That link has a copy of the entire memo detailing how he DNC ceded control of key functions and decision to Hillary’s campaign.
Like I said earlier, we can’t know how much that helped her. But it doesn’t look good from the perspective of any non-Hillary candidate, not just Sanders.
We can never know but I would love to see the alternate reality where it was a fair race to that point.
My bet is Clinton still would have been ahead but the margin would have been much closer.
As for Sanders continuing there was value in showing the DNC there were a lot or democrats out there who wanted certain things Clinton was not, of her own volition, likely to address.
God, I am sick of liberals in New York and California being blamed for whatever Democratic imbeciles in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Ohio were such lazy, complacent and apathetic motherfuckers that they couldn’t do their civic duty and vote. How could they claim they felt their votes didn’t matter? These states have been vital since Bush vs. Kerry, for fuck’s sake! (Maybe Bush vs. Gore too, I forget how that one went–other than Florida, obviously.)
So we did our jobs and now they whine that “wah wah Clinton didn’t visit us enough” or “Clinton looked kinda hinky” as excuses… I mean, she looked hinky, versus TRUMP?! Gimme a break. Anyone with a brain in their head who’s left of Richard Nixon should’ve known what a trainwreck Trump would be.
I live in NYC. (Same precinct as Trump’s, in fact.) Everyone knew NY was gonna go for Clinton, so hey, I could’ve stayed in bed and relaxed. THAT would have been understandable complacency.
But no, I got my ass up at 5AM to be one of the first to vote (along with hundreds of others who had the same idea, alas… including the news vans in case Trump showed up to vote). If we busy and allegedly complacent New Yorkers could do it, what excuse is there for the PA, OH and WI Democrats?
These lazy lunkheads are to blame. Not Clinton, not even Sanders. (Well, maybe a little Sanders.) And most assuredly not the New Yorkers or Californians who voted. We have ONE job to do every four years (presidentially speaking), and that’s to vote. Democrats (or anyone who didn’t want Trump) in PA, WI and OH didn’t, even though as I said, those states have been vital dating back 12 - 16 years! Now we’re all (minus the wealthy, xenophobes and/or racists) suffering as a result.
Stop blaming the coasts and grow up. In the name of God, do your duty. </atticusfinch>
Well you got up at 5, but how long did it take you to get all the way down from your ivory tower?
Say what you like about that, but do you agree that it all went to Sanders’ head and his campaign became an ego trip rather than promotion of public policy goals?
I’ve discovered the joys of absentee ballots. I can fill them out at leisure while exploring the positions and experience of all the lesser-known candidates for local positions on the Intertubes (if I haven’t already made my decision, which I normally do as soon as their candidacies are announced but before the Campaign Bubble closes in).
And I get my ballot in weeks *before *you. 
To some degree, probably. He’s human – it’d be extremely hard to suddenly gain a large following and not have some of it go to one’s head. Especially for someone with the ego to run for high political office in the first place. He made some mistakes, IMO, but no egregious or inexcusable ones, and like many or most political mistakes, ego was a big part of them.
Went to his head? As opposed to Her Inevitableness, who thought the Oval Office was hers for the taking, and all she had to do was pick it up off the sliver platter? It is to laugh.
Hillary lost for one reason: Hillary. Anyone who is still in denial about that is in danger of having their party lose again in 2020 because they didn’t learn a damn thing last time around. There are going to be any number of externalities in a campaign that the candidate can’t control. In order to win, you need to manage your campaign to deal with them (or not) and keep your eye on the things you can control.
Obama ran a mostly cool, calm and collected campaign in '08. He was Steady Eddie, mostly letting the scandal of the day slip into the news background. And when he won again in '12 despite a high unemployment rate that should have been crippling for an incumbent, he gave us a playbook for how to run a successful campaign. I think lot of people, like me, generally vote for someone whom they support more or less. Obama was the one guy I can remember enthusiastically voting for. That’s how you win-- generate voter enthusiasm. And you have to generate it is such a way as to win the Electoral Vote. You’re going to get a certain percent of the vote just because of the D or R next to your name. But you’ve got to get the non-tribalists to get out and vote if you want to win. Don’t do that, and you risk losing.
And one last note: Anyone who can’t go over how “unfair” the EC is (but Hillary won the popular vote!!) should seriously consider some other hobby besides presidential politics. Either that or fasten your seatbelt, because it’s going to be a bump night!
I sort of disagree with this sentiment – Hillary indeed was a highly flawed candidate, and made tons of mistakes, but at the time I think most of her decisions were generally reasonable (if some were unwise in hindsight), and she wasn’t able to overcome these “reasonable” mistakes. But she was who she was, and we nominated her, and she did the best she was able (ego and “inevitability” and all). She bears some of the blame, but I still put the lion’s share on those who voted for Trump, and those who didn’t come out to vote for Hillary. The American people bear a significant chunk of the blame for this. I wish she had done a better job of convincing people to vote, and I wish the American people were less racist, less bigoted, less misogynistic, less xenophobic, etc.
True dat, he only lost the popular vote by three million, so that’s clearly the voice of the people endorsing the Republican agenda. If he had lost by ten million, that would have been an absolute mandate.
Remember GeeDubya, lost popular vote by half a million? Remember that speech he gave nodding towards that result, about how that showed a divided nation? How that would require an agenda of compromise and accommodation from Republicans?
That’s OK if you don’t remember, nobody else does either.
Of course it went to his head. Remember how Shitbag Sanders kept his Secret Service protection even after he’d lost the very last primary? Oh, and he got his butt whipped in that primary. Remember Shitbag Sanders wanting to take it to the convention rather than conceding?
Sanders had been nothing but a useless backbench windbag for over 20 years prior to his quixotic campaign. Of course it went to his head. All of a sudden he’s being interviewed by the national media rather than doing phone interviews with left wing independent radio stations in Berkeley or Burlington.
His “quixotic campaign” generated more political enthusiasm in my generation (age 30 as of the election) than I have seen in my entire life. Your hatred of him is misdirected.
Too many of your generation have been ridiculous with their political enthusiasm. They voted 3rd party or wrote in Harambe. They’ll whine about sitting out the Illinois governor race because they didn’t get their progressive pony and can’t vote for a billionaire.
I’d prefer less enthusiasm and more common sense.
Get off my lawn with your hippity hop music and your wearable electronics!
Enthusiasm is what brings people to the polls. Democrats: adapt or die!
I’ve seen this movie before.
Like it or not, we need those youngsters to win the next election. Insulting and blowing them off seems like a poor strategy to get us the best chance to win.
Assuming the same number of total votes (which are irrelevant in the US Prez election), how many electoral votes would Hillary need to have won in order for the result not to show a divided nation? Let’s say she squeaks a win in FLA and WIN, how much would the “dividedness” have changed?
You missed my point. I would not suggest that Hillary was thwarted in acting upon a clear mandate because three million votes is not enough for that. Of course, losing by three million is even less so.
The Trumpists have demonstrated a clear and relentless determination to undo as much progress as they can get their grubby mitts on. But how can they claim the right to do so, how can they claim that the voice of the people is solidly behind them? As it stands, they take a winner take all approach until they lose, then they realize the value of compromise and accommodation.
Even a fetid pile of goon bait like Trump recognizes the validating power of the popular vote, he even went to the trouble to lie about it.
She lost because she had more baggage than the Andrea Doria. Folks didn’t want a Clinton Dynasty any more than they wanted a Bush Dynasty and the dems didn’t give any other possible candidates the time of day. IMHO Bernie didn’t count. She was probably the only person in the party who could have lost to Trump. Hillary’s unfavorables in Feb. of 2016 were 54 percent un to 40 percent favorable.