link; excerpt:

Appearing on Indian station NDTV during her tenure as secretary of state, Clinton was asked during a town hall-style public affairs program for her thoughts on outsourcing from the United States to India.

“Well, you know, it’s been going on for many years now,” Clinton said on the program, “and it’s part of our economic relationship with India, and I think there are advantages with it that have certainly benefited many parts of our country, and there are disadvantages that go to the need to, you know, improve the job skills of our own people and create a better economic environment, so it’s, like anything, it’s, you know, got pluses and minuses.”... Sanders’s campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, said he’s convinced Clinton’s comments will not play well in Michigan “when so many communities like Detroit and Flint have been hurt so badly by outsourcing.”

“Secretary Clinton should explain to the people of Michigan how they have benefited from outsourcing of their manufacturing jobs,” Weaver said.... At a news conference in Lansing earlier this week, Sanders made the case that he has consistently opposed “disastrous” trade deals, starting with the North American Free Trade Agreement in the 1990s, that Clinton supported during her tenures as first lady, a senator from New York and secretary of state.

Sanders has also been critical of the length of time it took for Clinton to reach her current opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership, a pending pact championed by President Obama that Sanders opposed from the outset.... Weaver also argued that Clinton’s comments in India differed from what she has said about outsourcing during appearances in the United States. The campaign pointed to a 2004 statement during his Senate tenure in which she says: “I do not think outsourcing American Jobs is a new kind of trade . . . and I certainly do not believe it is a good thing.” ... She {Clinton} said that Americans who have lost manufacturing jobs are fearful because they “don’t feel like they have any other job possibilities.”

WOW!

Source: Washington Post

Appearing on Indian station NDTV during her tenure as secretary of state, Clinton was asked during a town hall-style public affairs program for her thoughts on outsourcing from the United States to India.

“Well, you know, it’s been going on for many years now,” Clinton said on the program, “and it’s part of our economic relationship with India, and I think there are advantages with it that have certainly benefited many parts of our country, and there are disadvantages that go to the need to, you know, improve the job skills of our own people and create a better economic environment, so it’s, like anything, it’s, you know, got pluses and minuses.”... Sanders’s campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, said he’s convinced Clinton’s comments will not play well in Michigan “when so many communities like Detroit and Flint have been hurt so badly by outsourcing.”

“Secretary Clinton should explain to the people of Michigan how they have benefited from outsourcing of their manufacturing jobs,” Weaver said.... At a news conference in Lansing earlier this week, Sanders made the case that he has consistently opposed “disastrous” trade deals, starting with the North American Free Trade Agreement in the 1990s, that Clinton supported during her tenures as first lady, a senator from New York and secretary of state.

Sanders has also been critical of the length of time it took for Clinton to reach her current opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership, a pending pact championed by President Obama that Sanders opposed from the outset.... Weaver also argued that Clinton’s comments in India differed from what she has said about outsourcing during appearances in the United States. The campaign pointed to a 2004 statement during his Senate tenure in which she says: “I do not think outsourcing American Jobs is a new kind of trade . . . and I certainly do not believe it is a good thing.” ... She {Clinton} said that Americans who have lost manufacturing jobs are fearful because they “don’t feel like they have any other job possibilities.”

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/03/04/sanders-campaign-finds-fodder-with-clintons-tv-appearance-in-india-on-outsourcing/

---

WOW!

link; excerpt:

In a new CNN/ORC poll released Tuesday morning, Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.) defeats Donald Trump (R) in a general election match-up by 55 percent to 43 percent, defeats Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) by 57 percent to 40 percent and defeats Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) by 53 percent to 45 percent.

By contrast, Hillary Clinton (D) defeats Trump by 52 percent to 44 percent, less than Sanders but still impressive. However, while Sanders would defeat Rubio and Cruz by hefty margins, Rubio beats Clinton, 50 percent to 47 percent, while Cruz defeats her 49 percent to 48 percent.

This new poll is not an outlier. It reflects the broad trends of most polling. ... The data tell us ... that Clinton could be vulnerable in a general election ... Most important, this latest of many polls showing Sanders running well ahead of Clinton against Republicans suggests that the real majority... in American politics is the progressive populism of Sanders, which is a major reason polls suggest he would run stronger than Clinton against Republican opponents.... Sanders speaks of making healthcare truly universal through a single-payer system, raising the minimum wage to $15 dollars an hour, providing young people with a free public college education financed by a tax on Wall Street speculation, increasing Social Security benefits and breaking up the big banks, a position recently championed even by a member of the Federal Reserve Board.

Progressive populism triumphs politically over the supply-side economics of the right, the root-canal budget-cutting of more establishment Republicans and the crony capitalism of more conservative Democrats.... Bernie Sanders is winning the battle of ideas. In most polling, he soundly defeats Republicans because his message is far more powerful and appealing to the nation. Hillary Clinton is moving in the direction of Sanders by emphasizing more progressive and populist positions, which is good for America and heathy for Democrats.

Hillary's "50-state inevitability" meme has failed.

Hillary's new "no path inevitability" meme is also false.

Outside of the Deep-Red Southern States, Sanders is winning. By wide margins, Sanders has won 5 of 8 states outside of Dixie, and Clinton's 3 wins have been dirty and very narrow:

Iowa - Clinton won in dirty close race (closest in Iowa's history)

New Hampshire - Sanders won by wide margin

Nevada - Clinton won in narrower win than she beat Obama in 2008

Colorado - Sanders won by wide margin

Massachusetts - Clinton won dirty by very narrow margin

Minnesota - Sanders won by wide margin

Oklahoma - Sanders won by over 10% margin

Vermont - Sanders won by wide margin

The states of the former Confederacy include Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. The Clintons rose to power in the Deep South, and this is a region of the country that has not historically embraced Northeastern Jewish civil rights activists. Clinton has swept these states so far, but they are not states she can win in a general election.

These Southern states are not a perfect representation of America. Of course they get a vote in selecting our nominee (and I'm not suggesting otherwise), but these states do not get to pick our nominee to the exclusion of the majority of states with a different history, a different culture, and different attitudes toward progressivism. The Clinton campaign should stop suggesting the race is over simply because Clinton is winning Dixie and is currently losing outside of the Deep Republican South.

Sanders is working hard to bring new Democrats to the ballot box and Clinton (with the DNC's collaboration) is inspiring no growth or enthusiasm.

"1.1 million more Republicans have voted than Democrats" on Clinton-centric Super Tuesday:



The RNC is building its party while our DNC is shrinking and discouraging our base:



This voter downturn is the foreseeable result of the DNC conspiring with the status quo establishment candidate who has little appeal to new voters, independent voters, and young voters. If the DNC had put as much effort into building our party as it put into its effort to hamstring our other primary candidates in an effort to grease the skids for Clinton, we would not be behind the turnout eight ball like we are.

As things stand right now, we change the DNC's game plan or we lose in November.

Sanders has passed almost all the way though Dixie, and this is still a tight race: Clinton has earned 596 pledged delegates (over 59%) while Sanders has earned 399 (just over 40%) pledged delegates during the part of the primary calendar calculated to favor the moderate status quo establishment candidate.

The next 4 races are Kansas, Nebraska, Louisiana, and Maine.

The betting markets favor Sanders in Kansas (Sanders at a 71% favorite), Nebraska (Sanders at a 70% favorite, and Maine (polling advantage in addition to 83% betting market favorite), while Clinton nears the end of her Dixie collection of former Confederate states in Louisiana.

To put the pledged delegate count in context, Sanders is doing better than Rubio or Cruz (Rubio has won less than a fifth of the delegates and Cruz has won just under a third while Sanders has won just over 40%).