Here's the text of her post:
There seems to be a misconception in my region (Atlanta/SE U.S.) surrounding the rules of engagement in milongas. I hope that an experienced dancer and teacher (ME) can shed some light on things for those of you who are confused and experiencing emotionally painful things in milongas. It can be devastating to get all dressed up, go out, and then sit all night watching everyone else have fun. It hurts because you think that maybe these other dancers don't think you're good enough. I've been there many times. And I had to get past myself in order to grow out of that time. These days it is RARE that I'm sitting out against my will.
LADIES/FOLLOWERS: You. Are. Not. Meant. To. Be. Passive. Why should you be? You can work, be breadwinners, vote, hold public office, and many other things. Why do some of you think that it has to be always the man's choice and decision to help you have a fun night of dancing? F*** all that! Cabeceo does not involve you sitting there waiting for somebody to ask you to dance with them. You should be CHOOSING the men/leaders you want to dance with! Go forth and use those eyes! Show them with your smile that you're interested in dancing with them. The leaders have a hard enough time getting the nerve up every time to ask people to dance with them, and I can guarantee many will be very delighted to see you clear a pathway for them to ask you back with their eyes, and they will know it's going to be an easy deal!
Sometimes they won't look back, though. This probably means NO. And that's ok! They also have the right to refuse- JUST AS YOU HAVE. You should NEVER turn against yourself by blaming yourself, and you should most especially NEVER turn it against them and call them snobby/elitist. Deflecting your pain onto others by blaming them is not the best way to have a good time in tango- for everyone involved. Most important thing to remember: you are not entitled to dances, period. Just because you're in the room does not mean people owe you a good time. That's your business to make a good time happen for you- not the other way around. And if good times still aren't happening, in spite of all your actions taken to mingle and meet people, and looking at partners to signal your desire to dance with them-and no one at all seems to know you exist- you've got to try to remain positive and remind yourself that NO ONE OWES YOU A GOOD TIME. Remember that from all that mingling, you've just made some new friends. And they very well may look to dance with you the next time you see them. That's not bad!
I have more that I'd like to share on this subject, but this post is already long- so I will save the rest of my thoughts for a later time. I just see the discussion happening around this week surrounding these subjects, and I feel the pain of those involved. And I want you to know that I've been there and I've gotten past that part. And I'm much happier now! I hope that my thoughts and experiences can help you also get past your pain. Please inbox me if you have questions- I'd really love to help those who desperately need to understand and want to enjoy instead of having bad experiences.
Please everyone- do not use this thread to argue your opinions on cabeceo. Or to argue at all. With all my love, I am reaching out to people who need to understand how to get past painful ruts in their tango journeys.
And I KNOW how stinking long this post is, but I have to clarify one thing: IF YOU ARE IN A RUT AND YOU ARE FEELING BAD, READING BLOGS WILL NOT HELP YOU. Please call me, write to me, set up coffee date with me- just give me a chance to listen to you and help support you. You need help getting past this, and I want to help you.
Here's How Many Bernie Sanders Supporters Ultimately Voted For Trump
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont inspired millions of loyal supporters, some of whom chose not to support Hillary Clinton in the general election in 2016.
Fully 12 percent of people who voted for Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., in the 2016 Democratic presidential primaries voted for President Trump in the general election. That is according to the data from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study — a massive election survey of around 50,000 people. (For perspective, a run-of-the-mill survey measuring Trump's job approval right now has a sample of 800 to 1,500.)
Political science professor Brian Schaffner of University of Massachusetts, Amherst tweeted the data on Wednesday.
Schaffner's numbers show that after a bitter Democratic primary, more than 1 in 10 of those who voted in the primaries for the very progressive Sanders ended up voting for the Republican in the general election, rather than for the Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton.
What drove those voters to Trump? Schaffner dug into that, as well. What it wasn't was trade, an issue where Sanders was closer to Trump's philosophy than Clinton's. At least, the issue of trade didn't seem to have that much of an impact.
For those suggesting this is about trade, note that opposition to TPP is not dramatically different among defectors. 8/n pic.twitter.com/Fu0GhL58bU— Brian Schaffner (@b_schaffner)
Party seems to have had something to do with it — Sanders-Trump voters were much less likely than Sanders-Clinton or Sanders-third party voters to have been Democrats. Likewise, approval of President Barack Obama appears to be related — Sanders-Trump voters approved of Obama much less than other Sanders primary voters.
It is also the case that the defectors are not fans of Obama, as this chart shows. 7/n pic.twitter.com/HjictmLnnT— Brian Schaffner (@b_schaffner)
And then there is race. Nearly half of Sanders-Trump voters disagree with the idea that "white people have advantages."
But there does appear to be a racial component to this, as defectors are much more likely to disagree that whites are advantaged in US 9/n pic.twitter.com/zcoHm9APNf— Brian Schaffner (@b_schaffner)
This tracks with broader observations about election 2016 — for example, as I wrote last week, in general, the larger a state's general-election Trump vote, the less likely its residents are to perceive a lot of discrimination in the world, according to data from the Public Religion Research Institute. And another postelection study — co-authored by Schaffner — found a "relatively strong indication that racism and sexism were more important in 2016 than they had been in previous elections."
Caveats, caveats, caveats
To answer the question that many Clinton supporters may be asking: By this data, yes — there are enough of those Sanders-Trump voters who could have potentially swung the election toward Clinton and away from Trump.
Specifically, if the Sanders-Trump voters in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania had voted for Clinton, or even stayed home on Election Day, those states would have swung to Clinton, and she would have won 46 more electoral votes, putting her at 278 — enough to win, in other words.
But then, it's not as simple as that. First off, this counterfactual world in which these voters didn't vote for Trump rests on a few ifs. If the Sanders-Trump voters in these three states had defected and if nothing else had happened to somehow take electoral votes from Clinton elsewhere and if this survey is correct ... then yes, Clinton would have won. (Some would also argue that if Clinton had campaigned more in the so-called "blue wall" states, she also could have picked up more votes.)
A more important caveat, perhaps, is that other statistics suggest that this level of "defection" isn't all that out of the ordinary. Believing that all those Sanders voters somehow should have been expected to not vote for Trump may be to misunderstand how primary voters behave.
For example, Schaffner tells NPR that around 12 percent of Republican primary voters (including 34 percent of Ohio Gov. John Kasich voters and 11 percent of Florida Sen. Marco Rubio voters) ended up voting for Clinton. And according to one 2008 study, around 25 percent of Clinton primary voters in that election ended up voting for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in the general. (In addition, the data showed 13 percent of McCain primary voters ended up voting for Obama, and 9 percent of Obama voters ended up voting for McCain — perhaps signaling something that swayed voters between primaries and the general election, or some amount of error in the data, or both.)
All of that said, one other figure that stuck out to Schaffner: Compared with those numbers above, Clinton 2016 voters were remarkably loyal — "I found basically no Clinton primary voters who voted for Trump," he told NPR in an email.
When will it end?
Data like this might seem like yet another step in what will be an endless 2016 election relitigation. And it's true that there is bound to be plenty more in the coming months and years — particularly as Clinton releases her memoir on the campaign next month.
All of the unusual factors in election 2016 — the first female major-party candidate, the first major-party candidate with no military or elected-office experience — combined with the election's surprises — that there were actually a number of Obama voters who went for Trump, that the far-better-funded candidate lost, that the Republicans essentially torched the playbook they wrote after they lost in 2012 — mean that there are plenty of questions to answer in coming years.