Which ones ?
The owner of this blog had a piece wherein he accused Bernie Sanders of trying to overturn the will of the voters, with a subplot of disenfranchising the black/latino/women voters who have voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton.
Just as distressing, consider the big story of this Democratic primary: The party’s growth demographics — Latinos, African-Americans and women — have chosen a woman for the first time. Sanders and his people are arguing that should be thrown by the wayside because white voters prefer a white male candidate. If you ever wondered what “white privilege” was, well, you now have Exhibit A. The arrogance is astonishing, as is the lack of awareness of what he is suggesting.
Now, my wife and I just voted for Secy Clinton (CA, vote by mail), and I have contributed to Secy. Clinton. So I am no fan of Bernie Sanders. But I think the implied accusation of racism in the lines above is a bit much. I doubt Bernie Sanders (or any of his ardent supporters, for that matter) are thinking it through to that extent.
What is disturbing enough, and self evidently true, is that Sen. Sanders (and some of his ardent supporters) would seek to overturn the expressed will of the voters via the superdelegates. That is undemocratic… and yes, autocratic (as in autocratic socialist). And that is a bad enough sin. Sen. Sanders should be excoriated for that.
But he would have likely been making the same argument, even if Secy Clinton’s support was coming from “working class whites”, and his coalition was women/black/latinos. There is no actual evidence of racism, and given Sen. Sanders history, I suspect that is not a factor.