not to mention just a plain moron.

Do you believe that "center civil rights in their conversations" and "puts civil rights on the back burner" are the only alternatives?

For my part, I don't believe that. The candidates whom I consider progressive support civil rights AND support economic measures like single payer AND oppose imperialist wars AND support taking action on the global climate crisis (list not exhaustive).

They could not fairly be said to center any one of these issues in their conversations, but neither could they be said to put any of them on the back burner.

Do you believe there have been acts of environmental racism inflicted on racial minority groups?

I've seen and smelled the evidence. A sewage treatment plant was originally proposed for a site on the well-to-do and principally white Upper West Side of Manhattan. Because of that community's political clout, however, the plant was instead built a few miles to the north, in Harlem. It's nice that, after the construction of the plant, its vast roof was made into the popular Riverbank State Park -- but, depending on the weather and the wind, you can still smell the evidence of environmental racism.

Going forward: Unless the world makes very surprising progress on climate change, there will, by the end of this century, be several million climate refugees, the vast majority of them POC. The Ganges Delta is particularly vulnerable.

Who do they think they are fooling? Preaching to the choir won't get them recruits, and they sure aren't going to find takers among the Party's base.

are fundamental to real progressives. Without that, there is nothing.

emphasized enough.

or something.

and pigs flew.

Selma to Montgomery, 1965, and was one of the few white women. Civil rights have always been a priority with me. Well, since 1964; I was 10. Of course, I'm old, ugly and dumb, so I don't count............... according to Republicans. I've lived in the Deep South, and seen the economic savagery. And the physical savagery. I may be old, but I don't forget. A bunch of us kids in the neighborhood had a "parade" when JFK was assassinated. Three of the kids in the neighborhood were from black families (who were way more fun that a lot of the white ones) near the being-built Kennedy Space Center. I grew up in the "space race".

My dad said to us as kids "you can't see what color anyone is in a moon suit".

I hope that you won't chastise me for saying this. It was the first subject brought up in a forum (physical, not virtual) when I was in college. The professor actually said I couldn't see color, but heard the voices. I am not blind; mostly....... well, sorta, 20/450 left eye, 20/400 right. But color? Who gives a shit if the words are intelligent or fun or lively or whatever!

Focusing on civil rights means getting the sTrumpet OUT as fast as possible.

Oh, and mom also marched with Medgar in 1963. Only once, dad said Mississippi was too dangerous.

nt

First, we all agree the worst democrat is better than any republican because the party with the most seats, decides everything.

EVERYTHING

So an anti choice democrat, a racist democrat, a misogynist democrat, is better than any republican for that reason...

UNLESS

Somebody, cant mention names, comes up with a whole bunch of them. And forces us into a new dynamic where the D party is no better than the R party.

I just wish they would be honest about their real agenda.

If you have 217 reasonable democrats and one real bad racist asshole, but that one real bad racist asshole makes the D party the party in power, then you vote for said racist to get the power. BUT, if a movement occurs where many D's are like that and it changes the party, then fuck this, hello Costa Rica.

Because that's literally tens of millions of people.

This discussion is centered on what I see as a misguided desire to push aside long faithful capitol D democrats to chase folks who are only tangentially connected to our party.

If you can't fathom why Black Lives Matter is more important to our party than "white men are angry"

Well... I don't know what to say

That's my default setting UNTIL they prove otherwise.

FACT - Many of those folks (45/140 supporters and voters) make judgments (sometimes life threatening) about people that look like me based upon the color of my skin.

FACT - There are literally tens of millions of us. 37 Million per the US Census 2010 and when including those of us who appear black/are perceived as black but may have a parent of another race - that increases to 42 Million.

FACT - Anyone can get out of the 'deplorable bucket' with me AFTER they prove the content of their character.

In the meantime - their behavior is life threatening and I'm not obligated to put a target on my chest or back to make it easier for them to 'get me'.

I can't control how they perceive me than treat me - but I can control my reaction to their presence in America. If it hurts their feelings - so be it. They need to man up/woman up and suck it up.

If you actually voted for 45/140 (I love that moniker!) you have automatically put yourself on the wrong side of decency, and will need to prove quite vigorously that you repent, by working actively to mitigate the devastating effects your vote has on decent people, before being allowed to even become an acquaintance.

They certainly have little power or influence, outside of maybe like that "Jackpine Radicals" forum or certain segments of Twitter? I dunno.

I think it's intellectually dishonest to try to blame the genuinely weak current state of the Democratic Party (particularly outside of affluent metropolitan areas in a handful of mostly "blue" states) on Internet trolls. How are we doing in Congress and state legislatures again? Who is in the Oval Office and who has the majority on the Supreme Court? That's where all conversations have to start.

Or any of the people posting in this thread. No one here is constantly shifting the goal posts. lNobody here posted right wing sources or rec'd them up in order to smear Democrats in 2016 and now pretend it never happened. Nobody here wants to abandon the base of the party by "moving past identity politics."

seems unable to see that inequality due to race and gender is the very weapon with which the rich maintain economic inequality. You will not get rid of economic inequality until you have solved the problem of racial and gender injustice. The rich are kept in power by white men and women, who gladly vote against their own economic interests because they prioritize keeping African Americans and women in subjugation - it makes white men and women feel better about themselves if they can know that at least they are better than 'them'. Men feel better if they can make sure women cannot be on equal footing as them, hence the abortion issue, because reproductive freedom is the linchpin of women's liberation, and white people feel better if African Americans are constantly being brought back to square one economically through police shootings, discriminatory hiring practices, putting obstacles in the way of all African American children in the form of worse schools, less representation in the media, and so on. The rich get a twofer - not only are white men and women easier to control when they fan racism, but they also get an added economic bonus - it's easier to keep wages down if they have a slave wage class who cannot crawl out of poverty thanks to the lack of civil rights.

That means that the only way forward is by working on civil rights issues. Only when white men and women realize that women and minorities deserve the same as them (us) will we be able to work towards economic justice.