Hillary preparing to lose Iowa, NH.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

It's called firewalling. Bernie is gaining so fast in the big two first states that the Clinton campaign is trying to dampen expectations. So today we are seeing the rationale that HRC will win in bigger states with more diversity. In 2008 her campaign underperformed early and suddenly she started losing support in bigger states as well, particularly among black voters. Hard to say whether history will repeat itself, but Clinton's advisers were busy with inoculating talking points today (see link below).

1. Bernie Sanders has no roots in the Democratic Party; and

2. He can't connect with minority voters.

The first point is partially true, he has been known as an independent rather than a Democrat during his political career. But he has caucused with and voted with the Democrats (at least when they were voting like traditional Democrats, which has been less and less over the years). And establishment Democrats at the national level are not as honorable as they used to be in the sense that money has never been more corrupting in my lifetime.

The second point will be proved false in my view. Bernie Sanders is the only "real" candidate in this election on either side. What do I mean by that? He says what he means all the time and he is not packaged by focus groups or handlers in his presentation. Secondly, he is a real person. Unlike the other candidates he is not filthy rich, because he doesn't have a Super Pac, a corrupt foundation or million dollar weddings in his family. His lifestyle and perspective is more like ours rather than the 1%.

Bernie has never engaged in "dog whistle" politics. Like Barack Obama and Al Gore, he has taken the high road in every campaign, so I think all primary voters, from all walks of life, will like him more and more as they get to know that he is truly about fighting for social and economic justice for them and will not sell out for Wall Street or send our young people off to die in a foreign country. And he will fight for our survival as a people, by putting Americans to work at green jobs to fight climate change. So that our grand children can survive to see the 22nd century.

So I am hoping the firewall doesn't hold.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/dem-strategist-we-shouldnt-be-surprised-if-sanders-beats-clinton-in-iowa-and-new-hampshire/

[Frances]

1. I wonder why Martin O'Malley hasn't gained more traction

He was a 2 term Democratic governor who got a lot of liberal laws passed.

[SaranchaIsWaiting]

4. There is still time. Hopefully he will get more coverage because he has important things to say.

I like O'Malley. a lawt. and Bernie too. It's nice to have two honest, straight talkers on the list.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

14. I like O'Malley and Bernie as well.

On my threshold issue (climate change), I tend to believe both would be acceptable:

1. Get international agreement of substance; and

2. Some sort of Marshall Plan (green jobs in US & elsewhere, buy up Amazon forest to protect it; start re-planting forests world wide, etc.).

I have not trusted anyone previously on this issue other than Gore (because they all give great lip service) but O'Malley proved himself to be very serious about carbon as MD governor and Bernie says he'll do it and unlike other politicians, he is not a liar.

My only reservation about O'Malley is his charisma level, not policy. He's photogenic, but he is very careful, perhaps thoughtful about what he says. I'm fine with that but I think it is a debate/electability issue.

On the other hand he has a lot more experience connecting with black voters, which would be a big advantage if he could get traction.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

28. O'Malley put in place egregious police tactics in Baltimore.

He had better explain why he left them in place.

[RiverLover]

55. Violent crime dropped in Baltimore 48% while he was mayor. This checks out in fact checker.

The policy of sweeping arrests was changed by a new police commissioner after O'Malley became governor. (see article below) They focused on violent crime arrests, and overall crime is now up again.

Steven Kearney, a former O’Malley adviser, said the “ambitious” policing, guided by CompStat and similar principles of measuring arrests, was just one of O’Malley’s approach to driving down crime rates. He also created policies and to hold police officers accountable, increase the availability of drug treatment and provide more opportunities for children and students in schools, Kearney said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2015/04/28/omalleys-claim-about-crime-rates-in-baltimore/

I just don't believe claims that O'Malley is responsible for Freddie Gray & the current racial tensions in Baltimore. It's ridiculous to me to blame O'M when his tenure as mayor ended 8 years ago, and so did the zero tolerance arrest policy. The racial tensions in Baltimore date back to the 70s(see article above) and blaming one person who was praised at the time & became governor because of his success in Baltimore is simplistic and a cop out. IMO.

[shaayecanaan]

160. Violent crime was dropping everywhere, even in cities without zero tolerance

the only thing it achieved was putting a lot of black people in jail.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

179. Exactly. He would be an extremely divisive president.

The police practices he oversaw are cruel and unusual. I hope he addresses this publicly.

[bigtree]

180. his policing policies involved much more than zero-tolerance

...and the violent crime rate dropped by over 40% while the national average was 11%. His police dept.'s overall approach included the institution of a community policing program; a focus on police accountability which resulted in a sharp reduction in police shootings; and a crime tracking program which was hailed as a major innovation by Harvard and others.

From 2000-2010, the incidents of crime in Baltimore dropped 43 percent, outpacing by a stretch the 11 percent drop that the nation saw during that period. The crime rate dropped by (over) 40 percent.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/06/you-have-martin-o-malley-all-wrong.html

...referring to 1999-2009 data from the FBI, which tracks crimes reported to law enforcement agencies. Part 1 crimes are serious crimes that are likely to be reported to police, and are divided into violent and property crimes. These crimes include criminal homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, arson and motor vehicle theft.

The overall crime rate (the number of crimes per 100,000 people) fell by 48 percent during that decade, more than any other large police agency in the country. Specifically for violent crimes, the Baltimore City Police Department saw the third highest drop (behind Los Angeles and New York City) during the period.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2015/04/28/omalleys-claim-about-crime-rates-in-baltimore/

[Omaha Steve]

161. Popular with R's

Just staying.

[appalachiablue]

91. Perhaps Marty should perform a little, to give it some oomph though I've not seen him in action!

[rhett o rick]

21. I'm thinking it's his hair. Way to groomed. I like Bernie's hair. Just sayin'. nm

[Ed Suspicious]

31. I'm with you on that.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

142. LOL!

[rpannier]

22. Right now I think it's that Clinton and Sanders are sucking up all the air

I think we'll start to see a rise in his numbers come the fall when more people are engaged
Right now, it's the political junkies that are watching
As more people become interested and aren't sold on Clinton or Sanders, O'Malley will be someone they look at serious ly and he'll be a bigger force

[sabrina 1]

37. Way more than political junkies are watching THIS race right now. That is what is so

unusual about it. And I believe it has taken Hillary's campaign by surprise. The enthusiasm for a candidate that is so straighforward, who flies in the face of all the 'inside DC advisers that candidates shouldn't 'lose their cool' etc, Bernie DOES get angry, see his exchanges with Greenspan eg, he expresses genuine outrage and anger at people like that weasel the for so long people have WANTED to see, that it is attracting large numbers of people to find out more about him.

I would LOVE to see debates, REAL debates, OFTEN because one thing about Sanders, if you try to sugar coat anything, as Greenspan did eg, he will not let it go and the people LOVE to see someone this passionate. Iow, a very strange thing has happened to this election, it has become INTERESTING and people are getting engaged already

I think he is only going to become even more popular, especially if all the other candidates refuse to debate him.

[daleanime]

46. Amen....

But I don't seem to be hearing much about the debates. Wonder if someone is feeling kind of reluctant.

[Raine1967]

120. I agree.

It is really early in the season.

I also think seeing Jill Stein entering the race as a Green party nominee may have an impact on the sanders campaign. Time will tell.

[craigmatic]

39. He's too safe and too much in the middle of Bernie and Hillary. Bernie has nothing to lose so he's

going left. Hillary is scared of a repeat of last time so she's posturing and actively trying to be everything to everybody. O'Malley really doesn't have that much breathing room in between the two. Hillary has the name and electability thing and Bernie has the policies and the bonus of being so damn right. What is there for O'Malley to do?

[Betty Karlson]

41. Maybe because Mr. Sanders has the better name recognition at this point.

Had Mr. O'Malley declared befoire Mr. Sanders, their situations could have been reverse.

What is clear, howver, is the traction that the "complete reform of the political process" wing is gaining, who-ever will lead it.

[Romulox]

79. Sanders offers a more complete alternative to Clinton. O'Malley feels like a compromise.

And a compromise between an ideologically coherent candidate, on one side, and a "say anything" style triangulator on the other. In other words, O'Malley represents a compromise within a compromise--something that nobody is asking for.

That's my take.

[FSogol]

109. He will. Too many folks are in their bubbles and will be surprised when the actual primaries occur.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. This is shaping up to be a very interesting race...

I wouldn't be surprised to see him win in both those states.

He IS the real deal.

[daleanime]

47. And a lot more....

[onehandle]

3. Bookmarked. nt

[RobertEarl]

5. That's why I say

Go easy on the Hillary supporters.

They mean well and they are good Democrats. But Bernie is gonna run the table. That's just the way it is. We need to be there for them when Hillary bows out so we should practice being there for them now and be nice to them and make them feel as good as we can.

[Segami]

7. Heh heh...

[davidpdx]

10. I heard the other day that only 10-15 Hillary Clinton supporters were left on the board

Yes, that came from a Clinton supporter. Apparently the rest of them are now all in the witness protection program. (the last part was snark, but the first part is true).

[LovingA2andMI]

25. The the Board of What?

A sinking ship.....

[davidpdx]

53. Good one

I should have clarified I meant DU

[ohheckyeah]

27. How would anyone know that?

I haven't declared who I'm for. Why argue when I have no intention of changing my mind? It's too early anyway.

[davidpdx]

54. I'm saying that's what a Hillary Clinton supporter told me the other day

How that person knew is actually not the point. The point is the person was talking out their ass.

[ohheckyeah]

59. OK -

I agree. I misunderstood your point. Sorry.

[HooptieWagon]

102. Maybe the rest of them are dodging imaginary sniper fire.

[Sheepshank]

135. I'm not dodging any sniper fire, and I'm certainly not afraid of Sanders Supporters

Is there some sort of gloating going on?

[davidpdx]

156. No, if you'd read the post that person responded to you'd probably understand

what I was saying.

[davidpdx]

157. No comment except.......

[Scuba]

57. +1

[closeupready]

74. +2.

[Go Vols]

85. +1

[dsc]

128. I am just curious

but if your candidate were to win and then you were to ask some of Hillary's supporters to do something for your candidate, why oh why do you think they would ever say yes to you after what you just wrote?

[rhett o rick]

144. What I said was a little harsh, but as I see it there are two sides in this class war.

The progressives vs. the conservatives. People are dying at the hands of the conservatives. Possibly a million in Iraq. We lost troops and tens of thousands wounded with some living on the streets while the wealthy are raking in the dough. One either is fighting against the continuation of the growing inequality or they are enabling or supporting the inequality.

I am sick of seeing it get worse year after year with the conservatives now pushing the TPP which IMO will kill more Americans.

Again, one either is fighting the inequality or enabling/supporting it.

[bettyellen]

166. Seems they don't want to help Sanders? Perhaps they think he won't need it, or.....

[Paka]

30. I'll give it a try.

But it's hard to be nice to people who run so roughshod over you. I prefer to ignore arrogant backbiters.

[Betty Karlson]

42. Very well said.

If Mr. Sanders can take the high road, so can his supporters.

[quickesst]

56. I wouldn't change...

....and believe Bernie's supporters should remain as they have been. Remember the old adage? "To thine own self be true" and "Honesty is the best policy".

[Cheese Sandwich]

6. Ya it's the the expectations game.

And that's what they were doing today on the ABC show.

Hillary's person was on there saying it wouldn't be surprising for Bernie to win Iowa and NH.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=uNKOlSTUg-8


I'll say Hillary needs at least 65% in Iowa to consider it a win and at least 55% in NH. Anything less and she's done.

[morningfog]

8. Interesting. This would suggest Hillary is planning a long contest like 2008.

The long, delegate bagging, math race.

If she loses NH and IA, all bets are off.

[davidpdx]

13. I would have thought she and her campaign would have learned a lot from 2008

After breaking even on Super Tuesday her campaign went 11 primaries/caucuses and a full month without a win. She has many of Obama's campaign working for her as well as some of her long time staff which strategically puts her in a good spot.

The primary calendar is much shorter this time around Feb-early June. I don't get to vote until mid-May though.

[rhett o rick]

26. The problem is that she, like the leopard, can't change her spots.

She is 100% in the pocket of the wealthy banksters.

[daleanime]

48. And so many of us.....

are tired of that.

[davidpdx]

52. Oh, I agree 100%

No argument from me on that one.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

60. And I think she is uncomfortable

doing retail politics. Put her in a roomful of elites and she is ready to dazzle and be the alpha. But put her at a coffee shop counter with one person and she gets lost. Watch the next time she is asked an unscripted question. Her eyes go big and her cadence slows down and she becomes inarticulate.

[BeanMusical]

149. Yeah, when she's doing her populist impersonation I'm embarrassed for her.

[azmom]

72. +1

[Exilednight]

139. She doesn't have the RIGHT people from Obama's campaign

Working for her. Axelrod and David Plouffe were the masterminds behind Obama's win.

If you want a winning strategy, you get the guys who did the best.

Hillary has surrounded herself at the top with the same people who lost it for her last time.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

73. Well...

That, and the superdelegates who pledged Hillary are going to start dumping her like a hot potato, when they realize how angry the Americans are and start thinking about saving their jobs.

They may be angry at someone but they aren't angry at Secretary of State Clinton who is viewed favorably by 77% of all Democrats and 90% of African American Democrats and 77% of Latino Democrats:

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_National_61615.pdf

PAGE 37

[brooklynite]

75. The last Iowa poll had her ahead 54-12.

[morningfog]

76. Yep. From two weeks ago. Her internal poll must be showing a trend.

We'll see whether and to what extent Bernie has closed in on her in Iowa shoot enough.

[stevenleser]

118. Exactly. And the person quoted in the OP doesn't pretend to have any information otherwise.

The person who responded to you before me suggested "her internal polls must show..." blah blah. Based on what? The persons suppositions in the OP who doesnt even pretend to have an unnamed source?

[jeff47]

137. Why would her campaign set up expectations that she will lose

if they think she's doing great?

[Marr]

148. You didn't ask me, but I can imagine a few possible motivations.

It would help draw attention to those victories, and encourage the media to paint them as an indication of how the race is going to go-- diminishing your opponents. It would also help lessen the 'pre-ordained' air that the Clinton campaign has formerly cultivated, and which, I think, turns a lot of people off. It would almost certainly help keep volunteers and supporters from getting complacent.

I'm still amazed they're doing it, and hopeful that it is indeed a positive indicator for Sanders. If he won both of those, I'd be both shocked and ecstatic.

[stevenleser]

177. Except it's not her campaign doing it. It's an unaffiliated Democrat who made it up.

They have no sources and didn't pretend otherwise.

[jeff47]

136. Then why is her campaign setting up expectations that she will lose? (nt)

[aikoaiko]

9. I noticed it in an OP where a old guard Dem strategist lowered HRC expectations in IA and NH

"If your only significant constituency is older white voters, that'll be good in Iowa and New Hampshire, but when you hit Nevada and South Carolina you're in another world," said Democratic strategist Bill Carrick. "If you're going to be the nominee, you're going to have to do pretty well among Latino, African American voters, women, single women and millennials. That's the challenge for Bernie Sanders — to become more than a niche candidate and become a candidate with a broad coalition of support."

http://www.latimes.com/nation/immigration/la-na-democrats-latinos-20150620-story.html#page=1

[CoffeeCat]

36. Wow, they're polling must be telling them that Sanders is doing well...

…because Hillary's mouthpieces are ALL READY minimizing wins in New Hampshire and Iowa.

Lovely that even before the campaign season heats up--Hillary is denigrating those two states. Seriously? She's suggesting that Iowa and NH have primarily "older, white voters."?

That's a nice stereotype. I'm sure that will play so, so well with the people in Iowa and NH.

I'll remind Hillary that in 08--when she placed third in Iowa--Obama won all 99 counties. ALL of them. We may have some "old" people and a lot of "white" people, but we're not stupid. In fact, Democrats here are outrageously Progressive.

As a woman from Iowa, I think her comments stink.

Nice way to start her campaign here in Iowa. Denigrate the state. Laugh off a win here as insignificant because other parts of the country better represent America. After all, we're just old, white fools--chucklin at the tumbleweeds that roll by our dusty roads!

She came in third in Iowa last time, for nonsense like this. Is she going for forth place, this time?

Seriously.

[daleanime]

49. You have to wonder....

what they're seeing to make them say such things. Have to know it's counter productive.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

65. It's the truth...Iowa is homogeneous and in no way representative of the United States.

It's the truth...Iowa is homogeneous and in no way representative of the United States.


I can take the Orange Line from my apartment in Woodland Hills to North Hollywood and see more Asians, Latinos and African Americans on the bus than I would see if I lived in IA or NH in a week. In fact as a white person I will likely be in the minority on the bus. On some routes I might be the only one.

Hillary Clinton is hugely popular with African American and Latino Democrats who will account for close to four out of ten Democratic primary voters. How popular is she? She is viewed favorably by ninety percent of African American Democrats and 81% of Latino Democrats:

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_National_61615.pdf

PAGE 37

BTW, HRC didn't say IA is homogeneous and not representative of America, Democratic strategist, Bill Carrick did.


As to your assertion she will lose IA she has a 43% lead there:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-3195.html

Oh, spare me the retort "What about 2008?" ...She didn't have close to a 43% lead there at this time in 2007.

Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.

-John Adams

Seriously

[Admiral Loinpresser]

84. Seriously,

which way are the polls going?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

90. They are going this way

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html


And this way:


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/oh/ohio_democratic_presidential_primary-5313.html


And this way:


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/fl/florida_democratic_presidential_primary-3556.html


And this way:


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/sc/south_carolina_democratic_presidential_primary-4167.html




And this way:




http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-3195.html





And this way:




http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_presidential_primary-3351.html




And this way:


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html


FOR STARTERS


BTW, did you see what my intrepid investigation discovered about your source:


POST 69

[Admiral Loinpresser]

94. You're proving the point of my question.

The first poll you cite shows a graph with Bernie's numbers going up and HRC's going down. Of course she started with a huge lead, just like in 2008.

BTW, Iv'e responded to your post 69.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

96. Huh

I uncollapsed the poll of polls...She has been bumping along in the 40% -50% lead range forever:


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html#polls

[Admiral Loinpresser]

98. I'm guessing you're less concerned than the Hillary brain trust.

My graph inspection still looks like she rose after announcing, after drifting downward for a year and then she started falling again after Bernie got in. The latest in NH 41-31 is the worst news she's had since she lost to Obama. But feel free to take the last word and we can let the audience decide if everything is hunky dory in Fracker World.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

100. I will take the last word and offer a challenge

The latest in NH 41-31 is the worst news she's had since she lost to Obama. But feel free to take the last word and we can let the audience decide if everything is hunky dory in Fracker World.

If you believe heterogeneous New Hampshire is a proxy for the homogeneous United States there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion...

Let's make a wager:

Bernie wins, I donate $1,000.00 to the charity of your choice,


Hillary wins, you donate a $1,000,00 to the chaity of my choice.

At least those of us in Fracker World have spines.

P.S. The last word gambit with a gratuitous insult, the bottom of the deck for the passive aggressive poster.

#lol@me

[Admiral Loinpresser]

105. Since you raised a new topic, I'll respond.

I decline your wager because $1,000 is a bigger risk than I can afford. Maybe I'll reconsider after I can afford health care.

You must still be in the middle class. That explains a lot.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

107. "You must still be in the middle class. That explains a lot."

"You must still be in the middle class. That explains a lot."

I lost my business, home, car, savings, and investments in The Great Recession. Ummmm, no ... I don't even have a checking account...

In the unedited version to display my confidence I offered to eat a dead rat if HRC loses the nomination if you would promise to eat a dead rat if she wins it but I edited because it was untowards.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

111. I'm truly sorry.

I shouldn't have jumped to conclusions. We have both had serious disruptions in our lives and I will try to be mindful of that. Let me close by saying the misfortunes that you and I have experienced are a significant part of what makes me politically passionate. I hope you can understand that. I wish you good luck.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

113. Losing my possessions one by one was extraordinarily difficult.

Losing my possessions one by one was extraordinarily difficult at the time. At one point my gf and I had nothing; no money, no car, no home or apartment, no government benefits...Somehow with the help of friends and family we pulled through. She has a good job as a senior accountant now and we have a 450 square foot studio apartment that has everything I/we need- a bed, a fridge, an oven, a microwave, a tv , air condition, and my lap top. It did require us to leave the place I was raised and lived in for over forty years and move from Orlando to Los Angeles...

But I'm okay now...I learned to distinguish between what is important and what isn't.

[PotatoChip]

130. One has to wonder about the objectivity and methodology of pollsters who publish Michelle Malkin's

musings on Bernie Sanders, along with other right wing BS articles.

Bernie Sanders' Foul Socialist Odor
By Michelle Malkin - May 27, 2015
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/05/27/bernie_sanders_foul_socialist_odor_126736.html

[DemocratSinceBirth]

133. Is Huffington Post a more credible source?

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-democratic-primary


Real Clear Politics doesn't poll...They accumulate polls by others and average them.

All RealClearPolitics and the Huffington Post are doing is compiling polls and averaging them.


I can be convinced to rely on Huff Po more but the RCP polls are easier to find.

[PotatoChip]

134. I won't speak to the credibility of, or speculate about any other pollsters

since I have not seen (nor have I looked for) RW slanted articles by them.

The 'Real Clear Politics' Malkin piece is something I found this morning when searching for something entirely unrelated.

[okasha]

138. I suggest you read the whole afticle

rather than a carefully groomed paragraph.

The article observes that Hillary was "mobbed" by supporters, while Sanders spoke to a half-empty room. Beyond the carefully chosen paragraph above, Carrick went on on to point out that African Americans, Hispanics and other less privileged groups comprise the majority of Democratic voters, and that any successful Dem candidate would have to appeal to those demographics. The article was less about Sanders' strength--older white voters--than about his weaknesses.

Context matters.

[aikoaiko]

145. Yes I know the article was mostly a HRC supportive piece , but

The expectation reset for NH and IA is unmistakable .

I'm sure we will see more of it.

[okasha]

147. Not really.

And if you read it closely, the part you quoted wasn't really flattering to Sanders. It's called "damning with faint praise."

[NYC Liberal]

11. Bernie fans are preparing for his inevitable loss.

No, Hillary is not scared of Sanders. It's called campaigning.

By the logic of this article, Sanders is petrified of Clinton because his surrogates and supporters are constantly attacking her. Far more than Clinton supporters attack Sanders. Just look at this forum for proof.

Just wait and watch for the inevitable talking point that will be spread by DU's Sanders fans come primary time: "Hillary only won by 20/25/30 percentage points! She is doomed!"

[morningfog]

12. Of course Sanders and his surrogates will have to attack Hillary.

She is the formative front-runner.

[NYC Liberal]

15. And they are preparing to lose.

I'm sure when Sanders loses, it will be blamed on anyone and everything but the candidate himself. I'm sure Hillary will be accused of rigging or stealing the election. Bank on it.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

18. We are doing no such thing.

And we will not accuse Hillary of any such shenanigans.

We are better than that.

Bank on it.

[Puglover]

87. I think you are replying

to a whole lot of projection Peggy.

[HERVEPA]

23. really, really stupid post.

Try being fact-based.

[AtomicKitten]

122. Projection. You haz it.

HILLARY ACCUSED OBAMA OF CHEATING IN THE PRIMARIES

From the book “Game Change." A book published by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin The Race of a Lifetime reveals that Hillary Clinton accused Obama of cheating during their historic 2008 campaign race.

excerpt: "Hillary Clinton is depicted – and quoted – as foul-mouthed and consumed with anger over what she saw as the media’s kid-gloved treatment of Mr Obama. She was convinced that he had cheated at the start of their marathon primary contest by bringing in outsiders to vote in the Iowa caucuses, and when it was over she was supremely reluctant to work for him, the authors claim."

WE WILL NOT BE SILENCED
link: http://wewillnotbesilenced2008.com/

excerpt: "We believe The Democratic National Committee (DNC) made a grave error by depriving American voters of their choice of Hillary Clinton as Democratic nominee. Senator Clinton, by all accounts, except caucuses, won the Primary Election and, therefore, should be the 2008 Democratic Nominee. That didn't happen, due largely to illegitimate and illegal acts. We have interviews of many accounts from caucus states recounting threats, intimidation, lies, stolen documents, falsified documents, busing in voters in exchange for paying for "dinners," etc. There are at least 2000 complaints, in Texas alone, of irregularities directed towards the Obama Campaign, that have lead to a very fractured and broken Democratic Party."

[NYC Liberal]

125. Think what you want.

You are welcome to bookmark this and come back next year when Hillary has secured the nomination.

[BeanMusical]

150. Wow, projection indeed!

[Admiral Loinpresser]

17. Bernie Duers attack HRC. Surrogates?

I haven't heard it. Got specific examples? I'm really interested in seeing them, this is not a ploy.

The reason I say that is because Bernie is traditionally a high road campaigner in the tradition of,say, Gore. Whereas, Hillary I think has exhibited a history of taking the gloves off when she feels threatened. This is the light version of that we're getting from the linked HRC surrogate.

[SoapBox]

20. Thank you!

I am seeing the same persons saying that.

Names, numbers, threads, specifics?

[NYC Liberal]

33. A few just from a couple of quick Google searches:

Attacked for her choice of venue for her kick-off rally
Attacked for the way she speaks
A Sanders fan won't vote for Hillary even if she's the nominee
Attacked for saying "I'll keep Americans safe"
Sanders fans defend a sexist anti-Hillary cartoon

And every one of those threads has multiple Sanders fans joining in.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

40. I'm truly sorry for the misunderstanding.

I conceded that people on DU attack Hillary. Of course they do, we're in that season. But I mean something quite different by a surrogate. I mean someone associated with the campaign, i.e. a staffer, spokesperson etc. I'm not saying a surrogate hasn't attacked her, I just haven't seen it. I wasn't very artful but I meant to distinguish between DU supporters and surrogates. Sorry that you had to go do that for something I'd already conceded.

[kenfrequed]

92. Eh...

DU'ers aren't exactly surrogates. They really aren't professional political operatives.

I usually define surrogates as actually being political operatives or movers and shakers that can at least actually get an interview in a newspaper.

[NYC Liberal]

127. I said his supporters.

Once he has more surrogates, they will be out in force. That's what they're there for — doing the attacking so the candidate doesn't have to (as much).

[kenfrequed]

132. Ah...

So your argument is that Bernie will go negative because you say so.


Caveat: Distinguishing policy differences and records is not "going negative."

[rhett o rick]

29. Sen Sanders' supporters are merely pointing how how HRC has always sided with big money.

Gaining wealth is her prime objective. She loves her place in the 0.01% and pretends to care about the peons. Will she challenge her wealthy friends to get them to pay their fair share? I doubt it.

Her billionaire friends may buy her the presidency but she will still have to battle the Populist Movement.

Sen Sanders the people's candidate, HRC the corporations candidate. Are you on the correct side in this class war?

[restorefreedom]

154. not gonna be that easy

bernie is building momentum and people do not even know who he is yet. wait till they know who he is and who he is standing up for.

the coronation will not be televised, cause it ain't gonna happen.


bernie all the way!,

[KelleyKramer]

16. I think we are off the charts, anything can happen...

Just a month ago I wouldn't have thought Bernie had a snowballs chance of winning any primary.

At this point, the way he is surging in NH its almost a toss-up

I liked Bernie in the beginning simply because we needed someone to force Hillary to address the Left.

Now I think he very possibly could end up being a real contender for the nomination.

The crowd in Denver was stunning, this could get very interesting

[Admiral Loinpresser]

19. Yes, I saw some of the video from Denver.

This is passing rock star status and headed for avatar. I like how selfless Bernie is in keeping the crowd focused on the mission of defeating the elites rather than adoration of him. Very inspiring stuff. Like Mr. Smith goes to Washington.

[CoffeeCat]

32. I think Bernie will win in Iowa...

I live in Iowa, and there are many reasons why Bernie has a very good chance of beating Hillary.

1.) Voting first in the nation, Iowans take this responsibility very seriously. We go into research mode, attending rallies, reading up on the candidates and trying to speak to these candidates at events and ask them questions. Iowans don't like to be told that a candidate is "inevitable". We like to make up our own minds. Case in point--Barack Obama. He was a long shot when the primary season began with Hillary the frontrunner. Obama won in all 99 counties. We did our due diligence and we decided for ourselves, and we'll do the same again.

2.) Hillary just plain stinks in Iowa. I'm sorry, but it's true. She cannot seem to get it together and connect authentically with people. You can't do well in Iowa if you can't A.) Speak to people honestly and openly; B.) Take questions after the event; C.) Hang around after the event so the voters can dialog with you. This is the formula for winning in Iowa. It doesn't guarantee a win, if your messaging sucks. But you AT LEAST have to make an attempt at personal, meaningful communication. Hillary has given canned, corporate speeches in year's past, in Iowa--and this year, thus far--has only spoken at closed-door, small meetings with party loyalists. She's the most inaccessible candidate ever to campaign for President in our state--Democrat or Republican.

3.) Iowa has a very strong Progressive base. We were the third state to legalize gay marriage. Our Democrats are very liberal. The main urban areas, which contain more than 60 percent of the state's population--are overwhelmingly liberal. Hillary is a centrist and many Democrats are looking for something else. That's why Obama won in 08. Iowa Democrats sought someone to the left of Hillary and they found it in Obama. A large number of Iowa Dems will do the same in the next caucus.

4.) Hillary had problems in Iowa, in 08. Many may not remember--but many Iowa Democrats do. In the heat of the 08 primary season, Hillary was criticized for giving robotic speeches and leaving without taking questions. In response, Hillary organized a "Q&A" to appear more open and conversational. Shortly after this event, a reporter learned that all of the audience questioners were actually Hillary staffers asking scripted questions. Not cool. Also, after she lost the Iowa caucus to Obama--she criticized the caucuses. She accused Iowa Democrats of "bullying" her supporters into voting for Edwards and Obama. She claimed the process was unfair. The Iowa caucuses are democracy in action. Precinct members meet in town halls, libraries and schools--and we divide into candidate camps. Then, we discuss why we're supporting our candidate and we have discussions and debates--so everyone in the room can be informed before they vote. Then we vote by a show of hands. The counts are reported to a central office in front of everyone--for fairness. Hillary's assertions were bad-sport, sour grapes. Remember, she came in third place BEFORE she publicly criticized our state's political process.

5.) Bernie is way ahead of Hillary. Bernie's events have all ready drawn several hundred people in Iowa. He's all ready giving talks, taking question and talking with the people of Iowa. I think Bernie gets Iowa. I think he understands the formula for winning here and I think he will do well here--because he loves speaking to people and doesn't mind questions and challenges from people. He's in his element here. We want to engage with him--and he is willing and enthusiastic about doing so.

It will be an interesting campaign season, for sure.

[still_one]

34. That is why in Iowa's wisdom they thought replacing Harkin with Ernst was so great I guess?

[CoffeeCat]

38. Harkin retired...

…and there was an open race.

Bruce Braley was the Democrat who ran against Ernst.

Braley ran a horrifying, abysmal campaign. I still have no explanation for it. It was a train wreck. Obviously, Iowa Democrats are still reeling about this. We did not think her election was a great idea--as you stated. In fact, all Democrats were sick about Harkin not running again and retiring. We're still sick.

Ernst could have NEVER beaten Harkin. But she beat Braley--a very weak Democratic candidate.

Ernst was backed by the Koch Brothers. Lots of corporate money flowed to her, and she was able to galvanize the base of the Republican party, who was very enthusiastic about voting for her. They came out in high numbers for her, and the Dems were not motivated to vote for Braley.

Sad, really. All Iowa Democrats are completely devastated by all of this.

[still_one]

45. Iowa used to be a pretty solid blue state, same with Wisconsin. I am not saying that Democrats

wanted Ernst, Grassley, or Branstad, but something is messed up. Hell, George McGovern was a sure thing in South Dakota, I doubt today that a George McGovern could win in South Dakota, and I am questioning, is the same transition occurring in Iowa? Incidentally, I am originally from Iowa, Sioux City, but have been away from the State a long time, so I am puzzled why states like Iowa, Wisconsin, and Michigan seemed to have crossed over to the purple column, if not red, and it concerns me.

Whether Bernie wins the Democratic primary, Hillary or someone else, that isn't the issue for me, as much as can a Democrat win in those states today, and I don't know anymore.

The race between Ernst and Braley was supposed to be even according to the polls, and she ended up winning by 8 points.

I know they are different states, but what would convince me on the validity of your points is if Russ Feingold was able to win back his seat from Johnson.

[cascadiance]

99. Also, the Libertarian candidate died in a plane crash less than a month before the election...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/14/senate-candidate-killed_n_5983984.html

I'm sure she probably picked up more of his votes than Braley did too.

[cascadiance]

101. I voted in my first election in an Iowa caucus as a college student there then...

That was a big experience. I think that Iowa voters are a lot more independent than people give them credit for. There's a reason someone like Tom Harkin kept getting reelected as Senator. He certainly didn't fall in line with DINO or "New Democrat" party members but still carried a state that some wouldn't call a "blue state" here.

I think Iowa is a great opportunity for someone like Bernie to start the election with. He's almost better than any other politician in talking to people out in person, which a caucus state challenges all candidates to do. It is a lot harder to win and play the "cautious" candidate not willing to take honest and forthright stances on issues that you want to avoid talking about. Bernie doesn't have the same problem as other candidates in this area. Being on weekly with Thom Hartmann for an hour in a national "town hall" where he gets those kind of off the wall questions all of the time has well prepared him for that situation. A caucus state demand more of this kind of candidate than other forms of primaries and that really works in Bernie's favor. Especially as he campaigns heavily and talks personally to many Iowans in the weeks leading up to that caucus. Hillary's campaign knows that by that time she can't be perceived as "avoiding" talking about many issues like she has on things like the TPA/TPP. That just won't work for her there. And I'm sure that Iowans have learned like most Americans have since 2008, where this time they will want to not only have a candidate that promises "Hope and Change" that helped win them over then with Obama, but someone who DEFINES what it is and what they will do to make "hope and change" happen.

I think Braley, as you noted, made a lot of mistakes in his campaign, and wasn't a good replacement for Harkin. An example of this were some comments he made about Grassley not having a law degree, implying that Iowa needs a "lawyer" to represent them in the senate. I think many would not feel that to be logic that persuades them much to jump in to Braley's camp, no matter what you might feel about Grassley.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/03/bruce-braley-chuck-grassley-farmer-with-no-law-degree-105010.html

[Admiral Loinpresser]

43. Thank you for a very thoughtful post.

May send you an IM?

[ISUGRADIA]

58. Corrections

Obama did not win all 99 counties in the 2008 caucuses, I think it was closer to 45.

For all the attention Iowa gets the turnout is less than that of NH which is about 1/3 the size population.

The low turnout in Iowa is in large part to the restrictive voting process for the caucuses.

[dreamnightwind]

35. Re issue # 2, Bernie has great cred

He backed Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition runs in the 80's, rather than the corporate Dems. Bill Clinton used thinly veiled racist tactics re Jesse and Barack, they have no real cred on this issue, Bernie does.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

44. Yes, for a pol

who lives in Vermont he has a lot of experience working with black people on all sorts of issues, so I have some optimism for "Super Tuesday," provided he does well in IA and NH and that seems very likely already. He is so authentic that I think he can connect with people of all types. Hillary does not seem comfortable with Hoi Polloi.

[madokie]

50. One of the candidates

simply is not one of us. Each can be the judge of how they see that.

Bernie will be our next POTUS

[randome]

70. Because we always get a candidate who is one of us?

Not sure if that's been the case for...oh, a long time now.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

[Aerows]

51. When it comes down to it

I think the only person that wants Hillary Clinton to be POTUS is Hillary Clinton, and I think even she has misgivings about it.

[okasha]

140. You missed the target by 180 on thst one...

[Aerows]

141. Laugh if you can

At least someone is experiencing joy

[SidDithers]

61. The Washington Free Beacon...

Sid

[stevenleser]

97. It's worse than that. It's the opinion of one Democrat with no connection to the campaign and who

doesnt even suggest she has a source informing her.

It's her guess. That's what people are going with here.

[ismnotwasm]

62. No she's not.

[dembotoz]

66. Nh right next to Bernie home state he damn well better do well there

Same way walker is and bachman did do well in Iowa.

Easy and cheap access for campaign workers
Bernie damn well better do well if not...remember pawlenty in Iowa ???
No one else did either

[L0oniX]

67. K & R

[hrmjustin]

68. Wow! Linking to a right wing rag to take down Hillary and 57 people rec it.

Reaching for the stars I see.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

69. LMFAO

The Washington Free Beacon is an American web site that publishes news and associated content from a conservative perspective. It states it is "dedicated to uncovering the stories that the powers that be hope will never see the light of day" and producing "in-depth investigative reporting on a wide range of issues, including public policy, government affairs, international security, and media."[1] It was founded by Matthew Continetti and Michael Goldfarb and launched on February 7, 2012, as a project of the 501(c)4 organization Center for American Freedom.[2] In August 2014, it announced it was becoming a for-profit news site.[3]



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Free_Beacon

What's next articles from the National Review, the American Spectator, the Weekly Standard?


Cui bono? Right wing rags have a vested interest in undermining Hillary Clinton because the fear of the Clintons literally makes them foul themselves.

[SidDithers]

71. It's the mouthpiece of the Center for American Freedom...

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Center_for_American_Freedom

Funded by none other that the fucking Koch brothers.
http://thinkprogress.org/media/2012/01/05/398169/the-1-solution-koch-brothers-bankroll-right-wing-thinkprogress-clone/




Sid

[DemocratSinceBirth]

77. I see that ass clown Bill Kristol talking up Bernie Sanders all the time.

It's clear who they want to run against and who they don't.

[SidDithers]

78. Yup. And the editor of the Free Beacon, Matthew Continetti...

just happens to be married to Bill Kristol's daughter.



Sid

[Metric System]

95. +1

[Admiral Loinpresser]

103. Next time I'll cite that ethical beacon, the Clinton Foundation. n/t

n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

108. They Clinton Foundation has done more to improve the lives of people...

They Clinton Foundation has done more to improve the lives of people like providing anti-malarial drugs and drugs in Africa to combat HIV than the Piece of Shit you cited.


Piece Of Shit Defined :

The Washington Free Beacon is an American web site that publishes news and associated content from a conservative perspective. It states it is "dedicated to uncovering the stories that the powers that be hope will never see the light of day" and producing "in-depth investigative reporting on a wide range of issues, including public policy, government affairs, international security, and media."[1] It was founded by Matthew Continetti and Michael Goldfarb and launched on February 7, 2012, as a project of the 501(c)4 organization Center for American Freedom.[2] In August 2014, it announced it was becoming a for-profit news site.[3]

The site is noted for its aggressive, ideologically driven reporting, modeled after liberal counterparts in the media such as Think Progress and Talking Points Memo.[2][4] Jack Hunter, a staff member of U.S. senator Rand Paul's office, resigned in 2013 after a Free Beacon report detailing his past as a radio shock jock known as the "Southern Avenger" who wore a luchador mask of the Confederate flag.[5] The publication also broke several stories about former first lady and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's successful 1975 legal defense of an accused rapist that attracted national media attention.[4][6]

The New York Times described the Free Beacon's reporting as "gleeful evisceration."[7] However, its tactics have also led to attacks from media critics and watchdog groups. The Atlantic's Conor Friedersdorf called the Free Beacon's stated mission "decadent and unethical."[8] Media Matters for America founder David Brock sent a letter to news organizations in 2014 saying, "If credible media outlets regard the unethical practices of The Free Beacon as valid, all of journalism will be debased."[9]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Free_Beacon

[BeanMusical]

152. +1

[JoePhilly]

158. And there is the tell.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

165. After the tell comes the showdown:

Ms. Nemcova then met with officers at the Clinton Foundation, Ms. Veres Royal said. Afterward, she said, “Petra called me and said we have to include an honorarium for him — that they don’t look at these things unless money is offered, and it has to be $500,000.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/30/us/politics/an-award-for-bill-clinton-came-with-500000-for-his-foundation.html?_r=0

[Admiral Loinpresser]

167. Then comes the shakedown:

She can't quite be bothered with saving the planet or avoiding the further extermination of native people when there's money to be made. Oh well, I'm sure they can buy us another planet.

Climate campaigners say that the payments raise concerns about industry influence on Hillary Clinton, a likely 2016 presidential candidate who has so far remained mum on her position on the tar sands pipeline, despite a call from 30 environmental organizations—issued over a year ago—urging her to take a stand against it.

The gifts to the foundation—whose stated mission is to "improve global health and wellness, increase opportunity for women and girls, reduce childhood obesity, create economic opportunity and growth, and help communities address the effects of climate change"—were first reported by The Wall Street Journal earlier this week.

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/02/19/clinton-foundation-receiving-millions-proponents-keystone-xl

[Admiral Loinpresser]

168. While we're on the subject of Clintonian ethics:

was her IWR vote in 2002 the result of incredible naivete or a cynical ploy to keep her viable for a later White House run?

[JoePhilly]

171. She was from NY.

How do you think her constituents felt on this topic?

It certainly did not stop Dems from nominating John Kerry in 2004 did it?

btw ... I like this tactic where you reply to your own posts ... and then jump from topic to topic.

The phrase "Gish Gallop" comes to mind.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

173. Are you serious?

You think because a bunch of Saudis organized by Al Qaida attacked their city, they would want to invade Iraq? You realize that rationale is neocon nonsense don't you? In answer to your question, I don't think intelligent New Yorkers were for the invasion of Iraq.

I don't think many thinking people were for it, do you?

So she voted in favor of the greatest military blunder in American history because her constituency wanted it? Then she has absolutely NO business running for president. You'll have to do better than that on a rationale for her vote.

How about: "she's sorry." She finally trotted that lameness out a while back. You have to be ethical enough and smart enough to avoid terrible decisions like that.

[JoePhilly]

176. Were you born then?

Actually, she voted to give the President of the United States, the ability to go to war, having exhausted all other alternatives.

That is what everyone voted on. Including John Kerry. Democratic Presidential nominee, 2004.

Now ... if this is the reason you'd like to allow a Republican to hold the White House, along with a GOP Senate, and House ... tell me ... what happened the LAST TIME we allowed that to happen.

Bush, GOP controls Senate, House, Supreme Court ... 9/11, Katrina, Iraq war, economic collapse.

And so ... when Hillary wins the primary, which she probably will, what are you going to do?

I know ... stay home and let the GOP win and so they can try to destroy the country for a second time in this century, right?

[Admiral Loinpresser]

178. "That is what everyone voted on."

No. Bernie voted the right way. The reason a bunch of senators voted the wrong way was because the expert consultants (who were dead wrong) believed that to be viable as a presidential candidate in 2004 or 2008, you had to vote "yes." So they all did it: Hillary, Kerry, Edwards and Biden. Shame on all of them. Others voted the wrong way because they were stupid or cowardly, but these were the most venal.

The reason Bush won was because Kerry provided no contrast on the Iraq war at a time that the public was starting to come to its senses. We need massive cuts in military spending and a major pull-back on our jingoism, so that we quit creating more terrorists. Hillary is not going to do that. And she's not going to do anything significant about climate change either. So we will keep racing toward human extinction, as if business as usual is OK.

If my choice is Bush III vs. Clinton II, I believe my grand children will not die of natural causes regardless of who wins. Because business as usual, with Wall Street immunity and rapacious corporations and TPP and fracking and Tar Sands destroying the planet means death for humanity. You realize Hillary has a disgusting environmental record, right? I can't remember a Democratic candidate for prez as bad as her, I honestly can't.

We have just passed 400PPM co2 concentration in the atmosphere and a growing number of scientists believe we are in the early phase of a massive extinction of species like we haven't seen in 65 million years. We need radical action and a transformative president to lead us. I don't hear Hillary doing anything but giving mild lip service.

Bernie is talking about these things and he acts on what he promises. He can be trusted. By her IWR vote in 2002, HRC proved she is untrustworthy. She knew exactly what she was doing. She's plenty smart, just not ethical.

[JoePhilly]

170. Unnamed people have "concerns" .... GASP!!!!

[JoePhilly]

169. You want Bill to attend your event ... then you pay him.

You really can not be this naive while posting on DU, can you????

Let's imagine DU decides to hold a dinner and give Bill an award. Do you think he'd come???

You give Bill an award, and you pay him to attend, because your organization will make much more than what you pay Bill for attending.

Duh.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

174. They have a name for that profession.

At $500k a pop, somehow I don't feel like it's all about the love. Typical political formula. Hold office, then gorge on speaking "fees."

[JoePhilly]

175. Bad Bill ... making money on being Bill.

Oh wait ... the money goes to a foundation that does good work around the globe.

Why are you pretending like all the money goes directly in Bill and Hillary's pocket?

When I ask RWers this question, I know what their answer will be ... I wonder what your answer will be.

[uponit7771]

81. +1

[Admiral Loinpresser]

93. Two salient points.

First, your ad hominem style argument against my source is without merit. Of course it's a right wing rag, so what if the article is acceptable? What are your specific complaints about spin or falsit in the article? The article plays it fairly straight in summarizing the linked conversation. The only spin I saw in the article cut for Hillary: the idea that only "left-wing" people support Bernie. That's RW bullshit. His populism is in the main stream because of four decades of wealth transfer to the filthy rich, i.e. people such as HRC and fat cat corporations. Hillary with her support of the racist Tar Sands project and her love of fracking in Eastern Europe and her million dollar wedding for her over-privileged daughter married to a fat cat investment banker-- that is what's outside the mainstream.

Secondly the ruling elites are fine with a Bush III- Clinton II contest, because no matter who wins, Wall Street will be immune from prosecution, the trend toward laissez faire capitalism will continue (e.g. the repeal of Glass Steagall), corporate-designed trade deals will continue, the middle class will continue to shrink and welfare kings will keep getting those big fat checks for poisoning poor people and bombing brown people.

But by all means keep laughing as the world is destroyed.

[uponit7771]

80. You didn't address issues 2 at all, I'm starting to think Bernie's staff knows Bernie is more Kerry

... thank JFK when it comes to people of color and UNLIKE Gore (who blacks voted for in the 90% range) and Obama he's not even attempting to connect connecting at all.

The NPR interview was one of his chances to go there like Clinton has done with guns and he's taking a pass... because he's supported some pro-gun initiatives in the past

But he has tons of time... if he adjust to try and connected with POC and don't do the Kerry thing he turn folk out.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

89. I feel I did address it,

in the last two full paragraphs, but I agree that there was no depth to it. I decided rather than treat either issue in depth better to keep the OP fairly short. I don't think Bernie is like Kerry at all. From a young age, Bernie has sought out working with black people on social justice. For example marching with MLK in the '60s and fighting housing segregation in Chicago in the '70s.

[restorefreedom]

82. it is starting to feel like 2008

wow if she is already lowering expectations this early in the game, that doesn.t bode well. then again, its bernie who has the true progressive message so it is not a surprise.

not trying to be hurtful to hrc supporters, but there is a reason she lost in 2008. and i think those reasons are coming to light again.

[Robbins]

83. Something is in the air

Bernie gets huge cwords wherever goes,and now clintons supporters and downplaying Iowa,and NH.

GOP pundits love to say bernie can't win he can only push Hillary left to hurt her.

They want to run against Hillary.that's the entire 2016 playbook for them.

Republicans in 2003 keep saying howard dean couldn't win.in fact he was one guy who could have successfully run on Iraq.Kerry
voting for it and his i voted for 87 billion before i voted against it doomed him.

If bernie is no threat why downplay expections for iowa and NH? Before the democratic primarys was suspose to be cornation for
Hillary.

Bernie as young man was part of civil rights movements and clintons played dog whistle politics in 2008 against Obama.Black voters
should think twice before supporting her.

Mark my words they are planting seeds to say if hillary loses iowa and NH she only lost to white voters and those states aren't very deverse.Ignoring Obama won Iowa In 2008 and carried both states against republicans.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

86. LBJ saw the handwriting on the wall after NH.

Maybe, the unbeatable HRC will do the same.

[stevenleser]

88. All according to one strategist's opinion who has no connections to the campaign.

Not much there there.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

104. I'm absolutely positive she ad libbed her talking points,

with no coordination with the Clinton campaign, whatsoever.

[stevenleser]

112. So why did you post the OP then? nt

[Admiral Loinpresser]

114. Sorry, didn't know a sarcasm graphic was necessary.

Of course she didn't ad lib that. You cl. Almost everything on thvoid a career limiting move by saying something the HRC campaign would find undesirable. It wasn't by accident those talking points were delivered. Almost everything on those shows is scripted-- either by the producer or by campaigns.

[stevenleser]

116. Of course she did ad lib that. She didnt even try to suggest otherwise. She didnt even use the

"unnamed sources in the Clinton campaign said" tactic. It's all supposition by her.

You didn't realize that?

[Admiral Loinpresser]

121. I don't believe it.

If she's a political consultant making that significant point without preparation and consultation she is a complete outlier.

[stevenleser]

123. You don't believe what exactly? Her not having sources when she never even suggested she had any?

You don't think she would name a source, a poll, something to back her up if she had it? That she would intentionally indicate she is completely alone and out on a limb if she could help not doing so?

[Admiral Loinpresser]

129. First she didn't al lib her points.

She delivered talking points. I guarantee you she prepared them beforehand.

Second what professional reason would she have for IDing herself as a Clinton supporter, other than getting payment from the HRC campaign?

I did one of those shows one time. You practice getting out your points smoothly. You anticipate potential problems when the producer invites you on.

[LanternWaste]

106. We do tend to pretend our wishes are prophecies... human nature, I'd guess.

We do tend to pretend our wishes are prophecies... human nature, I'd guess.

[FSogol]

110. LOL at Washington Free Beacon. You really should delete this nonsense, you

are embarrassing yourself.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

115. Your nonsense should get specific.

Yours is a variation of ad hominem attack, which is an informal logic fallacy. You should cite specifics. Of course it's a RW rag. That doesn't mean it's incapable of posting useful content.

The video has nothing to do with the posting cite. The website article was a throw away. I posted it for the ABC video. However, if the synopsis is inaccurate, point that out.

So if anybody is embarassed, it ain't me.

[FSogol]

117. Maybe Drudge or Info Wars have some good videos you could post?

[Admiral Loinpresser]

119. I rest my case.

You got nothin.'

[nolabels]

124. It's feels kind like a basketball game

The team that goes on to get wiped out has an early ten point lead and is trying to figure out how to parlay the ten points rather than keeping their nose to grindstone and going for the ball. You can't sell nothing, especially when all you have to sell is nothing.

Wanting to live your past in better ways only hinders your future.

I would ask what a liar would offer me to believe in but that is just the same as lying to oneself

[Admiral Loinpresser]

126. Yes, I think HRC

is going to get wiped out just like last time. She is afraid to meet with real people. Her campaign is sheltering her. After these two states, the contrast will be even more clear when Bernie shows he is more comfortable going everywhere and talking to everybody.

[MineralMan]

131. Wishful thinking, eh?

I doubt very much that she's all that worried.

Do you have polls showing that Sanders has a majority in any state? I doubt it.

Bernie Sanders is making progress, no doubt, in NH and IA, but a win in either of them is far from assured. There's still a long time until people actually participate in a caucus or primary.

Premature statements like this one often go awry. (or gang agly, if you prefer an older way of saying that.)

[Rosa Luxemburg]

143. #2 watch this space

don't underestimate Bernie and minority voters. Things are already happening!

[thesquanderer]

146. Smart strategy for HRC

By saying this early in the game that they are prepared to lose IA and NH, it will be no great shakes if they do... and it will be tremendous if they win. It sets up a no-lose scenario for them in those two states.

[bvar22]

151. Hillary must be having sleepless nights....

...watching 2008 play out all over again.

Going from "Front Runner" to "also Ran".

[AtomicKitten]

153. Looks like FREEBEACON source is okay for some, not for others.

---> This thread deemed unacceptable by the Hillary Rah-Rah Machine.

---> This one okay: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026884342

Good lord, keeping up with the spin around here is exhausting.

[nadinbrzezinski]

162. and they are quoting ABC

[AtomicKitten]

163. their argument is that she'll kill in the states that "count"

Same stupid strategy, different election.

Bernie's momentum cannot be denied. It's on.

[nadinbrzezinski]

164. I know, and O'Malley has not caught on fire

[NotHardly]

155. A little reminder of what year it is ...

Just helping out ... it's 2015, summer with the presidential election a bit more than 1 1/2 years away. So, I'm thinking that all this "Hillary is going to Lose" might be a bit premature.

You all are just going to wear yourselves to a frazel if you bang around like this for another 18 months.

[jwirr]

159. Spent a lot of time today fighting about number 2. I then talked to my daughter about the dirty

politics that Hillary is using. She was upset because she is afraid that Bernie cannot win. She finally decided not to vote at all. I have time to change her mind. Go Bernie Go.

[PatrynXX]

172. #2 is historically and physically false

got pictures. people do have pictures of him fighting for civil rights.