From
"Inside the bitter last days of Bernie's revolution/For better and for worse, Sanders made all the big decisions" at Politico.
Convinced as Sanders is that he’s realizing his lifelong dream of being the catalyst for remaking American politics—aides say he takes credit for a Harvard Kennedy School study in April showing young people getting more liberal, and he takes personal offense every time Clinton just dismisses the possibility of picking him as her running mate—his guiding principle under attack has basically boiled down to a feeling that multiple aides sum up as: “Screw me? No, screw you.”...
“They would be very smart to understand that the best way to approach Bernie is not to try to push him around,” [campaign architect Tad] Devine said. “It’s much better if they try to cooperate with him and find common ground. They should be mindful of the fact that the people he’s brought into this process are new to it and they will be very suspicious of any effort to push him around.”
Aides say Sanders thinks that progressives who picked Clinton are cynical, power-chasing chickens — like Sen. Sherrod Brown, one of his most consistent allies in the Senate before endorsing Clinton and campaigning hard for her ahead of the Ohio primary. Sanders is so bitter about it that he’d be ready to nix Brown as an acceptable VP choice, if Clinton ever asked his advice on who’d be a good progressive champion....
ADDED: It was Clinton's attack on Sanders's gun record that (apparently) set him off. He held off at first, and:
“If they hadn’t started at it by really going hard at him on guns, raising a series of issues against him, that really was what led to him being much, much more aggressive than he otherwise would have been,” said Devine....
पोस्ट्स
५९ टिप्पण्या:
his guiding principle under attack has basically boiled down to a feeling that multiple aides sum up as: “Screw me? No, screw you.”...
Love this. You can take the boy out of Brooklyn, but you can't take Brooklyn out of the boy.
If Bernie really wants to shove it up Clinton's criminal ass he ought to get the Greens to nominate him for their VP nominee.
Communists at war among themselves is always a fight to the death, because they understand one another so well there can be no respect of the other one. They resort to Power that comes from the barrel of a gun.
Really Bernie? I guess you aren't so sick and tired of hearing about Clinton's damn e-mails now, are you?
The problem with Bernie was never his message. The problem was his lifelong lack of leadership.
He is losing to someone who is borderline criminal (likely because she has a decades long history of hiding evidence), with incredible unfavorable ratings, and with a pretty proven history of poor decision making in an executive position.
"Really Bernie? I guess you aren't so sick and tired of hearing about Clinton's damn e-mails now, are you? "
That's how he started, but then when she attacked him on guns (apparently), he went ballistic.
Perhaps if he actually tried to win.
"I'm sick of talking about your emails".
Yeah, such kindness always leads to great results.
That's how he started, but then when she attacked him on guns (apparently), he went ballistic.
He was fighting a Clinton. Being nice is always the dumbest possible policy.
Bernie on Hillary emails: unilateral disarmament.
Maybe it was inspired by Obama's deal with Iran.
TreeJoe,
"He is losing to someone who is borderline criminal (likely because she has a decades long history of hiding evidence), with incredible unfavorable ratings, and with a pretty proven history of poor decision making in an executive position."
Tough crowd. He's an obscure person from the outer ideological edge of mainstream politics, from a small state with minor influence, going up against a candidate who had the institutional weight of her party plus some serious heavy-hitters behind her. I think it's amazing he gave her such a run for her money. He never was going to win, but he campaigned as though he could, and from a position of near-absolute disagreement with him, I admire him for it.
JPS said: "...and from a position of near-absolute disagreement with him, I admire him for it."
Concur.
"He never was going to win, but he campaigned as though he could, and from a position of near-absolute disagreement with him, I admire him for it."
I do, too. His supporters, however, are blackshirts and will riot at the Dims convention.
A very interesting year.
A few years ago, Sanders expressed concerns about the effect of massive illegal immigration on US workers' wages. During this election, however, he competed with Hillary Clinton about promising never to deport anyone except violent felons.
On the gun issue, he seemed to come around to Clinton's idea that people should be able to sue all gun manufacturers and sellers out of existence.
On those two issues -- illegal immigration and gun lawsuits -- Clinton became the leader and Sanders became the follower.
I don't see Bernie staying mad for long. He'll get over it. He could take a lesson from Clinton when she knew she wasn't getting the nomination in 2008. Bernie will come around, or he will be left behind, or out on the cold. Bernie isn't stupid, he'll not throw away his career.
Just thinking about how dumb her "gun" attacks were. Some lefty redistributionist feels the Bern, and she thinks the fact that he's at least moderate on guns is going to sink him? I don't think there's a lot of single issue anti-gun voters.
Some history.
Would you expect a front-runner to fail twice?
Bernie isn't stupid, he'll not throw away his career.
Bernie is 74. His career is almost over anyway. Hillary is also old. Ditto Trump.
Welcome to Geriatric Rule.
Bernie's been good for Hillary. He's dragged her to the left, Warren has helped. We won't see Hillary wandering over to the right or the middle. It's all good.
At least he was pro-native. Sort of. Kind of. Sometimes. He had that going for him. But he cannot compete on equal footing with the paradox of redistributive change and equality treatment. That's Clinton's angle. That, and [class] diversity.
Brando said: "...I don't think there's a lot of single issue anti-gun voters." That's my impression also, and in fact I read somewhere that gun control is the perennial fail topic for politicians. Those whom they please, really don't care that much; or enough. While those whom they antagonize, will crawl miles over broken glass to vote them out.
I picture only 2 outcomes for the Democratic convention, and neither are good.
1st possibility is that the Bernie supporters, and delegates just don't show up.
2nd and I think worse is that they do.
"Communists at war among themselves is always a fight to the death, because they understand one another so well there can be no respect of the other one."
How is this relevant here? There are no communists involved, only a liberal Democrat and a liberal Republican running as a Democrat.
By the way, I completely agree with this JPS, "Tough crowd. He's an obscure person from the outer ideological edge of mainstream politics, from a small state with minor influence, going up against a candidate who had the institutional weight of her party plus some serious heavy-hitters behind her. I think it's amazing he gave her such a run for her money. He never was going to win, but he campaigned as though he could, and from a position of near-absolute disagreement with him, I admire him for it."
The fact is, he could have won by using her self-inflicted e-mail scandal against her among other scandals. Heck, the state of Libya alone should have done it. Or Syria. Or ISIS growth during her time. That's how incredibly weak of a candidate she is.
The one thing I'll say about Clinton: My guess is if she wins we are going to see some hardcore war against ISIS as she knows she was a primary entity responsible for their existence, and she'll want to wipe them out quickly.
"There are no communists involved, only a liberal Democrat and a liberal Republican running as a Democrat."
The former honeymooned in the Soviet Union but that was not important.
Bernie also lists himself as Socialist.
Just like most communists.
Democrat with "benefits". Not democratic. The Democrat majority and democratic will are overridden through executive and judicial license.
Although it seemed like he was giving up ammo to a lot of us, I doubt beating up Hil over the emails was going to resonate with any potential Berners. I remember a Berner thinking that him being nice about that was a sign of virtue or something. His only real traction is around the promise of free stuff and beating up on the 1%. As part of that 1%, hard to imagine any of his votes going to Trump as some protest vote. They will calm down into "at least she's not Trump".
"Bernie is my number one choice and Trump is my number 2."
A not-so-old post, from the Althouse blog...
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2016/01/bernie-is-my-no-1-choice-and-trump-is.html
But Trump is the petty, emotional one.
Aides say Sanders thinks that progressives who picked Clinton are cynical, power-chasing chicken
Welcome to the world.
The only question remains whether or not feelings were hurt beyond repair. Hillary may try to offer Bernie a VP spot to help shore up his supporters. Let's see if Bernie is the one who is a "cynical power-chasing chicken", or if he actually believes what he claims too.
It would be quite the cynical moment to see Bernie under Hil's (chicken) wing ;)
It's over. The Empire struck back and won. Money and power won once again with the deliberate help of the corporate media. I'm sure a lot of us are bitter - but we'll get over it.
The Clintons will be back in the White House soon. Trump is too childish and messed up to be President.
I think ARM will give us an idea of how this will play out.
If he gets on the Hillary train, you know that means they'll all get on the train.
sunsong: "The Clintons will be back in the White House soon. Trump is too childish and messed up to be President."
Besides, everyone knows the Clintons should have been able to sell at least 2 to 3 $$Billion more of US policy to foreign interests.
Hillary has lady-parts and was married to Bill so they have earned it.
TreeJoe said...The one thing I'll say about Clinton: My guess is if she wins we are going to see some hardcore war against ISIS as she knows she was a primary entity responsible for their existence, and she'll want to wipe them out quickly.
Counterpoint: Obama & his Admin. were really gonna take on the Taliban & "win" Afghanistan since it was "the good war" and "the right fight" and they wanted to correct GWB's "terrible Iraq distraction." How...how'd that work out, again?
walter said...Although it seemed like he was giving up ammo to a lot of us, I doubt beating up Hil over the emails was going to resonate with any potential Berners. I remember a Berner thinking that him being nice about that was a sign of virtue or something.
I agree the specific issue of "the emails" wouldn't have been an automatic winner for Sanders, but his whole pitch is that the system is broken, insiders are corrupt, and people like him need to be put in charge to put things right. Using "the emails" as an example of how Clinton herself didn't believe in following the rules, may have used government to enrich herself, behaved like the rest of the 1% to do whatever she liked no matter whom it harmed...I think that could definitely have helped his appeal or at least refined his specific argument against Clinton herself (as opposed to against "the system" generally).
Bernie has a very thin skin, it seems. He's a nasty self absorbed fellow for sure. Does he have a sense of humor? Not that he's shown. Hillary either though she at least tries. The kind of people our political system elevates is discouraging.
Trump may be funny, but that doesn't mean he has a sense of humor.
Obama's pretty thin-skinned, but it sure seems like Bernie's worse...and Trump's much worse! Hillary certainly has a reputation for being vindictive and (in her personal life/treatment of people who work for her) petty, but I bet a lot of the reactions we'd think of as personal over-sensitivity in others get categorized instead as "fighting back against sexist attacks" and the like.
But aren't these the putative qualities Clinton is now touting to sell herself as the "come together" candidate?
“It’s much better if they [team Clinton] try to cooperate with him and find common ground. They should be mindful of the fact that the people he’s brought into this process are new to it and they will be very suspicious of any effort to push him around.”
He roller-coaster, he got early warning
He got muddy water, he one mojo filter
He say, "One and one, and one is three."
I see that someone has purchased the clintonemail.com domain name.
$ ping clintonemail.com
PING clintonemail.com (208.91.197.27): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 208.91.197.27: icmp_seq=0 ttl=241 time=73.645 ms
64 bytes from 208.91.197.27: icmp_seq=1 ttl=241 time=73.188 ms
64 bytes from 208.91.197.27: icmp_seq=2 ttl=241 time=72.245 ms
It's registered to someone in Jacksonville, Florida. They probably figure they can scalp Hillary when she wants to run another email server in her house.
I wouldn't be surprised if we see overwhelming support for Hillary and overwhelming astonishment when Trump is elected. This is known as preference falsification, and it's how neighbors have always gotten along.
It is pretty scary to imagine Hillary in the White House. Renting out the Lincoln Bedroom again.
Terrorizing White House staff, especially those whose status is not political. I wonder if any will be allowed to stay ?
Foreign policy will be chaos. Who pays the most to the Clinton Foundation.
Domestic will be left wing like no one has ever seen before as Hillary now has to please Bernie supporters, even if the election is over.
New Supreme Court.
Texas secedes. There will be a serious movement.
No matter what the WaPo says.
Bernie could have used the emails as part of an attack on her Culture of Corruption - that she used her private email server to hide her selling of the State Department to evvvviiil big business, big banks etc.
People who have had a security clearance are of course outraged at her flagrant disregard for information security and retention rules - and rightly so. But those people aren't even potential Sandernistas.
At first Bernie was not playing to win - later he realized that he theoretically could win, but by then he had already given up some key weapons.
Bernie is an angry old rat-bastard hippie communist who has never recanted for any of the obvious foolishness he was involved in @ 1968. But he has only himself to blame for getting nothing for not playing his trump card (HRC emails) when it would have counted. Why? My own theory is that because he is/was a hippy communist, he still thinks the US military and the CIA are the enemy, and therefore security concerns (about secure emails and such) are not something he cares about at all.
Sanders trump card wasn't the emails. A useful thing maybe, but not in themselves.
"At first Bernie was not playing to win - later he realized that he theoretically could win, but by then he had already given up some key weapons."
True, I think he only went into serious mode late. But his fault wasn't giving up weapons. His real problem was he didn't have buy-in from the Democrat tribal groups - he had just one tribe out of 4-5 major ones that make up the Dem coalition.
"Domestic will be left wing like no one has ever seen before as Hillary now has to please Bernie supporters, even if the election is over."
Has nothing to do with Bernie supporters. Its all about power, not ideology. It will be all about impoverishing any business interests or entire industries if not actively allied, of bringing what parts of the Fortune 1000 not yet under control to heel, and maximizing the institutional funding of her allies - like La Raza for instance.
And, above all, engineering the electorate so as to retain power long term. Electing a new people is the most successful political strategy of the last 50 years. And their loyalty will be assured through the ancient Roman method of bead and circuses.
There is an awful lot of ruin in a country, and the US more so than any. There is quite a lot of decadent decline ahead.
"Screw me? No, screw YOU!"
Aha! THAT'S the face I've trying to place.
Bernie's being played by Alan Arkin in one of his trademark pissed-off roles.
Thanks, guys. Now I can sleep...
The drunken stroke survivor is going to try to run a campaign without talking to any actual voters. It is possible with a compliant media but I don't see them remaining compliant. No media personality will be able to post a legitimate story about the soulless witch without fearing for their life. I don't see their bosses being excited about the prospect of the most corrupt administration in history being off limits.
In essence with a Hillary presidency the press will be changing her depends for 4 years.
But if Donald is president it is going to be war with the press for 4 years.
I think the press will take an interest but not the one most think it will.
The closest model is not the Soviet Union, or Venezuela, but Argentina.
The Peron's destroyed the institutional restraints on power, removed all opposed economic interests, like the British investors, through nationalizations, made the remaining big businesses buy in to the corporatist system through a system of official and de facto monopolies, and bought the people through the dole.
The correct comparison is Europe, to which Argentina was on par, to France, Germany, Britain in per-capita measures back in 1930-1950. By 1970 Argentina was at the level of Greece and Spain. By 1990 it had fallen far below every Western European country, at @75% of Greece and Portugal.
The Argentine system has proven very robust, through 70 years of economic paralysis, surviving all sorts of misfortunes almost untouched, including multiple overthrows of the regime. The successor regimes simply didn't dare substansively reform the system, and by then the people themselves were, for the most part, so corrupted that actual reform that would make Argentina a first-world country again is not even thinkable. They live, but cannot progress.
"Texas secedes. There will be a serious movement."
Bye! Good riddance. Don't come begging when you need federal funds for natural disasters.
"Bye! Good riddance. Don't come begging when you need federal funds for natural disasters.'
The net positive of all the regulatory overhead they will avoid will be worth far more than any disaster aid. Take a really good strategic look at Texas, at the energy, transport, and industrial infrastructure. They are very well set for independence, down to having an independent power grid.
Look deeply.
In reality they are a large net payer of taxes. Importantly, most such sneering at the viability of seceding US states misses the fact that US corporate ownership forces a lot of tax collections to be reported in just a few states, notably New York, Delaware, Connecticut, California, where headquarters disproportionately are, where the mutual funds are based, as are the billionaire owners. But an independent country would require tax reporting and collection of revenues from local operations, and markets, which are much more evenly dispersed. Texas will be extremely rich thereby.
Also, strategically, if Texas goes, so also, very likely, a large swathe of states will also go, in a confederacy. They would be fools to stay in, their economies and societies are more bound with Texas than the US and the same benefits apply.
The net effect, in a peaceful secession, is also likely to be an enormous capital flight to Texas, to a less onerous regulatory environment. Tariff and capital barriers by the rump US would be largely self defeating.
Sanders missed his opportunity early on- he basically gave Clinton a pass on her specific ethical lapses until it was too late to matter. I think, maybe, early on he didn't think he even had a chance to win, and by the time he realized just how weak she really was, it was over for him.
In any case, keep an eye on that investigation- it is pretty damned obvious to me that it has expanded into the donations to the Clinton Foundation. It is quite likely that the contents of the server were recovered in their entirety. It was never to be Sanders, but Biden is warming up in the bullpen. July is going to be an interesting month.
"That's how he started, but then when she attacked him on guns (apparently), he went ballistic."
Went ballistic about guns, mainly, but I never heard him take up the email issue again, so it's how he started and how he ended. Also, "ballistic" would have to mean "changing his position to agree with Hillary that gun manufacturers should be sued", which is an odd thing to call "ballistic" if you ask me.
"The Argentine system has proven very robust, through 70 years of economic paralysis, surviving all sorts of misfortunes almost untouched, including multiple overthrows of the regime."
I agree and I think that is where we are going. At least if Hillary (Evita) gets elected.
The net effect, in a peaceful secession, is also likely to be an enormous capital flight to Texas, to a less onerous regulatory environment. Tariff and capital barriers by the rump US would be largely self defeating.
Ignoramuses ,like Inga, know nothing about the economy. Without Texas the US economic numbers would be far worse.
I also agree a swath of southwestern states would leave or consider doing so.
Michael Lotus and Jim Bennett have been predicting a state realignment.
This could be the trigger event if Hillary wins.
I'm disappointed, not bitter. I supported Sander's candidacy and I'm not even a Socialist or a Democrat.
I'm still willing to do nearly any legal thing possible to help keep the Clintons out of the White House...
except vote for Don J. Trump.
"Really Bernie? I guess you aren't so sick and tired of hearing about Clinton's damn e-mails now, are you? "
That's how he started, but then when she attacked him on guns (apparently), he went ballistic.
It was a mistake the day he said it.
His primary opponent was under criminal investigation. That's a real issue, and you can't take it off the table. Especially if you're planning a "Crooked Hillary" line of attack. A poorly planned White Knight moment, combined with a lack of research on just how serious the issue actually was.
The gun thing -- of course she used it. She only has a couple of issues where she's to the left of Sanders, so she hammers them.
David said:
Bernie has a very thin skin, it seems. He's a nasty self absorbed fellow for sure. Does he have a sense of humor? Not that he's shown. Hillary either though she at least tries. The kind of people our political system elevates is discouraging.
Running the country is not a fucking joke, you twat.
"Ruining the country is not a fucking joke, you twat."
Hillary, rules !
FIFY.
Don't feel ashamed to keep playing with yourself, Michael K, when no one else is playing with you.
Seriously. Does anyone respond to anything you say? Ever? If your comment was about your abominable Trump candidate, then it's a stupid follow-up.
But I'm sure your loser kids can make you feel better about that. When you're done making up your mind on whether to berate them or praise them. It all depends on the day... much like Trump's tweets.
Running the country is not a fucking joke, you twat.
And yet you're going to vote for Bernie. The biggest joke of this election cycle.
Free stuff!!
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा