascertain that the person they're talking to actually adheres to those precepts. That's exactly what makes it a slur instead of a meaningful critique.

It's pretty funny because it can go from François Hollande (former French republic president of Left wing Parti Socialiste) to Paul Ryan while also describing George Bush (all of them), Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and even people like Hilary Clinton.
It's a meaningless word these days.

e: holy shit I missed a lot of stuffs in France.
The horseshoe theory is a thing, the far left loser are actually using the method and rhetoric of the extreme right. And the leader of that movement agrees with Lepen on most things now.

 

[excelsiorlef]

You know that there is no actual platonic 'centre' right

Centrism is a range of beliefs and its boundaries are entirely subjective

If someone wants to support imperialism and think capitalism is really lit and also consider themselves some kind of radical leftist no one can stop them. But a pacifist communist is going to consider them a centrist.

I don't know why people take it as some kind of horrendous libel when all it means and all anyone should ever take it as is "person who is more moderate than me"

Edit - like a Marxist Leninist would consider me a revisionist centrist neoliberal shill. Which is fine with me because I am indeed more moderate than them. I don't know why it's such a slur for liberals.

Because it's used as a slur?

And because calling everyone you think (even when it's not true) is not as left as you a centrist is nonsense.

 

[GuessMyUserName]

My argument is that this shit is obviously all relative and it's not, like, completely illogical for people on the far left to call people closer to the centre centrists.

But it is?

The very fact you used the word "farther" is an admittance that liberals are on the left.

 

[mlclmtckr]

I mean, I think this is literally the problem, though. Neoliberal does have a specific meaning. It's not clear to me that the people accusing others of being neoliberal have a clear understanding of that meaning or sufficient evidence to ascertain that the person they're talking to actually adheres to those precepts. That's exactly what makes it a slur instead of a meaningful critique.

Okay let's hash out a real quick and dirty working definition of neoliberalism

I would say: Support of market based economics in a moderately lassiez faire regulatory climate coupled with a basic social safety net and higher degree of personal freedom than in authoritarian societies. What do you think? Because I think it really is a useful term, and I have never used it in bad faith, and it's fucking tiring to see drive by posts going "you must be some kind of white brocialist bernie stan dudebro" every time someone uses it.

I know you're very proud of what you think is some gotcha, but I was not saying only liberals can be on the left in that post. Just that by definition liberals are on the left. It's not exclusive.

"the definition of liberal is being on the left"

There are actually more things to liberalism than simply being on the left half of the spectrum

 

[Nafai1123]

You know that there is no actual platonic 'centre' right

Centrism is a range of beliefs and its boundaries are entirely subjective

If someone wants to support imperialism and think capitalism is really lit and also consider themselves some kind of radical leftist no one can stop them. But a pacifist communist is going to consider them a centrist.

I don't know why people take it as some kind of horrendous libel when all it means and all anyone should ever take it as is "person who is more moderate than me"

Edit - like a Marxist Leninist would consider me a revisionist centrist neoliberal shill. Which is fine with me because I am indeed more moderate than them. I don't know why it's such a slur for liberals.

Because the world and this country doesn't revolve around your perspective. Calling someone who is left a centrists has certain implications to it. It's intentionally insulting and you know it. Acknowledge that your beliefs are fringe left, which is fine, and that other peoples beliefs are still left. Calling them centrists implies they are closer to the racist bigoted pieces of shit than they are to you, which is complete bullshit and downright insulting. Just like using the term neoliberal haphazardly without proper context or understanding of the definition is insulting. You guys name call ALL THE FUCKING TIME, and yet cry foul at the first comparison to Bernie bros or what not. It's intentionally antagonistic and you fucking know it.

 

[Mael]

Okay let's hash out a real quick and dirty working definition of neoliberalism

I would say: Support of market based economics in a moderately lassiez faire regulatory climate coupled with a basic social safety net and higher degree of personal freedom than in authoritarian societies. What do you think? Because I think it really is a useful term, and I have never used it in bad faith, and it's fucking tiring to see drive by posts going "you must be some kind of white brocialist bernie stan dudebro" every time someone uses it.

At least you define the word you use, I can't say I've ever seen the term used that way.

"the definition of liberal is being on the left"

There are actually more things to liberalism than simply being on the left half of the spectrum

You have no idea how confusing that part is.
Common knowledge in Europe is that self styled liberal people are quite clearly on the right.

 

[mlclmtckr]

But it is?

The very fact you used the word "farther" is an admittance that liberals are on the left.

But like

I just said

Okay I'm sorry but I just said that "the centre" is subjective, relative, and describes a range. There isn't one exact dot on some kind of political spectrum that is "the centre" and no one one inch on either side can ever be described as "a centrist".

 

[shawnbuddy]

Okay let's hash out a real quick and dirty working definition of neoliberalism

I would say: Support of market based economics in a moderately lassiez faire regulatory climate coupled with a basic social safety net and higher degree of personal freedom than in authoritarian societies. What do you think? Because I think it really is a useful term, and I have never used it in bad faith, and it's fucking tiring to see drive by posts going "you must be some kind of white brocialist bernie stan dudebro" every time someone uses it.




"the definition of liberal is being on the left"

There are actually more things to liberalism than simply being on the left half of the spectrum

Every time someone uses it as a slur, not every time someone uses it.

I guess I should have said "includes being" if I knew I was dealing with someone so bloody-minded. In the US it's well accepted that someone who identifies as a liberal is on the left of the spectrum. You can dance and dance but you can't defend these slurs.

 

[eBay Huckster]

You have no idea how confusing that part is.
Common knowledge in Europe is that self styled liberal people are quite clearly on the right.

it's less confusing once you realize the traditional "liberal" parties in north america co-opted the shit out of some socialist policies in large part so that they wouldn't wind up like the UK liberals

 

[sangreal]

Do you honestly think you're the mature one here? You are just as tribalistic as any one in this thread. Stop with the "Bernie Stan, Bernie bro" shit.

None of this fucking matters. Nobody is going to remember Nina Turner's water and donuts during the 2020 general election. It's cheap, lazy political theater. Big goddamn whoop. Why the fuck does everything have to set shit off like this? What does anyone have to gain by trying to paint ~40% of the people who voted in the 2016 democratic primary as a lunatic fringe? You think you're gonna "#berniesowhite" the 'lunatic/ignorant/misogyracist' fringe away while simultaneously courting white moderates? What are the fucking logistics of that?

Chill out and pander more. There's like a 3-foot gap we need to bridge here. I really don't see the utility in acting so damn indignant whenever someone criticizes the party. The craziest iteration of either party in modern American history controls every branch of the federal government. If that doesn't inspire humility and a willingness to accept criticism, then we are mega-fucked going forward.

Go hard left on campaign finance reform. When we're on the other side of this Trump/Russia shit, we're going to be able to draw straight lines between the collusion and rich ass Americans who helped bankroll this shit (someone needs to snatch up Robert Mercer by the throat). Carville was on O'Donnell the other day and he really pimped that as being something they need to build their 2018/2020 strategy around. Made me really optimistic for the first time in I don't know how long.

There will be a shitload of elections between now and 2020

Also, Russ Feingold, of the McCain-Feingold Act -- the bill that was struck down by citizens united -- lost in 2016 to a rich corporatist. Where were Bernies supporters and all these people who are supposed to turn out for campaign finance reform as their biggest issue?

 

[rjinaz]

Was going to post this in the other thread before it got locked

I'm not sure it's a race issue by itself, it's more privilege. They don't have a whole lot on the line, so they want to take more risks, they want to push for a more liberal agenda. Mean while people of color want to play it safe. They want to win. They see progress as more pragmatic.

I think it's an insensitivity to the issues other's face, but I don't think it's strictly about race. Well I mean I'm sure it is for some who are we kidding, but I'd like to think not most.

 

[Dash_Riprock]

"Neo-Liberal" going from a defined political ideology to a catch-all insult for any non-Republicans that don't bow down and worship Bernie Sanders has to be one of the strangest things to come out of this election.

 

[Ekai]

Labeling people centrist based on one position, a lack of enthusiasm for Bernie, is intellectually dishonest. You don't know these people or where they stand on all the issues.

When did I at all relate this to Bernie? That you don't at all read what I've typed is honestly just more proof that you're being intellectually dishonest. You don't seem to know me or why I say what I do. But sure, keep claiming it's all about #BernieHowDareYouDon'tSupportHim for me. Again, it's stuff like this that makes discourse here so frustrating.

 

[FZZ]

"Neo-Liberal" going from a defined political ideology to a catch-all insult for any non-Republicans that don't bow down and worship Bernie Sanders has to be one of the strangest things to come out of this election.

I use it for the contrary but just looked up the definition and apparently my ass has been using it incorrectly

Idk what form of liberalism Bernie supporters fall under then if that's the case

strong left white liberals? lmao

 

[Mael]

it's less confusing once you realize the traditional "liberal" parties in north america co-opted the shit out of some socialist policies so that they wouldn't wind up like the UK liberals

not really.
I mean for that you need to know about UK politics, US politics and the political history of both country (and as noted above I'm French so add that to the pile).
It's not something I would expect most people interested in politics to know.

Spoiler

of course once you get it, it makes perfect sense.

And even then if you look at the economical definition of liberalism it gets confusing again.

 

[Arrogant Bastard]

Good lord we are screwed in 2018 and beyond if we don't cut this shit out.

Yep, this infighting is amaze balls. I knew this thread would be shit before I even entered. Sorry to those that are really screwed by Republicans.

 

[KingV]

There will be a shitload of elections between now and 2020

Also, Russ Feingold, of the McCain-Feingold Act -- the bill that was struck down by citizens united -- lost in 2016 to a rich corporatist. Where were Bernies supporters and all these people who are supposed to turn out for campaign finance reform as their biggest issue?

Getting dragged down by the top of the ticket like all the other democratic upsets, I assume.

Trump won Wisconsin, IIRC.

 

[Betty]

On the bright side Dem's can claim a moral victory if they shun the extreme left and stick to their core beliefs.

That'll be the only brightside if they lose but it's something.

 

[Nafai1123]

I'm just gonna put this here.

Currently, neoliberalism is most commonly used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers", and reducing state influence on the economy, especially through privatization and austerity.[5] Other scholars note that neoliberalism is associated with the economic policies introduced by Margaret Thatcher in the United Kingdom and Ronald Reagan in the United States.

Using it so liberally (pun intended) has reduced it to a pejorative, especially around here. So when you use the term like that, you have to be aware that you are being intentionally antagonistic and intellectually dishonest. It's just name calling at this point.

 

[Ekai]

On the bright side Dem's can claim a moral victory if they shun the extreme left and stick to their core beliefs.

That'll be the only brightside if they lose but it's something.

Again, I don't see what is extreme about the lefts belief system. What moral victory is there in appealing to the center-right and throwing their base under the bus? To reference your post in the topic that was closed and redirected here, you said "sticking to the moral high road" of supporting their base would have us lose again and that we have to go with the center-right individuals. (least that was your implication in response to me, if I misunderstood, please clarify) So, please. Explain to me why they the left is extremist and we have stay centrist in order to win. How does this happen? How does this at all do anything but slowly kill the party?

 

[Ziltoidia 9]

From the other thread that was locked, Dash_Riprock asked "How and where did you get this conclusion?"

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-bernie-sanders-is-most-popular-u-s-politician/

Here.

Dash_Riprock also said, Dash_Riprock said, "This is a man who ran against what may have be the most unpopular female politician in American history and still lost the nomination."

Because he was new to the national stage and largely unknown and didn't do well in the south, which was his own mistake.

But after the fact, and after the country has come to know him, he is the most popular politician.

Also from the other thread, said "This just makes no sense. If he was the most popular politician in the US, he would have won the primary and he'd also be the president. He wouldn't even have needed to join the Democratic party to run!"

Again, knew to the national ticket. He is the most popular politician NOW. Hell he might have been then too, but it was a rigged democratic primary anyway, so what ever. Also a lot of the the voting registrations had been locked out way before he was as big as he was, and independents that might not usually vote in primaries didn't get a chance to vote for him.

The Poll

 

[FZZ]

Again, I don't see what is extreme about the lefts belief system. What moral victory is there in appealing to the center-right and throwing their base under the bus?

The bernie segment of the far left isn't what comprises a majority of the democratic base

 

[GoldenEye 007]

Because he was new to the national stage and largely unknown and didn't do well in the south, which was his own mistake.

But after the fact, and after the country has come to know him, he is the most popular politician.

Also from the other thread, said "This just makes no sense. If he was the most popular politician in the US, he would have won the primary and he'd also be the president. He wouldn't even have needed to join the Democratic party to run!"

Again, knew to the national ticket. He is the most popular politician NOW. Hell he might have been then too, but it was a rigged democratic primary anyway, so what ever. Also a lot of the the voting registrations had been locked out way before he was as big as he was, and independents that might not usually vote in primaries didn't get a chance to vote for him.

The Poll

After the fact means shit. And you're lying. Rigged primary. My god.

 

[Mael]

but it was a rigged democratic primary anyway

We're never going to get out of this, aren't we?

 

[cheezcake]

I use it for the contrary but just looked up the definition and apparently my ass has been using it incorrectly

Idk what form of liberalism Bernie supporters fall under then if that's the case

strong left white liberals? lmao

White is less accurate than young, considering he also won the vote among all race demographics for people under 30 except black which I believe he and Clinton were tied when factoring in margin of error.

 

[El_Tiguere]

While Democrats beholden to big money and the corporate media try all they can to subdue New Deal Democrats behind Bernie, can some defenders here offer up their better policy ideas? we can start with health care.

 

[Saucycarpdog]

Might as well post this here then.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/11/politics/democrats-bernie-sanders-feud/index.html

In what should be Democrats' strongest moment since November, a series of emotional and racially charged clashes are forcing the party to once again confront the problem that has plagued it for a year: How to incorporate the supporters of Bernie Sanders.

The anger that has simmered in Sanders' camp since the 2016 Democratic National Convention bubbled to the surface in comments from some of the Vermont senator's most prominent political allies and surrogates, particularly in two recent clashes.

First, three key Sanders backers -- National Nurses Union executive director RoseAnn DeMoro, pro-Sanders journalist Nomiki Konst and "People for Bernie" co-founder Winnie Wong -- publicly dismissed Sen. Kamala Harris' prospects of winning over the party's progressive wing. The pointed quotes were picked up online when a Mic report, published after the California Democrat was feted by top party donors in the Hamptons, went viral in late July.

Many Democrats saw the criticism of Harris as a needless and counterproductive jab at a rising star. But Sanders' backers -- who tend to be younger and whiter than the overall Democratic electorate -- were stung by suggestions that their distaste for Harris is fueled by race, like those from liberal MSNBC host Joy Reid, who tweeted: "So black Democrats must go begging young white leftists who were not numerous enough to nominate their preferred pick last time?"

"So odd, no, that these folks have (it) in for Kamala Harris and Cory Booker," tweeted Neera Tanden, the president of the Center for American Progress.

The intense backlash provoked an equally sharp response from Sanders' allies, including Turner and the three who had initially panned Harris -- DeMoro, Wong and Konst, none of whom are white men.

In both the backlash over Sanders allies' criticism of Harris and the DNC incident, Nina Turner said she saw "the system" -- Democratic donors, Hillary Clinton-aligned operatives, in particular -- "really trying to continue trying to drive a wedge between progressive people of color and progressive whites."

"They're using identity politics as a weapon," she said. By criticizing black Democrats such as Harris, Booker or former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, Sanders supporters are "labeled as a racist and a sexist. But they don't say the same thing when their side comes out and attacks somebody like me."

 

[Chumly]

It's disappointing seeing Bernie supporters spew fake news bullshit. I have a friend that does the same.

Hillary makes a mistake. "She's the worst candidate in history"

Bernie does something wrong. "DNC rigged the election". My source is RT

 

[Ekai]

The bernie segment of the far left isn't what comprises a majority of the democratic base

Again, when the hell did I say this had anything to do with people who support Bernie? I don't appreciate the constant words shoved into my mouth.

 

[eBay Huckster]

I'm just gonna put this here.



Using it so liberally (pun intended) has reduced it to a pejorative, especially around here. So when you use the term like that, you have to be aware that you are being intentionally antagonistic and intellectually dishonest. It's just name calling at this point.

frankly i just want to ask people using "neoliberal" like it's a weird version of It Hits the Fan whether they actually believe the people they're using it on want reduced state involvement in the economy

 

[FZZ]

White is less accurate than young, considering he also won the vote among all race demographics for people under 30 except black which I believe he and Clinton were tied when factoring in margin of error.

Yeah that's true

One thing that I will say that left me a lasting impression of some Bernie supporters (not of all Bernie supporters of course) was at my university was how reluctant they were to support Hillary after she won the primary. This continued for months into the election as well all they way until Trump was in office.

You could see that shit all over social media as well, the amount of instagram pages dedicated to "bernie_for_life" "bernie_not_shillary" was honestly insane. Part of me wonders if that was Russia fucking with dems now, but I doubt they would put in the effort to create instagram accounts that were propping up Bernie to only shit on Hillary, but then again idk anything anymore.

and there were groups of PoC who didn't want to vote Clinton even after she won the primary, they wanted to abstain from the election

this was in socal

Again, when the hell did I say this had anything to do with people who support Bernie? I don't appreciate the constant words shoved into my mouth.

Then I don't know what base you're talking about, the democratic party covers a wide range of people from different backgrounds and has since the 70s been primarily a center-left party in the US

hell probably been center-left since after FDR left office

 

[JustenP88]

There will be a shitload of elections between now and 2020

Also, Russ Feingold, of the McCain-Feingold Act -- the bill that was struck down by citizens united -- lost in 2016 to a rich corporatist. Where were Bernies supporters and all these people who are supposed to turn out for campaign finance reform as their biggest issue?

I dunno. I'm not in charge of keeping track of where Bernie supporters are at any given time. What's your point? Russ Feingold lost an election so "fuck campaign finance reform?"

Anyway... I just realized I'm in a thread where people who were accusing me and others of not giving a shit about women, minorities and LGBT Americans a year ago are offended by being called 'centrists'. I need to bounce before my eye twitches out of my skull. You all have fun with this.

 

[Betty]

Again, I don't see what is extreme about the lefts belief system. What moral victory is there in appealing to the center-right and throwing their base under the bus? To reference your post in the topic that was closed and redirected here, you said "sticking to the moral high road" of supporting their base would have us lose again and that we have to go with the center-right individuals. So, please. Explain to me why they the left is extremist and we have stay centrist in order to win. How does this happen? How does this at all do anything but slowly kill the party?

I meant the ones who lean left but hate abortion, aren't so hot on LGBTQ rights, if they shun those diet-racists etc then they can claim a moral victory.

 

[Arrogant Bastard]

We're never going to get out of this, aren't we?

Nope, never. This is the go to talking point, even though it is utter horseshit. It is that and well Sanders was polling better than Clinton against Trump in May.

 

[Ekai]

I meant the ones who lean left but hate abortion, aren't so hot on LGBTQ rights, if they shun those diet-racists etc then they can claim a moral victory.

I know just about no leftists who are like that. I don't deny they exist but I haven't met a lot of them. Gong to be honest.

 

[cheezcake]

This happened at my university

and there were groups of PoC who didn't want to vote Clinton even after she won the primary, they wanted to abstain from the election

this was in socal

Not entirely sure what you're talking about in regards to what I said? What happened at your university?

 

[Chumly]

I know just about no leftists who are like that. I don't deny they exist but I haven't met a lot of them. Gong to be honest.

Where do you live?

 

[excelsiorlef]

Alright let's play a different game.

Bernie wing folks. Other than Sanders (who may not run) who are your candidates for 2020. Like actual candidates who you think actually could win. We know the other wings gave 5 or 6 people. Instead of only talking about why they suck please put forward names...

 

[shawnbuddy]

From the other thread that was locked, Dash_Riprock asked "How and where did you get this conclusion?"

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-bernie-sanders-is-most-popular-u-s-politician/

Here.

Dash_Riprock also said, Dash_Riprock said, "This is a man who ran against what may have be the most unpopular female politician in American history and still lost the nomination."

Because he was new to the national stage and largely unknown and didn't do well in the south, which was his own mistake.

But after the fact, and after the country has come to know him, he is the most popular politician.

Also from the other thread, said "This just makes no sense. If he was the most popular politician in the US, he would have won the primary and he'd also be the president. He wouldn't even have needed to join the Democratic party to run!"

Again, knew to the national ticket. He is the most popular politician NOW. Hell he might have been then too, but it was a rigged democratic primary anyway, so what ever. Also a lot of the the voting registrations had been locked out way before he was as big as he was, and independents that might not usually vote in primaries didn't get a chance to vote for him.

The Poll

Sounds like the same "New at this!" excuses they make for Trump. Who is President now, BTW. Also, Bernie has been in politics for decades and is a Senator, he's no babe in the woods.

 

[Ekai]

Where do you live?

Would rather not specify on a public forum for my own safety. America is the most I would say.

 

[jack_package_200]

I would argue that older minority voters, especially older black females, are the base of the democratic party.

They always turn out in very high numbers to actually vote. Earning their support is pretty important if you want to get your agenda into the democratic party. Obama had their support in 08 and Clinton had their support in 2016.

 

[GoldenEye 007]

Would rather not specify on a public forum for my own safety. America is the most I would say.

Blue state or red state?