Bernie's "She's not qualified" and his switcheroo campaign.

[kstewart33]

More than anything else that Bernie has done in his entire campaign, those two actions together are the most mystifyingly stupid of his campaign.

Why, when the only way that Bernie can win is by convincing a large number of the Clinton super delegates to switch and support him, why would he loudly exclaim that their candidate is unqualified to be president?

Imagine what this morning, those super delegates are thinking: "This guy isn't even a Democrat but a Johnny-come-at-the-last-minute party joiner which he admits he did to increase media attention to his campaign. A Democrat? He's suing the DNC, for geez sake. He's railed against our party many times over the years. He won't give a dime to our down-ballot races.

And now he says that my candidate is not qualified? A backbencher in Congress for 25 years with very little to show for it. And he says that Hillary isn't fit to be president?"

Bern just drove his switcheroo campaign off the cliff.

[LexVegas]

1. A dangerous combination of lack of intelligence and lack of integrity = Bernie. nt

[DURHAM D]

2. I think BS is ready to leave the campaign trail.

Sad that he couldn't come up with a better exit strategy.

[The_Casual_Observer]

3. It's one thing to point out where she has goofed up (in his opinion) but it's quite another

to make big news proclaiming shit like this.

[thesquanderer]

4. This s not going to matter one whit to the super delegates.

They're politicians too. They understand campaigns. They understand rhetoric.

If Obama could turn around and make Hillary Sec'y of State, believe me, Bernie's "she's not qualified because..." litany is not something a SD is going to be at all concerned about. At least what Bernie says about Hillary's positions there are all true, unlike a lot of the stuff Hilary was tossing Obama's way!

[kstewart33]

5. Bernie's statement confirms for many SDs that he is not a Democrat.

And their belief that he is not interested in helping the party and its down-ballot candidates which include many of the SDs themselves.

SDs were established by the party for one purpose: to protect the long-term welfare of the party. Bernie's statement isn't going to help him because these are career Democrats who already believe that he has no business vying for the head of a party in which he has given every indication that he has no interest.

[thesquanderer]

9. The SDs--largely people in Congress--know that Bernie...

...has caucused with the Dems forever. He has consistently been a voice of support, not opposition.

Maybe they aren't thrilled that he isn't tossing funds the party's way, but...

(a) unlike Hillary, he does not have tons of donors who have maxed out at $2700 and thus have funds available to give beyond that (that's where Hillary's support for the party comes from), and

(b) logically, it does not make sense for him to funnel money into campaigns of people who are trying to defeat him (by offering their endorsement to Hillary)

Again, I think it comes down to the fact that most politicians are still realists.

The SD's over-riding concern is that they want the Dems to win the WH in November. If the convention comes around and they see Bernie as the stronger path toward that, that's the only thing that will determine whether or not they switch. And it is possible that they may see him as the stronger nominee, based on things like who comes into the convention with more pledged delegates, who is polling better against the Republican nominee (who will be known at the time, since their convention happens first), what the status of the email investigation is... we can't predict all the variables now, but we do know what their goal is.

[kstewart33]

10. I agree with you about the SD goal.

However, I don't think that they believe that Bernie will win the general election. It would be best for both if the email investigation was resolved before the convention but the Director (Comey) said a few days ago that they are in no rush to do so although a judge is losing patience with them.

If Bernie were thoroughly vetted that includes his biography (his Communist and Marxist relationships, praise of Castro and close relationships and support of the Sandinistas, etc. etc.), and the vetting did not negatively impact his poll numbers, then I agree that the SDs were be a different story.

However, he has not been vetted; up until his interview with the NY Daily News editorial board, Bernie's been given a free pass by the media. So the SDs aren't going to change their minds unless the vetting occurs.

The other probability is that these SDs don't believe that Bernie will be an effective president. Think about it - these members of Congress have observed Bernie for many years. Why have only 7 endorsed him? It can't be that they're all corrupt(!). I'd wager that from their experience with him, they just don't think he would be a good president. But of course, all this is just my view.

[thesquanderer]

11. re: "I don't think that they believe that Bernie will win the general election."

The question isn't really what they believe today, it's what they believe come July 25. A lot can happen between now and then. IF he ends up with more delegates, or IF they have internal polls showing Bernie significantly more likely to win the general, or IF Hillary is under serious threat of legal problems, they may reconsider (especially if two or all three of those things are true). I will grant you, this may be an improbable scenario, but not an impossible one.

As for why only 7 have endorsed him... Hillary is the safe bet. Assuming Hillary wins (which is the most likely scenario), it's better to be on her good side. There is no comparable downside to not endorsing Bernie, who is not expected to win. Also, there might be something to this:

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/04/01/how-hillary-clinton-bought-the-loyalty-of-33-state-democratic-parties/

[kstewart33]

12. TS, I just don't think Bernie will have more delegates by July 25.

His NYDN interview is damaging. And he made it worse with the 'she's not qualified' statement. Both aren't going to help him in NY.

He is sounding like a old pol. That's the worst that can happen to him.

As for the story cited, I and other Hillary supporters don't believe that Hillary is the "merchant of death," "mistress of Satan" (both stated on this forum and there have been worse here) and all of the other attacks she's faced in the last many months of this campaign. It's getting to the point that we shake our heads in wonder and frankly, disgust.

So let's agree to disagree. But I appreciate your thoughtful comments. It's nice to have a thoughtful conversation with a Bernie supporter!

[thesquanderer]

13. re: "I just don't think Bernie will have more delegates by July 25."

I agree. So we may not disagree as much as you think. I just think it's possible. Not probable.

I don't think the NYDN interview itself was so bad... I think the issue about the interview is that a lot more people are being exposed to the negative spin about it than will ever read or hear the actual interview. So yeah, it may hurt him. Or it may be a distant memory by primary day. I think the debate will have more of an impact in NY than the interview will.

But yes, nice to have a thoughtful conversation with a Hillary supporter as well. Luckily, there are still a few of us on each side.

[Sheepshank]

15. "...has caucused with the Dems forever."

a happenstance coincidental convenience.

Dems standards more closely align to his than Reps. Trust me, his caucusing had nothing to do with elevating the Democratic Party,

[thesquanderer]

17. I didn't say he "elevated" them.

But congressional Dems have generally been able to rely on him for his support.

[Sheepshank]

18. again...a coincidental convenience

he didn't do any of that to promote or support the Democratic Party. In fact he's made it publicly clear he despises the party. But Bernie supporters want to use that happenstance caucusing as a reason that we should consider him a Dem. Nope I've been saying for months he is not a Dem and will not party build, and will actually damage the party. Voila, it's all coming to pass.

[thesquanderer]

19. To quote Hillary, "What difference does it make?"

The bottom line is that we have two candidates legitimately running for the Democratic party nomination, with that party's blessing, having met what the party considers to be appropriate qualifications. If it's okay with the party, I don't know why it should be a problem for anyone else.

You can just vote for the one that better represents what you believe the Democratic party's positions should be.

[seabeyond]

6. Excellent post. Nt.

[Lucinda]

7. KNR

[ecstatic]

8. Not to mention the BernieBros are swarming them online.

That alone dooms Bernie.

[MineralMan]

16. I checked in on my progressive House member's FB page

again today, and on Al Franken's, my senator. For every post each makes, no matter what the subject, people chime in with demands that they switch to supporting Bernie. No matter what the subject, that's the demand. Post after post after post.

It's a losing strategy, and then some.

[uponit7771]

14. Sanders is losing more than just this primary right now