Berserk Clinton Bigwigs Launch Nixonian Attack Against Surging Sanders - Observer

[WillyT]

Berserk Clinton Bigwigs Launch Nixonian Attack Against Surging Sanders
Eleven populist points about the Bernie blizzard
By Brent Budowsky • Observer
01/20/16 9:36am

<snip>

In an astonishing political development, as a CNN/WMUR poll shows Bernie Sanders defeating Hillary Clinton by an astounding 27 points in the New Hampshire primary and an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll finds him defeating Donald Trump in the general election by a whopping 15 points, a long list of prominent Clinton supporters has launched an all-out negative attack against Mr. Sanders reminiscent of the red-baiting attacks Richard Nixon once deployed against liberals.

First, a caution to readers: these polls show definite trends that should bring joy to the hearts of Sanders supporters and dread to the hearts of Team Clinton, but trends in campaigns and results in polls will shift many times in a presidential election.

Second, an observation on the meaning of the Sanders surge: these and other polls demonstrate what I have long argued is the great truth that will be revealed in the 2016 election. There is a progressive populist majority in America that exists beneath the tectonic plates of American politics that Mr. Sanders to his advantage is galvanizing in his campaign and Ms. Clinton to her disadvantage has been resisting in hers.

Third, a word of advice to Team Clinton: calm down and back off the panicked attacks against Mr. Sanders that are highlighted in a New York Times story in which one Democratic Senator who supports Ms. Clinton, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, reached a new low by suggesting that Republicans will run an ad against Mr. Sanders alongside the hammer and sickle which, in other words, would paint him as a communist.

Fourth, a key fact: the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal poll really did find Mr. Sanders defeating Mr. Trump by 15 points, confirming an earlier Quinnipiac poll showing him defeating Mr. Trump by 13 points, with other polling by NBC/Wall Street Journal showing the Vermont senator defeating the Republican frontrunner by similar margins in general election match-up in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Fifth, perhaps the most fascinating impact of the huge Sanders surge is...

<snip>

More: http://observer.com/2016/01/berserk-clinton-bigwigs-launch-nixonian-attack-against-surging-sanders/

[Punkingal]

1. Great read!

[WillyT]

2. Thanks !!!

[lewebley3]

23. Hillary is up again by 25 points: and she up Iowa again by 21

[Fuddnik]

25. Yeah, but that was a poll from the Onion.

[AgingAmerican]

34. Onions are scientific!!

[lewebley3]

93. Gravis poll has Hllary 20: and Chalie Cooks says sign point clear

Last edited Thu Jan 21, 2016, 02:16 PM - Edit history (1)

sailing in Iowa for HIllary

[bvf]

122. Gravis. OK, then.

BTW, has anyone ever told you your posts are actually painful to read?

[arcane1]

127. Outsourced support via contractors n/t

[bvf]

131. If they can coach a guy in Mumbai to speak with a Texas

twang, why can't they bring someone up to speed on simple shit like subject/verb agreement?

Makes sense, though.

[arcane1]

132. They thought they would only have to convince stupid people..?

[pangaia]

141. Wo bu dong!

[yuiyoshida]

153. mandarin?

"I, No, Understand." wow.. how about that! Looks like my friend teaching me a bit of mandarin paid off!

[pangaia]

156. Hai, so desu.

[yuiyoshida]

162. hehe

Kyō wa watashi no tanjōbidesu!

[Punkingal]

38. Pftttt.....

[lewebley3]

27. Charlie Cooks say: It looks good for Hillary to sailing through Primaries

[bvf]

134. Harvey Jame say; Already with looking Basics yesterday!

[pangaia]

142. Wakarimasu, ne.

[yuiyoshida]

154. sou ka

Best be careful, I had one of my posts hidden for using an Asian language
Its true: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014800179#post2

[pangaia]

157. Wow.. talk about xenophobic idiot...

That guy doesn't speak English. Why should I?
I answered one of his in Arabic also. we shall see.

If I figured out the Tokyo subway, then I think I have earned the right to use a little Japanese, eh. :&gt )

[yuiyoshida]

163. Mochiron!

[pangaia]

164. Arigato gozaimasu, Yui-chan.

[yuiyoshida]

165. kochira koso!!

[roguevalley]

155. I just saw Clare McKaskill on the teevee saying what she

said and that git, Ed Rendell. I nearly put my foot through the teevee. They will lose. I will celebrate. Win-win for me.

[MuseRider]

3. I have not read this yet

but I had to rec it just for the headline. LOL. That is a great use of words.

Bookmarked for later.

[pnwmom]

59. It's Trump propaganda. Is that what you like to read?

Wikipedia:

Jared Corey Kushner (born January 10, 1981) is an American businessman and investor. He is principal owner of the real estate holding and development company Kushner Properties and the newspaper publishing company The New York Observer. He is the son of American real estate developer Charles Kushner and is married to Ivanka Trump, the daughter of American business magnate Donald Trump.

[Politicub]

69. It's pro Sanders so it must be allowed

Doesn't matter if it was written by a right wing nutter. If it's positive about Sanders it's gotta be good.

[Ivan Kaputski]

80. Putin approves of it.

[MuseRider]

85. Where do you get off

assuming I like to read Trump propaganda? Did you not read my post? I said I have not read it yet in the heading, "bookmarked for later" in the body and I still have not looked at it. I just thought the title was clever. Holy hell.

To the other poster, no it is not OK if it is not a good and truthful article just because it supports Sanders. I swear, the chips on shoulders around here for no good reason just make this a hard place to want to visit.

[pnwmom]

112. The editor who wrote the title is a former henchman for Guiliani. n/t

[MuseRider]

115. As you have said over and over again.

So? It was cleverly worded. Does this mean we have to have a knee jerk hatred for everything that comes out of that paper? What about all the papers Murdoch owns? What about all the media that is owned by the MIC and other RWers?

I can read something and not be captivated with the owners or former bosses of the writer. I can even appreciate something that is not Democratic and not change my mind or buy any of it.

This really really really gets to you doesn't it. I think you need not worry we will all swing to Trump or whatever it is that worries you. Against Hillary, is that it? I still have not read it so I don't know but I really feel like I do not need to be schooled every time I read something or think something is clever.

Poor poor HRC. It must be a humdinger of an article to get this response. I think we all know it would not have been a big deal or AS big of a deal if it had been bad about Bernie.

[pnwmom]

117. It was an inflammatory, attention-grabbing title, of the type that will be used

against Bernie if he is the nominee and he goes against Trump.

I doubt that you will be making excuses for this rag then.

[MuseRider]

119. This is my last response to you.

I fully expect many papers, organizations and news mongers to write things against Bernie. It is the way it goes, every time. You know this. If we all agreed nobody would write anything bad or mean about the other people involved but then if we all agreed we would not need elections.

Again, I will read anything that gets put in front of me. I can read things I don't like from people I don't like or support and use it to form my own opinions.

I could not care less who this guys former boss was or who owns the paper. I read and make my own decisions. I suspect you do the same or maybe not. Maybe you only read news that pleases you? Well that would make sense I suppose.

Really, I don't think you have changed any of us who believe in reading many different viewpoints and are perfectly capable of deciding what to do with that information. If your whole beef is who wrote it and who owns the paper then good luck. We will all be living in a dark hole if we have to only read papers or articles that have nothing to do with people we don't like.

[pangaia]

143. You want inflammatory?

HRC sending out one of her soldiers to accuse Bernie of being a Communist is inflammatory.

[pnwmom]

144. Do you have a link for that?

[Kalidurga]

104. Brent Budowsky is the author of the article

Brent Budowsky formerly served as policy aide to Sen. Lloyd Bentsen (D-Tex) and Legislative Director to Rep. Bill Alexander D-Ark.), then Chief Deputy Majority Whip. He holds a law degree from Catholic University, and an LL.M. degree from the London School of Economics and writes a weekly column for The Hill. Email him at [e-mail]

[pnwmom]

113. He didn't write the inflammatory title. That's an editor's job.

And their editor is a former Guiliani guy.

[Kalidurga]

128. Do you have anything better than BAD TITLE BAD TITLE as an argument?

I had a professor that would buy that as a reason to ding a paper, but even he wouldn't say the whole essay is crap over a crap title.

[pnwmom]

129. When DUers post those kinds of titles -- they don't have to -- they're cooperating

in a deliberate effort of the editor to inflame and mudsling.

[mdbl]

159. What is the difference in a law degree from a catholic university?

Do those lawyers believe in punishments from Leviticus? Do they prosecute neighbors for coveting someone's wife? Do they make all of their clients go to confession? Just wondering. I know a law degree from liberty university makes you a different type of lawyer, one that answers to the bible instead of the constitution, but don't know about the catholics.

[Kalidurga]

106. On Wed Jan 20, 2016, 01:44 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Berserk Clinton Bigwigs Launch Nixonian Attack Against Surging Sanders - Observer
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511034904

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

The OP is aware that the Observer is now owned by the Trump family -- by his son-in-law -- and that its anti-Clinton diatribes are not journalism, they're propaganda.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Jan 20, 2016, 01:51 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: "anti-Clinton diatribes are not journalism" Pro-Clinton = Journalism, anti-Clinton = not journalism. This alert is transparent as hell.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is alert stalking
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: There is nothing hide-worthy in this post
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: tRump's son-in-law? That means he's married to Ivanka, who clearly takes after her mom in terms of being sane. Would you want to be judged by your spouse's dad?
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[pnwmom]

114. If Sanders wins the nomination and the Observer starts treating Sanders

like it's been treating Hillary -- which it will -- suddenly all of you will see the light.

The Observer was bought and paid for by the Trumps, and so are all the other media outlets in that chain.

We should be worried about them, not applauding them just because they see a strategic interest in promoting Bernie at this moment in time.

[Kalidurga]

126. I don't care what critics have to say

I don't watch FOX, I don't read MSM except for here, and I have been tuning out Hillary supporters from day one.

[pnwmom]

130. You might as well watch FOX, if you're going to be influenced by Observer propaganda. n/t

[Kalidurga]

136. I agree with the author of the essay

I agreed with it before I read it. I think you are just closed minded to any view but your own. That's fine stick to your guns. Don't budge on the issues. And please avoid posting anything of substance.

[pnwmom]

138. You're already acknowledged that you don't try to inform yourself

about both sides of the issues.

I wouldn't be on DU if I tried to avoid every piece by a Bernie supporter, since 90% of Duers are his supporters.

[Kalidurga]

139. It's not my fault you like to focus on things you don't like.

[bvf]

135. Wow. Completely skunked. Aces.

[Kalidurga]

137. Yeah I wish I had been on the jury

I had to copy that from someone else's post.

[tk2kewl]

4. .

The bonehead move of the year award goes to DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and whoever whispered in her ear to seek the fewest possible debates with the lowest possible audience.

[jalan48]

6. Exactly.

The run out the clock strategy is backfiring now that Clinton is behind in these polls. DWS is treating this as if it's a high school student body election where the "cool" kids get to set the rules and rig the game.

[malthaussen]

7. Don't know if you like football...

... but my experience has always been that the "prevent" defense should be renamed the "allow" defense. Playing not to lose rarely wins.

-- Mal

[jalan48]

8. I am. I think this was DWS's strategy. Hillary had a big lead, run out the clock on anyone else.

Now, as Bernie surges she's in a pickle.

[lewebley3]

31. Hillary is ahead in Iowa by 21:and 25 naitonally

[Fawke Em]

41. On an outlier.

All other polling says its tied.

[snoringvoter]

43. Lay down that pipe

And wake up to reality

[rhett o rick]

111. Look around at the people. People that lost their jobs, lost their homes, lost their

retirements. They are sick of the Establishment 1% and their puppets looting the 99%. This is a movement to throw out those that are puppets of the Wealthy 1%. Why would any Democrat support a candidate that accepts money via Citizens United and is loved by the Corporate Media? This is a class war and H. Clinton with her quickly accumulated $50 million wealth isn't on our side.

[pangaia]

145. أنا لا أفهم

[Jeff Murdoch]

36. I prefer to use "prevent the win" for this.

[bvar22]

96. Exactly.

Changing up late in the game, and playing "not to lose" instead of continuing to do what has worked to get the lead is insanity. Those pages should have been ripped out of the playbook long ago.
Same applies to political campaigns.

[Fuddnik]

32. More like voices in her head.

Yeah, it was Howard Dean screaming "YEOW"!!!!

The only logical interpretation was "Hold less debates". When nobody will be watching. On a station nobody watches. With twits as moderators.

[Armstead]

5. Good article -- The author makes many valid points

[TIME TO PANIC]

9. The damage to her campaign is irreversible and self inflicted.

If she gets the nominee our next president will most likely be republican.

[SammyWinstonJack]

11. Yep, sadly.

[TIME TO PANIC]

16. It's a damn shame.

The backlash is inevitable. A political party can't bury a popular candidate without consequences.

[Ivan Kaputski]

95. Exactly. If she wins the primary we will end up with Trump ...and maybe moosie girl.

[TIME TO PANIC]

103. Ha, is Palin going to run again? n/t

[Ivan Kaputski]

107. Rump's VP.

[TIME TO PANIC]

108. LOL!

[Kalidurga]

105. I prefer

Sparkle Moose. It reminds me of that guy Sparkle Unicorn or something. I think he was the one under the blue tarp. It's kind of hard to tell they all look pretty much alike when they are under blue tarps.

[Ino]

124. She was very sparkly in the press conference

[Kalidurga]

125. And shiney too

she needs to fire her make-up artist.

[pangaia]

147. But think about it.

Bernie was catching up way before she started her filthy behavior.

[cantbeserious]

152. This Citizen's Humble Opinion - A Vote For HRC In The Primary Is A Vote For Trump In The General

eom

[TIME TO PANIC]

166. Yep, and I don't vote for republicans.

[chervilant]

10. Awww...

I think someone(s?) getting their wee fee-fees BERNED.

[SammyWinstonJack]

12. She's horrible. Hammer and Sickle, really? BOO!

[nxylas]

28. They've already done it

Did you see that New York Pissed story?

[pnwmom]

56. What is horrible is seeing gullible DUers getting suckered in by a Trump publication.

Wikipedia:

Jared Corey Kushner (born January 10, 1981) is an American businessman and investor. He is principal owner of the real estate holding and development company Kushner Properties and the newspaper publishing company The New York Observer. He is the son of American real estate developer Charles Kushner and is married to Ivanka Trump, the daughter of American business magnate Donald Trump.

[snoringvoter]

81. Who cares?

You're shooting the publisher, not the message.

You ignore this at your own peril, Pacific Northwest Mom.

[Gene Debs]

13. My concern is that Sanders could win literally every primary and

they'll still use the superdelegates to install Clinton as the nominee.

[mindwalker_i]

14. That would make things interesting

My guess is that it would rip the democratic party apart, with liberals forming their own party (I would be in this camp), and the others, whether you want to call them DLC, third-way, republican-lite, would be the (D) party. Republicans would go more extreme and probably the way of the whigs.

[TIME TO PANIC]

21. We seem to be headed in that direction.

I don't see how the republicans can push the envelope much further without causing mass protest, and that might not be a bad thing.

[raindaddy]

37. The Democratic party under the control of the neolibs have continued to lose membership .

I see Sanders as a last ditch effort to bring the Democratic party back inline with traditional Democratic party values..

If Sander's loses and Hillary's the nominee we'll be living under a corporate Wall Street owned government where the majority of the citizens no longer support either party and actual membership declines to fringe party levels.. Not a healthy state of affairs...

[mindwalker_i]

51. Both parties have some serious problems

For democrats, the party has become too corporate and too connected to wall street. It's lost its position on things that liberals like, and Bernie is shining a quasar on that. For republicans, they have been fed such a highly-concentrated diet about lazy poor people living off the government dole, how corporations are being picked clean by said poor, and how the "other side" is against America and God that they are completely unable to keep the country running without causing their NRA-fueled base to drop into negative sanity territory.

The result has been a country whose laws and actions have been hurting the big majority of its people. It hurts innovation on a huge scale - innovation that we really need to solve the problems that could be catastrophic for the world and civilization. Something has to give.

[Enthusiast]

72. Huge +1!

[TIME TO PANIC]

66. I totally agree. n/t

[Enthusiast]

67. I have had quite enough of corporate rule.

[99th_Monkey]

17. I don't think that's mathematically possible

but I could be wrong. I know supers carry more clout, like twice as much (?) ..

I'm sure Hillarians will try every dirty trick in the book, and probably add a few new ones,
but I think if Bernie really did win 90% of the primaries, he'd still have more delegates than
the supers could over-ride.

[SheilaT]

45. No, they don't carry more clout.

They each have one vote, just like the regular delegates.

[jeff47]

47. Superdelegates have about 20% of the votes at the convention.

So they could overturn a close result (say, 47% Sanders, 43% Clinton) but they can not overturn a very lopsided primary result.

[Old Codger]

20. If that were to happen

All bets are off, a run as a third party would be wide open and have a decent chance of taking the flag..... She would be a loser and most likely so would the rest of the Dem party.... It may take that big a revolution to turn things around for the rest of us..
I would hate to see that happen and would be very hesitant to vote off party but this may end up being our only real chance to make the changes that are truly necessary for our country to actually become what it once was...


I wonder of they may add some more debates??

[jeff47]

33. That can only happen if the primary is close, and the superdelegates want to end their careers.

Superdelegates have about 20% of the votes needed for the nomination. If Sanders wins literally every primary, they don't have enough votes to overturn the pledged delegates.

If it is somewhat close, then they could throw it to Clinton. However, the backlash would be enormous. Since most superdelegates hold elected positions, they are very likely to lose that position. Especially after such a tactic creates a massive loss in the GE due to shredding Democratic turnout.

So while it's mathematically possible to do, it is extremely unlikely that the party will be dumb enough to do it.

[Gene Debs]

40. "extremely unlikely that the party will be dumb enough to do it"...we're talking about

Hillary Clinton, whose bad judgment under pressure is the stuff of legend, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz, whose willingness to do just about anything to install Clinton as the nominee is so brazen that she doesn't even try to be sneaky about it. If the two of them thought it might work, they'd do it.

[jeff47]

46. Clinton and DWS would argue for the party to do it, but they can't make the party do it.

A lot of superdelegates on the 2016 ballot would have to decide that they want to lose their re-election campaign due to destroying turnout, and never run for office ever again due to the betrayal felt by the rank-and-file of the party.

While there's plenty in the establishment willing to support Clinton, their desire for self-preservation would overcome that support.

[SheilaT]

44. Not enough super delegates.

Plus, the super delegates, while well inside the party, have always gone, in the end, with the candidate with the most regular delegates. Thinking the DNC could manipulate the supers like that, just shows, you don't quite understand the math or how the process works.

[TCJ70]

64. That's one way to lose quickly...n/t

[Le Taz Hot]

123. It would be the end of the Democratic Party.

Oh yeah, and riots. Don't know if you were around for 1968 but we could easily be there again,

[Spitfire of ATJ]

15. The sheer PANIC from Dinos cracks me up.

[pnwmom]

62. The sheer gullibility of those who swallow Trump propaganda

makes me sick.

The owner of the Observer -- and a chain of publications, which are all being used in his service - is Trump's 34 year old son-in-law.

[snoringvoter]

83. Attack the message, not the messenger

I just told you upthread.

I said, WHO CARES WHO OWNS IT - if it's published, it's out there for dissemination.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

98. That explains the attacks on all other Republicans.

[Enthusiast]

75. I have never seen anything quite like it.

[Ivan Kaputski]

99. LOL Dinos indeed.

[99th_Monkey]

18. K&R - another good one WillyT. Kudos. n/t

[Matariki]

19. Wow. That headline sounds like it's right out of a Dr. Strange comic!

lol

[Duval]

22. A prize OP, WillyT.

The more I learn, the more I sincerely hope Hillary is not the nominee. We need underhanded crap going on in the While House like we need the bubonic plague. Really, I am beginning to think she may be up for criminal charges regarding her "damn" emails.

By attacking Bernie in this way, she is hurting the Democratic Party.

[pnwmom]

53. This "prize" was put out there by the Trumps. Are they a good source of prizes for you?

Wikipedia:

Jared Corey Kushner (born January 10, 1981) is an American businessman and investor. He is principal owner of the real estate holding and development company Kushner Properties and the newspaper publishing company The New York Observer. He is the son of American real estate developer Charles Kushner and is married to Ivanka Trump, the daughter of American business magnate Donald Trump.

[snoringvoter]

84. You have offered nothing of substance in this thread.

*plonk*

[pnwmom]

90. The thread is based on the false idea that Trump's son-in-law

is publishing journalism.

[snoringvoter]

92. So? It's been around for 30 years

If it was recently launched, you might have a point. Unfortunately, you don't. It's been established for over 30 years.

[pnwmom]

94. The OWNER is 33 years old. He must have launched it when he was 3.

The owner is worth hundreds of millions of dollars, because he was born with an even bigger silver spoon than Trump. And he wasn't responsible for what was published decades ago because he only bought the paper recently.

[anigbrowl]

118. My goodness you are gullible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Observer

[snoringvoter]

120. I'm not. You're the one who's throwing everything claiming "right-wing" on everything.

You're the gullible one, and I really feel sorry for you.

[anigbrowl]

121. Ah, I'm the gullible one because I do check sources and facts

uhuh.

[bvf]

140. You've posted that at least twice now.

You're doubling down on nothing.

[in_cog_ni_to]

24. OMG! The idiot voters are going to elect a SOCIALIST!!1!!!11!1! What's a corrupt Democratic Party to

do?!

They've done everything they could to stop Bernie in his tracks and WE THE PEOPLE have answered back with OUR power! 99% > 1%! We're going to beat them!


I would love to be a fly on the wall in DWS/DNC/HRH meetings! Damn voters screwed up our grand plan!


PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[MisterP]

73. "I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist because of the

irresponsibility of its own people" --best bud Kissinger

[Ivan Kaputski]

100. Obviously ...we approve of it.

[SoapBox]

26. K & R!

I hope they are all peeing their pants.

[guillaumeb]

29. What an eye catching title. eom

[hootinholler]

30. BoneHead of the year!

[Lorien]

35. Yes, this:

"Tenth, the bonehead move of the year award goes to Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and whoever in the Clinton campaign whispered in her ear to seek the fewest possible debates with the lowest possible audience.

This ill-fated plan to rig the nominating process violates everything Democrats stand for and has now backfired against Ms. Clinton. Who ever heard of a political party that wants the smallest audience to hear its message, or a national political committee such as the DNC showing such extreme bias for any candidate as it did for Ms. Clinton and against Mr. Sanders on the debate issue?"

[seafan]

39. I swear, WillyT, you find the best stuff.

Thanks for pointing us to this excellent piece in the NY Observer.

In an astonishing political development, as a CNN/WMUR poll shows Bernie Sanders defeating Hillary Clinton by an astounding 27 points in the New Hampshire primary and an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll finds him defeating Donald Trump in the general election by a whopping 15 points, a long list of prominent Clinton supporters has launched an all-out negative attack against Mr. Sanders reminiscent of the red-baiting attacks Richard Nixon once deployed against liberals.

.....

Democratic presidential candidate U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders speaks during the the Iowa Brown and Black Forum sponsored by FUSION and broadcasted from Drake University on January 11 in Des Moines. (Photo: Joe Raedle/Getty Images), via Observer


Read this one, y'all.

[Fawke Em]

42. And smear campaigns rarely work against people viewed as a whole

generation's "Grandpa."

Millennials love the guy.

[seafan]

91. Right on, Fawke Em.

As we can see, negative attacks aren't designed to improve the attacker's support; negative attacks are designed to tear down an opponent's support.

These ferocious attacks are ricocheting off of Sanders and backfiring big time on the attacker.

And with carping corporate hacks like McCaskill emerging today, it has never been clearer that our party needs a thorough housecleaning.


First Read: It's Panic Mode for the Democratic Establishment, January 20, 2016

Democratic politicians ran to the New York Times to tell the paper that Sanders would damage the party at the top of the ticket because he's a democratic socialist. Some of the juiciest quotes:

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon: "Here in the heartland, we like our politicians in the mainstream, and he is not — he's a socialist."
Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN): "It wouldn't be helpful [on downballot races] outside Vermont, Massachusetts, Berkeley, Palo Alto and Ann Arbor."
Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO): "The Republicans won't touch him because they can't wait to run an ad with a hammer and sickle."

(And then don't miss David Brock on Bloomberg last night, labeling Sanders a "socialist… … He's got a 30 year history of affiliation with a lot of whack-doodle ideas and parties. Think about what the Republicans will do with the fact that he's a socialist in the fall.&quot

As the political-science crowd might say, this is "The Party Decides." Of course, it hasn't worked -- at all -- on the Republican side against Trump. So, did Team Clinton ever think it would have to come to this -- trying to destroy Bernie less than two weeks before Iowa?

(bold type added)

Just a few of those power-driven politicians whose positions of arrogance and jealousy are disintegrating.

This country is ascending a tsunami of populism and the Establishment's iron grip will soon be history, and one that we should never allow again.

Donald Trump leads one army and Bernie Sanders leads another army, and the Establishment is now surrounded.

For them, there is no way out.

[Fawke Em]

150. STEVE COHEN said that?

Oh, hell. What the fuck is happening?

Cohen used to be Southern Bernie, for Pete's sake!

Seriously, I live in Tennessee and, while Cohen represents the side of the state furthest from me, I always considered him my only representative.

Here's his Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Cohen

I'd like to see the context of that quote. Cohen is a natural Bernie supporter - unless he's been bought out by Fed Ex or something.

[pnwmom]

48. The Trump family owns this Hillary-hating rag, and the OP keeps posting from it anyway.

The publisher is a Trump son-in-law editor was a henchman of Guiliani's.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Kushner

Jared Corey Kushner (born January 10, 1981) is an American businessman and investor. He is principal owner of the real estate holding and development company Kushner Properties and the newspaper publishing company The New York Observer. He is the son of American real estate developer Charles Kushner and is married to Ivanka Trump, the daughter of American business magnate Donald Trump.

[SunSeeker]

55. Yes, the right wing are really pushing this bullshit meme.

Like the right pushed Nader to undermine Gore.

[Kentonio]

49. I love the word Bigwigs

It's like it was invented for Trump.

[libdem4life]

63. I saw what you did there .,.. LOL ....good one.

[TheBlackAdder]

50. Clinton's hypocritical reversal of Single Payer Healthcare seems to have broken the camel's back! nt

[pnwmom]

52. This is a Trump produced rag now. Do you believe everything Trump says?

From Wikipedia:

Jared Corey Kushner (born January 10, 1981) is an American businessman and investor. He is principal owner of the real estate holding and development company Kushner Properties and the newspaper publishing company The New York Observer. He is the son of American real estate developer Charles Kushner and is married to Ivanka Trump, the daughter of American business magnate Donald Trump.

[TheBlackAdder]

54. This article aside, HRC's reversal of SP has doomed her campaign. Observe the polling timelines. nt

[pnwmom]

57. This article is the basis of the OP. No one should be posting Trump propoganda here.

[TheBlackAdder]

82. Don't ignore my post and deflect to this article. The reality is a level of hypocrisy is unrivaled.

.


I'm a fifty-something neutral poli-sci continuing ed student, asked to upgrade to honors level, and I an uncommitted.

I am a staunch Democrat and only want to see a Dem in the White House and in down ballot elections.


===


If what I post upsets you, you should sit back and detach. I'm seeing a lot of people here who have lost their objectivity, polarized to one candidate or another. As someone who looks at this through the lens of critical analysis, I am seeing a group on both the HRC and SBS sides going at it for months. Both sides flaring up and I thought about stepping away for awhile, when things were getting really ugly.


Truth be told, the HRC campaign made some serious mistakes that are now coming home to roost. Whether there was influence on the DNC or what, that cast a really huge presentation of a rigged system. I care about getting the Dem message out, and it's hard to do when the debates are limited. But, that seems to be an almost moot point, even though DWS can schedule more debates midweek--they just don't want to.


The co-opting of SBS ideas, several weeks after SBS adopts them and then the low backing off of them by HRC leaves those politically savvy wondering what does she believe in? That was transparent to those studying politics.


Now, her complete reversal of Single Payer is the most stupefying move I have ever seen in politics (and I've seen a lot). Here is someone touting it for decades, and then all of a sudden comes out against it. Not only that, but Howard Dean, who works for a law form supporting the industry echos that position in an almost coordinated manner. The red flags immediately go up!


Whether you like my posts or what I say or not, I am trying to tell it the way I see it. (Oh, based on some good info, she's lost most of the Northeast, possibly retaining CT and maybe MA, but MA is looking doubtful.) The only way to really see this is to detach from the candidates. I took a wonderful Women and Politics course, and I swore HRC was going to walk away with this. I would really like to see a gender change in the high office, even though there are great institutional barriers in place. But, when I see HRC, someone I've loved since the 1990's, do and say the things she is doing in her campaign--it's really upsetting. This brings flashbacks of 2008 and her actions are self-destructive. There are no other forces causing this damage, but her and her campaign's actions. (To my SBS fans, I love Bernie too. For me, this contest is the best match-up that could occur. It puts old versus new political styles in play, with two very strong opponents.)


Campaigns want people to donate $3 dollars. Why? It's not for the money, political science shows that even $1 will politically align a donor with a candidate. The more small donations a candidate gets, the larger their base becomes. HRC still seems to struggle in this area. It's not a good sign, especially when you break those numbers down on a state by state basis. Extrapolated out, she's hurting in many states.


.

[pnwmom]

89. If you don't want your post ignored, then don't laud a Trump-produced

piece of propaganda.

[TheBlackAdder]

110. There ya go, regardless of the thread I posted to, you've ignored it. Kudos! nt

[Hassin Bin Sober]

158. Well I appreciated what you had to say.

[snoringvoter]

86. *sigh*

Really?

[Armstead]

58. Has nothing to do with the article itself

How about addressing the subject instead of "shoot the messenger?"

[pnwmom]

60. The Observer is part of Trump's attack machine, not some neutral messenger.

And we should all be fighting back, not promoting anything it says.

[Enthusiast]

79. Good suggestion.

[WillyT]

76. And The Author ???

Also form Wikipedia:

Brent J. Budowsky (born February 19, 1952)[1] is a liberal / progressive[2] American political opinion writer and blogger for publications including The Hill,[3] the LA Progressive,[4] and The Huffington Post.

From the mid-1970s to 1990, Budowsky served in senior congressional staff positions including legislative assistant to former Senator Lloyd Bentsen;[6] extensively involved with the Intelligence Identities Protection Act and Intelligence Officers Death Benefits Act, and legislative director to Representative Bill Alexander, then the Chief Deputy Majority Whip.

Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brent_Budowsky



You're acting a tad panicked there...

[pnwmom]

78. Authors don't write headlines, editors do. And the editor is a Guiliani henchman.

It's too bad that Budowsky can't find a better employer than Trumps' son-in-law, who was born with even a bigger silver spoon in his mouth than Trump was.

http://therealdeal.com/issues_articles/jared-kushner-the-accidental-ceo/

[INdemo]

61. What Difference A Day Makes

Dedicated to all the Clara McCasshill fans and all the Hillary Clinton Fans

[Enthusiast]

65. Kicked and recommended! Thanks, WillyT! I agree with all of that.

I love that bonehead move of the year award.

[pnwmom]

70. You just swallowed whole a Trump produced piece of crap. The headline alone

should have given you a clue.

Wikipedia:

Jared Corey Kushner (born January 10, 1981) is an American businessman and investor. He is principal owner of the real estate holding and development company Kushner Properties and the newspaper publishing company The New York Observer. He is the son of American real estate developer Charles Kushner and is married to Ivanka Trump, the daughter of American business magnate Donald Trump.

[Enthusiast]

88. It might be influenced by Trump but the content is highly accurate.

I could have come up with a similar list myself. Many of us could.

If you can't see the glaring flaws in the Hillary campaign you aren't looking very closely. Or maybe you are looking through rose colored glasses.

Hillary needs to back off on the attacks. A huge majority of Democrats want single payer. How do you think it makes us feel when she attacks Bernie the way she does?

[gordyfl]

68. Hillary Living in a Bubble

Elizabeth Warren had stated the the Democratic Party has moved left. Apparently Team Hillary didn't get it, or don't want to believe it.

Bernie is in tune with the pulse of the nation. It seems Hillary is living in a bubble.

[yuiyoshida]

71. and the results are in!

On Wed Jan 20, 2016, 01:44 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Berserk Clinton Bigwigs Launch Nixonian Attack Against Surging Sanders - Observer
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511034904

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

The OP is aware that the Observer is now owned by the Trump family -- by his son-in-law -- and that its anti-Clinton diatribes are not journalism, they're propaganda.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Jan 20, 2016, 01:51 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: "anti-Clinton diatribes are not journalism" Pro-Clinton = Journalism, anti-Clinton = not journalism. This alert is transparent as hell.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is alert stalking
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: There is nothing hide-worthy in this post
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: tRump's son-in-law? That means he's married to Ivanka, who clearly takes after her mom in terms of being sane. Would you want to be judged by your spouse's dad?
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[bvar22]

146. Gee. I wonder if anyone has trouble identifying the alerter?

The alerter's comments mirror several posts in this thread....style and content.
Glad she got blitzed out of the thread for spurious alerting.

[Jokerman]

74. Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT

On Wed Jan 20, 2016, 01:44 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Berserk Clinton Bigwigs Launch Nixonian Attack Against Surging Sanders - Observer
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511034904

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

The OP is aware that the Observer is now owned by the Trump family -- by his son-in-law -- and that its anti-Clinton diatribes are not journalism, they're propaganda.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Jan 20, 2016, 01:51 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: "anti-Clinton diatribes are not journalism" Pro-Clinton = Journalism, anti-Clinton = not journalism. This alert is transparent as hell.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is alert stalking
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: There is nothing hide-worthy in this post
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: tRump's son-in-law? That means he's married to Ivanka, who clearly takes after her mom in terms of being sane. Would you want to be judged by your spouse's dad?
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[snoringvoter]

87. I'm very sure we all know who alerted it.

She's been all over this thread.

[KamaAina]

77. The inevitable alert got skunked 0-7!

On Wed Jan 20, 2016, 01:44 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Berserk Clinton Bigwigs Launch Nixonian Attack Against Surging Sanders - Observer
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511034904

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

The OP is aware that the Observer is now owned by the Trump family -- by his son-in-law -- and that its anti-Clinton diatribes are not journalism, they're propaganda.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Jan 20, 2016, 01:51 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: "anti-Clinton diatribes are not journalism" Pro-Clinton = Journalism, anti-Clinton = not journalism. This alert is transparent as hell.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is alert stalking
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: There is nothing hide-worthy in this post
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: tRump's son-in-law? That means he's married to Ivanka, who clearly takes after her mom in terms of being sane. Would you want to be judged by your spouse's dad?
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Uncle Joe]

97. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, WillyT.

[senz]

101. K&R -- Thanks for this, WillyT

[bvar22]

102. The TRUTH that entrenched Hillary supporters refuse to face....

...is that Hillary will ALSO be attacked as a "Socialist"in the General Election.
That has been SOP for EVERY winner of the Democratic Presidential Primary since before FDR.
Using that argument against Sanders is politically naive, if not outright disingenuous.


[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center] [center] [/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[gordyfl]

109. Good Quote

by Paul Wellstone. Thanks.

[Armstead]

133. Jeeze I wish that guy were still around (Wellstone)

[John Poet]

116. Joe McCarthy is BACK FROM THE DEAD and now

running the Clinton campaign!


I think Team Clinton has stolen Marty's Time Machine and landed back in 1955...

YO HILLARY! Come BACK TO THE FUTURE!

[John Poet]

148. This red-baiting campaign of Hillary's is making me angrier,

the more I think about it...

I mean, what party does she think she's running in?

[Bad Bad JuJu]

149. Apparently

the "Clinton" party. Do ya think when Bernie wins the Democratic nomination she'll run as an Independent, just to derail him? You know - throw it to the Republicans, since the 1% aren't too choosy who the leader is, as long as they are bought and paid for.

[Myrina]

160. Hell, she can run as a Republican when tRump drops out.

Her platform pretty much fits the mainstream GOP agenda, although the Teabillies will be pissed.

[Doctor_J]

151. She has turned into a pathetic loser. As Steven Leser so cogently observed

"Unfit to be president". She no longer even pretends to be a Dem.

[LanternWaste]

161. I'm concerned you didn't accuse the bigwigs of suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.

I'm concerned you didn't accuse the bigwigs of suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.