BERNIE VERSUS BLACK POWER
COMPILATION AND COMMENTARY
BY LUCY WARNER
NOVEMBER 11, 2018


TO PREPARE YOUR MIND FOR THE FOLLOWING NYMAG ARTICLE, SEE THIS ITEM ABOUT A RACE-BASED AND EXTREMELY FUNNY SATIRE OF THE 1970S CALLED “PUTNEY SWOPE.” IT DOES HAVE MEANINGFUL THINGS TO SAY, BUT THE FILM IS EXPLOSIVELY FUNNY. THE POLITICS OF DEALING WITH THE BLM CROWD IS, IT SEEMS TO ME, MUCH THE SAME AS WHAT IS SHOWN IN THAT GREAT OLD MOVIE. IT SHOWS THAT WE EACH HAVE TO LEARN A LITTLE ABOUT THE OTHER’S LANGUAGE AND CULTURE; THAT WE THEN NEED TO TALK RATHER THAN FIGHT; AND THAT EVERYBODY IS FLAWED AND MORE THAN A LITTLE BIT RIDICULOUS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPgId7RgQ2E
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Putney_Swope.

SOMEHOW, READING THIS ARTICLE AND NOTICING THE CAREFUL OR SIMPLY POLITE WAY THAT SANDERS SPEAKS – WHICH THE BLM GROUP SEEMS TO CONSIDER RACIST – REMINDS ME OF THE INFAMOUS CLINTON MISTAKE: “A BASKET OF DEPLORABLES.” SHE FORGOT THAT NOBODY, EVEN POOR AND IGNORANT WHITES, DESERVES TO BE SPOKEN OF IN THAT WAY, AND THAT IF SHE WANTS TO WIN ELECTIONS, SHE WON’T DO IT.

PERSONALLY, I DO SEE AN INABILITY TO “FEEL COMFORTABLE” IN VOTING FOR A BLACK CANDIDATE AS BEING RACIST, BUT NOT AS VILE AS THE COMMENT “DON’T MONKEY THIS UP.” BUT WE ALL NEED TO COME TOGETHER MORE FOR CAUSES AND FOR GOOD COMPANIONSHIP WITHOUT THE NAME-CALLING. BLACK AND WHITE PEOPLE CAN ACTUALLY FIND THAT THEY LIKE EACH OTHER. LET’S ALL, BLACKS AND WHITES, LAY DOWN OUR BURDEN OF RACIST VIEWS AND ATTITUDES AND MEET ACROSS THE LINE IN GOOD WILL. AMERICA NEEDS US ALL.

THOSE WHO ARE UNWILLING TO DO THAT ARE UNABLE TO BE A FRIEND, AND IF THEY ARE OF THE HOSTILE SORT, THEY MAY WELL BE AN ENEMY. AT THAT POINT IS WHERE THE BARRIER LIES. IT IS INVISIBLE, BUT REAL. THERE IS A CULTURAL GAP COMPOSED OF MANY LARGER AND SMALLER DIFFERENCES, AND SANDERS ACKNOWLEDGES IT WITHOUT BLAMING WHITES EXCLUSIVELY AND HARSHLY, NOR BLACKS EITHER. HE WANTS TO SET UP A DIALOGUE. JEWS ARE RARELY AS RACIST AS WHITES OR BLACKS, AND HIS WAY OF APPROACHING PEOPLE AS INDIVIDUALS IS WHAT I PERSONALLY TRY TO DO, AND BELIEVE OTHERS SHOULD AS WELL.

WHEN I FIRST MEET A BLACK PERSON, OR A MEMBER OF ANY OTHER GROUP, I NOTICE CLOSELY THE FACIAL EXPRESSION, TONE OF VOICE AND DEGREE OF RELAXATION. THEN I TALK A LITTLE BIT AND IF THEY RESPOND IN A FRIENDLY WAY, I AM DELIGHTED. IF THEY DON’T, I LEAVE THEM ALONE. THAT’S BECAUSE I REALLY AM NOT A DIPLOMAT, OR A CON ARTIST. I’M JUST HONEST AND OPEN. I AM ALSO NOT ALWAYS NECESSARILY POURING OIL ON THE WATERS. IF ANYONE OF ANY COLOR APPROACHES ME AGGRESSIVELY, I WILL DO THE SAME TO THEM AND QUICKLY, NOT AS A PLOY, BUT IN REACTION. THAT ALWAYS STOPS THE ATTACK. TO THE DEGREE THAT I AM CHRISTIAN, THAT TEACHING DOESN’T MAKE ME PASSIVE OR A PACIFIST. IF SOMEBODY IS HOSTILE TO ME BEFORE I HAVE DONE ANYTHING TO THEM, I HAVE TO WONDER WHY, AND WHETHER OR NOT I SHOULD TRUST THEM ON THE PERSONAL LEVEL.

IT ISN’T THAT I “DON’T SEE COLOR,” BUT THAT I DON’T LET THAT SINGLE FACTOR MAKE MY DECISION ABOUT THE PERSON. IF IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THERE IS NO WAY TO MEET IN THE MIDDLE AND DISCUSS THINGS WITHOUT USING THE BLAME GAME, I RARELY TRY TO CONVINCE THEM TO LOVE ME. I MOVE ON AND DEAL WITH SOME OTHER INDIVIDUAL WHO IS NOT CLOSED OR HOSTILE. PEOPLE ARE INDIVIDUALS. I DEAL WITH THEM AS SUCH, WHICH I THINK IS THE ONLY FAIR WAY. IF WHEN THEY LOOK AT ME, THEY SEE SCARLET O’HARA, IT’S A LOST CAUSE. OF COURSE I SEE TO IT THAT I DON’T ACT LIKE SCARLET O’HARA, TOO.

SO, WHO IS CLEANING THE TRUTH UP? WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN SO MUCH BETTER WAS FOR HILLARY TO FRAME HER WORDS AS DELIBERATELY AS SANDERS TENDS TO DO. HE ISN’T AN ENEMY TO ANY GROUP, UNLESS ITS’ “THE BILLIONAIRE CLASS;” SO I DON’T THINK HE SHOULD BE BLAMED FOR NOT TALKING ALONG RACE-BASED LINES. HE DOESN’T DEAL IN RACIAL POLITICS, BUT IN ECONOMICS AND HUMAN FULFILLMENT, AND I RESPECT THAT STRONGLY. HE GREW UP POOR, SO HE KNOWS THAT POVERTY CROSSES ALL RACIAL AND CULTURAL LINES. I BELIEVE THAT FOR A KID TO GROW UP IN A CITY SURROUNDED BY NEGATIVE THINGS AND RACIALIZED THINKING, INSUFFICIENT AND INNUTRITIOUS FOOD AND CLOTHING, AND THEN NOT BECOME A GANG-BANGER OR SOMETHING CLOSE TO THAT, IS PROBABLY A MIRACLE. IT’S NOT IMPOSSIBLE, THOUGH.

IT MEANS THAT THE PARENTS WILL HAVE OPENLY LOVED THE KIDS AND DID NOT BRUTALIZE THEM, TALKED TO THEM ABOUT PROBLEMS THEY WERE HAVING, TAUGHT THEM WHAT A GOOD ADULT SHOULD BE LIKE, TOOK THEM TO CHURCH AND DISCUSSED HUMAN ISSUES IN THE LIGHT OF THAT -- OR SOME OTHER MENTALLY HEALTHY SOCIALIZATION GROUP -- (IN THE WHITE POPULATION IT IS POSSIBLY BOY AND GIRL SCOUTS OR 4-H)(IN BLACK AREAS I HAVE HEARD OF “JACK AND JILL.”) IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE PARENTS NEED TO STAY ON THEM ABOUT DOING THEIR SCHOOL WORK EVEN IF IT IS “BORING;” AND TO GUIDE THEM AWAY STRONGLY FROM OTHER KIDS WHO ARE BULLIES, STEALING OR CHEATING, CUTTING SCHOOL CLASSES, USING DRUGS OF ANY KIND INCLUDING NICOTINE, OR WHO ARE REBELLIOUS IN GENERAL. IF A KID CAN BE GUIDED IN THE RIGHT WAYS UP UNTIL THEY ARE OUT OF THEIR TEEN YEARS, THEY WILL PROBABLY BE OKAY. HAVING TWO ADULTS WHO ARE IN THE HOME IS ALSO IMPORTANT. SOMEBODY NEEDS TO BE AT HOME FOR THE CHILD.

NONETHELESS, IF WE CAN CHANGE THE NATURE OF CITY NEIGHBORHOODS SO THAT THEY ARE NOT RACIALLY RESTRICTED AND FULL OF DESPAIR, BY GIVING EVERYBODY ENOUGH MONEY ASIDE FROM THEIR WORK, IF THEY HAVE ANY, TO EAT AND DRESS REASONABLY WELL, I SEE FEWER EMOTIONALLY AND INTELLECTUALLY STUNTED PEOPLE EMERGING FROM THERE. IF I COULD SEE MORE LAWYERS, DOCTORS, TEACHERS, WRITERS, AND ARTISTS WITH GOOD MENTAL HEALTH AND NO DRUG ADDICTION AS THE PRODUCT OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, I WOULD BE SO HAPPY. I CAN’T SPEAK FOR HIM, BUT THIS PHILOSOPHICAL GOTCHA TRICK THAT SOME BLACK PEOPLE USE WHEN THEY CLAIM THAT BLACK PEOPLE “CAN’T BE RACIST” IS A MAJOR CAUSE OF INTERRACIAL PROBLEMS. PARDON ME, BUT THAT IS A LOAD OF SMELLY WASTE MATERIAL. GET HONEST, AND WE’LL ALL DO BETTER TOGETHER.

THAT CARE IN PHRASING OF HIS, SAYING “UNCOMFORTABLE” RATHER GOING ON A BLAME GAME ABOUT RACISM, THAT HAS TURNED OFF SOME BLACK PEOPLE WHO, I SUSPECT, WANT THEMSELVES AND THEIR GROUP -- SPECIFICALLY -- TO BE FAVORED, AND NEVER BLAMED. THEY SEEM NOT TO CARE ABOUT HISPANICS, JEWS, NATIVE AMERICANS, GAY/STRAIGHT, RICH/POOR, CHINESE, ETC., AND ALSO WHITES. NOT ONLY DOES THAT ANNOY ME, BECAUSE IT IS NO MORE FAIR-MINDED THAN THE FAR-RIGHT BIGOTRY IS; BUT, IT ISN’T SMART POLITICALLY FROM THE BLACK POSITION, EITHER. THE DEMS HAVE BEEN PLAYING IDENTITY POLITICS FOR MANY YEARS, SO A CORE GROUP OF BLACK PEOPLE WILL ONLY VOTE FOR CERTAIN TRUSTED DEMOCRATS SUCH AS THE CLINTONS. WHEN SOMEONE AS GOOD AS SANDERS COMES ALONG, IT IS A SHAME TO HAVE HIM BE TREATED THAT WAY.

BERNIE IS MORE INTERESTED IN MONETARY DISTRIBUTION POLITICS FOR THE WHOLE 90% THAN IDENTITY ISSUES, I CAN SEE THAT. HAVING A DEPENDABLE INCOME FROM WHICH WE CAN ALL PAY FOR BASIC NEEDS PLUS HIGHER EDUCATION SHOULD, I THINK, PRODUCE YOUNG PEOPLE WHO WILL SETTLE DOWN AND STUDY WHEN THEY ARE IN SCHOOL, TRY TO PURSUE A PROFESSION, AND ACCEPT AT LEAST THE BEST OF THE CULTURAL OFFERINGS OF THE WHITE WORLD. NO, I DON’T MEAN “ACT WHITE.” I MEAN ACTUALLY ADOPT INTELLIGENT AND BEAUTIFUL THINGS, READ GOOD BOOKS, TRY SOME ART OR POETRY OF THEIR OWN, EVEN IF THOSE THINGS DID COME FROM THE WHITE SEGMENTS OF SOCIETY, AND MAINTAIN A SUFFICIENT ABILITY TO READ EVEN AFTER SCHOOL THAT THEY CAN MASTER NEW MATERIAL. WITHOUT THAT, NOBODY WILL BE ABLE TO DO COLLEGE WORK, SO FREE COLLEGE WON’T BE OF MUCH USE. IF BEING BLACK IS NOT A THING TO BE DEPLORED, NEITHER IS BEING WHITE. WE ALL NEED AN ECONOMIC BOOST, AND WILL HAVE TO WORK TO GET AHEAD, BUT IT SHOULD BE POSSIBLE AND WITHOUT USING DISHONEST MEANS.

WHAT SANDERS DOES IS FOCUS ON FINANCIAL ISSUES PRIMARILY WITHOUT ADDRESSING IDENTITY POLITICS. YES, IDENTITY POLITICS MEANS BOTH THE WHITE SUPREMACIST GROUPS AND THE BLACK SUPREMACY GROUPS, WHILE WE MAKE ROOM FOR THE GENUINE NEEDS OF SOME THAT CANNOT GO BEYOND THE AVERAGE. IN THE GAME OF GOLF IT’S CALLED A HANDICAP. TO THE DEGREE THAT RACE IS USED TO DISCOUNT BLACK STUDENTS, THEN IT SHOULD BE ILLEGAL, BUT IF IT IS USED IN THE OTHER WAY TO DISCOUNT A WHITE STUDENT, THAT ALSO SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED. COLLEGES SHOULD OPEN THE DOORS AND LET EVERYBODY IN, BASED ON PERSONAL ABILITY AND A STRONG DESIRE TO GET AN EDUCATION. IF THEY DON’T CARE, THEY WON’T STUDY, AND IF THEY DON’T DO AT LEAST A LITTLE STUDYING THEY WON’T MAKE IT THROUGH COLLEGE. RIGHT NOW, THERE IS A GROUP OF OUR MAINLY YOUNG BLACK PEOPLE WHO WANT TOP BILLING WHETHER THEY DESERVE IT OR NOT -- THE BLM WOMEN WHO TOOK BERNIE’S MIC FROM HIM AND STARTED HARANGUING HIM AND THE CROWD, FOR INSTANCE. THEY DIDN’T CONVINCE ME THAT THEY ARE WORTHY INDIVIDUALS, OR THAT I SHOULD SPEAK KINDLY OF THEM. I READ THE “ABOUT PAGE” OF THE BLM WEBSITE WHEN THEY FIRST EMERGED ON THE SCENE AND FOUND IT FAIR AND ENLIGHTENED. SOME OF THE THINGS THEY HAVE DONE SINCE, NOT SO MUCH!

I BELIEVE ABSOLUTELY IN EQUALITY, BUT NOT IN VERY LOWBROW POINTLESS RUDENESS, AND WHAT THEY DID TO BERNIE WAS IGNORANT AND UNKIND. NO, I’M NOT SAYING THAT BEING BLACK MEANS YOU’RE IGNORANT, AND CERTAINLY NOT THAT BLM HASN’T DONE A GREAT DEAL OF GOOD, BUT THAT BEING SO POINTLESSLY RUDE TO A TOTALLY WELL-MEANING AND GOOD WHITE POLITICIAN WHO WANTS THE WHOLE 90% ECONOMICALLY TO DO WELL, JUST SHOWS THE CHARACTER OF THOSE SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS, OR PERHAPS IT WAS JUST A CASE OF IMMATURITY.

AT SOME POINT ALL OF THAT BLACK SUPREMACY ENERGY WILL DO NOBODY ANY GOOD, ESPECIALLY BLACKS, BECAUSE WHAT IS ESSENTIALLY A RACE WAR WILL HELP NONE OF US. AND FOR NOW, ALL THAT “ATTITUDE” IS CAUSING DECENT WHITE PEOPLE TO HAVE UNNECESSARY PROBLEMS IN KEEPING THE FASCIST FORCES FROM CONSOLIDATING POWER. LIKE IT OR NOT, BEING A MINORITY MEANS THAT JUST WITH THEIR POPULATION ALONE, THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO WIN ELECTIONS, AND THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO WIN IN A CULTURAL STREET WAR EITHER. THEY NEED WHITE PEOPLE AND WE NEED THEM.

WE NEED TO LOOK NOT SO MUCH AT SKIN AS AT BELIEFS, PERSONAL OPENNESS AND BASIC HONOR. IF ANGRY YOUNG BLACK PEOPLE DON’T WANT TO LIVE IN A NEO-NAZI STATE, THEY WILL LET THE GENUINELY WELL-QUALIFIED WHITE LEADERS HAVE SOME POWER. IF THEY DON’T LIKE THAT LEADER, THEN GO TO COLLEGE, GET A GOOD POSITION, AND THEN RUN AGAINST THEM AT THE NEXT ELECTION. THE FUTURE IN THIS COUNTRY WILL BE EITHER WITH TRUMP AND THE NEO-FAS, OR THE EMERGING NEW PROGRESSIVE FACE OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, ONE OF WHOM HAPPENS TO BE BERNIE SANDERS. SO, YOUNG BLACK KIDS, WHAT COUNTRY DO YOU WANT TO LIVE IN? ALL OF US NEED TO THINK HARD ABOUT THAT, AND WORK TO SOLIDIFY OUR DEMOCRATIC STRUCTURES AND LEADERS. THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS ARE LIKELY TO BE CRUCIAL. BLACKS CAN KEEP THAT DANCE OF ANGER GOING IF IT MAKES THEM FEEL GOOD AT THE MOMENT, BUT WHEN NAZIS CRACK DOWN ON ALL OF US DISSENTERS, THOSE WITH THE LESS THAN WHITE SKIN TONES WILL BE THE FIRST TO BE HURT.

TO SEE WHO ZAK CHENEY-RICE IS, GO TO: https://www.linkedin.com/in/zak-cheney-rice-43741a73. LOOK AT HIS PICTURE, TOO. I SEE A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF “ATTITUDE” THERE. I DON’T BELIEVE HIS GOAL IS TO DO GOOD, BUT TO BASH BERNIE. IS HE BEING PAID BY THE CORPORATE DEMOCRATS, BY ANY CHANCE? DOES HE HAVE ANY INTEREST IN BLACKS AND WHITES GETTING ALONG, OR JUST THIS CONSTANT STOKING OF ANGER?

BERNIE WANTS BLACKS AND WHITES TO GET ALONG, AND I NOTICE, DOES NOT CRACK DOWN HARD ON THE TRUMPITES, BUT I THINK I KNOW WHY. HE KNOWS THAT POOR WHITES HAVE PROBLEMS GROWING UP UNDER THEIR LIFE CONDITIONS ALSO. THE WAY I LOOK AT WHAT HE SAID, WHICH WAS TO EXPLAIN WHERE POOR WHITES COME FROM, IS SIMPLY AN URGE ON HIS PART TO BE FAIR TO THE EMOTIONAL MORASS IN WHICH THEY GREW UP ALSO. I’M WILLING TO BE FAIR TO THE PROBLEMS OF BLACK PEOPLE, BUT I WANT THEM TO MOVE OVER CLOSER TO THE CENTER AS WELL.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/11/bernie-sanders-and-the-lies-we-tell-white-voters.html
POLITICS 9:00 A.M.
Bernie Sanders and the Lies We Tell White Voters
By Zak Cheney-Rice

PHOTOGRAPH -- Bernie Sanders at a rally for Florida gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum last month. Photo: Jeff Mitchell/Getty Images

In the 2016 Democratic primary, Hillary Clinton mopped the floor with Bernie Sanders among black voters. That a commanding 50-point margin separated the two with this crucial cohort prompted soul-searching for the Vermont senator, whose 2020 plans rest on building a more multiracial coalition. Sanders has responded with earnest outreach. He has communicated frequently with progressive black mayors across the South and endorsed popular black statewide candidates, like Andrew Gillum and Stacey Abrams. The Associated Press reports the senator “huddles more routinely with black lawmakers to discuss shared priorities.” And Sanders continues to downplay his 2016 black support gap, pointing out that he won voters under 30 across racial lines.

So it was a setback on Thursday when the Daily Beast published an article quoting Sanders on the role of racism in Gillum’s apparent defeat. “I think you know there are a lot of white folks out there who are not necessarily racist who felt uncomfortable for the first time in their lives about whether or not they wanted to vote for an African-American,” the senator said of the Florida governor’s race. A small outcry ensued, accusing Sanders of evading the reality that opposing a black candidate out of discomfort with black leadership is, by definition, racist. Sanders tried to clarify his comments later that day. “There’s no question that in Georgia and in Florida, racism has reared its ugly head,” he told NPR. “And you have candidates who ran against Gillum and ran against Stacey Abrams who were racist and were doing everything they could to try to play whites against blacks.”

In neither statement did Sanders indict voters for backing racist candidates. To the Daily Beast, he recast their racism as mere discomfort, and to NPR, blamed a candidate-led con job and not the electorate itself. That he did this may have been a rhetorical lapse, or strategic to his political aspirations — calling racist white people “racist” is probably a good way to ensure they do not vote for you. But either way it is not the truth, and echoes a broader tendency in American politics to entice such voters by lying to them about how racist they actually are.

Sanders is far from alone in not indicting racist voters, but he is singular among white progressives being floated as 2020 hopefuls. He is the most popular political figure in America, according to multiple polls. He has almost single-handedly driven the Democratic Party’s leftward shift on policy, giving him significant sway over whatever platform future candidates put forth. Such influence has likely engendered caution. Sanders saw what happened to Hillary Clinton when she told the truth about racist voters. In September 2016, the then-Democratic presidential nominee made a speech decrying “half of [Donald] Trump’s supporters” as “deplorables” — “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic.” She was not being derogatory. Clinton’s claims were borne out by several polls attesting to the bigotry of many Trump supporters. But looking back today, even she sees her honesty as a gaffe. “I’m sorry I gave [Trump] a political gift of any kind, but I don’t think that was determinative,” Clinton said last year. The term “deplorable” has since assumed totemic power among the president’s base, adorning T-shirts worn proudly by those Clinton described as such.

The costs of such language now loom large over Democrats’ 2020 ambitions. Soon after the 2016 election, Sanders spoke critically about the limits of appealing to voters on the basis of identity alone — a thinly veiled critique of Clinton’s rhetoric. “It’s not good enough for someone to say, ‘I’m a woman! Vote for me!’ ” he said. “What we need is a woman who has the guts to stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industry.” Yet this is not true on the other side. Appeals to identity seem not to have harmed Trump en route to victory, or Ron DeSantis on Tuesday. On the contrary, Trump’s rhetoric was practically a who’s who of white grievance causes. DeSantis, Gillum’s Republican opponent in the Florida governor’s race, used Trump’s formula to sweep the board with white voters, garnering 51 percent of the white female vote and 79 percent of the white male vote, according to CNN exit polls. This was despite the Republican lacking so much as a concrete political platform as late as September. The essence of his appeal was less policy than it was race.

Florida Republican gubernatorial candidate Ron DeSantis, with President Donald Trump, at a campaign rally in Pensacola, Florida, on November 3. Photo: Mark Wallheiser/Getty Images

“[DeSantis] has only continued in the course of his campaign to draw all the attention he can to the color of my skin,” Gillum said of his opponent in October. Shortly after winning the nomination, DeSantis implored voters not to “monkey this up” by electing his black challenger. He declined to return campaign donations from a flagrant racist, associated with bigots at right-wing conferences, and lied to exaggerate crime under Gillum’s mayoralty in Tallahassee. His run was driven by white voters who felt the mere existence of a black governor would inflame tensions. “[The Obama election] trickled down to everything,” Courtney Cooper, a 36-year-old white Trump voter, told the Washington Post. “Now everyone is so worried about the other race.”

The implication was clear: DeSantis’ racism was functionally invisible, while Gillum’s mere allusions to that racism heralded impending racial conflict. This is a persistent balancing act for black politicians especially. Obama suffered the consequences of speaking too bluntly about race in 2012, when he said, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon [Martin],” after the black teen was killed in Sanford, Florida. The comment proved politically explosive, transforming what had been a source of bipartisan outrage into a right-wing crusade to smear the dead child. In this light, Gillum was careful to call DeSantis racist only indirectly. “I’m not calling Mr. DeSantis a racist,” he said on October 24, after cataloging his opponent’s record on the subject. “I’m simply saying the racists believe he’s a racist.”

Sanders likely used a similar calculus, albeit weighted by less political risk due to his whiteness. Both men understand that racist white people are a significant voting bloc, and winning governorships and presidencies must at the very least account for them. But it is a tradeoff. Unwillingness to alienate racist voters inevitably leads to coddling racist voters. Whether everyone who voted for DeSantis fits this descriptor is up for debate. Whether the parameters Sanders outlined in his initial statement does — voting against a black candidate because of some race-based “discomfort” with said candidate — is not. Sanders is describing racism without naming it, even as he is willing to indict the candidates for reaping its rewards. That it’s not politically expedient to have this conversation honestly — especially if one sees the alternative as gift-wrapping American democracy for Trumpian grifters, kleptocrats, and white supremacists — is one of the more pathological features of today’s politics. But how sturdy, really, is a democracy kept afloat by lies? We are rapidly learning the answer together.