You might believe this. But it’s fiction.
My news feed this AM says Bernie has only $6M left. The fork might finally be with him.
I’m just guessing here, but my guess is that he has been totally dependent upon “flow”: a consistent and enduring flow of small contributors. Which is totally cool and worthy of applause, for reasons that I have already expounded upon. Downside is, when the enthusiasm cools, so does your money.
And it may only be a coincidence that just now Hillary begins to shift her money donations toward the general Dem effort across the country. Which Bernie has not done and now, pretty much can’t.
Bernie should do that today, he should at least encourage his supporters in the states that are already in the bag, primary wise, to send their money to down-ticket races. A lot of lefty websites offer easy ways to chip in $2-3 for a particularly interesting and close race.
Anyway, I’m guessing that most of Bernie’s supporters, being leftish and given to fits of rationality…have seen the Writing. We had a good hard scrap, its over, and more people voted for her. And the outcome is only “wrong” when the guy who got fewer votes wins.
Still think when all the dust settles, we will be warmly remembering Bernie for years to come, for his demonstration of the power of small donor politics. Good on you, Bernie!
Now, a few words about the Mother’s March Against Cognitive Dissonance! As many of you know…hey!..stop that!..quit shoving, I got my free speech rights!..
This is actually one of the serious issues that I developed with the Sanders campaign as time went on - unlike the insurgent campaign of Obama in 2008, it doesn’t look like Sanders had a really good game plan to start with. As a result, their fundraising has been great, but the campaign has gotten pretty poor return on their campaign spending.
I’m a natural cynic in most areas political, but I figure that Sanders is really holding out for a miracle in California. If he loses there - and that’s the way it’s looking - I bet he will concede before the convention. Probably not much more than a grudging endorsement for Clinton, though. There are going to be some pissed off dead enders, but I think their numbers are smaller than their Internet noise.
So Bernie’s going to get back at DWS by primarying her:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/21/politics/bernie-sanders-debbie-wasserman-schultz/
Say goodnight to your Senate career, Bernie. Maybe you can caucus with the Republicans now. Or go back to your small pond and win the governorship back.
Vindictive guy, Bernie Sanders.
But though the intended instrument of his revenge, Tim Canova, has been doing quite well in fundraising (apparently from GOP sources, too–when Obama endorsed DWS in early April, Canova’s donations skyrocketed), he may not do so well with the voters of the district in question:
(from your CNN link).
On the Obama endorsement’s effect: Obama's Endorsement Of Debbie Wasserman Schultz Brings In Serious Money... For Her Challenger | HuffPost Latest News
Nothing wrong with trying to get more progressive Democrats elected. If he wins the primary he’d have a very good chance in the general.
Its hair envy on Bernie’s part. Bitter, bitter hair envy.
Yeah, I saw that. He likely picked the wrong battlefield to spend political capital on, same as Palin did with Ryan. At this point, all I can say is he deserves the recriminations he’s going to get.
[QUOTE=DSeid]
Nothing wrong with trying to get more progressive Democrats elected. If he wins the primary he’d have a very good chance in the general.
[/QUOTE]
There’s something wrong with his rationale for doing it. How many other races is he working on? The fact remains that he’s not going to start a progressive revolution in the short term, and will still have to work with all those ‘establishment’ D senators. Except that they won’t work with him.
Yes, the bit I put in red is going to be on the minds of a lot of the Ds. The phrase “persona non grata” may as well have been invented for ol’ BS.
I started off this primary season with a good deal of respect for Bernie. As the season has gone on there have been several things that have caused me to lose respect for him and reach a point where I don’t want to see him get the nomination.
BUT, the idea that Wasserman-Schultz has been evenhanded in the Democratic primary contest is ridiculous. The debate schedule was clearly set up to screw over Sanders and O’Malley for starters. There is no doubt in my mind she has done everything possible to tilt the playing field in favor of HRC. Frankly, I would be happy to see her replaced by someone more progressive.
Yes, just like Paul Ryan, Ted Cruz and Rubio all got the persona non grata treatment.
I guess it’s on like donkey kong and the Leftea Party(©2016) has begun.
They all contributed to the campaign of someone trying to primary an officeholder they resented/disliked? And/or declined to financially support GOP aspirants? (I’m really asking; I’m not familiar with the donating habits of the gentlemen in question.)
Yeah, I pretty much agree. Debbie Wasserman-Rodham-Clinton-Schultz has it coming. She was acting more like Hillary’s campaign manager than DNC chair.
Please. The *last *thing Sanders can complain of is lack of exposure. There is no need to look for anyone else to blame other than himself.
Perhaps you noticed in school that the grading system was rigged in favor of students who did their homework. Well, so is the electoral system.
Yeah, it’s a bit weird how Sanders fans brag about packing rallies with a hundred thousand people in one breath, and in the next complain about how more people would support him if only the DNC hadn’t prevented them from learning about him.
There are three other races that he’s helping fundraise for.
A previous post looking into those four races.
If all he does is help fundraise for a few already strong in their primarying from the left, then yeah, that is not much help in furthering the agenda that matters to him. But fundraising for progressive challengers, selectively betting on those already doing fairly well, is not in and of itself a bad thing. Do I expect he will follow through and do more? No. But he might and if he does then fine. I’ll reserve my condemnation of that for when it does (not) occur.
Let’s look at the issues. Wasserman-Schultz is from a district that went 38% for Romney in 2012, 17% for McCain in 2008 and 24% for Bush in 2004. Not sure why results were weaker in 2012, but I suspect that’s redistricting related.
Wasserman-Schultz has shown real leadership. She joined forces with Republican Dennis Ross to delay restrictions on payday lending for 2 years as well as create a loophole regarding deferred presentment transaction (a term a Politico article uses but does not explain or define).
She has sponsored bills on identity theft, courageously increasing penalties for it despite a longstanding consensus among criminologists that probability of punishment matters more than its intensity. Also, business victims of identity theft will now be protected. Two time victim of identity theft MfM contains his enthusiasm with ease and looks around for brickbats. Just for reference.
Wasserman-Schultz opposed a 2014 medical marijuana amendment in Florida.
She’s a real prize in a liberal district. Why oh why would progressives want to give her the bum’s rush?
Yeah, it’s liberal, but not really Sanders’ supporter liberal. It’s the area north and east of Miami (including Miami Beach) with a median income of $50,000 and 38% Hispanic.
https://ballotpedia.org/Florida's_23rd_Congressional_District