Bernie Sanders Landslide Victory? Non-White Democrats and White Liberals Could Unite to Make This Happen


Hillary Clinton wasn't at Netroots.


The former Secretary of State waited almost three weeks to address Ferguson.


In 2008, the Clinton campaign ran a 3:00 a.m. ad against Obama that contained a "racist sub-message" according to Harvard's Orlando Patterson.

If Donald Trump had used a similar version of Clinton's televised 3:00 a.m. ad against Obama, how would you view this decision?

In 2008, South Carolina Congressman James Clyburn stated that "black people are incensed over all of this," referring to comments President Clinton made about Barack Obama.

If Black Lives Matter was as powerful of a movement in 2008 as it is today, what would have happened to Clinton's campaign?

The only thing preventing Bernie Sanders from a landslide victory in the 2016 Democratic Primaries is the notion that non-white Democrats will automatically side with Hillary Clinton.

If this seems like hyperbole or an unrealistic assessment of today's political landscape, then let's look at the big picture.

What happens when African-American, Latino and other non-white Democrats evaluate Bernie Sanders alongside Hillary Clinton, and decide that the Vermont Senator is a far better choice for president?

Poll numbers aren't set in stone and if minority voting groups follow the lead of women across America, Bernie Sanders will shock the political world.

In a Daily Beast article titled Why Are Women Ditching Hillary? Patricia Murphy highlights a recent phenomenon that political wonks and the Clinton campaign failed to predict:

The slide among Democratic women in New Hampshire and Iowa mirrors a series of national polls that show Clinton's performance among women on a steady downward trend.

As Sanders's crowds at campaign rallies grew into the thousands and Clinton was dogged by media questions about her email server over the summer, Clinton's support among Democratic women nationally dropped to 51 percent by the end of August, with Sanders's up to 27 percent.

"Knowing that women will comprise a majority of the electorate and knowing that she will under-perform among men compared to President Obama and President Clinton, she needs to get closer to 58 percent to 60 percent among women and right now she is nowhere near that."

From December of 2014 to September of 2015, Clinton's support among women has plummeted from 75% to 51%. Today's skeptics never imagined Bernie Sanders surging from 2% all the way up to 27% support among Democratic women. In addition, when support from a core demographic plummets from 75% to now 51% (remember also that 25% of voters still "have not heard enough" of Sanders), it's reasonable to expect other core demographics to follow the same polling trajectory.

Furthermore, if the pattern of women voters in Iowa and New Hampshire "mirrors a series of national polls" according to The Daily Beast, then Clinton's lead over Sanders among other demographics isn't safe.

There's another question that should be asked, especially since many women across the nation don't seem to be ready for Hillary, and Bernie Sanders has already surpassed Clinton in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Naysayers, skeptics, and pundits (note the redundancy) believe that white liberals have bolstered Bernie's ascent in Iowa and New Hampshire, but more diverse states like South Carolina will side with Clinton.

There's a glaring flaw in this argument.

When you hear that Sanders is ahead in Iowa and New Hampshire because of white liberals, and therefore Clinton has the advantage in more diverse states, have you ever heard an explanation of why Clinton is better than Sanders with minority voters?

When the skeptics cite poll numbers indicating Hillary Clinton's lead among minority voters, they conveniently fail to mention the reasons for this lead, or the fact that this advantage could be temporary; women are leaving the Clinton campaign and 25% of voters still have not heard enough of Bernie Sanders.

Therefore, why would African-Americans, Latinos and other non-white Democrats choose Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders?

There's a reason Professor Cornell West, Black Women for Bernie, Latinos for Bernie, Nicholas Gonzalez, Alejandro Escovedo, Killer Mike, Blacks for Bernie, African-Americans for Bernie Sanders, Lil B, 100 celebrities of all backgrounds, and Americans of all ethnicities support Bernie Sanders in 2016.

There's also a reason that writer and director Casar Vargas wrote a brilliant piece in The Huffington Post titled Why Latinos Should Vote For Bernie Sanders and Why He Needs Us, explaining why Latinos should choose Sanders in 2016:

I am here to tell the Latino community we need to endorse and vote for Bernie Sanders to become the next president of the United States. There are several reasons why and I'll start with the ones I admire the most:

He's morally consistent.

He loves people.

He doesn't pander.

He supports our DREAMers and undocumented workers.

He's been an advocate of health care reform.

To the Latino community:

The future of this nation lies with us. As a faithful servant, I say to you, get to know Bernie Sanders. Vote for him during the upcoming democratic presidential primary.

Let's show the nation that we are an active part of it.

With all due respect to Nate Silver and other polling experts, the Democratic Primaries and presidency will be decided by voters who want a "morally consistent" candidate that "doesn't pander." In 2016, the viewpoint of Cesar Vargas and others are infinitely more valuable than ever-changing poll numbers.

As for an enormous issue pertaining to the African-American vote, Bernie Sanders has a Racial Justice Platform praised by Black Lives Matter and Deray Mckesson. In contrast, Daunasia Yancey has called Clinton's racial justice record "abysmal." In a recent interview with NPR, the founder of Black Lives Matter in Boston explains why Clinton's appeal with minority voters doesn't correlate to current poll numbers:

SIEGEL: You and your fellow activists had tried to attend a candidate's forum that was on substance abuse, and instead, you got a meeting with Secretary Clinton. What were you hoping to hear from her in that?

YANCEY: We were hoping to hear a personal reflection of Secretary Clinton's participation in an advocacy of policies, specifically through the war on drugs, that we've seen has been a war on drug users and more specifically, black and brown drug users, and that's not what we heard. What we heard was clearly a policy-based response and, actually, an admonishment of the movement, which wasn't what we were looking for.

SIEGEL: Do you think that she's been unusually hard on issues that have affected African-Americans negatively?

YANCEY: I think that her record is abysmal (laughter). I think that her support of policies that have decimated black community - she talked a lot about her advocacy for children, for black children, for Latino children while simultaneously sending those children's parents to jail and, if we talk about the Juvenile Justice System, sending those children themselves to jail. And so it's kind of speaking out of both sides of her mouth in a way.

If Hillary Clinton has advocated polices that "have decimated black community" according to one civil rights activist, then how does the former Secretary of State have a better chance than Sanders of winning South Carolina and states across the South?

If Clinton's meeting with Black Lives Matter resulted in "an admonishment of the movement," then how does this sentiment reflect within today's poll numbers?

If you believe that 45 million African-Americans and 54 million Latinos in America, ethnic groups that vote over 90% and 70% respectively for the Democratic Party, will automatically vote for Hillary Clinton simply because of a poll number, then you might be surprised in 2016.

In my recent appearance on The Benjamin Dixon Show, I spoke about how pundits have placed 45 million African-American and 54 million Latino voters into one poll number; assuming that this poll number is gospel and will remain static forever. However, I've yet to hear a compelling argument as to why non-white Democrats and white liberals won't vote for the same candidate. If Democrats and progressives of all backgrounds vote based upon their core value system, rather than a theory that the FBI and The New York Times are part of a right-wing conspiracy, then Bernie Sanders will win a landslide victory in the 2016 Democratic Primaries and win the White House. After all, can you name any reasons why Hillary Clinton is better for minority voters than Bernie Sanders?