Home | About | Donate

Rust Belt Upset Puts Sanders Back in the Game


Rust Belt Upset Puts Sanders Back in the Game

Ruth Conniff

It was a big upset for Bernie Sanders. Polls showed him down by twenty points against Hillary Clinton in Michigan. His win, delivered by Michigan voters on Tuesday night was a blow to conventional wisdom.

“I want to thank the people of Michigan who repudiated the polls which had us down 20 to 25 points and repudiated the pundits who said Bernie Sanders wasn’t going anywhere,” Sanders declared in his victory speech.


"... [Sanders'] message on trade policy and the failure of austerity and trickle-down economics resonated with rust belt voters, including African American voters, who handed him a victory in hard-hit Flint."

First reference i'd seen to Sanders winning Flint, epicenter of the US auto industry, labor movement, and de-industrialization.

That's tremendous information going forward:
In African-American majority, working-class, poor and now poisoned Flint, the local community got extended up-close looks at both candidates. Flint chose Sanders.


If Sanders had not addressed "trade policy" early in his campaign, we would be seeing a repeat of the 2012 election where it was not discussed for one second by Obama or any GOP presidential candidate. With Bernie in, CNN could no longer ignore "trade policy",


bernie keeps talking real issues, people finally paying attention - I keep sending money - Bernie keeps at it. what are you doing to make it happen for us all? I wear my big BERNIE button everywhere I go. the more folks see the name the more they pay attention. If we want the changes, we need to work for them where we live. GO BERNIE GO! We got your back.


So, imagine this: Clinton manages to knock Sanders out of the game, perhaps the neocons knock out Trump. I could see 'em teaming-up together as an independent ticket...Trump/Sanders...Sanders/Trump...whatever. They'd wipe the floor with both parties.

Now, where the hell are my meds?


In my view the African American vote for Clinton in the South, in typically Republican states, may be explained for their anxiety to get a President who will protect them, and their assumption that Clinton would be the democratic candidate able to win in the finals. But the African Americans in the Democratic states do not buy that rationale, they can assert their interests beyond sheer survival, for they are better organized and more resolute, and may enjoy the luxury to vote for someone who stands not just for their color but for their class demands.


Bernie is on fire. No more Mr. nice guy, calling it like it is. Great debate for Bernie so far.


It looks like unlike other years, when the very late Pennsylvania primary is ignored, it may be that all eyes will be on Pennsylvania this time. So, for any Pennsylvania resident reading this who is an independent or Green (or Libertarian or Republican for that matter), you need to change your registration to Democrat by March 28 to vote for Bernie in the April 26 primary. You can always change you registration back afterward! It can be done on the web - go here:



Bernie certainly won this debate to judge from the audience's cheers. Hillary's face showed how unhappy she was with the way things are going. I think she has started to become resigned that people want change and they don't think she will give it to them. I bet she regrets all those Goldman Sachs speeches because her face reddened and she got that sour pursed lips look ...was that daggers shooting from her eyes...lol?

Bernie had a great night. Not perfect but better than Hillary. Even she doesn't believe what she is saying anymore!

Did she pop a pill? In the middle of a debate? I guess she must have needed it?


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


Okay I can buy that reasoning, debates are rough on coughs. Nevertheless... Lol?


Remember when she fell at home and hit her head a few years ago ? At that time, she was diagnosed with a mild concussion. Maybe the effects of that incident are long-lasting. She will eventually lose her cool in the coming debates, and her inner demon will be unleashed. A sick woman indeed ! Watch out Bernie - she gonna be spittin' some serious venom your way.


Generally a good article, as I've long come to expect from Ruth Conniff. One irritating nit however, Bernie was never really "out of the game." This media trope really is as disgraceful as it is ignorant group think from media who want to be known as credential worthy, as counting for something. Don't buy into it. This is not a real point from knowledge, this is a talking meme from so-called journalists who want to sound in-the-know by repeating things their sources have fed them without mentioning who impressed them so, rather than thinking for themselves and having the confidence to write independently. Just notice how so many of the media try to sound as if they are experts by repeating source conversations as their own thoughts rather then by research and evaluation on their own.

Primaries are not horse races. In a horse race all horses leave the gate at the same time to run against each other in real time. In primaries the "starting times" are staggered. Because each primary has a different set of voters with different interests and allegiances you cannot look at vote accumulations and delegate accumulations as they are early in the process and make conclusive statements about how the remainder of the primaries will vote. They are not the same and it is bad data because it is incomplete. Some may happen to represent the overall, county-wide view better but lumping them all together, adding them up and projecting the percentages ahead is incredibly inaccurate, dismally disregardful of upcoming demographics and lazy reporting, not to mention misleading and prejudicial to upcoming votes.

The only "back in the game" is that the media is grudgingly (and barely) acknowledging Bernie. "Back in the game" has nothing to do with full-primary-spectrum demographics, only with media perception.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


Lol...I thought he won and that bit about the Kochs is seriously strange anyway you look at it. What is that about even? Very bizarre. Lol...can't wait to find out more about that!

There seems to be a growing sense in the press that just maybe the rigged game might not be enough to go the distance and Bernie'll do it. Some big wins are ahead for Bernie with California and New York. Big wins for Bernie in those states will make the difference.


And where are Hillary's Goldman Sachs speech transcripts? Demands to release them seems to have subsided - has Hillary gotten a free-pass and people forgotten?
Who the Clinton team really serves is revealed in those million dollar speeches and the public wants to see them!
If there is nothing to hide then release the transcripts in full Hillary!


I fully agree but Hillary is getting a free ride in a lot of ways. Even if the press is willing to let the issue of those speeches slip from view, Bernie needs to bring them up. People may want to contact their local newspaper or news program asking about them. No issue will disappear if people keep talking about it. Her speeches are really damaging and she is very expertly trying to avoid them being used in the race. What could she say about them? Bernie needs to vary his wording a bit more. He needs to keep saying the same things but to say them with more variety in his wording. Imo

I am glad that Bernie spoke up about what seemed obvious to me which was Hillary was seemingly given more time to answer while Bernie was cut off more. It was like the reporters would try to make up the time Hillary took by taking it away from Bernie. That keeps happening at all the debates.

Nevertheless I liked this debate because they asked a few tough questions of Hillary. People may have missed it but one of the hosts asked Hillary if she would resign from the race if indicted. She passed it off and refused to answer. He asked it again and she waved it off dismissively but she was shocked and off balance but then the network cut away to a break letting her off the hook. Seriously letting her off the hook. That question showed the cracks are developing in Hillary's protective shell with the press.

She knows that the Repubs will go there if they can and she is desperate to keep that question even being asked... This time it was though. It'll be asked again. She tries to make it seem like she did nothing wrong and blah blah blah but why did she do it at all? Bad judgement? An attempt to forestall freedom of information requests? People shouldn't accept the oops I made a mistake line from her. First off that was real dumb to do and not presidential quality judgment but just maybe the reason was worse... A way to avoid answering to the public for her bad calls through a FOI request.