During the first three weeks of March, democratic party primary elections in Massachusetts and Arizona have generated a pair of online petitions that reflect the degree to which Bernie Sanders supporters feel that the game is rigged in favor of Hillary Clinton.
The first is a Change.org petition calling for the arrest of former president Bill Clinton for violation of Massachusetts election laws. Inexplicably, and for no plausible reason, Bubba saw fit to appear at multiple polling places during the day to just, oh, I don’t know, chat it up with folks I guess. To date, upwards of 120,000 people have signed the petition. If this was a petition on the Whitehouse.gov website, it would have easily passed the threshold necessary for the Obama administration to give it serious consideration, which is 100,000 signatures in 30 days.
I’ve written this previously, but I’ll write it again. The Clinton camp and the DNC are now running the very real risk of seeing millions of Sanders supporters boycotting the general election due to a perception that the fix has been in from the beginning.
Can you say President Trump?
Steve, while Bill Clinton may have acted a bit iffy in MA, there’s no evidence he broke any laws and, even if his presence had any effect, he could hardly have swung 17,000 votes to steal the election.
And your rage about Arizona is absolutely misplaced. The number of polling places in Maricopa County was entirely a decision of local county leaders, not the DNC and certainly not anyone in the Clinton camp. Indeed, since Clinton won Maricopa County by nearly 20%, her voters were at least as affected by delays as Sanders’ were. Further, the DNC had zero to do with registration and enforcement of party ID, either.
“Further, the DNC had zero to do with registration and enforcement of party ID, either.”
Link?
Seriously, John? Like every other state, that’s handled by the local government. http://www.azsos.gov/elections/voting-election/register-vote-or-update-your-current-voter-information
Poll workers, too. The parties do not control the elections anywhere.
Seriously, folkbum?
“Veteran Democratic political strategist Donna Brazile is an adjunct professor, author, a syndicated columnist, and the Vice Chair of Voter Registration and Participation at the Democratic National Committee.”
https://www.democrats.org/person/donna-brazile
Meaning, Brazile helps organize registration drives around the country, but neither she nor anyone else at the DNC makes the registration rules, hires poll workers, or controls where and when voting takes place in any state or municipality. That’s just not how the world works.
You live here in Wisconsin, right? Do you think the DNC makes the rules about voter registration here, too? or about how many polling places? or who works the tables in those polling places? Of course not.
Look, there are legitimate gripes to be had against DWS and the DNC this cycle. The Maricopa County fuck-up is not one of them.
folkbum,
Please take this link back to your bosses at “Hillary for America.” It’s 90-seconds of President Reagan with the Statute of Liberty in the background saying, there is no “freedom,” without “collective bargaining,”
“These are the values inspiring those brave workers in Poland, the values that have inspired other dissidents under communist domination, who have been willing to go into the gulag and suffer the torture of imprisonment, because of their dissidence. They remind us that where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost… They remind us that freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. You and I must protect and preserve freedom here, or it will not be passed on to our children and it will disappear everywhere in the world. Today, the workers in Poland are showing a new generation how high is the price of freedom, but also how much, it is worth that price. I want more than anything I’ve ever wanted, to have an administration that will through its actions, at home and in the international arena, let millions of people know, that Miss Liberty, still lifts her lamp beside the golden door.”
http://bloggingblue.com/2015/03/ronald-reagan-collective-bargaining-freedom-video/#comment-146867
I don’t need to (also, they are not my “bosses”), as Clinton fully supports collective bargaining rights for all workers.
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/labor/
folkbum, you wrote, “I don’t need to…”
Yes, you do. Using President Reagan’s pro-union statements against the GOP makes political sense.
You wrote, “(also, they are not my ‘bosses’)”
If you’re not getting significant compensation, why have you caved?
WRT your link, there’s no mention of repealing NAFTA. There’s no mention of NAFTA on steroids, aka the TPP. There’s no mention of her conveniently timed and tepid TPP flip-flop. She wants to change a few sentences and then pass it.
From wealthy Utah banker Marrineer Eccles in 1933:
“It is utterly impossible, as this country has demonstrated again and again, for the rich to save as much as they have been trying to save, and save anything that is worth saving. They can save idle factories and useless railroad coaches; they can save empty office buildings and closed banks; they can save paper evidences of foreign loans; but as a class they can not save anything that is worth saving, above and beyond the amount that is made profitable by the increase of consumer buying. It is for the interests of the well to do – to protect them from the results of their own folly – that we should take from them a sufficient amount of their surplus to enable consumers to consume and business to operate at a profit. This is not “soaking the rich”; it is saving the rich. Incidentally, it is the only way to assure them the serenity and security which they do not have at the present moment.”
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/09/marriner-eccles-on-the-need-to-save-the-rich-from-themselves.html
From Eccles’ book, “Beckoning Frontiers,” in 1966.
“As mass production has to be accompanied by mass consumption, mass consumption, in turn, implies a distribution of wealth, … to provide men (sic) with buying power. … Instead of achieving that kind of distribution, a giant suction pump, had by 1929 – 30 drawn into a few hands an increasing proportion of currently produced wealth … The other fellows could only stay in the game by borrowing. When their credit ran out, the game stopped.” –Marrineer Eccles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriner_Stoddard_Eccles
FDR appointed Eccles to the Board of the Federal Reserve.
John, I honestly don’t understand what you’re trying argue here, or what you think I believe. Do you really think I’m suggesting that Clinton isn’t trying to use her support for labor against the GOP?
And about what do you think I have caved? Again, honestly, I don’t know what you mean here. Who or what do you think I am that you are so angry at and opposed to?
folkbum,
You wrote, “John, I honestly don’t understand what you’re trying argue here, or what you think I believe.”
I don’t believe you.
You wrote, “Do you really think I’m suggesting that Clinton isn’t trying to use her support for labor against the GOP?”
If you have any evidence that the 99% can trust President Hillary Clinton to battle against wealth inequality, please present it. If you have any evidence she will support collective bargaining for anyone, please share it. If you have any evidence she will support collective bargaining for public sector workers, such as yourself, please share it.
You wrote, “And about what do you think I have caved? Again, honestly, I don’t know what you mean here.”
Are you still confused?
You wrote, “Who or what do you think I am that you are so angry at and opposed to?”
When did you first imagine that I was angry at you? Please be specific. According to you, Steve’s got, “rage.” Do you think everyone is against you? Or, is it limited to Republicans, Democrats, and Independents who are troubled by Sec. Clinton selling out to Wall Street, and until Sanders forced her to, embracing the TPP?
Well, I didn’t know at the time I wrote my comments that Sanders can talk to the animals, so I now renounce every kind word I ever said about Hillary Clinton. You win.
folkbum,
16. Since you claim Sec. Clinton, “fully supports collective bargaining rights for all workers,” will she promise to renegotiate NAFTA?
Below is 2008 video of President Obama promising to renegotiate NAFTA.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PF9gpvI2UfU
16.1 Did President Obama keep his promise?
Per your link about Sec. Clinton supporting collective bargaining for all workers, I saw no reference to “right-to-freeload,” laws; what the GOP calls right-to-work. As you know, it overturns that a, “majority rules.” If a majority of workers vote for a union to represent them, the union can’t compel dues. That means the union can’t afford the attorneys, financial jocks, PR firms and accountants that the owners are hiring to hide assets.
16.2 Does Sec. Clinton have a strategy for overturning right-to-freeload laws?
16.2.1 If so, what is it?
16.2.2 If unions can’t compel dues, does “collective bargaining,” matter?
16.3 Why hasn’t President Obama opposed right-to-freeload laws?
16.4 Why hasn’t Sec. Clinton criticized President Obama for not opposing right-to-freeload laws?
folkbum,
You wrote, “And your rage about Arizona is absolutely misplaced.”
1. Do you have a degree in psychology or psychiatry?
2. I missed the “rage” in Steve’s post. Can you point it out?
3. “The number of polling places in Maricopa County was entirely a decision of local county leaders, not the DNC and certainly not anyone in the Clinton camp.”
Way to bury the DNC and “Hillary for America.”
Sen. Sanders should double whatever “Hillary for America’s” paying you.
4. Did the DNC not know there was a Presidential election coming up?
5. Am I wrong that ALEC (they’re national) works really hard at the state and local levels to shorten the hours polling places are open in precincts that lean Democratic. Don’t they work at state and local levels to restrict absentee voting (if it will help Republicans), and reduce the number of polling places in Dem leaning areas?
6. Isn’t it the DNC’s job (7. and doesn’t “Hillary for America” control the DNC?) to roll up their sleeves and work with state Democratic parties (DPW) to fight ALEC?
8. Are you and All1dr going to be here after the primary? If you’re not, it’s going to look even more like “Hillary for America” hired you both for the primary.
Okay, now I see what’s going on here. You’re constructing a long chain of events through which Hillary Clinton is personally responsible (and, as such, should never be elected president) for Arizona’s being a red state for decades. Gotcha.
Tell you what: I have $100 for the Sanders campaign if you can link me to what the Sanders camp did in the run-up to the Arizona primary try to expand the voting opportunities in Maricopa County. I mean, if he’s the *real* progressive in this race then surely his team was on the ball there, no?
Oh, and as for “working with state Democratic parties,” I would like to point out that Sanders is as we speak throwing a hissy fit over Hillary Clinton and George Clooney raising money for state parties and down-ballot races. So get your message straight.
folkbum,
If you want to keep hanging curve balls,
“Tell you what: I have $100 for the Sanders campaign if you can link me to what the Sanders camp did in the run-up to the Arizona primary try to expand the voting opportunities in Maricopa County. I mean, if he’s the *real* progressive in this race then surely his team was on the ball there, no?”
I’ll keep hitting them.
DEMOCRATIC
N-A-T-I-O-N-A-L
COMMITTEE
They’ve had eight-years of an allegedly Democratic President watching their back so they could defend voting rights in all 50-states for both parties, for all Americans who are registered to vote.
Instead, you’ve got Obama4America skimming Democratic, progressive, and labor dollars from the DNC. How much did Obama4America spend in Arizona to protect voting rights?
We could have taken the Senate in 2014, if Obama hadn’t suddenly stopped talking about income inequality in the months before the election. Worse, he started talking about Mike Grebe’s favorite topic, “terrorism.” A huge win for the GOP and defense contractors who outsource U.S. tax dollars intended for national defense.
“US Air Force using counterfeit Chinese parts”
https://www.rt.com/news/us-air-force-counterfeit-electronics-879/
Obama knew the easiest way to raise money from the elites in his last two-years in office for his Presidential library, was to insure that Mitch McConnell was Senate Majority leader. The bonus is, fighting a Republican Senate falsely cements his legacy as a progressive.
Where was Sec. Clinton?
We’ve got voter ID in Wisconsin. Isn’t that just welfare for the GOP? I’m, guessing voter ID will reduce their mailing costs. They don’t have to use the United States Post Office, which they hate, to mail post cards into Democratic leaning areas for “voter caging.” http://crooksandliars.com/2014/10/voter-caging-wisconsin
You’ve got me seriously considering another $100 on top of the $550 I’ve already sent Sen. Sanders.
John, you link to rt.com? Oh, please. And also the “voter caging” story was retracted–I know because I had to issue my own correction when I wrote about the John Doe docs myself.
But still: You continue to believe that Clinton and the DNC (by the way: Clinton does not control the DNC; the current chair is an Obama appointee, for example) should have done more to fix the problems that developed in Arizona. Let me spell this out for you:
1) Democrats don’t control AZ, and haven’t for a long time.
2) Democrats have been fight hard to restore the Voting Rights Act, including in the Congress and the Obama administration’s vigorous defense at SCOTUS.
3) Clinton, as much as Sanders, has been talking VRA and promises to fight to restore it. (Although you seem to think every word on her campaign page is a lie, since even though I linked to her defense of labor and collective bargaining, you insist she does not support labor or collective bargaining.) (Well, that’s the charitable explanation; the less charitable one is you are just lying about Clinton.)
4) No one, not even St. Bernard of Vermont, foresaw the egregious problems that would develop last Tuesday. If you blame Clinton for not having ESP to know it would be a problem, why aren’t you blaming Sanders for the same lack of foresight?
folkbum,
11. So that’s a “no,” on carrying water back to “Hillary for America?”
12. If it’s wrong, inaccurate, or incomplete, why hasn’t RT retracted the story?
13. Is New York Mayor Bloomberg ok with you? His media reported the same thing a year earlier,: “China Counterfeit Parts in U.S. Military Boeing, L3 Aircraft”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-11-07/counterfeit-parts-from-china-found-on-raytheon-boeing-systems
14. Did Obama’s DOJ indict anyone who works for U.S. defense contractors?
14.1 Can you identify new U.S. manufacturing that’s taken over defense work that was offshored?
14.2 How do you offshore defense contracts without offshoring the spec sheets?
14.3 Isn’t that a breach of classified information?
folkbum,
15. Does “Hillary for America,” encourage you to link to articles you wrote that required retractions?
“Note: After this commentary was written, The Progressive Magazine retracted its report that Walker staff may have engaged in vote caging. We have removed the allegation from the text.”
15.1 Are you saying that (a) Republicans don’t voter cage, (b) They do, but not in Wisconsin. (c) They do in Wisconsin, but it’s done nationally by the DNC’s counterpart, the RNC. (d) Something else.
If (d) please explain.
Is my spelling ok?
folkbum,
You wrote, “But still: You continue to believe that Clinton and the DNC (by the way: Clinton does not control the DNC; the current chair is an Obama appointee,”
Correct.
And more so after your response, but I’ll continue to keep an open mind.
When you’re responding to questions, #7 in this case, imho it would help if you’d number them.
7.1 Let’s say you’re right, Sec. Clinton doesn’t control the DNC. Then in what areas are “Hillary for America,” and the DNC not aligned?
Please prioritize them, the most important difference first. If you can’t persuade me on this, I’m going to stick to my original opinion. Sec. Clinton is following President Obama’s lead and they are fully in control of the DNC and all party apparatus. I hope we agree that Wisconsin is critical to any Democrat running for President.
7.2 Would you agree that the DNC picked Mike Tate to run DPW?
7.3 Would agree that the DNC through Mike picked Mary Burke as the last candidate for Governor?
7.4 Would you agree that the DNC through Mike picked Chris Abele to crush Milwaukee County unions, especially public sector unions, and to groom him to run for Governor?
7.4.1 Do you agree that by slashing Supervisor salaries, ($25,000 a year?), Mr. Abele destroyed a fertile proving ground for Democrats to evaluate and groom future leaders? See Jason Haas and others.
7.5 If the DNC didn’t pick Abele and Burke through Mike, is the responsibility for Abele and Burke all his?
7.6 Would you agree that through Sen. Vinehout, the DNC wanted Martha Laning, to take over for Mike Tate?
7.7 Could you provide an analysis of Ms. Laning’s tenure, so far, as DPW chair?
7.8 Is there any strategy you would recommend through which DPW could strip Sheriff David Clarke of his affiliation with the Democratic party?
7.8.1 Would you support such a strategy?
folkbum,
You wrote, “1) Democrats don’t control AZ, and haven’t for a long time.”
I have no data to dispute that, but hasn’t Sen. McCain been a reliable pro-choice vote for decades?
17. Why is that? Why can’t Democrats get their message out in red states?
17.1 If the DNC has abandoned Arizona and other deeply red states, to what states have those DNC resources been re-deployed?
You wrote, “2) Democrats have been fight hard to restore the Voting Rights Act, including in the Congress and the Obama administration’s vigorous defense at SCOTUS.
3) Clinton, as much as Sanders, has been talking VRA and promises to fight to restore it.”
Correct, based on everything I know.
You wrote,
“(Although you seem to think every word on her campaign page is a lie,”
17.2 Where did you get your degree in mind-reading?
You wrote, “since even though I linked to her defense of labor and collective bargaining, you insist she does not support labor or collective bargaining.)”
Correct.
I would love to be wrong about that or, I would love for her to evolve on it.
You wrote, “(Well, that’s the charitable explanation;”
17.3 I haven’t seen anything I would characterize as “charity,” from you on this thread. Could you point it out? I thought the “Oh Please,” was sarcastic? Was I wrong? Was your, “Let me spell it out for you,” intended as “charity?
You wrote, “…the less charitable one is you are just lying about Clinton.)”
17.4 If you find anything I’ve written here to be false, inaccurate, or incomplete, please point it out. I have tremendous respect for what Sec. Clinton has accomplished. Her place in history is assured, I think our country and the world owe here a great debt. She was way ahead of her time on socialized insurance for health care aka single payer. I opposed her at the time and was wrong. have since come around.
You wrote, “No one, not even St. Bernard of Vermont, foresaw the egregious problems that would develop last Tuesday. If you blame Clinton for not having ESP to know it would be a problem, why aren’t you blaming Sanders for the same lack of foresight?”
Until you or someone else persuades me otherwise, I’ll continue to believe that Wall Street and the oligarchs control the main-stream media, the Democratic (and the Republican) party, President Obama, and Sec. Clinton. I’d very much like to be wrong about that.
17.5 Have you seen the movie, “The Big Short?”
President Obama’s DOJ didn’t indict one Wall Street CEO. Sec. Clinton has never attempted to hold him accountable. AFAIK, in the U.S. Senate, only Sen. Sanders and Sen. Warren have raised objections.
17.5.1 Would you agree that we have a two-tiered justice system; one for the elites, one for everyone else?
folkbum,
You’re hanging another curve, belt-high, over the plate.
“Oh, and as for “working with state Democratic parties,” I would like to point out that Sanders is as we speak throwing a hissy fit over Hillary Clinton and George Clooney raising money for state parties and down-ballot races.”
9. Where’s your link that Sen. Sanders is criticizing Sec. Clinton, “and George Clooney raising money for state parties and down-ballot races.”
Here’s “The Hill’s” reporting on Sen. Sanders’ criticizing Sec. Clinton. There’s no mention of what you claimed?
Here’s what they did report: ““Here is the truth: while tens of millions of Americans are struggling to put dinner on the table, the wealthiest people in this country have never had it so good,” he said. “And the great question of this campaign is will we restore a vibrant democracy in this country, or will we slide into an oligarchy in which the economic and political life is controlled by a handful of billionaires?”
10. folkbum, did you intentionally distort Sen. Sanders’s criticisms, or did you make an honest mistake?
How’s my message? Is it, “straight,” enough?
So you acknowledge that Sanders is criticizing this fundraiser, right? Here is what it’s about: “Funds raised by the event don’t go directly into Clinton’s coffers: The Hillary Victory Fund (despite its rather specific name) is a joint fundraising committee that technically includes the Democratic National Committee and 32 state party committees.”
Ergo, if Sanders is criticizing this event, he’s criticizing all this fundraising for Democrats in state and local races. Period.
folkbum,
“9. Where’s your link that Sen. Sanders is criticizing Sec. Clinton, “and George Clooney raising money for state parties and down-ballot races?”
9.1 Do you have a quote that Sen. Sanders or anyone connected with his campaign, has ever criticized the funding of Democratic “state parties and downballot races?”
9.2 Which “state parties and down-ballot races” are getting the money from the Clooney fundraiser?
9.2.1 Do they have to endorse Sec. Clinton to get the money?
9.3 Is there a web site we can check for donations to DNC and then who they give it too?
9.4 Do you know how much Wisconsin contributes to the DNC?
9.5 How much do we get back? Does it go to DPW, to others, directly to candidates?
9.6 Can you estimate how much DNC money Chris Abele has received?
9.6.1 Did that come directly from the DNC?
9.6.2 Was it channeled through DPW?
9.6.3 Was it paid to law firms, PR, advertising, media firms, who then turned around and did work for Mr. Abele, but didn’t bill him?
Look, John, I’m not your google monkey.
I don’t work for Hillary Clinton. I don’t work for the DNC, or DPW, or Mike Tate, or Chris Abele, or Martha Laning.
I just wanted to point out to Steve that Sanders supporters are not really helping their cause by pursuing two dumb things–a petition to arrest Bill Clinton for stopping by to thank poll workers and a petition de facto blaming the Clinton campaign for a problem caused by local officials–rather than, you know, trying to promote what’s good about Bernie and change Clinton voters’ minds.
But you want to make this into some epic whatever. I’m done with that. Have a nice holiday.
folkbum,
18. Whose “google monkey,” are you?
18.1 How’s the pay?
19. Does this mean you won’t be at Blogging Blue until after the primary; or are you just running away from this thread?
20. Any reason Ms. Laning’s last on your list?
20.1 Didn’t you already include her when you mentioned DPW?
John, how much does the Sanders campaign pay you?
Will you vote for Clinton if she ultimately becomes the nominee?
Dan,
Zero.
I’ve never requested employment from the Sanders campaign. Outside of being a donor, I doubt anyone connected with the campaign knows who I am. I have no idea whose running Sanders’ campaign in Wisconsin or how to contact them.
I sent Obama money in 2008 and voted for him. I sent him less money when he was running in 2012. I intended to vote for him. The night before the election, I made the decision I had been contemplating for some time, to trust the pollsters. They predicted Wisconsin would go for Obama. Based on that I took a very deep breath and voted for Jill Stein, the Green candidate for President. The rest of my ballot was all Dems. I breathed a huge sigh of relief when Obama won Wisconsin. I wanted to try and use my 2008 ballot to send DPW and DNC a message.
If Sec. Clinton is Dem’s choice, (if she continues to tack towards protecting Wall Street and the elites) I will follow the same strategy as I used in 2012. If I have any doubts about her winning Wisconsin, I’ll play it safe. I’ll vote for her. If I’m really confident she’s safely ahead in Wisconsin, I’ll vote a straight Dem ticket, but Green for President.
I completely agree with Steve’s observation about young voters. A lot of the smart, young people I follow on Twitter don’t even want to vote for Sen. Sanders. They see Dems as sellouts and don’t trust them. I’ve seen no evidence that DPW or DNC understands that.
Sen. Sanders agrees with Trump on Wall Street and the TPP. He’s the only Dem who can appeal to blue collar workers, who mostly vote Republican.
Dan,
Apologies for the error in my reply.
INCORRECT: “I wanted to try and use my 2008 ballot to send DPW and DNC a message.”
CORRECT: “I wanted to try and use my 2012 ballot to send DPW and DNC a message.”
Jay,
Rage? You’re either a mighty dainty fellow, or you’re trying to deliberately characterize me in an unpleasant light. It’s one of the two.
So you’re telling me that the Arizona state Democratic Party, or the Clinton campaign, or the DNC, could have done absolutely nothing to ensure that yesterday’s election proceeded one hell of a lot smoother than it did? Nothing?
They couldn’t have provided any resources to local officials to expand capacity, done any public education campaigns to inform people about who was eligible to vote, lobbied for a greater number of polling places.
They’re just at the mercy of whatfuckingever, eh?
Please.
And what did the Sanders campaign do in advance of election day to solve the problem? Look, it’s ridiculous to think that people who A) didn’t cause the problem and B) didn’t know there was a problem since C) the people in charge in Maricopa Co. were responding to a pattern of decreased in-person voting and also didn’t know there was a problem are some how responsible. The DNC and the Clinton machine, like the Sanders team, don’t have ESP and therefore didn’t magically intuit that there would be such a massive cock-up.
It doesn’t excuse the cock-up, sure. And the people who made the actual decisions to cut voting locations should be held accountable. But those are Arizona electeds, not DWS, HRC, or the DNC.
To look at what happened last night in Phoenix and decide that it’s a valid reason to stay home in November rather than vote for Hillary Clinton, that’s just …. insane.
“I’ve written this previously, but I’ll write it again. The Clinton camp and the DNC are now running the very real risk of seeing millions of Sanders supporters boycotting the general election due to a perception that the fix has been in from the beginning.”
Are you taking a responsible stance by asking Sanders supporters to vote for whomever wins the Democratic nomination? Or are you just bashing Hillary based on anything but facts? If it is the latter, shame on you and your ignorant hypocrisy.
Are those my only two choices All1dr? Is it possible there are more than two choices? Also, am I under oath? Your tone makes me think so.
Please forgive my tone. You know better than I whether or not you are under oath. I object to your unfounded accusation that the DNC, the Clinton campaign, or Secretary Clinton have anything at all to do with the ridiculous situation in Maricopa County. Have you not seen the same, or worse in Wisconsin? The cause and reasons for reducing the number of polling stations and hours, thus making voting as difficult as possible for the elderly, students, black and brown people, and anyone who typically votes Democratic, has everything to do with voter suppression. Your further assumption that it is the responsibility of one of the candidates and the DNC to correct the situation in advance of a primary is an impossible request (Folkbum’s replies addressed this very well) and illustrates to me an irrational sense of victimization. The victimization is counter-balanced by the idea that Secretary Clinton possesses powers beyond belief and that she is capable of creating anything and everything surrounding unfavorable circumstances for Senator Sanders. Once again, as with everything Clinton, there isn’t a hint of proof beyond the burning desire to make it so. Sen. Sanders blames the Voter Rights Act being struck down by SCOTUS as the cause of the mess in Phoenix. To me, it seems small and picky to threaten that millions of people might throw away their votes if Secretary Clinton doesn’t stop whatever it is that you think she is doing.
Tell you what, All1dr,
The perception out there right now is that the DNC had something to do with the mess in Arizona. And just like all of you who made no protest when John Lewis made his disparaging remarks about Bernie, or who said nothing when Debbie Wasserman Schultz tried to limit the number of debates, or scheduled them during low viewing times, or who were quiet when Clinton deliberately distorted Bernie’s positions on health insurance, or when David Brock told the media that apparently black lives didn’t matter to Bernie, I think I’ll just let this one ride.
Steve,
I understand your support of Senator Sanders, however, your distorted hatred for Secretary Clinton is delusional. You are clueless as to what ‘I, or all those like me’ think. You believe that I should object because John Lewis did not see Sanders during the fight for civil rights, so? When did that become disparaging? There was nothing there unless you want to make it up. It would have been difficult for Hillary to distort Bernie’s position on healthcare, since he didn’t have a plan at that point. I felt that Wasserman Schultz’ handling of the breach of Clinton’s voter web pages was awful, however. But, Sanders’ and his staff didn’t pay any price at all for their illegal search. (Odd that you didn’t mention that in your list of offenses.) Jeff Weaver tried to make Sanders look like some kind of altruistic hero for firing one person who tried to copy pages and stayed on that site over six hours, all well known to be illegal by even the newest of campaign workers. If you recall, the following debate, Sanders came out fighting and defensive, but needed prompting to apologize. Clinton accepted that quasi-apology with much more grace than it deserved. I guess Bernie’s staff illegally viewing Clinton’s web pages was okay cuz it was Bernie. Jim Weaver and Tad Devine misrepresent and disparage and lie. You’d better get a thicker skin if you want to stay in any kind of political discussion, let alone campaign. You may let this ride because there is absolutely no winning in your juvenile pissing match.
All1dr:
You responded to Steve with, “I understand your support of Senator Sanders, however, your distorted hatred for Secretary Clinton is delusional.”
I’ve been reading Steve for a long time. He’s a Democrat. Unlike me, he’s holding the party line on legalizing pot. Your attempt at slandering Steve fails.
3. What medical school did you graduate from? You’re calling Steve, “delusional.”
3.1 Based on what?
3.2 If someone’s, “delusional,” how are they rational enough to make the decision to, “hate?”
According to you, Steve’s “hatred” for Sec. Clinton is “distorted.”
3.3 Doesn’t that mean that it’s less hateful than “hatred,” that’s not, “distorted?”
You wrote, “You are clueless as to what ‘I, or all those like me’ think.”
4.1 Have you ever commented at Blogging Blue before?
4.2 If not, how are any of us supposed to have a clue about what you think?
4.3. Why don’t you explain to us what you and “all those like,” you think?
You wrote, it would have been difficult for Hillary to distort Bernie’s position on healthcare, since he didn’t have a plan at that point.”
There’s a photo of Sen. Sanders standing right behind the Sec. Clinton when she was First Lady, talking about her health care plan.
5. Have you seen it?
You wrote, “But, Sanders’ and his staff didn’t pay any price at all for their illegal search. (Odd that you didn’t mention that in your list of offenses.) Jeff Weaver tried to make Sanders look like some kind of altruistic hero for firing one person who tried to copy pages and stayed on that site over six hours, all well known to be illegal by even the newest of campaign workers. If you recall, the following debate, Sanders came out fighting and defensive, but needed prompting to apologize. Clinton accepted that quasi-apology with much more grace than it deserved. I guess Bernie’s staff illegally viewing Clinton’s web pages was okay cuz it was Bernie. Jim Weaver and Tad Devine misrepresent and disparage and lie.”
It sounds as though this is something. I hadn’t heard about it.
6. Do you have a link?
As you know, Republicans are emphasizing that Sec. Clinton leaked classified information in her emails. Why hasn’t her campaign emphasized President Bush’s commutation of Scooter Libby’s conviction for leaking classified information (on orders from V.P Dick Cheney) that lied us into invading Iraq? If the GOP’s so interested in leaks, why haven’t they asked Scooter to testify under oath before Congress?
Is there any movement in the DNC to invest in state Democratic newspapers? Here in Wisconsin, Ms. Laning could hire some seasoned reporters, from the many who have been laid off. The DPW’s paper could link to articles in the Wisconsin media, and then provide Democratic analysis. DPW already has a web site. Why not turn it into a robust news organization? Of real help could be reporting on what wingnut radio. Use the DPW’s site to give Wisconsin Dems talking points that refute what Charlie Sykes, Mark Belling, Vickie McKenna, and the rest are saying?
AFAIK, private equity firms own a controlling interest in the Gannett corporation that just bought Journal Media Group, whose crown jewel was the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. AFAIK, the purchase of JMG followed the same strategy that all private equity firms follow. They borrow huge amounts of money from corrupt bankers. They buy something with a portion of that cash. They then collude with the Board of Directors to use the rest of the cash to pay themselves huge bonuses. All the debt they borrowed is laid on the balance sheet of whatever they bought. They use that debt to squeeze all the cash they can out of the corporation. They slash wages, benefits, and retirement funds to service the debt they created and profited from. Once the stock price goes low enough, they can either take it private, sell it to another private equity firm, or try to package it as an IPO and sell it to unsophisticated investors.
They pay elite P.R. firms such as Sard Verbinnen http://www.sardverb.com to prevent the main stream media from reporting on their looting of U.S. corporations.
I would encourage you and folkbum to consider that humans (and wolves) got to the top of the food chain, because as species, over the millennia, we co-operated. Both species competed within the pack, while co-operating as a pack. Civil discourse matters.
All1dr:
You wrote: “Your further assumption that it is the responsibility of one of the candidates and the DNC to correct the situation in advance of a primary is an impossible request (Folkbum’s replies addressed this very well) and illustrates to me an irrational sense of victimization. Your further assumption that it is the responsibility of one of the candidates and the DNC to correct the situation in advance of a primary is an impossible request (Folkbum’s replies addressed this very well) and illustrates to me an irrational sense of victimization.”
When I started asking folkbum questions about his, “replies,” ran away. Will you?
1. If not the DNC, whose job is it to protect citizens right to vote?
1.1 If it’s not the DNC’s job to protect Democrat’s voting rights, what’s their purpose?
1.1.1 How do Democrats elect Democrats, if they aren’t allowed to vote?
2. Who runs the DNC?
2.1 What value do they provide to Democrats?
Steve, I reject your premise or suggestion that a true Progressive would out of spite boycott the election. It seems to me to be the act of a petulant, selfish child or a disturbed adult.
A true Progressive, or one with at least some sensitivity and looking forward, would not engage in an act of self destruction or a mindless act that would cause more harm to the general public and to the future of the progressive cause.
If you want an example, look at what the destructive zealotry of the Tea Party has done to the party of Lincoln. Even worse is Walker’s divisive approach as typified by his “divide and conquer” strategy.
Lets allow the electorate at the state polls determine who they prefer. To date Hillary has the advantage over Bernie, 1583 to 868, but there is a ways to go.
Just as I was deeply disappointed with the results of the last Presidential primary, I still voted for Obama at the final. Similarly, I will support the winner of the State Primaries this year.
Duane, Jay, et. al,
A careful read of my post shows that I did not call for anyone to boycott the election. But if you’ve been paying attention, you’d have noticed that the Bernie crowd welling up across the country were under the assumption that the DNC/Clinton folks would play fair and give Bernie an opportunity to make his case. They’ve seen first hand that isn’t the case, and they’re pissed. Their anger has been fueled by the fact that Clinton supporters say nothing when Bernie, or his supporters, are smeared, denied VAN access, attempts to limit debates/public exposure, etc, etc, etc. You’re all silent as these things occur and there’s a large crowd of political neophytes out there who aren’t susceptible to your arguments about ” voting blue no matter who ” or ” unifying the party : because they’re not a part of the party. You folks may reap what you’ve sown, is all I’m saying. I’ll vote, but I may vote Green Party for the first time in my life.
As I said, I think Sanders folks have some reasons to be displeased with the DNC (though the “limited debate” thing is ridiculous–we’ve had more in 2016 than were held in all of 2008). But your legitimate complaints are just going to get buried and lost with all the noise about stuff the DNC doesn’t come close to controlling.
Jay,
As I said elsewhere, it’s the perception of millions of folks right now that the fix has been in from the beginning. The points you make, valid or not, won’t change that. In fact, your comment is a good example of why people get pissed. The initial outrage was over sanctioned debates and the consequences if candidates attended unsanctioned debates, and you know that. But you launch your disingenousness anyway. Good luck with that.
folkbum,
You wrote, “As I said, I think Sanders folks have some reasons to be displeased with the DNC….”
Thank you.
I’d encourage you to consider changing that to all Democrats or all Americans who aren’t billionaires. They’ve been Republican-lite, which is why the party is losing younger voters to Socialism and Green parties.
I’d also encourage you to consider that you have a lot of leverage with “Hillary for America,” in the few remaining days before the Wisconsin primary. If you would come out and post at Blogging Blue, that you “don’t see much difference between Sen. Sanders and Sec. Clinton,” I tend to think, “Hillary for America,” would be very upset.
I hope you would consider using Steve’s post and comments, and others; that help explain where “HIllary for America” can improve in the primary and in the general.
I’m aware that support for unions, especially public sector unions, doesn’t poll very well. I understand why Sec. Clinton isn’t anxious to go to bat for public sector workers. I think it’s a mistake. I think the talking points are there, especially with fire fighters and law enforcement, but it’s not easy an easy sell with independent voters, who are already leaning Dem, because they don’t want to vote for Trump.
Sen. Sanders isn’t making pot legalization a center piece of his campaign, but he’s clearly for it. I love his cagey Senate legislation. He’s using something Republicans used to hold dear, “states rights.” He wants to de-criminalize at the federal level, and let the states decide.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/04/politics/bernie-sanders-legal-marijuana/
Sec. Clinton doesn’t have to take a position, but as a candidate, she’s allowed to ask questions in her “stump speeches.” Simply raising the issue would energize independents (a lot of older conservatives think pot works better and is a lot less expensive than what they have to buy from Big Pharma. I think it would energize African-American voters, who did not turn out for Mayor Barrett in the recall. I think it would energize a lot of younger voters. The problem is she’s taken a lot of money from Big Pharma.
IMHO, until the primary, you’ve got a lot of influence over Sec. Clinton’s campaign in Wisconsin. You’re the guy on the front-lines in the foxhole. While I don’t agree with you, I respect you for standing up for your candidate.
I think you’ve got a window to do some good for yourself, for your union, for the 99%. Saw this on Twitter, hope it fits on a bumper sticker. If you want to live like a Republican, vote Democratic.
If people want to correct what you believe is a misperception on the part of Sanders supporters, urge Clinton to denounce her victory in Arizona. Ask her to make a statement that the result likely isn’t valid. That would be the right thing to do. Folkbum, you could write a post for Blogging Blue. Show Sanders supporters there’s some integrity in the Clinton camp.
How are the results not valid? The math just doesn’t work any other way. Clinton won Arizona by more than 72,000 votes.
If we’re generous, we might say that there were 20,000 people left in line in Maricopa County after polls closed (reports of 300-person lines, times 60 locations). Most of them still voted, though, according to press reports. But let’s still be extra generous and say 20,000 people didn’t vote in Maricopa Co. who could have, counting people who went home after the race was called and others throughout the day who had to bail.
56% of Maricopa Co. voters voted Republican on Tuesday. But, again, let’s be generous to Sanders people here and say of those who couldn’t vote, most were Democrats or Dem-leaning voters who didn’t change their registration to vote in the closed Arizona primary. Call it 16,000 missing Democratic votes then. No, better: let’s say all 20,000 were Democrats.
Clinton won 58% of Maricopa’s Democratic votes. But again, let’s be generous and assume most of the non-voters were there for Sanders, not Clinton. No, better: let’s say alll 20,000 of them were Sanders voters.
If they all had their Sanders votes counted–if every single possible missing voter was for Sanders–then Clinton wins Maricopa by 20,000 votes, and Arizona by 50,000 votes. That swings, what, 5 or 6 delegates, tops? Clinton’s pledged delegate lead slips from 304 to 292–that’s still a larger delegate lead than Obama ever had in 2008.
Sanders lost. Sanders was projected to lose by the polling. Local officials screwed up the administration of the vote, and it likely affected supporters of all candidates, not just Sanders. But even if by some miracle it was only Sanders voters who were affected, Sanders still would have lost.
Look, Tuesday, Sanders had a good night. He made up some ground by blowing Clinton out in the other states. But he didn’t lose Arizona because of Clinton shenanigans, the DNC, or some other conspiracy. He just lost.
I give Sec. Clinton credit. She’s using all that money she’s raised from Wall Street and paying a lot better than the wingnuts. Someone’s researching the content, stuff’s spell checked, with good punctuation.
folkbum, you better be getting paid a lot better than All1dr. Tell “Hillary for America” that John Casper (and I’m sure many others) used to always Tweet out the dates that your band was playing. “Can Hillary for America,” hire you guys for some gigs?