Can you point to policy differences that are "words apart."? Certainly there is a difference in style and rhetoric, but by that standard Sanders falls short on equal rights.
"Class warfare" is a GOP term used to discredit policies favorable to workers and the poor. I never heard Sanders himself use that term.
What you refer to as a "demographic war" means politicians that pay attention to the concerns of non-white men. Those concerns are not encompassed by patronizing concern for "the vulnerable." The resistance to treating those Americans as full citizens with a right to political representation and politicians addressing their concerns is a serious problem.
By referring to Democrats attention to the concerns of voters besides white men as "demographic wars," you communicate that you imagine your own concerns to be universal and ours to be divisive. The fact is we are the base of the Democratic Party, its most reliable voters. As much as you are certain our concerns matter less, we don't see it that way. You don't see your call as exclusionary, but it is. Your views and your life experiences are not universal. And I for one am not going to back down on issues that are key in American society because you don't see them as important. I disagree with certain politicians who see white male votes as more important than regular Democratic voters, and those kind of dog whistles do not go unnoticed by the Democratic base.
The GOP exists precisely for people who view the concerns of the non-white male majority as divisive. As much as you want a party that treats the concerns of a minority as though they were universal, that is not the Democratic party. Other people exist in this country, and they deserve political representation. We are not going to sacrifice our rights because some white people feel uncomfortable hearing about, for example, black lives or women's rights. Diversity is a key value in the Democratic Party because the Democratic electorate is so diverse.
Voters decided the primary, and 3.8 million more of them voted for Hillary than Bernie. He lost by a wide, wide margin. You can recite every tired excuse for his political failure, but it accomplishes nothing productive. It does, however, harden divisions. You can keep talking about ending "demographic wars," but many are going to see that as an attempt to silence the majority of Democrats. You seem to forget that those "demographic warriors" are in fact the majority of the party, and we damn well vote.
Clinton had a robust plan to address jobs and inequality, far more extensive than Bernie ever did. That you never bothered to learn about her policy positions and rely instead on media hype and the self-serving statements of a candidate who lost doesn't give you the right to supplant the votes and the will of the millions of Democrats.
Your post does point to the problem of the lack of attention to issues and policy by the media and the lack of initiative by too many voters to inform themselves on policy positions. The fact is that democracy depends on an educated citizenry with some knowledge of civics. Without a responsible news media, it also requires self initiative. We don't have that, and it doesn't bode well for our future as a republic.
= new reply since forum marked as read
