2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhy are Clinton supporters so spiteful when Sanders is doing their candidate a YUGE favor in cali
by not kicking their candidate's ass by buying air time on TV?
Why is the DNC begging Sanders to go easy on their "nominee"? If Clinton was everything her supporters say she is he wouldn't HAVE to pull his punches (figuratively speaking).
Clinton is a deeply, deeply flawed candidate and Sanders is an honorable, decent person to not go negative on her when it would be SO very, very easy. But while pointing out Clinton's many, many flaws may hurt our "nominee" in the general ignoring those flaws or pretending that they somehow don't exist could hurt her much worse. This election is littered with the corpses of those who underestimated the popularity of Trump's low information populist message.
You guys should be kissing Sanders' ass. He's got the money and content to NUKE Clinton's campaign but decency and loyalty stays his hand. Would Clinton be that decent where her ambitions are concerned? We all know she wouldn't.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)1. Bernie IS running TV ads in California
2. He's losing every poll there
3. Hillary can lose California by a good percentage and still easily win the nomination
4. Bernie and his campaign have done very little except attack both Hillary and the Democratic party for about a month
Ned_Devine
(3,146 posts)auntpurl
(4,311 posts)The OP is wrong, Bernie IS running ads in California.
Whether you want to call it attacking or "telling the truth" as Bernie sees it, he has been making nonstop negative statements about Hillary and the Democratic Party for about a month. So the OP's point that Bernie is taking it easy on Hillary is also wrong.
Ned_Devine
(3,146 posts)I don't know why the OP said he wasn't running spots in CA, because I'm pretty sure he is.
firebrand80
(2,760 posts)Bernie is most likely running low on money. If he was flush with cash he would be competing in NJ, which would be critical to any realistic path to the nomination.
Bernie hasn't been as negative on Hillary as he could have, but Hillary could have gone more negative as well.
CrowCityDem
(2,348 posts)Trenzalore
(2,331 posts)Otherwise he would.
Most expensive state to run a political ad campaign.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)Garrett78
(10,721 posts)I must have imagined that.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)politician that has already lost, never was a Democrat and issue with a woman kicking his ass has to resort to.
MattP
(3,304 posts)jamese777
(546 posts)What is happening now in the political dynamics of primary season has happened in every presidential election year since political parties were first formed.
This campaign season has been rather mild in comparison. People who take their politics seriously don't like to lose and other folks are not gracious in victory.
In 2008 it was the P.U.M.A. ("Party Unity My Ass) group of disgruntled Clinton supporters who vowed to never support Barack Obama. Obama beat McCain by 10 million votes.
And so it goes.
jamese777
(546 posts)Demsrule86
(68,554 posts)He attacks her every so called rally...he ran out of money. He is a potential spoiler.
randome
(34,845 posts)Both candidates are flawed. The voters can decide who they want. Remember when Sanders supporters used to talk about issues? My, those were the days...
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]
KingFlorez
(12,689 posts)Do you really think that Sanders would not run ads as a favor to his opponent? That really makes no sense in the grand scheme of politics.