In case people would like to discuss the nitty gritty of the US presidential campaign without being interrupted by me saying I’m not interested in that.
Great idea Ophelia, although as a foreigner all I can really do is look and say WTF, what kind of madness is this!
As a PS, the comments on the main withdrawing room are disabled again, or at least I no longer see a comment box. That’s happened before and you fixed it, so I’m not sure what’s up.
Oops! Thank you. I don’t know what’s up either; I checked before to see if the “close comments after X days” option is checked and it isn’t. Stupid thing.
Our political process is ludicrous, embarrassingly so.
What? Why? I think you are over sensitive. Some of your candidates are pretty bonkers, but the process looks like vigorous democracy to many of us over here, including me, unlike most European systems which are typically much more cynical and sewn up party hierarchy and hidden intersts. Don’t be embarrassed, you are still the land of the free, and the rest of the free world still depends on you and your ludicrous devotion to democracy. Only, ditch Trump, if that is OK.
Interesting–by these numbers, the “Berniebros” are actually all in the 30+ age range, particularly the 30-44 slot. (After that, the gap narrows, though not to the level it is among the youngest voters.)
I get the impression from some other comment threads that some of y’all don’t think Berniebros exist. They do. Here’s a screenshot of the FiveThirtyEight comment section, just after Clinton’s vote percentage changed from 49.9 to 49.8:
I can’t say how common this is. I don’t frequent either Twitter or cesspool comment sections. (I came across the linked one purely by accident.) But I sort of doubt that Marcotte/McEwan et al. are making this up, and I really doubt that this dude came up with “policy over pussy” on his own. If I had to guess, I’d guess that much of this stuff is happening on Twitter.
For what it’s worth, I support Clinton over Sanders, and one of the reasons is that she’s a woman. I make no apologies for this. There’s no reason that the candidate’s sex can’t be one factor among many.
Yeah, I can definitely see where some left-leaning sexists would be Sanders supporters. Everything else being equal I would vastly prefer to vote for a woman, at least for as long as women are underrepresented in political positions. Unfortunately, Clinton’s voting record, current stated positions and conflicts of interest make her a vastly less appealing candidate than Sanders for me.
Everything else being equal I would vastly prefer to vote for a woman, at least for as long as women are underrepresented in political positions.
Yeah, that is my position as well. Of course, everything else is rarely equal, and I respect Sanders supporters – as long as they can express their support without saying things about Clinton that are untrue and/or sexist.
I also meant to say that I personally think it’s a mistake for Clinton to focus so sharply on feminism. Since when was that ever a selling point for anyone, for god’s sake?
Sanders himself has been crystal-clear about not wanting supporters like that. If one votes for nobody with objectionable supporters, one doesn’t vote.
Sanders himself has been crystal-clear about not wanting supporters like that. If one votes for nobody with objectionable supporters, one doesn’t vote.
Yes, he has, and I appreciate that. I’m not suggesting that people vote against Sanders because of the Berniebros. I’m just trying to raise awareness of a particular brand of sexist behavior that some people would like to deny exists.
Awareness is good and necessary. It’s too easy for politicians to enjoy the numbers while turning a blind eye to what some of them are saying. In that Sanders is setting a good example.
That some nasty stuff is being said about Clinton by Bernie Bros isn’t in doubt — it’s the narrative that Marcotte in particular is pushing that is false. Some of what she has published has actually been a little embarrassing tbh.
McEwen wrote a very good article on Clinton v Sanders last week, but followed that up with one that contained some statements that were hopelessly naive.
No one wants establishment candidates like Bush or Clinton. That Hillary would wheel out her husband to denounce Sanders’ sexism is an incredible howler.
People want candidates who speak with passion and energy.
Being Canadian, I’ve no horse in this race, but I must say that 2016 will be the most exciting year in American politics in decades.
Cressida: The notion of the “Berniebros” is that it’s a phenomenon of young, college-age men who are pretty much first-time voters. The numbers, though, don’t bear that out. Instead, the largest gender-gap in Sanders’ supporters are in that 30-44 demographic. This doesn’t surprise me–these are the men who tend to feel the most actively threatened by feminism and where you have a lot of general discontent that gets translated into misogyny because we’re so acculturated to do so, so this is where you’d expect them to crop up.
It seems like Clinton supporters are determined to continue pushing the ‘young voters are idiots’ line. During an NPR interview with a Clinton supporting Senator about the NH primary (which also hit the sexist button pretty hard*), said senator took it upon herself to attribute Bernie’s youth support as the young’uns being shallow and narrow-minded. It was enough that I almost forgot the sexist question the reporter led with. (“As a supporter of Hillary Clinton, what do you think she did wrong in New Hampshire?” as opposed to the obvious reality that she was in Bernie’s home court, and he just didn’t make any exploitable mistakes.)
I’m not sure why everyone continues to address me. I said what I had to say, namely, that it is a fact that there are a number of assholes on the internet who are using their support of Sanders as an opportunity to say sexist things about Clinton and her supporters. I made no claims about how many of these assholes there are, or how old they are, or whether certain bloggers are portraying them accurately, or anything else.
I’m always interested in what the pro-Clinton crowd have to say, but this rambling post has some incongruent statements that I’m struggling to get a grip of. I’m not convinced the author is writing in good faith here.
The most interesting part in the Gawker article is that the Dems are required by campaign finance rules to pay Katy Perry’s production costs (and that Obama paid Perry $128k for the same thing in 2012).
Even if I liked a particular pop singer or something, I seriously doubt I would give their political opinions any weight. I really have to wonder how valuable these kinds of endorsements are.
You’d think so, but if the Kardashians can convince someone to hand over $100 for a handbag, then it figures that Katy Perry could convince at least some people to wander into a polling booth and pull a lever.
Great idea Ophelia, although as a foreigner all I can really do is look and say WTF, what kind of madness is this!
As a PS, the comments on the main withdrawing room are disabled again, or at least I no longer see a comment box. That’s happened before and you fixed it, so I’m not sure what’s up.
Oops! Thank you. I don’t know what’s up either; I checked before to see if the “close comments after X days” option is checked and it isn’t. Stupid thing.
Our political process is ludicrous, embarrassingly so.
Yeah, I’m an American and I’m not sure I can do much more than say WTF.
Here Matt Bruenig takes Amanda Marcotte to task for some statistical tomfoolery:
http://mattbruenig.com/2015/12/22/marcotte-makes-basic-statistical-error-mythical-berniebro-continues-to-elude/
Before the Bernie Bros, there were the Obama Boys:
http://www.salon.com/2008/04/14/obama_supporters/
https://www.facebook.com/144310995587370/photos/a.271728576178944.71555.144310995587370/1118899404795186/?type=3&theater
https://www.facebook.com/144310995587370/photos/a.271728576178944.71555.144310995587370/1118980964787030/?type=3&theater
https://www.facebook.com/144310995587370/photos/a.271728576178944.71555.144310995587370/1118989904786136/?type=3&theater
https://www.facebook.com/144310995587370/photos/a.271728576178944.71555.144310995587370/1118995778118882/?type=3&theater
Our political process is ludicrous, embarrassingly so.
What? Why? I think you are over sensitive. Some of your candidates are pretty bonkers, but the process looks like vigorous democracy to many of us over here, including me, unlike most European systems which are typically much more cynical and sewn up party hierarchy and hidden intersts. Don’t be embarrassed, you are still the land of the free, and the rest of the free world still depends on you and your ludicrous devotion to democracy. Only, ditch Trump, if that is OK.
https://www.facebook.com/144310995587370/photos/a.271728576178944.71555.144310995587370/1119158498102610/?type=3&theater
Interesting–by these numbers, the “Berniebros” are actually all in the 30+ age range, particularly the 30-44 slot. (After that, the gap narrows, though not to the level it is among the youngest voters.)
I get the impression from some other comment threads that some of y’all don’t think Berniebros exist. They do. Here’s a screenshot of the FiveThirtyEight comment section, just after Clinton’s vote percentage changed from 49.9 to 49.8:
http://f.cl.ly/items/16011w3v2Y2h1k1V331B/Screen%20Shot%202016-02-01%20at%2010.04.32%20PM.png
I can’t say how common this is. I don’t frequent either Twitter or cesspool comment sections. (I came across the linked one purely by accident.) But I sort of doubt that Marcotte/McEwan et al. are making this up, and I really doubt that this dude came up with “policy over pussy” on his own. If I had to guess, I’d guess that much of this stuff is happening on Twitter.
For what it’s worth, I support Clinton over Sanders, and one of the reasons is that she’s a woman. I make no apologies for this. There’s no reason that the candidate’s sex can’t be one factor among many.
@Cressida
Yeah, I can definitely see where some left-leaning sexists would be Sanders supporters. Everything else being equal I would vastly prefer to vote for a woman, at least for as long as women are underrepresented in political positions. Unfortunately, Clinton’s voting record, current stated positions and conflicts of interest make her a vastly less appealing candidate than Sanders for me.
@Matthew
Yeah, that is my position as well. Of course, everything else is rarely equal, and I respect Sanders supporters – as long as they can express their support without saying things about Clinton that are untrue and/or sexist.
I also meant to say that I personally think it’s a mistake for Clinton to focus so sharply on feminism. Since when was that ever a selling point for anyone, for god’s sake?
Sanders himself has been crystal-clear about not wanting supporters like that. If one votes for nobody with objectionable supporters, one doesn’t vote.
And in other news:
https://www.facebook.com/144310995587370/photos/a.271728576178944.71555.144310995587370/1119472784737848/?type=3&theater
@Stewart
Yes, he has, and I appreciate that. I’m not suggesting that people vote against Sanders because of the Berniebros. I’m just trying to raise awareness of a particular brand of sexist behavior that some people would like to deny exists.
Awareness is good and necessary. It’s too easy for politicians to enjoy the numbers while turning a blind eye to what some of them are saying. In that Sanders is setting a good example.
And in other completely irrelevant news:
https://www.facebook.com/144310995587370/photos/a.271728576178944.71555.144310995587370/1119483671403426/?type=3&theater
https://www.facebook.com/144310995587370/photos/a.271728576178944.71555.144310995587370/1119496781402115/?type=3&theater
Cressida #14:
That some nasty stuff is being said about Clinton by Bernie Bros isn’t in doubt — it’s the narrative that Marcotte in particular is pushing that is false. Some of what she has published has actually been a little embarrassing tbh.
McEwen wrote a very good article on Clinton v Sanders last week, but followed that up with one that contained some statements that were hopelessly naive.
————————————————————————-
http://www.bustle.com/articles/140861-bernie-sanders-wins-womens-vote-in-new-hampshire-beats-hillary-clinton-on-the-gender-turf
These aren’t official figures, but exit polls say that Sanders won 53% of the female vote in NH, with Clinton getting 46%.
No one wants establishment candidates like Bush or Clinton. That Hillary would wheel out her husband to denounce Sanders’ sexism is an incredible howler.
People want candidates who speak with passion and energy.
Being Canadian, I’ve no horse in this race, but I must say that 2016 will be the most exciting year in American politics in decades.
Cressida: The notion of the “Berniebros” is that it’s a phenomenon of young, college-age men who are pretty much first-time voters. The numbers, though, don’t bear that out. Instead, the largest gender-gap in Sanders’ supporters are in that 30-44 demographic. This doesn’t surprise me–these are the men who tend to feel the most actively threatened by feminism and where you have a lot of general discontent that gets translated into misogyny because we’re so acculturated to do so, so this is where you’d expect them to crop up.
It seems like Clinton supporters are determined to continue pushing the ‘young voters are idiots’ line. During an NPR interview with a Clinton supporting Senator about the NH primary (which also hit the sexist button pretty hard*), said senator took it upon herself to attribute Bernie’s youth support as the young’uns being shallow and narrow-minded. It was enough that I almost forgot the sexist question the reporter led with. (“As a supporter of Hillary Clinton, what do you think she did wrong in New Hampshire?” as opposed to the obvious reality that she was in Bernie’s home court, and he just didn’t make any exploitable mistakes.)
I’m not sure why everyone continues to address me. I said what I had to say, namely, that it is a fact that there are a number of assholes on the internet who are using their support of Sanders as an opportunity to say sexist things about Clinton and her supporters. I made no claims about how many of these assholes there are, or how old they are, or whether certain bloggers are portraying them accurately, or anything else.
Cressida: I apologize if it felt like ganging up on you, and for misunderstanding the intent of your post.
https://www.facebook.com/144310995587370/photos/a.271728576178944.71555.144310995587370/1120018658016594/?type=3&theater
http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamonds/2016/02/10/bernie-sanders-and-revolution-betrayed/
I’m always interested in what the pro-Clinton crowd have to say, but this rambling post has some incongruent statements that I’m struggling to get a grip of. I’m not convinced the author is writing in good faith here.
https://www.facebook.com/144310995587370/photos/a.271728576178944.71555.144310995587370/1120513854633741/?type=3&theater
Hillary Clinton has held gigantic leads in polls for the Nevada caucuses — up until now. Candidates are now neck-and-neck: http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/nevada-democratic/
1
More polling news from Nevada: Very close between Clinton and Sanders; Trump a runaway leader for the GOP.
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/02/17/politics/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-nevada-poll/
On the subject of Trump…
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trumps-re-tweets-are-mostly-of-white-supremacist-sympathisers-a6838521.html
http://gawker.com/clinton-campaign-reportedly-paid-katy-perrys-company-7-1760133464
The most interesting part in the Gawker article is that the Dems are required by campaign finance rules to pay Katy Perry’s production costs (and that Obama paid Perry $128k for the same thing in 2012).
@33
Even if I liked a particular pop singer or something, I seriously doubt I would give their political opinions any weight. I really have to wonder how valuable these kinds of endorsements are.
http://studentactivism.net/2016/02/21/the-evolution-of-the-myth-of-the-sanders-english-only-chant/
This is the best attempt (that I’ve seen so far) at trying to pin down exactly what happened with Delores Huerta at the Democratic caucuses in Nevada.
Matthew #34:
You’d think so, but if the Kardashians can convince someone to hand over $100 for a handbag, then it figures that Katy Perry could convince at least some people to wander into a polling booth and pull a lever.
Then again, herding celebrities can sometimes be like herding cats…
http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/270005-britney-spears-deletes-hillary-endorsement
Holy guacamole! The Bernie Bros just got their own Wikipedia page!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Bro