2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe Clinton Campaign believes the best way to fight Bernie is to destroy his character
and his reputation as a person of, well, honor. An old fashioned term, I know. But it encompasses those qualities for which Bernie is known. Just as importantly, it highlights her reputation as dishonest and lacking in integrity. The goal of Brock and his team of smear elves, is to drag Bernie down a few notches. They don't have to drag him down to her miserable level, just dirty him up. Thus the cheap dishonest attacks claiming he hobnobbed with lobbyists and took corporate money at luxurious DSCC fundraisers.
Thus the cries of hypocrisy. Thus attacking his credibility on his early activism. Thus the innuendo, smears and lies stacked on half truths. This is, after all, a Clinton Campaign. And that is how they roll
I posted on Tuesday night that one figure coming out of the NH exit polls was a huge red light for them: On honesty and integrity, it was 93% for Bernie and 6% for Clinton. It doesn't take any imagination to understand the panic in the Clinton Camp when they saw that. They know how deadly that stark comparison is.
The not him in the photo junket by the MSM reeks of David Brock. And the accusations strike at the heart of Bernie's reputation as a person of great integrity. We on social media pretty much took care of that one, but within the next couple of days there will be a similar slimy attack from Clinton's hired smear merchants.
This is after all, a Clinton Campaign.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)He aint some shining light, that shines only pureness and good.
I hope she actually does hold him to some account. That's how the process works.
Promise the moon and when your opponent asks how you will do it, claim they are an oligarch out against the people they've been working for their entire adult life.
That is base politics, and Bernie aint above it.
So, GO HILLARY. Bernie isn't a victim, he is a politician.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)has nothing to do with how to pay for a program. its an ugly smear. period.
but that is what brock does best....l
Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)you know, that slimeball brock.....
oh and lets not forget jonathan "its not bernie" capehart.....who will,sacrifice his career to portray bernie as a liar and poser....
Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)Congratulations again on that.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1233592
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)a writer who perpertrates a falshood, and when confronted with the facts, obnoxiously doubles down. oh a writer who just happens to be the partner of someone who used to work for clinton at state.
and we are not supposed to call him out because he happens to be gay and black?
wow, the depseration of the clinton campaign is creating a deafening roar.
Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)Whod've thunk?
First, let's examine the "falshood"
You have 4x alumni who knew both Bruce and Bernie, and who claimed that it was actually Bruce.
You have the roommate, and best man from Rapport's wedding claiming it was Bruce.
You have the widow of Rapport also claiming that she believed it was her husband.
You have a Sanders Spokesperson who says that the campaign isn't positive it was Sanders.
You have a photographer who says it definitely was Sanders.
At the VERY least there was enough evidence to provide very reasonable doubt if it was or wasn't Sanders.
You'd think that Sanders, if his memory is working, could take one look at that photo, and go "yes, that was me right there, not Bruce". I know I can look at photo's from decades past, and even from my childhood and go "yes, that's me" with 100% certainty. Especially photo's that were part of the larger events in my life.
You might want to change your name here mate. One of the Key freedoms of the first amendment is the Press. You obviously aren't for it.
Tolerance is not part of supporting what you agree with. It's only applicable in your behavior on the things you don't.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)i said he needed to retract and that it is pretty crappy of him to double down when confronted with the facts (the photog who took it said it was bernie and was positive)
and freedom of speech applies to all of is, so i think i will hang on to my name
bernies campaign has come out and said they are 100 percent confident it was him.
and if capehart is going to use his position at the wp to push one candidate while slamming another, without disclosing his bias, he better be ready for the apporopriate criticism that will result
have a bernie day!
Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)At least I haven't seen anything at all from you doing it.
However there's a TON of evidence of it being done by fellow supporters of yours that are. On here. On Twitter. On facebook.
If my post came across as laying that on you directly, please accept my sincere apology. I do make an honest effort not to lump everyone into one basket.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)at the overall tone of the issue. there is a lot of stuff flying for sure. i really try and stick to issues and not persons. i don't always succeed, but the primary season will be long..plenty of time for mistakes and corrections on all sides
and this
peace, Amimmoch
Response to Amimnoch (Reply #27)
freedom fighter jh This message was self-deleted by its author.
DhhD
(4,695 posts)events of the past so he wasn't there and Sanders is lying about his Civil Rights activities. In my opinion, Lewis conflated the presence of Bill and Hillary Clinton but never that of Bernie Sanders in the Civil Rights Movement when Lewis said that the Clinton's were present but not Sanders. Was Sanders present at the 2004 event?
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/congressman-john-lewis-endorses-hillary-clinton-n440201
Last week, February 2016, Lewis was seen and heard giving his support to H Clinton for the D-Nomination for President when he actually gave his endorsement, months earlier, on July 30, 2015. Seems like Lewis and the Clinton campaign decided to set up a Swift boating and derogatory character assignation.
Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)So it's your summation that Rep John Lewis is not a man of his own mind, and his own opinion?
I guess the 84% of the rest of the Congressional Black Caucus who also has endorsed Hillary are likewise just pawns in her game?
How about the rest of the 158 Congressional Representatives that have endorsed her are likewise brainwashed? I guess the 2 representatives, this man with such a long and distinguished history in congress was able to pull are the only ones immune to her evil super powers of persuasion?
Ridiculous.
However if such an absurd affirmation was in any way correct, it would seem to me that someone who can pull that much stroke and had that great power to convince would be the one to pick when it comes to getting things done? In particular with the upcoming replacement of Scalia.
Especially when we know that this is what a Clinton SCOTUS appointment looks like:
cali
(114,904 posts)so has her campaign. David Brock ring a bell?
cali
(114,904 posts)He has continued to talk about the inequities in our society as he has always talked about them. If that throws light on Hillary that is unfavorable, that her own fucking fault and her own problem.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)is his "own fucking fault and his own problem". People can and should discuss it, because it is an issue that affects them and provides insight into how his policies would work for those who face these problems.
And YES he does besmirch it each time he talks about her taking campaign donations. Without a lick of proof that she has EVER done anything untoward as quid pro quo.
He is very good at painting himself as some sort of very pure politician, and anyone who doesn't do it his way is the enemy.
Response to boston bean (Reply #5)
Name removed Message auto-removed
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Ads maybe?
Lucky Luciano
(11,257 posts)boston bean
(36,221 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Its obvious & its sickening.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)of attacking his strength of fighting for an even playing field for everybody, rather than increasingly tilting it more and more toward the top 0.01%.
Bernie wants EVERYONE to get a fair shot at an education and a decent life. What a bastard.
bvf
(6,604 posts)islandmkl
(5,275 posts)Martin Luther King, Jr. , Memphis, Tennessee, March 1968 speaking to the striking sanitary workers...
"Now our struggle is for genuine equality, which means economic equality. For we know now, that it isn't enough to integrate lunch counters. What does it profit a man to be able to eat at an integrated lunch counter if he doesn't have enough money to buy a hamburger? What does it profit a man to be able to eat at the swankest integrated restaurant when he doesn't even earn enough money to take his wife out to dine? What does it profit one to have access to the hotels of our cities, and the hotels of our highways, when we don't earn enough money to take our family on a vacation? What does it profit one to be able to attend an integrated school, when he doesn't earn enough money to buy his children school clothes?"
you cannot 'cure' racism but you sure as hell can cure economic inequality
boston bean
(36,221 posts)islandmkl
(5,275 posts)you understand and promote what you think...and I will do likewise...
while you are at it...offer your suggestion(s) at how to eliminate racism throughout the society...
you work on that...I'll work on getting the minorities and disadvantaged economic equality...
blackspade
(10,056 posts)And, no, economic justice is not the only thing he has talked about.
But you know this, even though this is Clinton's current 'attack' du jour.
cannabis_flower
(3,764 posts)our corrupt campaign financing,
the tax system that allows corporations and wealthy Americans to pay less than their share,
criminal justice reform
the right to healthcare and so much more.
Bernie Sanders is not a one issue candidate.
And as far as the Bernie Sanders has no foreign policy experience. Well, lots of presidents had no foreign policy experience. I think we don't have to look back very far to find presidents that had no foreign policy experience when they first took office - Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The important thing is whether you have a good record on foreign policy experience once you have some. Hillary has foreign policy experience but exactly what has she achieved and did she do a good job on foreign policy? There are some of us who aren't exactly impressed with her foreign policy experience.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)I was specifically responding to BB's post about economic and racial inequities.
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)Sorry, I'm just going to need a moment here.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)So, until that day changes, I am not going to make Hillary out to be some monster, when there isn't one iota of evidence she has ever been bribed or voted in a fashion as quid pro quo.
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)Hillary's a corporate tool, bought and paid for. The receipt takes the form of those lucrative speaking fees; the goods delivered were Iraq and a bunch of pro-corporate legislation. Sufficient evidence has been obtained, at least so far as the Voters' Court goes.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)ever said she was influenced directly. Saying she takes corporate cash is only a smear if you think it is. If you think it's OK, then Bernie pointing it out should be irrelevant to you.
CorporatistNation
(2,546 posts)Because that is the way the powers that be like it... They are amaking out just fine the way things are. How's that working for most of the rest of us? WE want fucking BIG change... They want things kept the same. Hillary is compensated by the powers that be to NOT change a GD thing... Money up front... Money and position after. THAT IS HOW "THINGS" WORK!
Jarqui
(10,126 posts)Economic justice is a part of racial justice. I'll let feelthebern.org explain that to you:
http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-racial-justice/
US Poverty Today
Blacks 27%
Latinos 25%
Other 15%
Whites 10%
Unemployment today
Blacks 10.x%
Whites 4.x%
To paraphrase MLK, he said that there wasn't a lot of point to desegregating hotels and restaurants if blacks couldn't afford them. It's hard to argue convincingly against that basic logic.
Economic justice doesn't mean one ignores discrimination, discrimination in voting rights, discrimination in housing, substandard education for blacks, racial disparities and inequalities in healthcare, disproportionate incarceration of blacks, disproportionate shooting of unarmed blacks by police, etc, etc, etc - all the other racial issues.
Combined with the above link, Bernie covers a bunch of them here:
https://berniesanders.com/issues/racial-justice/
Economic justice is a big deal because it helps or reduces many of the above issues:
poverty
unemployment
helps overcome substandard education for blacks for some blacks
substandard education for blacks because more can afford education
racial disparities and inequalities in healthcare because more can afford healthcare
disproportionate incarceration of blacks because more blacks can afford to eat rather than committing crimes to get by
disproportionate shooting of unarmed blacks by police is likely to be reduced because more will be in school or in jobs - off the street
discrimination in voting rights would be improved because more can afford photo ID or whatever to get over the hurdle in front of them
If blacks got similar pay & similar employment as whites and we did nothing else, that would be enormous and help blacks with reduction of nearly all the other issues. It's the only issue on the list that has such a wide impact. Bernie is absolutely right to give it a high priority.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)I think you have "besmirch fever" !1!!!1!1!!111!
And YES he does besmirch it each time he talks about her taking campaign donations
DhhD
(4,695 posts)corporatize, a sovereign country. Clinton and her revolving door team set up the corporatization and fascism of the National Oil Industry of Mexico while Sec. of State.
Check with WikiLeaks. And check with WikiLeaks about what US Energy Corporations got the Oil contracts from the Right Wing Corporate Mexican Leadership. TPP is Clinton's gold standard, after NAFTA.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)And he loves the $$ from the MIC rolling into his state of VT.
Response to boston bean (Reply #136)
Name removed Message auto-removed
boston bean
(36,221 posts)He didn't. He likes to say he doesn't support war, when in fact he does every single time.
He also voted the 2001 AUMF, which to this very day is used to give authority for more military action.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)his standing on principle if he voted against the funding?
Truth be told Bernie can never win in your eyes, anything he does will not be right from your slanted perspective. As with your complaining about his vote to fund the troops, you agree with the funding, you just disagree with the person who voted to fund them.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)Welcome to the world of politics.
Now, try to hold every politician to the same standard.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)His son and my nephew was in Afghanistan. I will not vote for any Democrat that would be willing to let them hang in their with no means to do their jobs even if I disagree with them being sent there and I don't particularly like their jobs.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)It's a weird kind of anti affirmative action.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)And barely does he address the issue of racism keeping wages low.
But whatever, keep on keeping on.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)But whatever
thereismore
(13,326 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)Then again... say it with me now...
Bernie has been fighting for civil rights his entire adult life.
To try to minimize it by attempting to separate social justice from economic justice is simply a way for you to justify backing the corporate candidate who is beholden to Wall Street and health insurance companies.
We all know Bernie is for social justice. To continue to claim he is not, or that he not for it enough, is complete and utter bullshit.
.
Response to boston bean (Reply #1)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Admiral Loinpresser
(3,859 posts)He is the biggest scumbag since Lee Atwater.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)calling children to heel, stumping for her husband on NAFTA, Welfare Reform and the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement and advocating for fracking, Welfare Reform and the TPP. Not to mention taking money from corporations, private prisons and Super-pacs.
Bernie uses her own record very sparingly and usually only in answer to her own vile and often untrue attacks against him.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
this is politics.
Why make your candidate appear so ineffectual that if he loses it was a conspiracy of the oligarch? It might make people feel better, but it's bupkis.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)All over a fifty year old picture?
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)boston bean
(36,221 posts)Only internet warriors are worrying and listening to this extremely non important, issue. And thinking it makes all the difference in the world for Bernie.
Believe me most people aren't going to base their vote on whether Jonathan Capehart wrote something wrong, especially since the wife is still saying it is Rappaport.
Now, believe me, I JUST DON'T give a shit about it, so don't come back to me with arguments that you think I don't think it's Bernie. I DON'T CARE. Like most people living in the US.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Internet warrior that you are...
Clicky, clicky.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)boston bean
(36,221 posts)LOL
That proves I was right in the thick of it..... This is a joke, right?
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)would you like me to go get some more? I can assure you plenty more showed up..
boston bean
(36,221 posts)I was reacting to a new development.
And please post the many others. If they are as innocuous as the one you posted, I'm in good shape. Proving I DON'T give a shit about this.
You got the links to me saying that?
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)boston bean
(36,221 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Your post was pretty much in the middle. Proving you were there too. See, a MFWC argument?
boston bean
(36,221 posts)A post where not one single soul replied to it, put me in the middle of arguments?
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)boston bean
(36,221 posts)you and the original member who made the accusation have provided ZERO evidence of.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Here is another: Post #85, I believe:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1213369
boston bean
(36,221 posts)that the allegation is FALSE.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Like I said, just another mushroom filled with creme post.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)I will especially like you to find the ones that state exactly what I said above, to which a false allegation was made.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Have to go help Bernie out. Have a good day. And don't step on any more creamy mushrooms.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)You both like to skate around the edges of truth.
Ligyron
(7,633 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)was not present on the day of the photographs? Where in her lies standing to judge that photo? In knowing Bruce long ago? In not being there at the event?
How does 'the wife's' word have any merit at all, much less merit comparable to that of Lyon? You still might want to read up on Danny Lyon. His photos are source material for much civil rights and social justice history, disparage his integrity you disparage a vast body of very important works.
The wife. But really long estranged from a five year marriage ex wife. Who was not present.
Words mean things.
cali
(114,904 posts)SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Admiral Loinpresser
(3,859 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Ineffectual? He's winning so far.
Are you implying that you guys have been holding back? Do you have something worse that killing hundreds of thousands with the IWR that Bernie didn't vote for? I seriously doubt it. Hillary was wrong and this is the price she is paying for her little 'mistake', among other 'mistakes'.
Feel the Bern!!!!!
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)end of the world.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)boston bean
(36,221 posts)Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)So, she may as well try that card, see if it sticks. Bernie's message has been consistent and is resonating, he does not need new slogans.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)SmittynMo
(3,544 posts)It's a perfect match for her.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)Along with, "How much can you donate?"
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)All the criticism she's received about things like her relationship with Kissinger, her pandering, her extremely late LGBTQ rights "evolution", her Iraq War vote, her poor judgment for having that private email server, etc. etc. etc. she brought on herself.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)backscatter712
(26,355 posts)But he's a decent and honorable man.
And he doesn't pal around with war criminals.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)in VT all proceeds from the MIC. ie the F35 program and Lockheed Martin.
See how this works?
Do I think Bernie is corrupt person, no I don't.
But don't put a standard on one person, that you won't hold another to.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Do you have any evidence for that claim?
boston bean
(36,221 posts)That is him hobnobbing with Rich Stulen of Sandia. A subsidiary of LMCO.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)This is just a desperate attempt to claim Bernie is corrupt.
Karma13612
(4,552 posts)Response to boston bean (Reply #61)
Name removed Message auto-removed
boston bean
(36,221 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)boston bean
(36,221 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Next time alert then pm MIRT and we'll take him out asap.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)marble falls
(57,101 posts)jillan
(39,451 posts)do you not understand the difference?
Bohunk68
(1,364 posts)SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)A most valuable American, trashed and tarnished. That is not acceptable. But you applaud it.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)The only damage done to Clinton's character was done by Clinton.
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)If recalling your past words and deeds and then drawing a contrast makes you think you're being "besmirched", maybe the problem's with you.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)boston bean
(36,221 posts)This is politics.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)and definitely not over Hillary's sense of entitlement.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)I mean what good would it be to support someone who isn't willing to give it their all.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)is easier to accomplish. I am rather taken aback that you don't know that. Clinton has shown time and again to be a follower, not a leader, because she will do the wrong thing until doing the right thing has become the last and only option.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)standard.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Cool slogan, bro...
boston bean
(36,221 posts)is pretty naïve.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Clinton said: yes Bill do it. Strike this 'compromise' with the GOP.
Sanders said: Mr. President don't do it.
DADT:
Clinton was all for it, because a compromise 'had to be' struck with the GOP
Sanders called it an impugning of the character of thousands of American military personnel.
Marriage Equality
Clinton opposed it as recently as 2013. She only started suporting it after her obstruction rendered her unelectable because of shifting public opinion.
Sanders was right there with the body of consensus within the LGBT rights movement, every step of the way. As mayor of Burlington, he facilitated gay rights marches as far back as the 1980-ies.
Iraq War Resolution
Clinton was all for it, because polls told her that is how she could obtain the presidency in due course.
Sanders voted against it, and warned for the consequences that have, by now, become all too clear and all too atrocious.
TPP
Sanders was always against it, because it will lead to poverty in the United States and detorioration of environmental and labour protection laws.
Clinton calls it / called it / triangulated it a "golden standard".
Fracking
Sanders has warned time and again that we need to move to enegy-independent means of production, and not hazard human health.
Clinton was promoting it across the globe.
Minimum Wage
Clinton would start the negotiations at 12 Dollars an hour, even though that is BELOW living standard.
Sanders would start at 15 Dollars. Maybe he will compromise, but compromising from a strong opening bid is better than compromising from a sub-standard opening bid.
Racial Justice
Sanders has stood with the civil rights movement for four decades. Sometimes he was the ONLY Caucasian congressperson to show up to protest when PoC's voting rights were under threat / being denied. Even now, he is the one with the plan to demilitarise the police, stop the war on drugs (which plays right into the hands of those who want to target communities of colour) and abolish private prisons.
Clinton happily took contributions from the prison industry, which disfavours PoC disproportionally / supports the Death Penalty, which affects communities of colour disproportionally / called minors of colour 'predators who must be brought to heel'.
So yeah, I actually do believe that he won't compromise on anything I care about. Because I know him to be a man of honour and principle. His record informs me of his character and trustworthiness.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)I can just cut and paste what you wrote about DOMA:
Sanders said: Mr. President don't do it.
Of course, with John Lewis so much in the news of late, we can add that he also opposed the bill, which has turned out to be as bad as he foretold. His statement and an analysis of the consequences can be found here: "John Kasich and the Clintons Collaborated on Law That Helped Double Extreme Poverty"
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)With Third Way, it is almost impossible to keep track of every wrong turn they take.
Thanks for the addition, and feel free to add more.
Response to boston bean (Reply #128)
Name removed Message auto-removed
boston bean
(36,221 posts)Response to boston bean (Reply #131)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)One is that a candidate should be willing to do anything to win; Hillary is but Bernie isn't (your post #123).
The other is that Bernie can never live up to that standard of doing the right thing when the wrong thing is easier (your post #128, six minutes later).
Clever argument! Just about any choice Bernie makes can be adduced as support for one prong or the other.
Response to boston bean (Reply #117)
Name removed Message auto-removed
frylock
(34,825 posts)Win at all costs. Scorched earth. Ends justify the means. We know.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Lordy, Lordy! I declare! ... It shor's hot in this kitchen, ain't it?
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)mgmaggiemg
(869 posts)uponit7771
(90,347 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)That's worse than all modern countries. In fact 38 countries have lower infant mortality rates. I fine it immoral to support the profits of Goldman-Sachs over helping the poor in this country. A vote for HRC is a vote for Goldman-Sachs.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)bowens43
(16,064 posts)bklyncowgirl
(7,960 posts)Before the New York Primary Clinton supporters, possibly operatives, were calling into radio talk shows saying that they knew for a fact that Brown was gay leading a frustrated Brown to snarl during an interview with Phil Donahue "Yes I do date girls? Do you want names and phone numbers?" Brown lost New York but his campaign was dealt him the coup-de-grace when a group of anonymous California State troopers went on a news program claiming that the former governor openly tolerated drug use by his rock star friends--including former girlfriend Linda Ronstadt and may have indulged a bit himself. There was something about roaches (of the marijuana variety) found in a bedside soda can.
Mind you there was no direct connection to the Clintons but most suspected that they orchestrated the hit. The novel "Primary Colors" is based on that story. In the novel the target of the smear commits suicide. Fortunately for the state of California Jerry Brown is made of tougher stuff though he did leave politics for a while to get the nasty taste out of his mouth.
Of course in 2008 the Clinton campaign tried to do the same thing to a surging Barak Obama. Smears, innuendo. Pictures of him in Muslim garb turned up. His association with Reverend Wright, etc.
The good thing about this was that by the time the general election rolled around the Clintons had pretty much exposed every possible negative bit of information about Obama. When the Republicans brought it up the reaction was pretty much "Oh crap not this again."
If Sanders can survive the Clintons, he should be able to survive the GOP.
Karma13612
(4,552 posts)But I am not surprised in the least.
As the campaign wears on, I actually am feeling more and more confident that Bernie is made of the right stuff. And like Obama, will be able to tackle not only the Clinton machine, but also the GOP.
And next January, I am taking the day off from work to watch him become POTUS45.
Gnaw on that Hillary and Mitch!
cali
(114,904 posts)SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)peacebird
(14,195 posts)She can Wrap herself in Obama's legacy and spout Bernie's issues all she wants, who would believe a word she says at this point?
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)that she, nor her husband are any sort of Liberals. They are opportunists and corporatists.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)And Team Clinton isn't having it.
Cobalt Violet
(9,905 posts)Just like everything else she seem to stand for until last week or so.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)He saw the photo getting play on social media, remembered the article from Time magazine, and tried to be a smartass by "debunking" it without doing any kind of actual reporting or due diligence.
Seems like Capehart is the culpable one here, not the Clinton campaign.
cali
(114,904 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)Do you have evidence to suggest he was being directed to do this by the Clinton campaign (if that is what you are claiming)?
cali
(114,904 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)Without being directed by the Hillary campaign itself.
They could just be Hillary fans who wanted to try "get" Bernie of their own accord.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)but i am sure its all coincidence..
oberliner
(58,724 posts)On his Twitter feed he says this:
Javier Narvaez
capehart's husband works for the clinton campaign fyi
Jonathan Capehart
Incorrect on both counts.
Do you have evidence to show that he is lying about this?
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)third paragraph, senior protocol officer under sec clinton
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-PLUMBOOK-2012/pdf/GPO-PLUMBOOK-2012-8-22.pdf
an article about the couple referencing his work at state
http://capitolfile-magazine.com/inside-jonathan-capehart-and-nick-schmits-house
but i am sure feels no loyalty at all to his former boss....
oberliner
(58,724 posts)But it's one thing to say that this was motivated by being pro-Hillary and another thing to say that it was orchestrated by the Hillary campaign.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)but its like the game telephone...info is easy to screw up going through many hands
orchestrated is hard to define in this context, imo. we have a guy who used to work for sec clinton. his partner goes on a tear with no verifiable info. when confronted with solid info of his "mistake," he doubles down.
were phone calls made by clinton telling him to do this? unlikely. but it would not surprise me to learn that calls were made by clinton surrogates after the piece came out to schmit or even cape-hart himself as to handle the aftermath.
conjecture on my part.
that is the problem with dirty campaigning. there is always the phone call/paper trail/collusion theories that will persist no matter what.
it has been my experience that when something starts to stink, there is usually something there to cause the smell. but such is politics, hey?
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)Clearly they both like Hillary and that is motivating this.
That does not implicate the campaign itself.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)no_hypocrisy
(46,119 posts)but unless policy issues are challenged, democratic voters are likely to stay with their candidates and not change.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)Generally speaking, personal attacks are rationalized away by people who feel they are just revealing important information about an opponent's character, intelligence, motivations, etc.
Most people never drill very deep into issues and stop at some superficial level of analysis once they have confirmed their preexisting belief/bias. That's particularly easy to see whenever conversation turns to historic votes.
Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)It's all about power.
Is Karl Rove secretly on their payroll? Because this is the type of underhanded attack that is his trademark. Undermine your opponents strong points. I've followed Bernie Sanders career for over 20 years. His character has always been beyond reproach. And this attack is Rove and Fox News quality. Very Clintonesque.
I'll repeat a mantra I used back in 2008, and haven't used since.
No Hillary. No. How. No Way!
Bernie is trying to focus on issues and policy. The Clinton campaign is digging through their outhouse, trying to throw anything at him they hope will stick. Anything to distract from their record and corruption.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Why not just blame Capehart himself?
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)This guy likes Hillary, wanted to get Bernie, thought this was a good way to do so.
There is zero evidence of the campaign having anything to do with it.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)Karma13612
(4,552 posts)was kinda catchy.
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)Listen to the two of them talk.
Listen for the words, I, me, us and we.
Who uses which words the most.
This tells me something quite revealing about both candidates. This is something I do not think either of them have the ability to change. It's a matter of personality and world outlook.
'Nuff Said.
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)And want more republican policies enacted by a Democrat who only talks like a Democrat, & only in public.
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)I'll be just happy with Bernie.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)through outright lies and dirty tricks.
In doing so they risk making the gap greater as a new group of people, who were perhaps neutral on HRC's character, come to see her as nakedly and amorally driven, an Earth-scorcher of General Sherman caliber.
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)And that's a big "NO SALE".
She wouldn't lie to us then any less than she's lying to us now.
She's demonstrating that she's with the "say anything, do anything" school of politics. And she doesn't seem to grasp the obvious -- that that is exactly what people don't want.
This stuff is really stupid on her part. Add that to the list of negative qualities, it's growing.
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Neana
(38 posts)Everything about her seems scripted and phony, and her beliefs about issues change depending on the audience she is talking to.
hoosierlib
(710 posts)Ask of all the women that had the audacity to come forward and claim they were assaulted...
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)If the campaign is run on the issues, Hillary will lose, big time.
The upside is that the attacks backfire, every time.
Nanjeanne
(4,960 posts)Creating such racial divisiveness in their own party. There is only one person responsible and that is Hillary Clinton's. She chose this path in a desperate need to win SC. She will continue on this path bringing the tone of the campaign down and creating a rift with people like me who find it more and more difficult to consider voting for her.
But mark my words. When the next brick in her stairway to the Presidency is needed. It's going to be TAXES ON THE MIDDLE CLASS! That will be the Ohio and Pennsylvania strategy.
dlwickham
(3,316 posts)So telling the truth about Sanders is a bad thing
Strange world you live in
Beowulf
(761 posts)dlwickham
(3,316 posts)What's the thing about denial not being on the river in Africa
You are not going to answer the question. If you want to convince me, you have to do better than "because I told you so."
dlwickham
(3,316 posts)And you'd still ignore it
Beowulf
(761 posts)This is what passes for political discourse in Clintonville?
dlwickham
(3,316 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)therefore you go on the ignore list. I encourage others to do likewise, to cut down on your ability to disrupt, distort and distract.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Gossip : casual or unconstrained conversation or reports about other people, typically involving details that are not confirmed as being true.
Learn the difference.
dlwickham
(3,316 posts)That sounds like a lesson Sanders fans should learn
PatrynXX
(5,668 posts)And I don't think he cares let alone paying attention to the mud. He's Jewish, he's used to it. Just noise.
Politicub
(12,165 posts)It's about who is going to win and nominate the next Supreme Court justice.
If hell freezes over and Obama gets to nominate someone this year, it still means that more than one justice will most likely retire during the next presidential term.
krawhitham
(4,644 posts)Either get people to like her more by promoting her views and ideas OR make people like Bernie less by attacking and smearing him and his ideas
She and her campaign has chosen the latter which will alienate Bernie's supports and if she wins doing this many will not vote for Hillary come November. Bernie supporters will feel the Clinton Machine STOLE this from them with slander, smears, & lies. So if she wins the primary we could very well be screwed because it could very well end up costing us the supreme court for 15-20 years and much more.
Now if it is Trump or Cruz I do not think it maters who we run, we win. But if Jeb or Kasich win the primary we have problems because the Clinton campaign has alienated young and independents voters. The Young might stay home or jump ship and the independent voters will simply vote for the GOP guy (they're called independent for a reason).
If she had picked option #1 and won the Bernie supporters would have thought they fought the good fight and just lost to the better campaigner, most would have no ill feelings for Hillary and would for the most part coalesce around her for the General Election run.
But in the end they have decided to go full tilt boogie scorched Earth on Bernie and that decision might cost us all, everything
yourpaljoey
(2,166 posts)Could not find a single instance of him dipping Susie's pigtails in the inkwell in grade four,
or throwing snowballs at the school bus, or copying from his neighbor during Science 101.
Lord knows they have looked. He has been vetted by the hungriest, most viscous,
best-paid team ever assembled... and He. Came. Clean.
He is ready for the General.
Hillary, on the other hand - well, to quote the Fonz, "Hey Ho!"
MisterP
(23,730 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)And if Bernie can't stand the heat, he can stay out of the kitchen. Bernie supporters complain to much about the rough and tumble of elections that is always the case.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Or is her campaign too busy trying to explain why she preached against LGBT rights for 20 years? Want to play hot kitchen games with your own posts, that's perfectly acceptable under DU rules and it would be fun for me....it's rough and tumble you want, you sure can have it. Just ask.
cali
(114,904 posts)That poster will not respond
Fearless
(18,421 posts)Andy823
(11,495 posts)What has been going on around here by so many of those who call themselves Bernie supporters? You know, the ones that never say anything if it's not negative towards Clinton, and especially the ones that continue to point out how they will NEVER vote for her if she winds the GE, even though they don't have to admit such things they, seem to love saying it. Do you mean that kind of character assassination?
Uncle Joe
(58,365 posts)plus with the African American community, "two birds with one stone."
Thanks for the thread, cali.