Hillary Clinton And The Awful Risk Of Winning Ugly - TheWeek

[WillyT]

Hillary Clinton and the awful risk of winning ugly
Ryan Cooper - TheWeek
12/21/15


AP Photo/Scott Morgan

<snip>

Despite building a base of support larger than Donald Trump's, Bernie Sanders still lags far behind Hillary Clinton in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. Since November, Clinton has held on to a steady lead of 20 to 30 points, and Sanders shows little sign of breaking out beyond 30 percent or so of Democratic voters nationwide.

Clinton is dominating Sanders. Her victory over the Vermont socialist is all but assured. All she needs to do is keep coasting along, allowing Donald Trump to continue making the media fixate over how much of a fascist he is, and cruise to an easy victory.

That's what makes her recent campaign strategy so baffling.

Instead of laying low and playing it cool, Clinton is running as though the race were very close, tax-baiting Sanders with Republican talking points, and allowing a proxy to blow up a huge fight with the Sanders campaign over a data breach. It's a mystifying and risky way to run a campaign.

Let's run the tape. On policy, the Clinton campaign has been consistently tax-baiting Sanders over his support for single-payer healthcare and other moderate social-democratic programs. This not only plays into Republican narratives that taxes are always a simple decrease in income (rather than payment for valuable and desperately needed programs), but also boxes Clinton herself in on taxes. A promise of no tax increases means she cannot support Kirsten Gillibrand's paid leave proposal.

Clinton's stance also basically rules out badly needed increases in Social Security. At an Iowa townhall this month, Clinton spoke about the solvency of Social Security, and while she initially disavowed benefit cuts, she eventually ended up endorsing the possibility of raising the retirement age. Speaking about how it's harder for some workers to keep working to age 70, she said: "If we could figure out how to do it, I would be open to hearing about it, I've just never heard anybody tell me how we could do it."

In context, Clinton repeatedly states she is against benefit cuts, but it's a mark of the legacy of New Democrat triangulation that she can't even seem to talk about why they are a bad idea without tacitly endorsing them. And though she vaguely endorses the possibility of raising the payroll tax cap, this would mean raising taxes on people well down into the upper-middle class, and would certainly be subject to the same kind of tax-baiting she is deploying against Sanders. She would be called, with some justification, a hypocrite.

More recently, Clinton surrogate and head of the Democratic National Committee Debbie Wasserman-Schultz allowed a minor flap over data security to blow up into a major fight between the Sanders campaign and the DNC. The DNC keeps a big file of data from each campaign, but keeps a firewall between them. Apparently, Sanders' data guru noticed that the firewall was down, and looked into a few Clinton voter lists and models inside the system. The DNC accused them of copying Clinton's critical information, and locked the entire campaign out of the system.

The Sanders team quickly fired the staffer responsible, and has since suspended two others. But the DNC initially refused to allow Team Sanders access to the system. The Sanders camp retaliated, arguing that the vendor responsible for the data system had already let the firewall lapse on several previous occasions, and that the staffer had only been attempting to document the lapse (however inappropriately). Moreover, much of that campaign data was created by the Sanders team itself at great time and expense. Such data is the lifeblood of a campaign — permanently locking them out would destroy them. The Sanders campaign even filed a lawsuit in federal court against the DNC before the DNC relented and restored Sanders' access.

Both the Sanders camp and the vendor (the president of which worked on Bill Clinton's campaign) bear some responsibility for the initial problem. But it's ludicrous that the DNC allowed it to get so out of hand.

Let us not be children here...

<snip>

More: http://theweek.com/articles/595141/hillary-clinton-awful-risk-winning-ugly

[highprincipleswork]

1. Exactly. If you're going to win and convinced about it, why not graciousness, why not more debates?

[restorefreedom]

2. "Clinton is running as though the race were very close..."

It IS very close. internal polling must be disastrous for clinton, which is why the confluence of collusion and the dnc meltdown are happening out in public.

[Divernan]

10. Her internal polling must show Bernie winning NH and Iowa BIG -

With enough momentum to blow her out of the race.

Either that or it's just her nature and she can't control it. She will do everything in her power to win - witness the $12 million in debts she incurred in her 2008 campaign - took her more than 4 years to pay that off. Wonder how many vendors went under, "Waiting for Hillary."

And you know, I don't want a U.S. President who fights dirty either at home or abroad.

And let us not forget the infamous Clinton revenge list.

[restorefreedom]

12. yes. even the m$m polls can't hide it much more

he is looking to win nh and its looking very good in iowa, and of course those polls,often don't include millenials and cell phone users, so it could be big wins in both states

this freak out and data scheme did not happen in a vacuum. something prompted them to risk the backlash.

[rogerashton]

26. Nah. That's just the way Hillary rolls.

Think of how she will grind up her Republican opponent.

[Rebkeh]

34. This is not a red v blue fight yet

It's a progress v status quo fight.

The general is a long way off.

[Jackilope]

43. She needs progressives ...

... running as the centerist, corporate, Wall St. darling she is isn't winning me over. Just motivates me to give more $$ and volunteer love to Bernie.

[Uncle Joe]

3. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, WillyT.

[cali]

4. Just what I've been wondering

[virtualobserver]

14. She has seen this movie before.....and she wants a different ending this time

[840high]

29. She wants it desperately.

[loyalsister]

64. Extremely!

I can't understand it. I know it can be ruthless process, but it doesn't have to be. In 2004, Dean hit the other candidates on their support for the IWR, but I don't remember the candidates taking it to extremes.
I can't understand what she is doing. Does she feel it is "her turn," does she just want to complete a narrative and be a more notable historical figure, get even with republican Clinton haters?
She has not once come across to me as wanting to serve the country and help fix what is broken. Certainly not foreign policy. It just seems like her candidacy is more about her than us.

The 2008 primary got uglier than 2004. The common denominator is notable.

[Matariki]

5. "Clinton is running as though the race were very close"

Probably because her team knows it really is close. Or worse. "Polls" aside.

[AgingAmerican]

6. She is scared of Sanders

It's that simple.

[Fuddnik]

11. They're ALL scared of Sanders.

They know what jumped up and bit them on the ass in 2008.

They know the second bite is coming.

[pnwmom]

7. Please try to adhere more closely to the 4 paragraph quote guideline.

DU got sued several years ago for all the quoting. But as long as we usually stay within the limit, we should be okay.

Here you're not even close. Again.

[Divernan]

13. I've noticed many exceeding the 4 paragraph limit lately, including

many pro-Hillary posters.

[pnwmom]

15. You should point it out to them then. No one should be doing it. n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

68. There are hosts and juries and admins.

But thanks for watching over us!

[Proserpina]

8. A perfect demonstration of disproving your premise that Clinton is ahead 30 points

None of the data or real time experience supports it. Nor the campaign's behaviors.

"It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence. It biases the judgment."

Sherlock Holmes, A Study in Scarlet


btw
Winning ugly---isn't that another name for some form of cheating?

[daleanime]

16. Yeahup.....

sure is.

[mmonk]

9. It's a risk to us all.

[Divernan]

17. "Corruption at the organization (DNC) is notorious"

More from the OP link:

Let us not be children here: Hillary Clinton is no stranger to bare-knuckle politics. Her 2008 campaign repeatedly stooped to outright race-baiting against Obama. In the grand scheme of politics, this data-breach story is small potatoes. Yet instead of trying to smooth over the dispute — as Sanders himself did for Clinton's email problem — her only response was to insist on a full accounting of her campaign data. Eventually Sanders did get his access back, but only hours before the first hearing on his lawsuit against the DNC.

Sanders' supporters were furious, and were clearly itching for a fight with the DNC. Corruption at the organization is notorious, and Wasserman-Schultz was a Clinton campaign co-chair in 2008. It beggars belief to imagine such ham-handed tactics from their court if Clinton's and Sanders' roles were reversed.

The issue was mostly defused during Saturday night's debate. Sanders apologized for the breach, and Clinton said she would like to move on. Yet the DNC never would have gone so far as suspending access, even temporarily, if Clinton did not tacitly approve. One call and it would have been reversed — doubly hard to miss at a debate which had obviously been scheduled at an atrocious time to prevent Clinton opponents from getting much attention.

In any case, Clinton is positioning herself for the general election. She therefore ought to worry about deflating the evident passion of Sanders supporters. Most of them will probably end up pulling the lever for her, but I can see it being very hard to donate, volunteer, or work for the Clinton campaign — and she will likely need dedicated volunteers and staffers a lot more than voters. She ought to be trying to stay on good terms with Sanders' fans, and thus would be well advised to make sure her near-certain win is as clean and gracious as possible.

http://theweek.com/articles/595141/hillary-clinton-awful-risk-winning-ugly

[TIME TO PANIC]

18. Debbie's having a 2008 flashback.

[KittyWampus]

19. Winning ugly- like stealing Clinton's data? And then blaming HER for it?

AND filing a lawsuit?

LOLZ

And since Sanders campaign was caught with their hands in the cookie jar, OF COURSE their access was temporarily suspended… do they couldn't go back in and try and erase evidence.

[KamaAina]

24. Reading comprehension is your friend.

The Sanders camp retaliated, arguing that the vendor responsible for the data system had already let the firewall lapse on several previous occasions, and that the staffer had only been attempting to document the lapse...

[SunSeeker]

25. Bullshit. If the staffer was only documenting it, why did he erase his notes?

Why run 24 searches?

This is what happens when you hire Libertarians more interested in attacking Hillary than supporting Bernie.

[jeff47]

32. To document it.

How do you know what's possible when you don't try?

Can I create notes? Can I delete notes? Who can I see?

Since the vendor had apparently not fixed a major security hole after two months, a vulnerability assessment is necessary. This guy didn't think about the political problems he was causing, and so did not get enough people involved to avoid the political problems.

[SunSeeker]

45. Why delete notes to "document" anything? Why run 24 searches?

This was not a "vulnerability assessment." The prior problem in October did not involve the VAN.

[bjobotts]

52. So no one else could hack into it.Bernie is honest

His best quality for years so to suggest otherwise only makes you look a fool.

[SunSeeker]

59. Him suggesting someone did --with NO evidence--is just pure deflection.

I don't think that is a particularly honest move.

[uponit7771]

49. "Documenting" for 40 minutes!? really?!

[jeff47]

33. How about like breaking your contract with a campaign, as the DNC did? (nt)

[bjobotts]

51. He stole no data.He alerted server.DWS lied.

then she tried to block access to Sanders' own data base and knew she was lying so caved in immediately when Sanders said he'd take it to court for her Illegal behavior.As DNC chair. Clintons have been so abused by others they seem to believe it's ok to act the same way. You sound like a highly misinformed idiot who fell for DWS lie cause there was no "hands in the cookie jar"...just an alert to the server that the fire wall was down. To prove it go to the site of the DNC server company 'cause that is what they said...NO BREACH.

[seabeyond]

56. He stole. The one that stole is lying.

[seabeyond]

55. 600k a day the volunteers... Democratic volunteers gave? Damn straight. Nt.

[Divernan]

20. HRC's fundraising is on a downward trajectory.

Tied in with the DNC's desperate handling of the missing firewall is HRC's recent push to get both quadruple-bypass Bill and Chelsea out on the fund-raising circuit. Bill's fundraising efforts have been abysmal this month in Pennsylvania, which is a critical state for the general election. He actually canceled one fund raiser only the day before, with not even the courtesy of an explanation. And Hillary has continually reduced the rates she's been charging for admission to her fund raisers. First (also in Pennsylvania), the price range was as follows:

The event called "Conversations with Hillary" lists contribution levels of $1,000 for a "friend" on up to $27,000 which qualifies one as an "event host." (A mid level contribution of $2700 got a cattle call quickie photo with the candidate.) http://www.wtae.com/politics/hillary...burgh/34219740
Then the co-host price dropped to $10,000 - lately it has completely disappeared. Meanwhile the admission price dropped to $500, with $2700 to get a photo w/Bill. For the upcoming Boston fundraisers with Chelsea, the cheapest admission price has dropped to $250. HRC's funding is drying up.

I'm waiting for them to start offering a Ginzu knife to the first 20 callers.

[SunSeeker]

27. Thanks for reminding me. I just donated to her again.

I had become complacent since she is 20+ points ahead of Bernie, and I figured I'd wait until the GE to donate again.

[The Boss]

38. Her limited donor pool is almost maxed out.

The bad news, she's unable to squeeze more blood out of a rock until after the nomination is complete.

[Divernan]

41. Her latest pitch? Send me a dollar. . . .or $100,000

Her latest letter, featured elsewhere on DU, begs for One Dollar! So I guess she's skipping the free Ginzu knife offer - going for raising the number of individual donations/bringing down the average donation. Her last Manhattan soiree was $38,000 a head up to $100,000 a couple!

The event will take place on Dec. 17 in New York City, according to an invitation obtained by The Washington Post. About 100 people are expected to attend and tickets range from $33,400 for one person to $100,000 for a couple at the "event chair" level.

http://www.people.com/article/sting-perform-hillary-clinton-fundraiser

[wolfie001]

42. When her idea of a "Middle Class" income is $250,000 per annum.....

.....I'll bet that the donor list isn't very long.

[SunSeeker]

46. In L.A. and N.Y., $250k is still middle class.

That usually involves two professionals with $125K jobs a piece. We are not talking rich people. The cost of housing, childcare, college, cars, vacations, retirement savings, healthcare, dinners out for a busy family...they might be able to cover that, but they aren't rich. They're still one job loss away from devastation.

[mhatrw]

47. Please. How much do two teacher couples make in LA, NY & SF? nt

[wolfie001]

48. $125,000 each seems a bit high

The lower rich (super-duper-upper middle class) are really hurting. Boo frickin' hoo.

[SunSeeker]

60. Your post reminds me of an old Russian joke.

An old Russian joke tells the story of a peasant with one cow who hates his neighbor because he has two. A sorcerer offers to grant the envious farmer a single wish. “Kill one of my neighbor’s cows!” he demands.

[wolfie001]

63. Not really a joke

More like a lesson on envy. I'd like more lessons on forcing the rich and "super-duper-upper Middle Class to pay their fair share of taxes, that's all.

[SunSeeker]

66. People making 125k a year in salary pay a much higher percentage in taxes than the rich.

The rich tend to get their income from capital gains, which is taxed at a much lower rate--if at all --with all the accounting tricks available to them. Middle class professionals who earn their income from working get taxed at a much higher rate and have fewer tax deductions than the rich.

I know it is a bit hard for someone from the interior of the country to fathom, but $125k a year does not go far in LA, SF or NY. A decent family home (3 bdrm) with a backyard for the kids, in a neighborhood with a decent school system, is going to run you at least a million. Then there's all the other expenses of life. It really does take about $250k for a family of 4 to live a comfortable middle class life, where college, clothes, decent yearly vacations, etc are covered.

Attacking those people as "super duper" and lumping them in with the rich is wrong. It is a losing strategy for Democrats.

[wolfie001]

70. I'm not attacking anyone.

GWB lowered the tax rate on capital gains. He's also the worst Prez in US history. I'm all for a progressive tax rate. That's all I'm stating. When Hillary lumped the higher earners in her depiction of the Middle Class, it was picked up and criticized.

'Hillary Clinton's Strange Definition of "Middle Class"'- Mother Jones

'Hillary Clinton thinks $250,000 a year is “Middle-Class”'- New Deal Progressives

A quick google search will bring up countless critiques of her definition of Middle Class. Probably the biggest example of her gaffe is how the race has tightened since. IMHO of course.

Cheers

[SunSeeker]

71. Yes, you are attacking middle class working professionals, who already pay the highest tax rate.

Because of inflation, 250k today is what 40k was in 1970. Check it yourself: http://www.dollartimes.com/calculators/inflation.htm
These are not rich people. They are the comfortable middle class, a truly endangered species in this country. It makes no sense, as a Democrat, to lump those people in with the rich.

You are arguing they should be taxed more, equating them to the tax avoiding wealthy of this country. That is simply wrong.


You don't seem to get that people like teachers, who used to be in the middle class and could buy family homes in LA back in 1970 simply cannot do that now. Many teachers here in LA are working class, not middle class. Many cannot afford to buy a decent house here, let alone live what in the past was considered a middle class life: nice family vacations every year, new car every 5 years, sending all the kids to college and saving for retirement. You really need a salary of about $125k to live what in the past was considered a comfortable middle class life. And if you have a family and want to stay in the middle class and live in LA or NY or SF, your spouse better make about $125k too. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but that is today's reality.

[SunSeeker]

61. Not $125k. What is your point?

[wolfie001]

62. If both are working (teaching presumably)

125,000 + 125,000 = 250,000......you know, two "middle-class" teacher salaries. End of Math I lesson for the day.

[SunSeeker]

65. That would be more like tenured college professors. nt

[Warren Stupidity]

69. NYC starting base pay 49,908 tops out at 105,142.

http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/2712AB02-A1EF-4CE2-B879-33241B7AFFB5/0/TeacherSCHEDULEMAY12015Corrected.pdf

[SoLeftIAmRight]

21. Imagine - Hillary call center workers

Caller - "will you give Hillary some of your money"

Voter - "I gave to Sanders but is the the number for wallstreet - oh, never mind - you got that"

Yes she is worried

[Nyan]

22. Winning ugly is dangerous but

I don't think she's gonna win to begin with.
Bernie's doing better against Hillary than Obama was at this point in election, especially in NH and IW, which are the most important states.
I simply don't buy into the narrative that she's more likely to win.

[Babel_17]

23. Leading to the follow up question; Who has ever won major office with such bad negative numbers?*

The current (December 2, 2015) Quinnipiac poll:

December 2, 2015 - Bump For Trump As Carson Fades In Republican Race, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Clinton, Sanders Surge In Matchups With GOP Leaders
PDF format

Additional Trend Information

Eleven months before the 2016 presidential election, Donald Trump is the undisputed leader in the Republican field, as Dr. Ben Carson, in a virtual tie with Trump four weeks ago, drops to third place, according to a Quinnipiac University National poll released today.

On the Democratic side, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton widens her lead over Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont to 60 - 30 percent, compared to 53 - 35 percent in a November 4 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University Poll. Former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley has 2 percent, with 6 percent undecided.

Trump gets 27 percent of Republican voters today, with 17 percent for Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, 16 percent each for Carson and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas and 5 percent for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. No other candidate tops 3 percent, with 8 percent undecided.

Last month, Trump had 24 percent, with 23 percent for Carson.

Among Republicans, 26 percent of voters say they "would definitely not support" Trump, with 21 percent who would not back Bush.

"It doesn't seem to matter what he says or who he offends, whether the facts are contested or the 'political correctness' is challenged, Donald Trump seems to be wearing Kevlar," said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll.

"Dr. Ben Carson, moving to center stage just one month ago, now needs some CPR. The Doctor sinks. The Donald soars. The GOP, 11 months from the election, has to be thinking, 'This could be the guy.'

"Secretary Hillary Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders have to be hoping Trump is the GOP's guy."

American voters shift to Clinton as the Democrat gains ground against Republicans:

47 - 41 percent over Trump, compared to 46 - 43 percent November 4;
Clinton at 45 percent to Rubio's 44 percent, compared to a 46 - 41 percent Rubio lead last month;
Clinton tops Cruz 47 - 42 percent, compared to Cruz at 46 percent to Clinton's 43 percent last month;
Clinton at 46 percent to Carson's 43 percent compared to Carson's 50 - 40 percent lead last month.

Sanders does just as well, or even better, against top Republicans:

Topping Trump 49 - 41 percent;
Getting 44 percent to Rubio's 43 percent;
Beating Cruz 49 - 39 percent;
Leading Carson 47 - 41 percent.

Clinton has a negative 44 - 51 percent favorability rating. Other favorability ratings are:

Negative 35 - 57 percent for Trump;
40 - 33 percent for Carson;
44 - 31 percent for Sanders;
37 - 28 percent for Rubio;
33 - 33 percent for Cruz.

American voters say 60 - 36 percent that Clinton is not honest and trustworthy. Trump is not honest and trustworthy, voters say 59 - 35 percent. Sanders gets the best honesty grades among top candidates, 59 - 28 percent, with Carson at 53 - 34 percent, Rubio at 49 - 33 percent and Cruz at 43 - 39 percent.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2307

More people polled as seeing Clinton as being "not honest and trustworthy" than did so for Trump.

Trump, and the Republicans, have spent diddly so far on reinforcing that message. I'd prefer taking my chances on them trying to convince Democrats to stay home, and Independents to vote for their lunatic platform, because the Democrats were running a wild eyed Socialist, rather than taking my chances on millions of people coming out and voting for someone they saw as "not honest and trustworthy".

*Seriously, when will a journalist do the research and present the list? I'd like to see the names of those winners.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

28. According to some people here Bernie's donor list is fair game for Hillary.

[AtomicKitten]

30. Be any means necessary. Second verse (2016) same as the first (2008).

[Ichingcarpenter]

31. Interesting photo

reminds me of 'the iron lady'' unlike other photos of her all smiley and pointing fingers at the crowd...

the article choose well with that one.

[Divernan]

35. Yes, that's the real her.

[Tarc]

36. The 5 stages of Sanders' camp grief

1. Denial - "Feel the Bern!"
2. Anger - "Corpratist DLC doesn't represent the Party!"
+--------------------------- YOU ARE HERE ---------------------------+
| 3. Bargaining - "Ok, well, if Hillary's gonna win, don't win ugly!" |
+--------------------------- YOU ARE HERE ---------------------------+
4. Depression
5. Acceptance


You're at the hump day of Kubler-Ross, almost there!

[The Boss]

39. Clinton supporters are perpetually stuck at #1

[Tarc]

40. It's hard to be stuck in denial

when one's candidate has led virtually every poll in the nation since she entered the race, kiddo.

[uponit7771]

50. They're dismissing the polls, or is that anger?

[thereismore]

37. Coasting along is not going to be enough for Clinton. nt

[mindwalker_i]

44. Yeah but the article isn't scientific

[seabeyond]

53. Lmfao at the title alone. Coronation. She's losing. She has to win all, and big to be legit. Don't

Win by too much and embarrass the guys.

Hey. Why don't you all make a simple win unattainable and even a win is a loss.

[seabeyond]

54. I read a little more besides the title. Hush up little women, sit, be quiet... Humble, by gosh.

[Douglas Carpenter]

57. on the micro level that is exactly what we see here on this forum

We are constantly being told that Hillary has the nomination completely in the bag and anyone who doesn't accept that is just causing trouble. At the same time, the same people are blasting away slimy talking points in the shrill tone of utter desperation.

[Thinkingabout]

58. Hillary has developed a strong campaign group, she is working hard

And the staff and volunteers are working a hard grass roots campaign. We have lots of confidence in her abilities to be president but we will work everyday to get Hillary elected.

[SunSeeker]

67. Yes indeed!