Sanders gives up on six Super Tuesday states: Virginia,Georgia,Texas,Alabama,Arkansas, Tennessees

[hill2016]

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-nevada-republican-caucuses-trailguide-02232016-htmlstory.html#3233

But Sanders is so far spending nothing on television in two of the biggest states that vote on March 1, Virginia and Georgia, and only a token amount in Texas. He's also not on the air in Alabama, Arkansas or Tennessee. Clinton and the super PAC allied with her, Priorities USA, is advertising in all six.

[NurseJackie]

1. I've never doubted his intelligence. Obviously he sees the same things we do.

[R B Garr]

38. Exactly, perfect comment!

[HerbChestnut]

2. He just held a rally in Virginia today n/t

[arcane1]

4. "Holding a rally" and "giving up" are the same thing now.

[elleng]

6. and maybe not spending $$$ as others do???

[daleanime]

32. When did this campaign...

start doing thing like everyone else?

[Qutzupalotl]

12. A HUGE rally, with energized supporters!

[1939]

35. My daughter was at the Norfolk rally

She said there was a very long line to get in with lots of enthusiasm.

Bernie can't compete with Hillary's bankroll when it comes to TV advertising.and goes for

[Stand and Fight]

125. I think this is a fair assessment.

There's more ways than just television ads to connect with voters. In this age of instant communication, I think we sometimes forget the power of an in-person appeal to people.

[1939]

128. Yes, Trump certainly doesn't pay for his notoriety.

Jeb Bush and HRC have to spend bundles for what Bernie and The Donald get for free.

[Stand and Fight]

131. I think that's because of their notoriety and their stances.

Full disclosure, I'm a Hillary supporter, but I'm also what you guys would call a pragmatist, and I admire Bernie for not blowing through his supporters donations on states he's less competitive in. As I said down thread, it's been reported by The Young Turks that Jeb only got 4 delegates but he spent $29 million on each one. In that way, I don't think it's fair to equate Hillary Clinton and him in that way. She's getting far more bang for her buck! LOL

[1939]

134. I don't think it is an unfair comparison

Jeb just got blown away while Bernie didn't have quite the effect on the Hill. The mechanisms are the same.

[arcane1]

11. He's doing plenty in those states. Buying tv ads isn't everything.

Take a look at the map. Do those states look "written off"?

http://map.berniesanders.com/

[seaglass]

99. It isn't everything but he ran A LOT of ads in NH and started running ads in MA a good 10 days

before Hillary.

I'm sure he is focusing his money where he thinks he can win.

[TM99]

13. Not running ads doesn't mean he is not engaging those states.

This is just more moneyed propaganda with this week's meme which is demoralize Sanders supporters so they don't turn out.

I mean, come on, after Super Tuesday and Hillary's YUUUGGE win, it is all over, right?

[Carolina]

89. Exactly

not running SLICK ads does not = giving up.

Here is SC, there were no Trump ads or flyers, but plenty of both for Rubio, Cruz and JEB. Who won?
HRC's ads are nauseating and do not change the minds of those who know her record and don't like her. In the past 2 days alone, I have received several nice shiny flyers featuring with her and Obama... torn up and straight to the trash.

[Kang Colby]

21. It's Sanders' math. We've all seen his economic proposals!

[Kang Colby]

59. Okie Dokie.

I think that was an incredibly rude comment. Sadly, that has been par for the course from the Sanders crowd.

[hoosierlib]

29. And he'll get 40% of the vote no matter what he does...

Win a few states next Tuesday and live to fight another day...#insurgentlife

[workinclasszero]

30. Bernie has to concentrate all his energy

Into vermont.

What is it 5 or 6 delegates?

[HERVEPA]

45. Perfect user name you have there.

[workinclasszero]

49. Thanks I like it too

[panader0]

61. John Lennon, the author of "Working Class Hero"

would certainly, without a doubt, be a Bernie supporter.
Same goes for Zappa.

[Stand and Fight]

127. What exactly does your snarky (veiled insult) accomplish?

Did you have nothing meaningful to contribute and so you decided upon a bit of mean words instead? What do you hope to accomplish with that kind of pettiness? I'm genuinely curious. I don't get that kind of thing.

[Kang Colby]

62. But...but...but...Ben & Jerry's....LOL eom

[morningfog]

67. Because it is proportional allocation.

He doesn't have to get 51% in any of those states to get many of those 571 delegates. It's simple. He focuses where he can win and takes a significant portion elsewhere based on the fact they are ties nationally. She'll win more states and likely take more delegates on Super Tuesday. But Hillary will not secure the nomination the. Or even a month from then.

[DrDan]

106. even more reason for him to focus on Super Tuesday - cherry pick a few more delegates

[morningfog]

109. He's focusing on adding delegates where he is already doing well.

And those states that are close. Aside from the delegate count, the narrative is shaped by "states won." To keep momentum, he needs several good showings in addition to a sizable chunk of delegates.

[DrDan]

110. delegate are delegates - regardless of their origin

[morningfog]

111. Duh. You missed the point. He is more likely to add delegates

in a state where he is already doing well than in a state where he is not. Hope that is clearer for you.

[DrDan]

112. I understood perfectly -do you not understand the impact of him writing off certain states

it does not portray him as a fighter - and he would still gain a few delegates in the process

this is even worse as he is writing off an entire region

the MSM will not deal with this positively for BS

[morningfog]

113. He's got to pick his battles and spend resources wisely.

He is a fighter. A smart fighter who is devoting limited resources for greatest return on delegates.

[DrDan]

114. I agree with that - I just question how "wise" this is

[morningfog]

115. Time will tell. It's all uphill for him and has been since he announced.

[Yavin4]

5. His entire governing strategy is building a political Tsunami of people

Yet, he's writing off states one by one.

[arcane1]

17. He has written nothing off. That's a lie, and you are perpetuation it.

Which states are "written off" here:

http://map.berniesanders.com/

[hoosierlib]

33. With the exception of Texas, all of those have AA populations >15%...and they are front loaded

Again pick your battles and live to fight another day...who knows, a subpoena or a criminal referral from the FBI could change the entire game...

[NanceGreggs]

55. That's just sad.

Bernie can't win on his own merits, and his supporters are reduced to hoping that a major scandal will bring HRC down.

That great "Revolution" is looking more desperate every day.

[hoosierlib]

57. Remember that when the criminal referral comes...its a matter of time...

I just hope its before the nomination is finalized, because if HRC is the nominee, you can kiss the GE goodbye and all of the down ballot races...

[NanceGreggs]

58. Yeah, sure.

You keep hoping - it's pretty much the only hope Bernie has left.

[hoosierlib]

60. I'll PM you when it happens ;)

I'll thoroughly enjoy it...

[NanceGreggs]

63. I'm sure you would.

But it ain't gonna happen.

Like I said, this is what BS's campaign is down to - hoping that something knocks HRC out of the race, because they know he can't win on his own merits.

Sad.

[Gothmog]

79. Colin Powell confirms Hillary Clinton is in the clear on her email

Will you also remember to PM or e-mail Collin Powell. He will be very surprised by this event and will need to get his own attorney
http://www.dailynewsbin.com/news/colin-powell-says-hillary-clintons-email-is-a-non-issue/23756/

Now that former Secretary of State Colin Powell has been dragged into the same private server email controversy that’s been thrown at Hillary Clinton for the past six months, he’s weighing in on the matter decisively. Powell is being accused of having sent emails that contained classified information from his own private server while he was in office, and he’s making clear that any retroactive reclassification is a non-issue. In so doing, he’s also absolving Clinton in the matter.

Colin Powell is now calling on his own emails to be released to the public so it can be clearly seen by all that he didn’t reveal any information which was classified at the time, and that his emails were harmless. “I wish they would release them so that a normal, air-breathing mammal would look at them and say, ‘What’s the issue?'” He also stated he believes the emails in question are still not classified, despite any retroactive reclassification.

Powell didn’t mention Clinton by name, but he didn’t have to. By stating his own emails that weren’t classified at the time are a non-issue, he’s also labeling Clinton’s emails that weren’t classified at the time as a non-issue. This is key because Powell is not only widely respected, he’s a republican. This weakens the arguments being made by some republicans that Clinton has done something wrong with her emails, because she’s now being absolved by one of the most respected republicans out there. NBC has more on the story.

Powell will want to know about this so-called indictment

[hoosierlib]

95. He used a secure network, she didn't...

Don't worry, the distinction will be laid out in the criminal referral...

[Gothmog]

108. You are wrong again

The issue is that none of the so-called e-mails were actually secret and should not be classified.

Hillary will not be indicted unless Collin Powell is also indicted. That is not going to happen

[hoosierlib]

117. Lol...you are so confused and uninformed...

Powell received two e-mails that were not marked classified that contained classified material, but not secret or higher and the e-mails were stored on a secure server. Additionly, this occurred during the time period from 2001 - 2005 which was prior to Executive Order 13526 (signed in 2009) which set in place new rules governing how to properly handle and protect classified information.

Hillary's server has at least 1,200 emails that contain classified information, many at the top secret and at least 22 that are above top secret (SAP or Special Access Program). While none of the e-mails appear to labeled as being classified, their very existance and storage on an unsecured sever is a huge violation of EO 13526.

Huge difference...

[Carolina]

97. says the war criminal

who sold a nation war with his little tubes at the UN

[Gothmog]

77. Yep, the "Top Secret" Emails Were All About Drones

The so-called "Top Secret" emails were all about NYT stories concerning drones and were in the public domain http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/02/yep-top-secret-emails-were-all-about-drones

So just what was in those "top secret" emails that Hillary Clinton received on her personal email server while she was Secretary of State? The New York Times reports what everyone has already figured out: they were about drones. What's more, the question of whether they contain anything that's actually sensitive is mostly just a spat between CIA and State:

Some of the nation’s intelligence agencies raised alarms last spring as the State Department began releasing emails from Hillary Clinton’s private server, saying that a number of the messages contained information that should be classified “top secret.”

The diplomats saw things differently and pushed back at the spies. In the months since, a battle has played out between the State Department and the intelligence agencies.

....Several officials said that at least one of the emails contained oblique references to C.I.A. operatives. One of the messages has been given a designation of “HCS-O” — indicating that the information was derived from human intelligence sources...The government officials said that discussions in an email thread about a New York Times article — the officials did not say which article — contained sensitive information about the intelligence surrounding the C.I.A.’s drone activities, particularly in Pakistan.

The whole piece is worth reading for the details, but the bottom line is pretty simple: there's no there there. At most, there's a minuscule amount of slightly questionable reporting that was sent via email—a common practice since pretty much forever. Mostly, though, it seems to be a case of the CIA trying to bully State and win some kind of obscure pissing contest over whether they're sufficiently careful with the nation's secrets.

It is not against the law to read and talk about articles in NYT. Your wait for an indictment may be a very long one.

Heck even Trump has given up an indictment

[Carolina]

96. not hoping

knowing. She's scandal-plagued because she's a liar. Repukes will go after her with relentlessness on steroids. If you think their efforts to get ANYTHING on Bill throughout his presidency were bad, you ain't seen nothing yet. Now, they have years of additional material and the aid of the internet with its reams of video footage showing HRC's lies (Bosnia) and ever changing positions (with the political winds). All they have to do is paint her as untrustworthy which a lot of people (repukes, indies and even Dems) already believe and she's a LOSER.

And btw, what are her merits????

She is part of the Clinton legacy (the two for one, 8 of her claimed years of experience): DLC, NAFTA, Telecommunications Bill of 1996, Welfare Reform (not), and overturning Glass-Steagall. She and Bill kept Alan Greenspan at the Fed, placed the then Mr. Goldman Sucks himself Robert Reuben as head of Treasury and hired as financial advisor that abominable Wall Streeter Larry Summers (who lost a $billion from Harvard's endowment!). And those three wrecked the economy:



But we, the people (the little people, lots of women), reaped the whirlwind of that 1999 Commodities Modernization Act which ended Glass-Steagall and for which every repuke in the Senate voted AYE while every Dem -- save one -- voted NAY. Bill signed it into law anyway, paying no heed to the canary-in-the-mine Dems who said that this dastardly new law would lead to disaster 10 years hence. Sure enough it did, harming women and families throughout the land. And Wall Street, Hillary's BFF, her funding cabal, continues to be such a benefactor for women!

In the Senate, what did she DO? What legislation or amendments to legislation illustrate her initiative or activism on behalf of women (her favorite constituency, minorities (her alleged firewall) and children. The aye votes for IWR, the Patriot Act and Bush's Bankruptcy bill sure were a big help to us all

Then there was her abysmal management and nasty conduct during the 2008 primary campaign. She had the money, she had the name, she was entitled, she was "in it to win it" and so arrogant that she claimed it would be over by Super Tuesday. But when it wasn't and she was losing, she resorted to the gutter. She praised McCain and derided Obama as someone who only gave pretty speeches. And when the Party urged her to bow out gracefully, she said that she was going to stay in the race through the CA primary because "you never know... remember Bobby Kennedy..." Her insinuation (a veiled wish?) that Obama might be assassinated like RFK was beyond classless and tasteless. It was evil (google Keith Olbermann on that atrocity). And when she finally, gracelessly bowed out, she did so on condition that the Obama organization and DNC pay off her campaign debt. Some management skills, just like her Wall Street benefactors who f--- things up, then expect others to pay for the disaster created.

As SOS, she was also terrible. Honduras, Libya and Syria are a mess. But HRC, the consummate pro-MIC corporatist, never saw a war she didn't like. And last I checked, war is not good for women, children or men!


This is HRC's history, so please tell me, what she has DONE that is positive or constructive? What is this record she always harkens back to in her me, me, me, mine, mine, mine debate responses? What are her alleged merits? She's in it for herself, she plays sexist gender politics, she lies about her alleged record, she changes her mind with the political winds, she panders, she pads her pockets, and she is a third way triangulator to her core.

[Gothmog]

76. ANALYSIS: No, Hillary Clinton Did Not Commit a Crime ... at Least Based on What We Know Today

There was not crime committed here. Dan Abrams (son of Floyd Abrams) has some good analysis here http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/analysis-hillary-clinton-commit-crime-based-today/story?id=36626499

In the Wall Street Journal, Judge Michael Mukasey seems to be arguing that because this all just feels wrong and even criminal-y, Clinton should at least be charged with a misdemeanor. That is, of course, not how the law can or should work. In fact, Judge Mukasey learned the hard way that misstating the law when discussing the case against Clinton can be hazardous. Judge Mukasey also echoed the conservative talking point that the case against Clinton is eerily similar to the charges against former general David Petraeus: "This is the same charge brought against Gen. David Petraeus for disclosing classified information in his personal notebooks to his biographer and mistress, who was herself an Army Reserve military intelligence officer cleared to see top secret information." Except that it is nothing like that case. Apart from the possible charge, there are actually few or no similarities from a factual perspective as the lead prosecutor in the Petreaus case explained in an op-ed in USA Today:

"During his tenure as the commander of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, Petraeus recorded handwritten notes in personal journals, including information he knew was classified at the very highest level. . .

Both the law and his oath required Petraeus to mark these books as 'top secret' and to store them in a Secured Compartmented Information Facility. He did neither. Rather, Petraeus allowed his biographer to take possession of the journals in order to use them as source material for his biography.

Importantly, Petraeus was well aware of the classified contents in his journals, saying to his biographer, Paula Broadwell on tape, 'I mean, they are highly classified, some of them. They don't have it on it, but I mean there's code word stuff in there.' When questioned by the FBI, Petraeus lied to agents in responding that he had neither improperly stored nor improperly provided classified information to his biographer. Petraeus knew at that time that there was classified information in the journals, and he knew they were stored improperly."

In the law, intent can be everything. Petraeus clearly knew he was violating the law, but based on what we know today, there is no evidence - not suppositions or partisan allegations but actual evidence - that Clinton knew that using a private email server was criminal or even improper at the time. Even assuming for argument's sake she created the server to keep her emails out of the public eye, that is in no way remotely comparable to the Petraeus case. Efforts to contrast the two cases fall flat factually and legally....

To be clear, none of this means Clinton won't be charged. There may be a trove of non-public evidence against her about which we simply do not know. It's also possible that the FBI recommends charges and federal prosecutors decide not to move forward as occurs in many cases. No question, that could create an explosive and politicized showdown. But based on what we do know from what has been made public, there doesn't seem to be a legitimate basis for any sort of criminal charge against her. I fear many commentators are allowing their analysis to become clouded by a long standing distrust, or even hatred of Hillary Clinton.

Dan is a good lawyer and this is a good analysis of the law on this issue

[oasis]

80. Great info. Thanks for posting.

[Gothmog]

81. Trump's hope for an indictment are really sad but funny

The only way for the GOP to keep Clinton from being the nominee and winning the general election is an indictment and that indictment is not going to happen

[oasis]

83. Yessir.

[hoosierlib]

93. Storage of classified on a unsecured network is a crime...

[Gothmog]

105. No it is not

Even Trump (who is a complete idiot) no longer believes that Hillary will be indicted

Your claim is simply false

[Carolina]

91. Not to mention

if AAs carry the day for HRC in the southern primaries, it means squat because the south will go red in the general.

And I say that as an AA in SC who's among many planning to vote for Bernie on Saturday.

[hoosierlib]

94. Thank you for your support...

[Gothmog]

124. The delegates from red states get to vote on the nominee at the national convention

The DNC does not care if a delegate is from a red state or blue state. Each such delegate gets to vote and after Super Tuesday, Sanders will be so far behind that he will have no chance of catching up

[John Poet]

71. The fact is, states which the Democrats rarely or never win

in presidential elections, have proportionately somewhat less delegates than the states where Democrats win more often.

So the fact is, those former Confederate states where the Democratic candidate rarely or never wins, receive less delegate votes for the same amount of voters, than California or New York, for instance.

I don't know the exact formula, it's been a while since I looked at the delegate allocation rules.

[trillion]

85. I think we need to take a look at those states in the polls before we dismiss why he isn't running

tv ads there.

[alcibiades_mystery]

103. The best was the dude who said they shouldn't count toward the nomination because...

...they're unlikely to go Dem in the general!

Can you imagine the frustration and temper tantrum that gets you to that logic?

[workinclasszero]

43. I'd say that's proof of a failed strategy eh?

[alcibiades_mystery]

102. Well, *some* people just won't listen to reason, you know...

[Persondem]

7. Sounds good to me. If he wants to bail on states with 500+ delegates, let him.

Means more for Clinton. K & R

[TM99]

8. So he isn't running expensive ads

and that means he is giving up those states?

There are many more grassroots style approaches when your budget comes from the people. I expect rallies, phone banking, etc.

[arcane1]

14. Just more lies from the Clinton Crew. TV ads are now the ONLY valid method, it seems.

They'll say literally anything at this point.

[TM99]

15. It is the campaign strategy meme of the week.

It is all over Sanders especially after Nevada and soon Super Tuesday.

It isn't really. And Sanders has already stated we are going to the convention. He isn't dropping out. And it is wise to pick your battles when you don't have a DNC SuperPAC collusion war chest and Wall Street donors.

[arcane1]

18. They want him to drop out SO BADLY they will say or do ANYTHING to make it happen.

[TM99]

27. Yes, they fucking will.

And the more they try, the more we get pissed off, and the more we support him in the real ways that count.

[arcane1]

28. I like to kick another 10 bucks to his campaign every time they do that.

It pisses them off

[riversedge]

37. Article is from the LA times.

[workinclasszero]

46. Facts don't mean a thing to the Bernie revolution

As you can see.

[Kittycat]

88. Who actually watches them?

I dvr almost everything. I'll watch an ad online, by choice, but I've yet to see one as a commercial break. I don't have a home phone, only cell. So I don't get political calls. All junk mail, including political, is bypassed and trashed. Why do people put so much importance on them? It's a different age and there are different methods of teaching people. Ads circulate online better than via cable, anyway. Particularly web based ads, social media, etc.

[seaglass]

100. Of course that is not true for the majority. Bernie and Hillary invested a lot in ads for NH.

If you watch or listen to the local news in the morning and evening which many people still do, every commercial break had an ad. It does make a difference otherwise they wouldn't spend the money.

[Kittycat]

118. I don't dispute radio, but TV - eh.

Again, people have busy lives. They DVR their shows. Advertising online is more effective. You can make a tv type spot, never air it on cable, and get better traction than you would in a limited media market through target online ad buys. It's the digital age.

http://www.epipheo.com/blog/in-60-seconds-digital-video-ads-vs-tv-spots-research/

[seaglass]

119. Do you think people DVR the local news? I doubt it. No idea if ad money is spent during prime time

as I would agree if there is TV watching to be done there are all sorts of methods of doing it without ads including streaming and cable in addition to DVR. Campaigns I am sure do a cost/benefit analysis and determine if they are going to pay for TV ads and what time of day is the optimum time to play them. They wouldn't spend the money on them unless they were getting a return.

[bvf]

24. Exactly.

Anyone who doesn't see this may just as well be asking, "How much does a delegate cost?" without the slightest sense of irony.

[Attorney in Texas]

9. Remember when Hillary doubled down in New Hampshire and then lost by 22%? Sanders is smart enough to

focus his efforts outside of the Confederate deep red Republican states that have not always been as kind to liberal Jews as they have been to someone like the first lady of Arkansas who helped build WalMart into the global giant it is today.

He's not an idiot and Democrats aren't going to carry the Deep South in the general election so bravo on Sanders for a wise tactical decision!

[thereismore]

10. It's easier with SuperPACs! We know that and you know that.

[peacebird]

16. Bernie isn't buying into the traditional tv markets. Gosh. It has SO hurt his campaign thus far, LOL

He is using his money wisely and is continuing his massive internet outreach. It has propelled him from 3% to neck & neck with her highness. Color me not too worried about how Bernie campaigns.

[seaglass]

101. Again, not true. We were bombarded with ads leading up to the NH primary. They are obviously

effective. Bernie has been running ads in MA and started back up a good 10 days before Hillary. It is much more low key though, I don't know if the thinking is that we just got saturated with ads last month so not as many are needed now or as we get closer to the primary the intensity will increase. In any case I'm sure he is focusing money/ads where it will have the most impact.

[SheenaR]

19. As someone who is working hard

To GOTV in two of those states, it's news to us that we have given up.

But why provide a truthful headline.

$$ spent on ads does not equate giving up.

SC, GA, AL, TN, AR? I'll give you those as surefire wins. Tennessee reluctantly as we have some great folks working hard there.

[workinclasszero]

47. You better call up the LA Times and dispute their story

[Gothmog]

22. I was hoping for a contest in Texas

[DCBob]

23. Probably trying to conserve his cash for the long haul.

I suspect he and his campaign know he cant win but he wants to go all the way to the convention so he will need money to pay his staff and travel and such for the next several months.

[oasis]

87. Hard to stretch those $27 donations he's been bragging about.

He refused Super PAC dough, which is admirable, but I hope he doesn't have to share a cab ride to the Dem convention.

[SidDithers]

25. Hard reality setting in....nt

Sid

[workinclasszero]

48. Slowly but surely

South Carolina will be an eye opener also.

[workinclasszero]

26. Bernies campaign strategy....

[DamnYankeeInHouston]

31. Who needs advertisements or network TV?

[Eric J in MN]

34. Do you believe Priorities USA is independent and its donors have no influence on Hillary Clinton? NT

NT

[cantbeserious]

36. Predictably Spreading Establishment FUD - Meme Number 141

eom

[BostonBob]

39. Propagandists shilling for Shill

What do we need to say to demoralize Bernie's supporters? The truth is irrelevant. All hail Queen Shill and the bipartisan gravy train of corruption. Down with idealism and honesty.

[Carolina]

98. Exactly, and the more HRC and/or her surrogates

shill, the harder we work for Bernie.

[angrychair]

40. What is the definition of giving up?

Holding an event in Norfolk, VA today?
He was just in Alabama a couple of weeks ago.
He just picked up several new endorsements in Texas
Offices door knocking in Athens, GA his week
He just opened a new campaign office in Tennessee
He has had an active campaign office in Little Rock, Arkansas since November

So I hardly see this as "giving up"

[nc4bo]

41. Whatever that poster can pull out of his butt. nt

[arcane1]

51. No lie is too ridiculous for the Clinton Crew. n/t

[YOHABLO]

52. He was just at Morehouse College here in ATL. Lines around the corner.

So whatz up with that dude?

[kath]

70. In Tulsa tomorrow evening, Baldwin-Wallace Univ near Cleveland OH on Thursday.

yeah, he is definitely giving up.

BTW, the race is very close in OK.

[Petrushka]

116. Add some endorsements from lawmakers in South Carolina to your list --->

http://njtoday.net/2016/02/23/sanders-endorsed-by-black-south-carolina-lawmakers/

[RoccoR5955]

42. Who is Sander?

Is it Bench Sander, Belt Sander or Hand Sander?
I guess this Sander entity is a third candidate I have not heard of. Please elaborate.
Thanks.

[INdemo]

50. This is the LA times another Corporate Mafia owned paper and

Bernie Sanders has not given up on these States he has another Rally in VA and just had a Rally in GA recently

Priorities USA Pac..Isn't that the PAC Bernie and Hillary discussed at a debate and she went on the defense and said it was for Obama when ran in 2012 and she was not affiliated with in (she lied) and hasn't the Koch Bros. contributed to this PAC indirectly through one or more of their companies?

[k8conant]

53. What's Sander Levin (D-MI) got to do with Bernie Sanders?

[dr60omg]

56. Please have no fear

Sanders has invested money and opened offices in those states and he is doing very well ... He has not given up on any super Tuesday states save Arkansas http://www.texastribune.org/2015/11/11/sanders-campaign-ramps-texas/ another Texas radio station a PBS station http://tpr.org/post/uttt-poll-clinton-still-leads-texas-margin-has-narrowed#stream/0

I could go on state by state ... but, he is there and he is closing the gaps ... Please

Yes, Clinton's super-pac is in all six states kind of ironic since one of the things is that we want to get corporate money out of politics to save the nation and the planet.

[Lizzie Poppet]

64. All but one essentially certain to go red in November.

Just sayin'...

[OkSustainAg]

65. Just because

you don't advertise doesn't mean you are not going to get delegates. Proportional delegates means he still gets delegates. I personally don't watch TV.

[AgingAmerican]

66. No he hasn't

It is amusing how desperate her campaign and her supporters have become.

[JackRiddler]

68. Oh hooray, Clinton + Clinton PACs have more money!

Congratulations! It's totally because the corporate establishment deserves to pick the winner! So proud of you! Dance, dance! You are the best! Let's go NAFTA-Plus - fracking - mass incarceration - new round of wars! Hooray!!!

[Avalux]

69. Umm no. Bernie hasn't given up in Texas. A lot of us are working hard right now.

He may not be running many ads, but his people are here doing whatever we can.

Your Subject line is disingenuous. But that doesn't surprise me one bit.

[AZ Progressive]

73. Super Tuesday was originally intended to be a firewall against very liberal candidates

Or at least to give more moderate candidates an ability to compensate for losses in Iowa and New Hampshire.

No surprise here.

[brooklynite]

90. I see: a campaign in multiple States across the Country is a "firewall"

It's almost as bad as holding a national election.

[Recursion]

74. That's a mistake, IMO: he needs either VA or AR

This is surprising me because he was running a pretty effective campaign so far, but this is the wrong call for him.

[Gothmog]

75. I was hoping for a fight in Texas

In 2008, we had a great contest between Clinton and Obama. I am sad that Sanders gave up

[Thinkingabout]

78. He laid out big bucks in Nevada and did not get a great return, money spent and not

coming back. Presidential elections are very expensive and big bucks are needed. I don't know what day Sanders will realize some of the same things he has been told about running for president. I wish he would not look at everyone as having to have money given to provide a service in return. It just isn't true everyone is on the take.

[lancer78]

82. Lol

In my super-red east tennessee county, I have seen Sanders signs but no HRC signs. His strategy, as someone else said above, is since these 6 states are not winner-take-all, he will still get quite a few delegates, and then can try to put money in the winner-take-all states.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

84. Red states...

some just do not understand

[Betty Karlson]

86. You wish.

[quaker bill]

92. Whatever.

perhaps he is just focusing in the places where he is far more likely to rack up delegates. I would think you "H" people should know by know that it is about delegates, not square feet. Delegates from Michigan are as good as delegates from Tennessee.

[Stand and Fight]

132. Nice broad brush. I'm one of those "H" people and I don't agree with the premise of this post.

Please do try to NOT generalize so much. It's much more of a bane than a boon.

[islandmkl]

104. the Sanders camp doesn't know what they are doing!! OH NOES!! damn...

I better send them another $100 because at least they don't what to do with my $100...

since the campaigns seem to have trouble knowing what to do with the $2700 max-outs they are getting, too...

at least I get to play the game longer...oh wait, is that a plan?

[Vinca]

107. I love the gloating on this thread.

When President Trump is sworn in next January, I'll remember it. This is the year of the outsider, not the year of the status quo. Bernie is probably our best chance to beat Trump.

[hill2016]

122. but

the problem is that people aren't voting for him

[Vinca]

123. Bernie's the only person creating any excitement on the left.

And, in the past week, the only one who hasn't received a subpoena for anything. Trump is going to devastate Hillary. As pundits have been noting on air today, negatives stick to Hillary like glue, but they slide off "The Donald" as if he's covered with Teflon. Now I'm doubly worried about this election with Rick Scott's name being put out there as VP. Hillary's only hope in the general is getting enough Republicans to vote for her to put her over the top.

[Orsino]

120. He's not made of money.

Swearing off the big donors has consequences. One of which is retaining his relative virginity in the matter of campaign finance reform.

It's a gamble, but I am glad that he's betting on us. Tells me who he's working for.

[Waiting For Everyman]

121. Gee that's odd, my daughter was calling Arkansas for him last night.

The phone bank had volunteers calling all those states. I think Bernie knows what he's doing, thank you very much for your concern.

[taught_me_patience]

126. I pointed this out last week

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511337901

and got a lot of flack for it. He's giving up an insurmountable amount of delegates in Texas alone to continue on as a viable candidate.

[Uncle Joe]

129. I viewed two of his commercials on CNN last night here in Nashville.

Thanks for the thread, hill.

[Stand and Fight]

130. Given the number of people showing up at his rallies...

Given the number of people showing up at his rallies, I think the premise of this post is a bit of a stretch. I cannot honestly draw that conclusion based on the link or how well Sanders does at rallies. He's continuing to have events in some of those states -- he's just not blowing money on them. Shows a bit of economic pragmatism if you ask me since he's not made of money. Actually makes me respect him even more since he's spending supporters donations wisely. Much wiser than Jeb Bush who spent some $29 million for 4 delegates -- if The Young Turks is correct.

I'm a Hillary supporter, but I think this post is assuming too much. Just saying.

[datguy_6]

133. I agree that he is ceding AL, AR, GA and TN

Bernie has made several campaign rally stops in TX and VA, but instead of spending money on ads, he has focused more on phone banking and traditional GOTV...



The big question for me is why is Clinton spending so much in states she going to win easily?

Be curious to see her fundraising and spending numbers for February...