its way. People who used this term willy nilly in this election cycle have earned my scorn, and I'll never trust them.

package...and part of what you are selling as a candidate and message. But is she unintentionally implying with her logic that Clinton lost because of not enough identity politics? Besides, standing up for people's civil rights and being in favor of a big diverse and inspiring tent is not running on identity politics in the same way that some have used the term. When Sanders says we can't just run on them, he's referring specifically to a candidate emphasizing that quality while subsuming any platform on actual policies that will help people of these identities and the American people at large. We can disagree whether or not that happened in Clinton's campaign, but at the very least we need to know what we're talking about when we say "identity politics" and it sounds like we have different definitions.

But yes, saying "When you fight for things that people can believe in you win" is a good argument. It misses the realities of corporate media influence and all the candidates who lose when fighting for those things, so I assume she's oddly enough, talking about the Democratic Party at large, which has often been tepid on social and economic issues(as in coming late to the movements as the wind blows), in a kind of nudging way.

Or maybe somebody else can unravel this for me.

as merely 'identity politics'.

No, Not Samantha Bee.

More divide and conquer BS by the mainstream media. They are mischaracterizing a criticism levied by Sanders and others into something entirely different, and not just gleefully mauling that message, but joyfully bludgeoning the DNC for caring about diversity and social justice.

It's really baffling to me watching so many articles and posts pitting them against each other.

As BS has done more than once.

is what we used to call civility.

...of the term "identity politics" until maybe two months ago.

She's great, and amazing that it takes a Canadian to "tell it like it is"!

apparently beating up on civil rights is the cool millennial thing to do

with Richard Nixon and his "Southern Strategy" designed to appeal to working class whites at the expense of working class blacks and other minorities.

Last edited Tue Dec 13, 2016, 06:44 PM - Edit history (1)

...of ordinary people.

movements.

it has nothing to do with 'traits of candidates'

Whoever told you that was selling you something. If you didn't pull that out of somewhere yourself.

If you say something that is racist or sexist, then you are praised for being truthful and telling it like it is, rather than being condemned for being a racist or sexist.

Identity politics is when you vote for (or against someone) because of who they are -- regardless of their qualifications for office. Usually, it refers to when people vote for someone who looks like them or shares some kind of identity with them.

So, when an Irish person votes for the unqualified Irish candidate solely because he's Irish, that's identity politics. The same goes for Christians, blacks, LGBT, women, you name it. When you ignore qualifications and vote for identity, that's identity politics.

And how abandoning us will be STUPID.


"Invite white working class to the party, but don't let them take over the DJ table."

Sounds like common sense to me.

despite the rantings of some that she defeated.

Oklahoma is in the midst of a decision to put up anti-abortion warning signs in public areas, like bathrooms. Tell me how we are supposed to use economics to prevent that kind of shit? Just things like jobs doesn't prevent social apartheid on the basis of gender, race, orientation, and religion.

Claiming attention to the concerns of anyone but white men is divisive. KellyAnne picked that up again after a well-known politician decried identity politics. She was actually insisting Clinton's campaign was divisive because of identity politics, while she refused to admit that Trump's endless racist comments were.

And being a SJW is a GOOD thing.