Can someone please explain this? How this isn't implying that the DNC would sanction any debate which others agreed to? Doesn't this mean that prior to Sanders' newfound competitiveness she had no intention of an open and spirited debate on the issues?
Can someone tell me how I am interpreting this incorrectly?
Dear fellow Sanders supporters,
I want to send a heartfelt thank to you all for joining with me in supporting Bernie. I know that you are Patriots here, and I mean that in the sincerest way possible. We understand that a political system without real choice by the people for who is the leader of our country is by definition corrupt.
I have learned so much about the corruption endemic to our politics and governance, and I express my heartfelt gratitude to those who have been around the block already. I watch "America" every day, often multiple times, and I cannot help but feel the love of country that so many of us have. It is inspiring and humbling. Thank you for joining the movement with me. It won't end with Bernie, whether we prevail in this primary contest or not. I'll be voting and donating for a progressive liberal vision for the rest of my life. I'm a millennial in the middle of my first primary contest as a voting adult and I am heartbroken at the direction of our country; this is my chance to say "I now understand the system, and stand against corruption and the establishment elite".
A special thanks to CoffeeCat for her kind words and informative updates on the ground game in Iowa. Thanks to Uncle Joe for a steady voice in the fever-pitched environment that is GD-P. Thank you to merrily and cali for just being you! And beam me up scottie, always a passionate voice. And I almost forgot Armstead, whose insights always are well received. You are all amazing, and I hope to be half as witty as you all are some day.
With warm wishes,
P.S. stay warm and safe, all you out there in the east.
Well well, and people say that Bernie supporters are paranoid about talking of a so-called "democratic establishment". Guess again! I was reading The Grey Lady this morning (as I do every day, cover to cover) and found this gem nestled in the NY region section:
Bloomberg, Sensing an Opening, Revisits a Potential White House Run
Mike Bloomberg for president rests on the not-impossible but somewhat unlikely circumstance of either Donald Trump or Ted Cruz versus Bernie Sanders, said Mr. Rendell, a close ally of Mrs. Clintons who is also a friend of Mr. Bloombergs. If Hillary wins the nomination, Hillary is mainstream enough that Mike would have no chance, and Mikes not going to go on a suicide mission.
In a three-way race featuring Mr. Sanders and Mr. Bloomberg, Mr. Rendell said he might back the moderate former New York mayor.
Well well well, isn't that swell. Plenty of folks were talking smack about Bernie not paying his dues to the Democratic establishment, and now the establishment is considering backing an independent for president over the people's choice for the Democratic nominee. A candidate who strongly supports the bedrock principles of the Democratic party, but is just too anti-corruption and represents the people too well for the elite party members who Know Better(TM). My DU friends, we truly do live in a corrupt system, and it is only becoming clearer by the day.
P.S. I will soon be making a thread in the Bernie Sanders group, pondering where the country is after 2000 posts. Please join me there.
Bill Clinton, that is, in 1992.
Mr Clinton should 'level with the American people on the draft, on whether he went to Moscow, how many demonstrations he led against his own country from foreign soil,' Mr Bush declared on the Larry King television show.
'I don't have the facts, but to go to Moscow one year after Russia crushed Czechoslovakia, and not remember who you saw - I think the answer is, level with the American people,' Mr Bush repeated.
For the first time the Clinton rebuttal team seems to have been wrong-footed by an attack by the Bush campaign team. 'It's a pathetic ploy by a desperate politician,' Mr Clinton 's spokesman said.
Mr Clinton said Mr Bush was grasping at straws. 'Here we are on the way to a debate about the great issues facing the country and he descends to that level,' he said.
Seems that the Clintons have learned from the
Now, I wonder where I have heard that before....Faux News? Perhaps Secretary Clinton could get a job as a Right Wing spin doctor after this is all over.
Source (will update with full CNN/ORC details): https://twitter.com/DavidChalian/status/690277943579381760
"I was prepared to bring that up," Brock said, confirming a story published Politico on the issue. "I was scheduled to do a couple of interviews over the weekend in Charleston, so I was prepared to bring that up.
Releasing the records is part of the normal vetting process for candidates, Brock argued. Its usual for all candidates in the presidential, particularly someone whos doing well and becoming a top tier candidate, he said. And look, they said they were gonna do it, so clearly I was on the right path.
During an appearance on CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday Sanders said he had no problem releasing his medical records. Thank God, I am very healthy, Sanders said. We will get our medical records out the same way that Secretary Clinton has gotten her records out. It is not a problem.
I guess Sanders' campaign will get apologies from all the DUers who stated as fact that Sanders' campaign was fundraising off of rumours they themselves started? (You know who you are) I won't hold my breath.
We all have been told that it is misogynistic to call Andrea Mitchell "Mrs. Greenspan", when we are referring to her by that name to point out the connections she has to the establishment and her husband's policies.
A few choice quotes:
3. I think it's better to leave it alone, so that the actual misogyny can be seen, there
is so very much of it, hence wall the pre-emptive whining about misogyny. That thread really did shed light on the level of thinking that's going on here. It's sad when women also engage in misogyny.
1. The ever-present casual sexism of American society.
Pease keep calling it out - that is how we will learn to recognize and change our behavior!
People can dislike her, but she has been an accomplished journalist before she married.
But then I ran across this post from the HCS site. Why is it that calling her Mrs. Greenspan to point out her obvious biases is sexism and misogyny from BernieBros but hillary clinton supporters are allowed to say it as well??
I am basing this OP on the data that opensecrets.org has on outside spending, available at: https://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/summ.php?cycle=2016&disp=C&pty=N&type=A
Please do independently verify the screenshots below.
These two pictures pretty much say all that needs stating:
$3,607,885 - $3,306,964 = $300,921
This is ignoring the $20,886 spent by candidate(?!?!?) Bill Clinton.
Okay I actually do have one (obviously rhetorical) question as a follow up:
Why is Party Committee money being used against other democratic candidates in a primary contest?