Hillary Clinton had a distinct advantage with prominent members of the Democratic Party in 2008.

[MohRokTah]

This was a telling advantage over both Barack Obama and John Edwards.

Why?

The answer is simple. She quite literally spent decades building relationships with prominent members of the party, beginning as First Lady of Arkansas and working through her years as FLOTUS and on as a Senator.

Barack Obama didn't hit the national scene until 2004.

John Edwards had a bit more time to build the sorts of relationships, but only through a Senatorial seat, whereas Mrs. Clinton had built these relationships with Governors, Senators, Representatives, and numerous other high ranking members of the party.

In fact, it is exactly those relationships that guaranteed Mrs. Clinton a spot in the chase for the nomination all the way up to the last primary.

So why is this important now?

Compared to all others in the field, Bernie Sanders has a distinct disadvantage because NEVER in his career has he EVER spent the time building these sorts of relationships within the Democratic Party because, quite frankly, he has been an outsider to the Democratic Party for his entire political career.

So don't come crying to me or any other Democrat because Senator Sanders is left at a distinct disadvantage in his campaign to seek the Democratic nomination because he simply does not have the sorts of internal party relationships with higher ranking party members than the rest of the candidates. As I have shown, these sorts of relationships and that sort of networking takes years, and in the case of Secretary Clinton, quite literally decades.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. Thank you for fortifying my decision to vote for Sanders. I don't like "old boy clubs".

Even if they allow women.

[MohRokTah]

4. This is how party politics work.

That's why they are called political parties.

[davidn3600]

6. No. It's how a political elite establishment works

[MohRokTah]

7. Nope, works the same way in EVER political party.

You CANNOT have a political party that does not have internal political politics.

This is the nature of ANY political organization at ANY level.

Even a place like DU has the same sort of things going on within the multitude of cliques formed.

Any group of social creatures will have social requirements and politics. It's part of being a social animal.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. Yes. I know. That's why I'm voting for Bernie. Or, "Other" in the GE.

[MohRokTah]

10. It'll be nice not hearing from you for two to three months next year. eom

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. Thanks. I'll be here.

[MohRokTah]

19. Just not slamming Hillary Clinton is all.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

20. We're supposed to hold the candidates up to scrutiny.

Do you object to that?

[MohRokTah]

21. We'll see what you consider "holding the candidate to scrutiny"

We're all supposed to get behind the Democratic nominee.

Like I said, your ability to slam Clinton will go away for a few short months.



For my part, I like hearing your opinions as I find them to be what I want to insure my party tries to stay away from in many cases.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

22. OK. I'll be holding her up to scrutiny...call it what you like.

For my part, I like hearing your opinions as I find them to be what I want to insure my party tries to stay away from in many cases.

I feel exactly the same about you and Hillary.

[MohRokTah]

23. I'll be watching.

It's a good thing you're not a Democrat.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

25. I registered as a democrat in 1965.

And, I've been one since.

How about you?

[MohRokTah]

27. Could have fooled me

But then again, Bob Novak was a registered Dem rat, too.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. Like you?

[MohRokTah]

29. Unlike you and Novak, I have never failed to vote for a Democratic nominee in my life. eom

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

30. How very obedient you are.

"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all." --Thomas Jefferson to Francis Hopkinson, 1789.

"Were parties here divided merely by a greediness for office,...to take a part with either would be unworthy of a reasonable or moral man." --Thomas Jefferson to William Branch Giles, 1795.

[MohRokTah]

31. And yet Jefferson threw all of that under the buggy and became president and head of a party. eom

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

32. Is that what Bernie is doing?

Would you have voted for Ronnie Reagan if he had stayed a Democrat? Strom Thurmond? George Wallace?

How about Breckenridge? He was a (D) who ran against Lincoln (R).

I'm a Democrat but I don't for labels.

[frylock]

11. and it's the main reason why I don't belong to one

[MohRokTah]

12. This is how societal interaction works in any group of 3 or more people. eom

[snooper2]

2. and..... how did that work out for her again?

[snagglepuss]

3. ouch

[MohRokTah]

5. Actually damned well.

She'd have never made it where she did without that advantage.

Another telling fact is that both Barack Obama and John Edwards had also spent years building these sorts of relationships, too. Obama became a favorite within the party by raising a shit ton of cash for candidates all over the country in 2006.

This is something Bernie Sanders has never done. He simply does not have these sorts of relationships within the party.

[DanTex]

8. Pretty well, actually. She almost got nominated,

and only lost because she was up against a once-in-a-generation candidate, who also had huge fundraising potential, support from insiders, and the ability to appeal to both Democrats and independents. And there's nobody else like that this time around.

[Tarheel_Dem]

13. +1. There is no such loyalty to Bernie Sanders. Obama, with his huge popularity, stumped for

candidates up & down the ballot, and was a damn money raising machine. Bernie Sanders is no Barack Obama. I just looked over at Real Clear Politics, and the only poll that showed Bernie at 15% was the one (Quinnipiac) published the day after his announcement. All the later polls show him at about 10% which is still a 40%-50% deficit. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Obama was polling much closer to HRC at this point, right?

[leftofcool]

16. I believe you are correct.

[Tarheel_Dem]

17. That's how I remember it as well. nt

[JI7]

14. it's interesting to see people attack her for the 2008 loss

Without acknowledging why she lost. And act like anyone cOuld have done what Obama did.

[MohRokTah]

15. Actually, believing anybody could do what Obama did is the only hope they have.

I hate throwing water on their embers, but facts are facts. Had Obama not raised a shit ton of cash for Democratic candidates all over the country, he would have never started the campaign raising close to as much as Hillary Clinton and would have never been able to overtake her.

For those in the know for 2016, the vast majority of big Obama donors back Hillary Clinton. There's a reason her campaign felt comfortable enough to publicly state they believed they would raise $2.5 billion by the day of the general election in 2016. It's because they most likely will!

[MFrohike]

24. You tell em!

Just make sure you tell em he's the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee too. After all, we all know that's a position you get by lottery not by networking!

Plus, this is a really stupid point to make. You're emphasizing the fact all of her connections couldn't win her jack squat when it counted. Is that really to show that Sanders has no chance?

[cantbeserious]

26. I Will No Longer Settle For The Lesser Of Two Corporate Evils - Go Bernie Go

eom

[Marr]

33. It's actually hilarious that you think her political elite status is a selling point.

Hey, if that's what you like, you've chosen well. You will not find a better candidate than HRC if what you want is an insider who has spent decades being vetted and approved by 1%ers.

[JustAnotherGen]

34. I tend to agree with you

One of the appealing things to me about O'Malley - he's not a Washington insider. No one can ask him to call in past favors.