Is There a DANGER Of A "Delayed Hillary's Baggage" Effect?

[Segami]

Okay, say Hillary wins the nomination: she survives all of the different scandals and accusations which have hounded her during the primaries, and she becomes the Democratic Party’s nominee. While Sanders supporters (including myself) would be naturally distraught, the party has it’s official standard bearer. The worst is over. Well, wouldn’t that be a little short-sighted? Wouldn’t the kind of scrutiny she had received from her fellow Democrats really just pale in comparison to what she will then have to face in a grueling, head-to-head battle with the Republican establishment? Particularly now that conservatives will have a very real possibility of controlling all three branches of government? Will they stop at absolutely nothing? Even now, many are saying that Hillary is “a disaster waiting to happen.” The real tragedy would, of course, be if the “real disaster” happens during the general election. Then there would be no going back and finding someone else. And “the real disaster” could be brought into being by merely firing, on all cylinders, at HRC’s boatload of baggage. Perhaps no new revelations would even be necessary. The “Atlantic Magazine” recently ran an article entitled “From Whitewater to Benghazi: A Clinton Scandal Primer in which they say:

"....With Hillary Clinton leading the field for the Democratic nomination for president, every Clinton scandal—from Whitewater to the State Department emails—will be under the microscope. (No other American politicians—even ones as corrupt as Richard Nixon, or as hated by partisans as George W. Bush—have fostered the creation of a permanent multimillion-dollar cottage industry devoted to attacking them.) Keeping track of each controversy, where it came from, and how serious it is, is no small task,.."

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/tracking-the-clinton-controversies-from-whitewater-to-benghazi/396182/

They then list each one with a short summary of the specifics. Here’s the list:

The State Department Emails

Benghazi

Conflict of Interest at Foggy Bottom

Clinton’s Private Email Server

Sidney Blumenthal

The Speeches (the millions made from them)

The Clinton Foundation

The Bad Old Days (Whitewater. Troopergate. Paula Jones. Monica Lewinsky. Vince Foster)

Even if one can just shrug off some (or most) of them as empty or “resolved”, issues such as this can be no less harmful to a Presidential candidate. Need we look any further than John Kerry’s critical encounter with the “Swift Boaters”, to really appreciate how even a baseless accusation can torpedo a campaign? HRC’s vulnerabilities are legion. But, I think hers should be taken into consideration more than they currently are, when judging the risks of her candidacy, after the very distinct possibility of becoming the Democratic nominee, Would we even, perhaps, just be setting ourselves up?


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/11/29/1455177/-Is-There-a-Danger-of-a-Delayed-Hillary-s-Baggage-Effect

[The Blue Traveller]

1. Kicked and highly recommended read

Thank you, Segami for this excellent read.

[Agschmid]

21. She is quite consistent.

And apparently so are you...

[Sheepshank]

135. Consistently, the cycle of anti Hillary posts kick in

and here we go. Just another cycle in the desperate attempts (feel more like death throws) to damage a Democratic Candidate....instead of dealing with the shortcomings and bolstering their own candidate.

Kinda puke inducing.

[840high]

78. Welcome.

[enid602]

2. chaos

Check in with the boys at Chaos 2016. I'm sure they ca whip something up.

[MineralMan]

3. I'm pretty SURE the Baggage Handlers Union

has already endorsed her. They'll handle the situation. No need to worry. Don't forget to tip the porter, though.

Besides, her opponents who are Democrats have already beaten the Republicans to it. We've been hearing about that nonstop since primary season started.

[Hekate]

27. +1 Have they EVER beaten the Pubbies to it. Great JOB, Dem opponents!

[1StrongBlackMan]

31. Excellant Response ...

Apparently, the person writing the OP thinks those that would be influenced by any "Delayed Baggage Effect" don't have access to radios, TVs or the internet ... where her baggage has been laid bare for all to exaggerate. And when EVERY SINGLE piece of baggage comes up clean ... the republicans (and some on the left) are left with, "Well ... she may not have done what you insisted was bad, there must be something out there ... because I keep hearing how bad she is!"

So perhaps there will be that baggage ... But, I would think those of us on the left wouldn't be party to promoting the only thing the right has.

[Historic NY]

73. +1

[lovemydog]

93. LOL

You have a good way with words.

[leveymg]

4. Why aren't Libya and Syria on the list?

And being the Saudi Royal Family's BFF? Just curious.

[Wilms]

5. And Ukraine. n/t

[pengu]

128. And Honduras

[Doctor_J]

6. those are the reasons turnout by liberals and bernistas will be low

Iwr, wall street, heritage care, charter schools, etc. The wingers will flock to the polls because of the stupid stuff.

[Segami]

7. This was the list mentioned

in The Atlantic's article.........obviously, this Clinton list can easily be expanded on with enough specifics to fill every closet in a mansion.

[leveymg]

10. There are some who thought the idea of Arabs killing each other was brilliant.

And they still do, provided those being killed aren't billionaires. That's Hillary's real base of support.

[Scootaloo]

113. Some presidential candidates even got the giggles over it all.

After badly paraphrasing Gaius Julius Caesar.

[leveymg]

130. Presidents shouldn't have alter egos or behave like would-be world conquerers from 2,000 years ago

Not in this century.

[Segami]

11. "..In March 2013, The Washington Post ran a story..

"...about the launch of America Rising. The coverage was unusual: opposition-research shops don’t normally seek out attention from major papers; they prefer to operate under the radar. (As a 2000 story in the New York Post put it, “Oppo research is like underwear—it works best when you don’t see it.”) But this new firm, founded by Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign manager, Matt Rhoades, planned on “instigating nothing less than a revolution in the way the right does and uses oppo research,” according to The Washington Post. Tim Miller, the executive director of America Rising, told the paper, “Research has been people sitting in a dungeon or going through trash cans and then funneling the information up to a press person.” Miller, by contrast, issues frequent press releases and sometimes even writes op-eds. He speaks like the CEO of a public corporation. “Part of our brand is having credibility with journalists,” he told me.


- Oppo researchers today function in ways that make them almost indistinguishable from campaign strategists, just without the funding limits. They can provide one crucial piece of information—say, that John Edwards paid $400 for a haircut—that is subsequently integrated into the broader negative picture of a candidate (in Edwards’s case, that he was rich and vain). Last year, a tracker from America Rising caught Bruce Braley, a Democratic Senate candidate in Iowa, deriding the state’s senior senator, the Republican Chuck Grassley, as a “farmer from Iowa who never went to law school.” This turned into a meme that made Democrats look anti-farmer and alienated from Middle America. For 2016, America Rising is building a huge database of everything Hillary Clinton has said and done, regarding everything from Little Rock to Benghazi, to try to paint a robust caricature of Hillary in the public’s mind before the real Hillary even gets started.


- When Clinton went on tour to promote her new book, Hard Choices, for instance, America Rising was determined to counter all the free positive press. It sent trackers to record her every move and updated its site constantly. It aggregated unflattering news coverage, but almost always from reputable origins—a Politico summary of negative reviews of her book; or a Wall Street Journal poll showing that only 38 percent of voters thought she was “honest and straightforward”; or a Daily Mail article reporting that “U.S. taxpayers spent $55,000 on travel expenses for Hillary Clinton’s book tour,” including “a $3,668-a-night hotel suite.” The trick for America Rising is to find material that is damaging but still credible and mainstream. “If we were caught peddling really terrible stuff, wild conspiracy theories, it would have a terrible impact on our brand,” Miller told me.


- An already-emerging line of attack is the framing of Clinton as a plutocrat: elite, rich, and out of touch with average Americans. In some ways, it’s the evolution of the old portrayal of the Clintons as vulgar money-grubbers, Arkansas grifters involved in an assortment of sleazy deals all the way down to trading old underwear for tax breaks. Now, by contrast, they are portrayed as operating on a much grander scale, acquiring their money from universities, charities, and shady international ventures. Whenever possible, America Rising cites the perks that go along with the Clintons’ new wealth. Last September on the group’s Web site, a story based on a Bloomberg News video appeared under a breathless headline: “$25,000 to Burn? Bill Clinton Smokes World’s Most Expensive Cigar!” (In the video, the CEO of Gurkha—whose high-end cigars retail for $25,000 a box—mentions that Clinton is one of his clients.)

[hootinholler]

13. Maybe because the republicans won't go there

They kind of like those parts of the story?

[tazkcmo]

50. And sniper fire. n/t

[WillyT]

8. K & R !!!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

9. The baggage is in the hold

The republicans want it to stay that way so she can win the Dem nomination. If she does win then they will make sure that they open all the baggage.

[840high]

79. You bet they will. They're salivating.

[Jarqui]

12. It's inevitable

Look at what they did to John Kerry
Look at the stuff they tried to get Obama with (birther, muslim, guilt by association etc - and they made a bunch of that stick because a bunch of Americans think Obama is of Muslim faith born in Kenya).
Look at what they did to Acorn
Look at what they did to Planned Parenthood.

In those cases, they took a few facts and spun them into a fable to damage the candidate or entity. Recently, they've damaged Hillary similarly with Benghazi and emails.

Here's some of what they're up to:

Inside the Republicans’ Opposition Research Machine
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/27/opinion/inside-the-republicans-opposition-research-machine.html

In this political cycle Republican investigators have been given a rare gift: a clear front-runner with a long and public history.

The Republicans boast that their research shop is bigger and better than the Democratic National Committee’s, but in fact the Republicans’ biggest advantage is Mrs. Clinton herself. While the Democrats have more than a dozen Republican candidates to research, the Republicans can focus their energies entirely on her. The fodder seems endless: over 40 years of public life, she has changed roles, funding mechanisms, policy positions, even regional accents.

Mrs. Clinton “may not like those of us willing to hold her accountable, but she only has herself to blame,” Mr. Shah says. “We’re simply citing her own past words, positions and actions.”
...
The committee shares its work with reporters who cover the presidential campaign. Other times, it seeks federal investigations on issues revealed by news reports, in cases like the discovery by Reuters of errors in the Clinton Health Access Initiative’s tax records and The Times’s reporting on Mrs. Clinton’s private email server.

They're going to to be all over Hillary like a pack of rabid dogs, take that Koch money and spew their negative findings and propaganda all over the media.

Two troubling things about Hillary
a) they have volumes of true stuff to work with (ie lies, flip-flops galore, money innuendo, etc)
b) Republicans and Independents heavily do not trust Hillary according to many polls and find Hillary one of the most unfavorable candidates (in many polls) since they started tracking those polls so the GOP smear machine is more likely to gain traction easily.

I think they'll hit her so hard, it will be a cakewalk for President-elect Rubio and it will cascade down the ballot.

i don't just prefer Sanders' positions, I prefer not having to deal with all the garbage they're going to hammer Hillary with - because some of it, we'll have no comeback as it's either true or they'll have some dandy evidence.

[Jarqui]

17. Here's one I came across today that burns me

Under pressure, Clinton Foundation’s Canadian arm reveals 21 donors
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article24784342.html

Under pressure to lift the veil of secrecy over who bankrolled his Canadian charity that’s affiliated with the Clinton Foundation, Vancouver-based mining mogul Frank Giustra late Friday released the names of 21 of its largest donors, most with connections to the mining and oil-drilling industries.
....

However, the biggest donors to the Canada partnership were Giustra, who has pledged $100 million to the Clinton Foundation and donated more than $30 million directly so far, and his Radcliffe Foundation, which gave more than $18 million between 2007 and 2013, according to public records.

Others on the list include:

--Pacific Rubiales Energy Corp., a Canadian petroleum firm in which Giustra invested and which pursued drilling interests in Colombia.

--Gran Colombia Gold Corp., a Canadian firm with mining interests in the South American nation.

--Endeavour Mining Corp., a Canadian-based gold mining firm, and its chief executive officer, Neil Woodyer.

--Stephen Dattels, a British-based mining industry financier.

--GMP Securities, LP, a Canadian firm that has been instrumental in underwriting mining ventures.

-- B2Gold Corp., a Canadian gold-mining firm.

--Sam Magid, a former business Giustra business partner.

--The London-based Dragon Group of companies, which deal in silver, copper and diamonds.

Why are a bunch of mining companies wanting to work with Bill & Hillary on philanthropy ... and uranium deals?

doesn't look good:
http://cgepartnership.com/who-we-are/clinton-foundation-partnership/

I hear about what a smart man Bill Clinton is, when he lets the right head do the thinkin'. But how can Bill and Hillary claim to be smart enough to be the first family again and do the above? It's so stupid, it defies reason.

Maybe, there's nothing sinister going on. But public perception of the above stinks like a septic tank burst. Wait til Karl Rove and Co get their mitts on it.

If these folks want to do great philanthropic things, great!!. Give to Save The Children or the United Way or with more than $100 million they're giving the Clintons, they can start their own charity. Just don't mess with the front runner for president of the Democrats Party. It's tough enough as it is.

It's just a potential scandal that was absolutely needless.

[Live and Learn]

32. Exactly! nt

[artislife]

49. That is quite a list.

I am sure there are unhappy people that this list was released.

[Jarqui]

18. Here's another one: Hillary Clinton's Goldman Sachs Problem

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/hillary-clintons-goldman-sachs-problem

Robert Harrison
Chief Executive Officer, Clinton Global Initiative
https://www.clintonfoundation.org/blog/authors/robert-harrison

Bob Harrison is chief executive officer of the Clinton Global Initiative. Previously, Bob spent 22 years on Wall Street as an investment banker and attorney. In 1987, he joined Goldman Sachs, where he became a partner in its investment banking division.

Why Wall Street Loves Hillary
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/11/why-wall-street-loves-hillary-112782

Goldman Sachs, Buying Redemption
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/10/26/goldman-sachs-buying-redemption/

The 10,000 Women program was a big participant in the Clinton Global Initiative conference in September, among other things hosting a panel moderated by Chelsea Clinton. The sponsorship didn’t come cheap. The program paid the Clinton Global Initiative $375,000, the Goldman spokesman said.

Lament of the Plutocrats
Why Wall Street is fed up with the White House—and Republicans too
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2013/12/wall-street-white-house-republicans-lament-of-the-plutocrats-101047

On a recent afternoon, executives at Goldman Sachs invited a few hundred major investors to the Conrad Hotel in lower Manhattan. The bankers and their guests filed into a large room and turned their eyes to Hillary Clinton.

Ordinarily these masters of the universe might have groaned at the idea of a politician taking the microphone. In the contentious years since the crash of 2008, they’ve grown wearily accustomed to being called names—labeled “ fat cats" by President Obama and worse by those on the left—and gotten used to being largely shunned by Tea Party Republicans for their association with the Washington establishment. And of course there are all those infuriating new rules and regulations, culminating this week with the imposition of the so-called Volcker Rule to make risky trades by big banks illegal.

But Clinton offered a message that the collected plutocrats found reassuring, according to accounts offered by several attendees, declaring that the banker-bashing so popular within both political parties was unproductive and indeed foolish. Striking a soothing note on the global financial crisis, she told the audience, in effect: We all got into this mess together, and we’re all going to have to work together to get out of it. What the bankers heard her to say was just what they would hope for from a prospective presidential candidate: Beating up the finance industry isn’t going to improve the economy—it needs to stop. And indeed Goldman’s Tim O’Neill, who heads the bank’s asset management business, introduced Clinton by saying how courageous she was for speaking at the bank. (Brave, perhaps, but also well-compensated: Clinton’s minimum fee for paid remarks is $200,000).

Certainly, Clinton offered the money men—and, yes, they are mostly men—at Goldman’s HQ a bit of a morale boost. “It was like, ‘Here’s someone who doesn’t want to vilify us but wants to get business back in the game,’” said an attendee. “Like, maybe here’s someone who can lead us out of the wilderness.”

Goldman Sachs gave between $1,250,00 and $5,000,000 to the Clinton Foundation
http://www.vox.com/2015/4/28/8501643/Clinton-foundation-donors-State

I don't know how true it is that there's a problem. But again, it stinks. And they keep doing it to themselves instead of operating without any relationship with people like this.

[tularetom]

14. It isn't a possibility, it's a certainty

And the patented Clinton tactic of fake indignation and finger wagging will not defuse it. There are a lot of Americans of both parties who are convinced that the Clintons are deceptive, if not outright crooks. The republicans among them are salivating at the prospect of her candidacy in the general election.

[Segami]

16. "Deceptive?"......thats putting it mildly....

Both Bill and Hillary ( who are trying to occupy the WhiteHouse once again) have intentionally, straight-out-lied directly to the voters and especially to their Democratic base supporters without so much as a hint of ethical remorse.


Its their makeup and NOBODY should expect anything different from either of them.....

[Live and Learn]

34. Very true! nt

[bvf]

24. This ^ n/t

[Armstead]

15. And then there's Bill's baggage....

[KoKo]

123. yes.........n/t

[Ino]

19. Absolutely...

That's why we haven't really heard much about the Clinton Foundation allegations yet... they are saving that for the General Election and/or to hamstring her presidency should she survive the GE. It will be nothing but investigations. All. The. Time.

[Paka]

20. K&R

She is truly, a disaster waiting to happen.

[jalan48]

22. Ms. Samsonite. Tap dancing her way to the White House.

[ibegurpard]

23. nope

She's the most qualified EVER and ready to go on day one!
Or something...

[MBS]

25. Yup, this has always been my fear. n/t

[JoePhilly]

26. We should pick some one the GOP likes to avoid this.

[Major Hogwash]

134. The GOP doesn't hate Bernie with the fire of a 1000 torches.

Not the way they hate Hillary and Bill Clinton.

That's for reals.

[pnwmom]

28. Wait till the Rethugs start tossing mud at candidate Sanders.

At his born-out-of-wedlock son.

At his two wives (neither the mother of his son)

At his essay about women's and men's rape fantasies.

At his wife's "golden parachute" from Burlington College amidst accusations of loan fraud.

All of that will be totally irrelevant to his performance as President, but it will be thrown at him, full force, in any General Election.

No one should delude themselves that, just because the media has been focusing on Hillary till now, Bernie will be immune from unfair attacks.

[Live and Learn]

35. None of those are issues that can be investigated indefinitely and nobody cares about them.

And why the hell do you people keep picking on his son? It is disgusting. He has a son and he took care of him like any father should.

[pnwmom]

48. In the general election, if he is the nominee, MILLIONS of people will care about them.

Only one previously divorced President has ever been elected -- Ronald Reagan. And no President known to have a child born out of wedlock has ever been elected.

All that cross-over appeal that Bernie is supposed to have could evaporate once the gun-owners learn more about him, through the same kind of opposition research that the Rethugs are now directing at Hillary.

[Live and Learn]

51. Wow, some of you really live in yesteryear. You are wrong, nobody cares.

And they aren't worried about socialism either.

I am sure you will be happy to know they don't care about Bill's philandering either.

But issues that involve misuse of funds, government agencies and property and anything resembling payoffs to friends, people do care about.

[pnwmom]

57. His wife received a $200K payment from Burlington College

after she was asked to leave when she mishandled some multi-million dollar loans. You can be sure that will be dug through if he's the nominee.

Along with questions about whether his position in state politics helped her get her position as President of Burlington College.

[Live and Learn]

59. It has been explained thouroughly. Nothing improper about it.

And, she isn't even running.

I wonder what Bill has been up to all this time. But it really isn't relevant is it.

Picking on women and kids is how you are going to play now?

[pnwmom]

97. Where has it been explained thoroughly? Her previous jobs don't explain it.

She'd been a trustee at Goddard, where she was an alum, so they asked her to be provost temporarily while they found another one. She was there for a year and a half.

That's it. The rest of her jobs were social service jobs and campaign jobs.

And the PhD she got in 2000 was from a mostly online school, "The Union Institute," that was forced to dissolve (and reform) its graduate programs a few years later, after the school didn't pass muster during an Ohio review. For some reason Burlington College hired her in 2004 even with that discredited PhD and no experience as a College President.

Maybe they were hopeful she had good connections?



P.S. I seem to recall hearing something about the Rose Hill law firm when Bill Clinton was running. You can be certain if Bernie is the nominee we'll be hearing plenty from the GOP about Burlington College.

We can stop pretending that Hillary and Bill would be the only ones with targets on their backs. If Bernie is the nominee, he and Jane will get the same treatment.

[Live and Learn]

98. Now you are discounting social service and campaign jobs? Seriously??

Sorry but that post was utterly snobbish and not worthy of a DU post.

[pnwmom]

99. Yes, I am. Her jobs were not preparation for college president,

which may be why she ended up being asked to leave, after it turned out she had gotten millions of dollars in bank loans for the college, based in part on reporting pledges that didn't exist.

[Live and Learn]

101. Actually it was pledges that didn't pay up. How was her fault?

And what in the hell does it have it to do with Bernie? Your accusations are absurd and more than a bit disgusting.

[pnwmom]

103. How did she get that job in 2004 with a 2000 online PhD that had already been discredited

when the Union Institute was forced to dissolve its graduate programs in the interim -- because of inadequacies in those programs?

Why was Burlington College willing to overlook her lack of relevant experience and and her questionable PhD?

Here's more info about the pledges. One of the "pledges" wasn't actually a pledge that would pay out every year for six years, as the loan application indicated. It was actually a bequest, that wouldn't pay out anything until the giver died -- at some unknown date in the future. She has never explained how a million dollar bequest was incorrectly reported as a million dollar pledge.

At the very least, she demonstrated incompetence, reporting $2.6 million in pledges but only receiving $676K. She was $2 million short -- and a million of that was from the bequest that was incorrectly reported as a multi-year pledge.

http://vtdigger.org/2015/09/13/jane-sanders-overstated-donation-amounts-in-loan-application-for-burlington-college/


Sanders told People’s United Bank that the college had $2.6 million in pledged donations to support the purchase of the former Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington property on North Avenue. The college, however, received only $676,000 in actual donations from 2010 through 2014, according to figures provided by Burlington College.

That’s far less than the $5 million Sanders listed as likely pledges in the loan agreement, and less than a third of the $2.14 million Sanders had promised People’s Bank the college would collect in cash during the four-year period.

Two people whose pledges are listed as confirmed in the loan agreement told VTDigger that their personal financial records show their pledges were overstated. Neither were aware that the pledges were used to secure the loan.

Burlington College also cited a $1 million bequest as a pledged donation that would be paid out over six years, even though the money would only be available after the donor’s death.

SNIP

Sanders, wife of Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who is now running for president, resigned under pressure from the Burlington College board of trustees nearly a year after obtaining the multi-million dollar loan. After both sides lawyered up, the board gave Sanders the title of president emeritus and a $200,000 severance package. Sanders was president of Burlington College from 2004 to 2011.

[Live and Learn]

104. OMG I can't get past your title. You are truly over the top here.

First his kid and now his wife? Sickening!

[pnwmom]

105. If this is too much for you, just wait for the General Election, if Bernie is the nominee.

You might as well get used to it. Your candidate and his wife have a history that will be exploited by the opposition, just like any other Dem.

[Live and Learn]

107. I think most will feel like I do that your accusations are (DBAB) disgusting beyond all belief. nt

[pnwmom]

109. His fervent Democratic supporters will. But many other voters won't. n/t

[Live and Learn]

110. You are wrong about that. Everyone will. nt

[Happenstance24]

118. No offense but man are you naive. n/t

[Live and Learn]

142. I think you may be the naive one. I am out in the streets. These are non-issues. nt

[Jim Lane]

85. Your history is probably wrong unless you give a tortured reading to "known"

You write that "no President known to have a child born out of wedlock has ever been elected." There was no DNA testing in the 19th century, so the facts cannot be "known" with certainty, but certainly plenty of voters believed it. Per Grover Cleveland's Wikipedia bio:

{The Republicans} charged that Cleveland had fathered an illegitimate child while he was a lawyer in Buffalo, and chanted, "Ma, Ma, where's my Pa?"[88] When confronted with the scandal, Cleveland immediately instructed his supporters to "Above all, tell the truth." Cleveland admitted to paying child support in 1874 to Maria Crofts Halpin, the woman who claimed he fathered her child, who she had named Oscar Folsom Cleveland. Halpin had been involved with several men at the time, including Cleveland's friend and law partner, Oscar Folsom, for whom the child was named. Cleveland did not know which man was the father; he assumed responsibility because he was the only bachelor among them.[46] Shortly before the 1884 election, the Republican media published an affidavit from Halpin in which she stated that until she met Cleveland, her "life was pure and spotless", and "there is not, and never was, a doubt as to the paternity of our child, and the attempt of Grover Cleveland, or his friends, to couple the name of Oscar Folsom, or any one else, with that boy, for that purpose is simply infamous and false."[89]

Remember, that was when attitudes toward sex were more uptight than they are now. In today's world, if Bernie Sanders gets the vote of everyone who has an out-of-wedlock child, he'll win in a landslide.

[pnwmom]

96. You're right, that claim was made. Though since it happened "shortly before the election"

it is doubtful that most voters had heard anything about it. They didn't have the Internet then, or even CNN.

And yes, Cleveland squeaked by with a win -- with a difference of 1/4 of a percent in the popular vote.

I don't think Bernie's son would make any difference to the Dems in the primary. But I don't think it's realistic to expect a lot of crossover votes, as many of his supporters seem to.

[Live and Learn]

100. Really? You don't think Republicans have evolved on that issue as well?

You really need to get out more often. Bernie has much more Republican crossover support than Hillary.

There are very few people that still call children 'illegitimate' or think having a child 'out of wedlock' is a problem or anybody's business. Unfortunately, some of those few seem to be Hillary supporters on DU.

[Jim Lane]

102. They had newspapers then. People knew about it.

The Wikipedia article reprints a cartoon mocking candidate Cleveland over the issue. OK, they didn't have the Internet, but they also didn't have Dancing with the Stars to distract them from political news.

As for Bernie's crossover vote, the strictly ideological voters would be more likely to cross over for Clinton, who's more conservative. Bernie's strength is with the voters who are less ideological than the average DUer (which is to say, nearly all of them). There are people who are more likely to vote for someone they perceive as a straight shooter than for someone they perceive as less trustworthy. That Sanders is to Clinton's left on something like single-payer health care or reinstating Glass-Steagall will matter less to those folks than their assessment of a candidate's character.

As against that, I think Clinton would get some crossover votes from nonideological Republican women who are closer to the Republican nominee on the issues but who want to break the glass ceiling.

There's also the turnout issue. Will Clinton turn out women? Will she turn out Republicans who will be more committed to voting against her? Will Sanders turn out hitherto apathetic young people who haven't been motivated to choose between two "establishment" politicians in past elections? Who knows.

[treestar]

141. Republicans do

How absurd to claim it is "disgusting" to warn of what Republicans will do. You know full well they will use all of this.

[Live and Learn]

145. It is disgusting to see unethical, Republican like, slanderous insults used by supposedly

progressive Democrats. What next, 'illegitimate'? Oh yeah, it has already been posted here.

[treestar]

148. The other poster was not using it that way

Only saying the Republicans will. So the poster does not deserve that response. The Republicans might.

[Live and Learn]

149. That is not the way I see it. nt

[artislife]

52. I think only the "golden parachute" may have any legs

The other "points" won't be easily distinguishable from the GOP men. Lots of ex wives, children out of wedlock. The essay? It is like trying to make "fetch" happen.


look it up.

[pnwmom]

55. When has a President ever been elected who's known to have a child born out of wedlock?

The only President ever to have a previous divorce was Ronald Reagan.

It won't matter to Democrats, but we keep hearing how people will be crossing over to vote for him. That seems unlikely when the opposition research team gets through with him.

[Live and Learn]

60. STOP picking on the CHILDREN. It is ugly and beneath you. nt

[Scootaloo]

115. You really think so?

[Live and Learn]

146. Maybe not. nt

[treestar]

144. Stop being disingenuous about the discussion

no one is "picking on the kid" here but only saying the Rs will pick on Bernie about it.

[Live and Learn]

147. You do not have the right to tell me what I am genuine about. nt

[artislife]

61. Lets look at who is getting elected in this country

How many elected divorced people hold office? Sure, almost every president has been married to the one spouse when putting their hand on the bible, and Ronnie was the only divorced one. The other side actually seems to not break a sweat about multiple wives, mistresses, children by different partners. They just didn't like Bill doing it in the Oval Office.

8 years ago, there was no marriage equality---what is acceptable for elected members in the national, state and local level has greatly changed. I wouldn't think everyone still agrees with Ross Perot about marriage infidelity as a hiring and firing matter.

Frankly, I find it rather vomit inducing that a poster would use a "family value" argument multiple times on this board. He has stood by his children. He hasn't denied any of them his parenting. That is honored by many people of both parties.

[Segami]

65. You sound just like the George W Bush Lee Atwater disciples....

who also decided to trash John McCain with the same playbook smears....

"...John McCain must be haunted by the vicious South Carolina smear campaign (he was crazy, a traitor, he fathered a black child) that helped Bush win the 2000 Republican nomination. Has McCain joined the team that engineered his destruction?.."

[840high]

83. Bringing children is - disgusting from you.

[Scootaloo]

114. It doesn't seem to do anything when you keep trying it.

[MaggieD]

136. There is something lurking in his finances too

Between the two of them they make over $350k per year, but have little in savings or investments. Gotta wonder where it all goes, and why all savings and investments are in her name with none in his name.

[chervilant]

29. I think you saw

this that I posted a few days ago, only to be told it was "six months old," like that will stop the Republicans from using this against Hillary.

I fully anticipate that Hillary -- IF she ends up the Democratic nominee -- will be bombarded with investigations and dirty attack ads, and I will be VERY surprised if she survives that to become president.

All the more reason to intensify our efforts to support Senator Sanders for the nomination...

[jmowreader]

38. You don't think they'll do the same thing to Bernie Sanders?

[hopemountain]

87. of course they will try

but it is all very weak compared to outright deception.

[Live and Learn]

30. Most definitely!!! nt

[Gman]

33. This is so ridiculous

Repeating right wing attacls that never worked before are going to work next November? Ridiculous.

[SoapBox]

41. Not ridiculous...

We've seen nothing, compared to the absolute slaughter of crap that the Pukes, Baggers, Kochhead Brothers, Murdoch and his Fake News will launch on her...not to mention the impotent MSM being complacent and complaisant in their coverage of her.

No amount of shenanigans from the Entrenched Establishment Crowd, DWS and the DNC will be able to "press release" her into the White House. Anyone registered as a Puke will be frothing at the mouth to vote for anyone other than her...and the Dem vote will be very weak as usual (lack of excitement and motivation, since she's been "Anointed" by the Established, from day one).

She will not win and we will be screwed with a Fascist in the White House.

Oh, don't think he can get elected? We in California got stuck with Schwarenegger...so many people thought it would be "funny" to vote in Ahnald...it was anything but funny.

[Gman]

80. Like they don't have their own baggage to attack

Them on. They can accuse Hillary of eating baby parts with ketchup and people will have watched the GOP debates and heard their rhetoric and they'll say eating baby parts is not as bad as they are

[Mister Ed]

36. It's a given that the GOP will try to Swiftboat the Dem nominee.

Regardless of who that nominee may be.

[Tarc]

37. The Sandernistas are getting desperate

Promising October Surprises now? That's a Karl Rove playbook page.

[Segami]

40. Your post is nothing more than Rovian!

Typical shell game response.

[SoapBox]

42. Ditto.

[moobu2]

39. No.

[mythology]

43. So the theory is that the Republicans have been taking it easy on the Clintons up to now?

Really? That's your theory? Interesting.

And I suppose they would hold hands and skip with Sanders?

But if we're going to talk about what ifs, what if Sanders passes before the election? What if the 50% who say they wouldn't vote for a socialist hear that Sanders is a democratic socialist?

What if people mistake the name Obama for Osama? Will the U.S. public elect a guy with a middle name of Hussein? Or a black guy? Will people think Kennedy is a pawn of the pope because he's a catholic?

Worrying too much about what nonsense the Republicans are going to dig up is kind of useless. They are going to dig up crap and invent more. It's up to the campaign to fight those things. The Kerry and Gore campaigns didn't do a good job of it. The Obama and Bill Clinton campaigns did. It will be up to the nominee this year to do the same.

[upaloopa]

44. Hillary is better at dealing with the bullshit than

any other Dem candidate for President because she been through the lies and innuendo before. I'm sure you know about the Benghazi hearings.
Nothing here to worry about

[jonno99]

81. "she been through the lies and innuendo before". Well, that is the problem and the very point

of the OP as I see it.

She certainly has been through "it", but MANY folks were not (and are still not) satisfied with the untidy outcomes...

[LongTomH]

45. I wish we could stay positive. There are a lot of positive reasons to support Bernie Sanders!

[GitRDun]

46. Let it go Segami

It might feel good but none of us undecideds will accept this crap.

Bernie has some great history. Focus on that. Look in my journal if you need ideas.

This stuff you post is just....sad.

[NurseJackie]

47. No.

[pnwmom]

53. If Sanders is the nominee, the Rethugs will portray him

as the Socialist-Hippy-RapeFantasyWriter-DadOutOfWedlock-GoldenParachute-guy.

It won't be pretty.

[The Blue Traveller]

56. All of which has been recycled over and over again in the primaries with zero effect.

Next!

[pnwmom]

58. Yes, in the primaries. The OP was about the general election.

If Bernie is in the general instead of Hillary, he will be subject to the same trash talk by the Rethugs that she has been. And he'll provide them with plenty of material.

[Live and Learn]

62. ROFL You will be laughed out of town with that meme.

[AtomicKitten]

89. No, that's what Clinton people will portray him as.

Like you just did. Effect? Meh.

[jwirr]

54. And you have forgotten the latest: the tax forms that they

just updated for quite a few years with on the excuse - we made a mistake. These were tax forms for the Foundation that they just corrected and turned in.

[Live and Learn]

63. Another 'mistake'? Jheesh, is anyone keeping tabs on how many 'mistakes' she makes? nt

[jwirr]

67. Doesn't seem like it. I just read what it wrote in the original

statement and I think I better go to sleep - out having a late thanksgiving dinner with family and they are a handful.

[Live and Learn]

68. Have a great night. nt

[Orrex]

64. Right now, Sanders' biggest advantage is that the GOP doesn't know he exists

If by some miracle he lands on the ballot, they will turn the entirety of their multi-billion dollar attack machine on him, and the worst of today's perceived attacks against him by Democrats will seem like glowing praise in comparison.

Sanders has zero track record of handling the Republican attacks at this scale. Clinton has been handling them easily for decades, most recently (and spectacularly) during the Benghazi farce.

[zalinda]

82. Sanders has maybe 10 things that they could call him on.

Hillary has 30 years worth. She and Bill never tell you the truth, in the beginning. It always takes a long time before the truth comes out. And the thing is, there may not be anything that was illegal, but they sure act like they are doing something wrong. How long and how much money have the repubs spent on Benghazi? They are still looking through the email stuff, and not just the repubs. It was really, really stupid to have a private server, no matter if others did it or not. It's like asking a child if he/she would jump off a bridge if their friends did it. She knew damn well she was running for President. She knew the repubs would be out to get her. Yet, she went ahead and did it any way. THAT, shows poor judgement.

And that damn video of "We came, we saw, he died." and the cackle at the end, just freaks me out. Any one's death should not be a joke, no matter who it is.

From the moment she is the nominee, she will be hounded from morning to night, with all the stuff she has done that looks like it just borders on crime. And, if by any miracle that she wins, she will be investigated ala Ken Starr, from the very first day. The government will end up spending millions of dollars on investigations, that may or may not go any where. But, there is one thing for sure, nothing will get done for the millions of us who are getting pretty desperate, as not one of the repubs will end up working with her.

Z

[Orrex]

86. Old news

From the moment she is the nominee, she will be hounded from morning to night, with all the stuff she has done that looks like it just borders on crime.

I hate to break it to you, but that's been true since the 70s, and she's sailed through it handily.

And if you think that "Sanders has maybe 10 things that they could call him on," then you don't know how the process works.

[pnwmom]

112. The press hasn't bothered with Sanders till recently. He and his wife will have plenty

of history for them to dig through.

For example, how did she get her job as President of Burlington College? Other than a year and a half as an interim provost at her alma mater (where she'd been trustee), she didn't have the background for it. And she didn't have the education. Her 2000 online PhD was from the Union Institute, which a few years later was forced to dissolve its graduate programs after a state review (in Ohio, where the school was headquartered) decided they were inadequate. Yet Burlington College hired her as President in 2004. What made them think she was the person for the job? Did that have anything to do with her connections?

If Bernie is the nominee, there will be lots of questions about this and whatever else they find when scouring records of his decades of public service.

[1StrongBlackMan]

151. Perpare for "But HRC was appointed partner to one of the largest ...

law firms in Arkansas because of Bill" comebacks ... which will display zero knowledge of how law firms work.

[pnwmom]

152. And zero acknowledgment that Hillary had degrees from Wellesley and Yale,

which qualified her for everything she has done since.

You know when we last ran into Union Institute? When people here were pointing out that it was where Michele Bachmann's hubby got his sketchy PhD in psychology.

[1StrongBlackMan]

153. Oh my ...

I forgot about that alumnus of that academic institution.

Now, be prepared for cries of foul ... spouses are off limits.

[oberliner]

66. How is Benghazi considered baggage?

Or even considered an issue.

[Live and Learn]

71. That is the one that is not an issue. Simply ridiculous. But her 'mistakes' on other issues and

whatever else is coming down the pipeline are another story.

[Segami]

72. The Benghazi hornet's nest

will be stirred up once again........Starting the first week of January 2016...

Viewers of Tuesday’s Republican presidential debate are buzzing about the fact that a trailer for Michael Bay’s controversial new film film about the Benghazi terrorist attack aired on the Fox Business channel prior to GOP front-runner Ben Carson’s criticism of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s handling of the 2012 tragedy.

“13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi,” which is based on a non-partisan, non-fiction book by Mitchell Zuckoff – doesn’t hit theaters until January (the same weekend as the jingoistic blockbuster “American Sniper”) – but it has already drawn the ire of progressives for appearing to promote the debunked narrative that rescue efforts at the American embassy in Benghazi were stymied by White House bureaucracy.

An ad for the film, which portrays what appears to be a government official telling heroic soldiers to “stand down,” preceded an exchange with Carson over questions of his character. Carson deflected the issue in part by bringing up Clinton’s alleged obfuscation of the crisis in Libya at the time of the attacks.“I look at somebody like Hillary Clinton, who sits there and tells her daughter and a government official that ‘No this was a terrorist attack,’ and then tells everybody else it was a video,” Carson said. “Where I come from, they call that a lie.”

Bay’s film has been politically polarizing ever since its first trailer appeared back in July, with some predicting it could be a thorn in the side of the Clinton campaign in the weeks leading up to the crucial Iowa caucuses.



“13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi trailer: Release date: January 2016

.

[oberliner]

74. I think that would work to her advantage

As it did during the hearings where she made the Republicans look ridiculous.

[Duval]

69. I really don't know. Yes, the Republicans will

trash her, but she may have the Media. What a mess! My hope is Bernie will become even more popular. By the way, I just watched
Bulworth. Funny, it was done in 1998, but still appropriate regarding issues.

[billhicks76]

70. Independents Don't Want Bill Clinton Back In White House

[Historic NY]

75. Maybe he can live in the guest house.

[BeanMusical]

76. Kick and R

[baldguy]

77. So, the message is: "Don't vote for Hillary because the VRWC spreads lies & might spread more"?

Do you really think the VRWC cares which Democrat is in the White House? If you do, you might as well just throw in the towel and concede to them. They've already beat you.

FYI, the VRWC doesn't care which Democrat they smear. Bernie knows this. That's why he doesn't engage in this RW bullshit.

[Live and Learn]

92. No the message is, Hillary makes a lot of 'mistakes' and shouldn't be our candidate. nt

[riversedge]

116. I think baldguy said it correctly.

[baldguy]

117. The VRWC will make ANYTHING into a "mistake" - even when everything is correct & proper.

Hell, half the "mistakes" listed in the OP are total lies made up from whole cloth by them. The only real crime The Clinton's are guilty of is the same as EVERY Democrat - that of not being Republican. Just as guilty as Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry and Obama. And Sanders is just as guilty as they are.

FDR said: "Judge me by the enemies I have made." As far as I can see all the people who hate Hillary are the correct ones.

[LuvLoogie]

84. The Revolution is heavily invested in Hillary's Baggage

Last edited Mon Nov 30, 2015, 04:29 AM - Edit history (1)

Such devotion and commitment to the cause.

[McCamy Taylor]

88. Wow. Just wow. You are nominated. Won't say for what.

But your logic is....not sure I have an adjective to describe it.

Let me try to sum up your thesis:

The Republicans will sling mud at Clinton if/when she is the Democratic nominee. Therefore, we should not nominate her.

This is presumably from the "we are too timid to fight" wing of the Democratic Party. The rest of us, in the "we enjoy kicking GOP ass in the general election" part of the Democratic Party hope that our compatriots get over their excessive timidity soon. Politics is not for the faint of heart.

[McCamy Taylor]

90. Are there really 56 people at DU who are this afraid of the right wing conspiracy?

If so, you really ought to support Clinton. She has a track record of throwing their mud right back at them---and making it stick.

[Live and Learn]

106. Nope, we are afraid of her 'mistakes' and the big one that may come to light. nt

Last edited Mon Nov 30, 2015, 04:46 PM - Edit history (1)

[Agschmid]

120. *may

Please be careful of making mistakes, they are frowned on around here.

[Live and Learn]

140. Hmm, that was an odd misspelling. Thanks.

[pinebox]

91. Delayed? No it's already here!

And it is one reason why I support Bernie over her because I see her as nothing BUT dishonest. Seriously, we have a candidate running who lied about ducking sniper fire? We have one who isn't willing to give universal health care to everybody? We have one who won't fight for a living wage? We have one whose flip-flops read like a cook book of recipes to make on a train wreck?

Sorry, no time for guessing which pancake is more cooked when you flip it.

Nope.

[Live and Learn]

111. +1000 nt

[lovemydog]

94. There's a DANGER to everything Segami.

There's a danger to taking a shower. You can trip on a bar of soap, crack your head open and die. I can't predict any of what's going to happen much better than you or anyone else. I do think the primaries are good for seeing what flies and what doesn't. Whoever wins the nomination should be pretty well battle-tested.

[askew]

95. The biggest concern is the FBI, IG and Senate investigations into Hillary's email server.

We don't know where that will end up but if even one or two of her aides get charged with something due to the email server/classified info, she becomes unelectable overnight.

My fear is the charges get announced in June after Bernie and O'Malley have dropped out and we go into the convention with a unelectable winner and it turns into a massive floor fight.

[lovemydog]

108. If that happens, I think she lets her former aides

fall on their swords, says the rest is right wing politically motivated nonsense and gets more people voting for her.

[askew]

137. That won't work with anyone besides diehard Democrats. Once the FBI, starts charging people

you can't call it a right-wing conspiracy. Laws were broken.

She'll lose the general election if any of her aides get charged by FBI over this email mess.

[Scuba]

119. If Hillary is our candidate, the right will turn out in record numbers to vote against her ....

The left will turn out, as always, to vote against the Republicans.

The middle will not turn out; neither will those who usually don't vote because they think it doesn't matter.



The result will be Republicans holding all the power and the rest of us will be fucked.

[Segami]

125. Just mentioning the name Clinton...

serves as a Pavlovian trigger. They'll be wheeling republicans strapped in hospital gurneys to the voting booth just to cast a vote against Hillary.

Enthusiasm (not hype) for Hillary is low and presents a serious concern moving forward in the GE if she becomes the nominee. Even with all the Clinton machinery, its not surprising to see match up polls with her trailing the current group of republican misfit clowns.

[Vinca]

121. I don't think it's worth stewing about.

Whether it's Hillary or Bernie or Martin O'Malley, the GOP will pick ridiculous items from the past and blow them out of proportion. If Hillary happens to be elected POTUS, it will be investigation after investigation from day one because the GOP has nothing else to do with itself. Their entire party is currently based on "Obama hatred." They have no plans for the future, are unable to govern and need a reason to exist. "Hillary hatred" is an easy substitute and the far right hatemongers will eat it up.

[99Forever]

122. This primary has been a sugar-coated lovefest for Clinton...

... compared to the shitstorm that will hit if the Democratic Party is gullible enough to nominate her.

[Motown_Johnny]

124. No Danger of it. It is assured.

The slime machine hasn't even started yet.

Hillary just isn't worth the risk.

[karynnj]

126. my fear is that the Independents won't be like

some Democrats and immediately say she has been vetted for 2 decades and nothing was proven --- when it was more complicated than that.

That said, any other nominee faces the task of defining themselves before Republicans do with negative images. Even if a man or woman with unusual integrity and as clean a past as possible were nominated, this would be a big job.

[AzDar]

127. If HRC's political positions (which are ever-'evolving') aren't enough to turn your stomach...

wait 'til you get a load of the veritable graveyard's worth of skeletons in her closet.


NO THANKS!!

[Mike Nelson]

129. Danger? ...

We can count on it! The Republicans will reach new levels of "baggage claims" - as they will with ANY Democrat who wins the nom. I predict ugliness not yet imagined.

[greymattermom]

132. Any Democratic candidate will have baggage, real or imaginary

Don't you remember when Barack Obama was attacked for putting mustard on a burger?

[JTFrog]

133. Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!

And Vince Foster!!!!




Hmm... nope, Hillary is still way out front.

But nice try.

[Beacool]

138. Yes, because if Sanders was the nominee we wouldn't hear the word "Socialist" 24/7.

It's so disingenuous to point at Hillary and proclaim she has too much "baggage" when the Republican party would go after Sanders en masse too. I can see it already, Sanders is a Communist, a Marxist, etc. And let's not forget that he would be the oldest nominee in U.S. history by quite a few years. How many times would we hear comments about his advanced age?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

139. No. But, only if there's nothing questionable in the baggage car or it remains secret.

[Aerows]

143. I'm sorry to say this

but if she is our nominee, we will lose.

She has enough stuff piled up in her closet that it is amazing that she can open her mouth without a bone flying out.

[bvar22]

150. A Hillary Nomination would be a major disaster.

1)Either she would WIN, and it would be a disaster for everyone who Works for a Living, and a disaster for those in the Middle East


2)Or she would LOSE ( most likely case), and it would be a disaster for every American who Works for a Living, and a disaster for those in the Middle East.