Innula, Antonio Moore had his radio show on Friday and it's a very intelligent discussion about Obama's legacy, Biden and black politics. I don't agree with everything people said but it's an enlightening discussion.
And he discusses a number of linked articles. This one, though, is the biggest thing for me.
Destruction Of Black Wealth During The Obama Presidency
It hit very hard when he said in the show that Obama in the financial crisis took black wealth, which was in their homes, and funneled it to white companies by propping up the financial institutions without bailing the homeowner out, who then in turn redistributed that wealth to white people via stocks. That was profound. There's quite a bit there in this show to deal with.
Thanks. I'll take a look at it when I have the time, though I have to say that I don't that often have the time (or the inclination) to listen to hour-long podcasts.
I did take a quick look at the article and think it perpetuates a very dangerous mistake in conflating the equity someone has in their home with wealth.
Wealth is, generally, either something that generates income for you or something you readily sell or exchange for something else, and thinking of the equity in your home that way is a big mistake, to my mind, since it's neither.
Getting stuck with negative equity is, as Brits will know all too well, one of the disadvantages of being a homeowner (or having a mortgage) in a recession, quite simply, and while it's maybe fair to blame Obama for not helping out people stuck with negative equity, that's a completely separate issue from preventing the banks from failing (and how anyone can fault Obama for preventing the banks from failing is beyond me, because the consequences of not doing that would have been catastrophic for everyone -- if you think 2008 was bad, it would have been a hell of a lot worse if major US banks had started failing).
But, really, I'm not asking why people think a lot of traditional Democratic voters have failed to warm to Sanders -- that's not the problem.
I am asking, rather, both why the Sanders campaign finds this surprising in the first place, since I'd have thought they'd have been expecting the results based on their canvassing and on the confidential campaign surveys I assume they must have been running, and why they don't seem to engage with voters who, for whatever reason, prefer Biden or someone else, and find out from them what they see the problem with Sanders as being.
Sanders supporters talking about Democrats who support candidates other than Sanders seem to be talking about a group of people about whom they know very little and have to rely on experts and podcasts to explain to them, rather than about people they've been engaging either at party meetings or on the doorstep when they're out canvassing -- that bothers me, and it really doesn't bode well for the success of his campaign.