Krugman explains the reason for the pre-mortem article - more smearing

[robbedvoter]

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/04/04/shadows-of-smears-past/?smid=tw-nytimeskrugman&smtyp=cur&_r=0

So now, in a last desperate attempt to beat the arithmetic, the Sanders campaign is turning the implicit character attack explicit, and doing so on the weakest possible ground. Clinton, who has said that coal is on its way out, is a tool of the fossil-fuel industry because some people who work in that industry gave her money? Wow.

also

Sanders himself got to play the issue-oriented purist, in effect taking a free ride on other peoples’ character defamation. There was plenty of nastiness from Sanders supporters, but the candidate himself seemed to stay above the fray.

The so called pre-mortem which is really more spin is here
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/04/us/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0
I like this on the speeches

But Mr. Sanders, hunched over a U-shaped conference table, rejected it as a personal attack on Mrs. Clinton’s income — the sort of character assault he has long opposed. She has the right to make money, he offered.

It's the equivalent of this

[Rose Siding]

1. Maybe someone should ask Sanders about his own investments

http://garnetnews.com/2016/04/04/bernie-sanders-invested-wall-street/

[radical noodle]

2. I'm sure that's different

Bernie's touch is magic and makes it okay.

[BlueMTexpat]

3. Never forget!

Whatever it is, IOKIYABS.

[mcar]

7. He is pure and above reproach

Even when he isn't.

[pandr32]

5. Apparently his supporters don't care--he is still "taking on Wall Street"

...and not handing out any favors for his investments--so it's all good

[robbedvoter]

6. Actually, "fossil fuels is the New Wall Street"

There was an article last week about BS polling what "issues" work in NY. They may also have discovered lots of voters work on Wall Street - it's a real place, in a real city. So, pay attention: have you heard "Wall Street" from him lately? The funny thing is, the analysis of his investments shows one of his mutual funds buys stock in Diamond Back - a Texas fracking company. So, Bernie financing that!

[pandr32]

9. That makes sense!

He is a cagey old guy and his managers are ruthless.

[Rose Siding]

8. Oh that's right

I forgot about all the "proof" they have that Hillary hands out favors

[pandr32]

10. They don't need proof

His whole campaign is rhetoric and innuendo and pie in the sky nonsense.
Works great with people who don't use critical thinking skills. Makes me wonder if they teach that in college these days. Those kids should all know better, but can't say the same for all those libertarian independents.

[Rose Siding]

12. Too f'ing bad the only place he is capable of "taking on Wall St" is at a rally

NY Daily News proved that for us.

Kids -some kids- are really intent on instant gratification. I know I was! -at least til my mid twenties. Something kicked in. My judgement skills improved and I could think more long term. That isn't true for everyone, I know. One daughter had her head on straight early, the other took as long as I did. But it's undeniable that physiological development is active at that age.

I hope they don't all tune out when Bernie loses, but once you've dug in at that age on an emotional level, they'll have it rough. He has really done a disservice in making them believe in such wild and civics free eventualities.

[Her Sister]

13. Thanks for the article!

Maybe someone should ask Sanders about his own investments

http://garnetnews.com/2016/04/04/bernie-sanders-invested-wall-street/

I think maybe this is why BS did not want to go negative, he knew he wasn't that pure.

[liberal N proud]

4. last desperate attempt

[CalvinballPro]

11. It's called "vetting." If Sanders had ever experienced it before his supporters might be used to it.

[Princess Turandot]

14. Yeah...

It hit all the anti-Hillary high-lies...It read like one last love letter to Sanders by the NYT, two weeks before the NYS primary.

HRC: Speeches! Emails! Foundation! Dishonesty! (Her evil deeds unproven? Who gives a shit!)

BS: So noble. So nice. Almost won as many states! No reference to the fact that most of them were in caucuses in states that were largely white. Or the fact that she's won a hell of a lot more votes than he did. Or how they used polling from the onset to see if they had a demographic they could pitch to, out of the box, to create an impression of profound enthusiasm.

On the other hand, the coverage of the article by others seems to focus on the idea that the BS advisers are admitting defeat.