Except he can’t get anything but control of the platform committee, and that’s meaningless. He hasn’t shown much real aptitude for politics as you accurate describe it over the years, has he?
Or he can keep doing what he’s been doing.
The question is how much longer he’s going to let his own ego override that concern. He used to talk that way, granted, but not recently.
They don’t like her involvement with Wall Street. They don’t like her because she represents the establishment. Go visit his subreddit if you want to learn the opinion of his supporters. Over 234,000 participants. Here is a good thread to show you the mindset of the Bernie Sanders supporters right now.
Prime time or not? Inside or outside the building? And constructive or ego-driven?
I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt that rather than his ego, it’s because he genuinely cares about the issues involved. Also as others have said Clinton still hadn’t conceded at this stage in 2008 despite also having no path to victory. Bernie may get some concessions of electoral reform in the delegate process as promise to buy his endorsement. I’m assuming that behind closed doors various discussions are taking place.
[QUOTE=New York Times]
Advisers to Mr. Sanders said on Wednesday that he was newly resolved to remain in the race, seeing an aggressive campaign as his only chance to pressure Democrats into making fundamental changes to how presidential primaries and debates are held in the future. They said he also held out hope of capitalizing on any late stumbles by Mrs. Clinton or any damage to her candidacy, whether by scandal or by the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald J. Trump.
[/QUOTE]
Bernie and his supporters aren’t going anywhere anytime soon.
For all the worst reasons, too.
Then he wouldn’t be actively trying to damage the nominee who can help make some of it happen.
Wrong. It was still realistically possible for her then, and she did concede the day that was no longer true. That point is long past for Sanders.
Would that include changing some, or all, of those inane caucuses, that have provided the bulk of his delegates, to much-more-democratic primaries? Or are we talking some sort of affirmative action program for future dilettantes and ideologues?
Sure. But no agreements reached there need to last any longer than the next news cycle.
So the question is if Clinton can do anything about it besides praying people eventually realize how scary Trump is.
There is no question that right now we are seeing the impact of the GOP circling their wagons even if some are reluctantly doing so, while the Sanders camp is still in full attack posture mode.
It always bear repeating that Clinton not only still had a realistic path to winning up until the very end but that her own rhetoric was very measured wrapped in the big picture from a point much earlier than this.
So really the claims that Clinton did the same thing are very specious. Dang if only Sanders was taking that as their main tact instead of being sore losers who keeping whining about imagined bad calls and bad field conditions
But right now we do see the peak of the divisive attack posture from Team Sanders and the most let’s all join forces on the Trump side. I am hoping the damage from that can be contained as Sanders, hopefully sooner rather than later, pivots. The longer it goes though, the more the damage, and the harder it is to undo.
Clinton must be able to focus on the general election from here out.
Clinton can only do so much about the bleed to the general election being caused by Sanders continued biting her ankles. Personally she has to ignore it and let it speak for itself. If Sanders does not pivot and postures to making unreasonable … requests … for his real best efforts at working together … then her only option is publically reject the portions that she feels are too extreme, and hope for the best that loss of some of those who could have been won with Sanders solid working on the team’s behalf will be offset by those who that action appeals to as a sign of strength, resolve, confidence, and to whom burning down the building appeals little, those who see the structure of our system as sound but that we need to get to work replacing some of its pipes, and fixing the cracks in the foundation.
Seriously that is the message she needs to be able to send:
America is great. And it can still be much better. The last eight years have seen an economy in freefall turned around, a world pulled off the brink of economic collapse. Much progress was thwarted by obstructionism in Congress, the same obstructionism that we see illustrated currently by the Senate refusing to even give a hearing to a SCOTUS nominee, playing games, holding the work of the Court hostage for some hope of partisan gain. We must toss out the obstructionist Congress, and get to the serious work of fixing what needs to be fixed so we can be even better than we are. Clinton is simply the best person running to get that serious work done.
You should have stopped at Britebart. From Politifact:
(Note: Tom Tancredo wrote the Brietbart article, and he based it on statistics obtained from a presentation by James Simpson at the Center for Security Policy)
So it’s bad but not as bad as portrayed. Alright.
Dems need to listen to Bill Maher, given how Trump is polling really well on terrorism: just use the term Islamic terrorism:
Bill Mahrer is wrong. He may be a funny guy, right about most issues, but he’s wrong here. Uttering the words “Islamic terrorism” isn’t the Ace of Trumps that you think it is- it’s pointlessly inflammatory and offensive to our Muslim friends.
you don’t think that foreign Muslim leaders can’t find out about Hillary using the term in the past (which she did?) Even Obama once used the term “radical Islam,” in his Speech on Race.
And even then, which would “offend” leaders of Muslim countries more; people who use the term, or people like Trump, who both use the term AND want to blanket ban Muslims coming into the country, talking pigs blood bullets, etc.
Also, this notion that it would offend Muslim countries beyond belief is misguided. (and that source is no GOP/conservative one either)
Oddly enough, in every single one of those polls, except the Faux News poll, Clinton outpolls him in dealing with terrorism. Hmm…wonder how that works out?
I guess they finally got over their revulsion for Trump.
ETA: I know. “Poll taken from Bill O’Reilly callers. Margin of error +/-80%.”
or those numbers in the non-Fox polls are too close considering Trump has zero gov experience.
How do you conclude that it’s “bad”? You were presented facts that establish that illegal immigrants are fearful of disobeying laws, and are therefore less likely to commit violent crimes than average citizens, your anecdotes notwithstanding. I don’t care what the answer is, but facts matter.
So, the guy gets charged with serial cannibalism, but it gets proved that all he ever actually did was a DUI, and you say “Well, so not quite as much a criminal as we thought”?
The pollshave definitely narrowed with RCP showing Trump up by 0.2 points. I suspect a fair amount of this is Bernie voters who are now saying they won’t vote for Hillary. Many of them will come back once the primary is over and Bernie presumably endorses Hillary. Obama and Warren will also help Hillary consolidate the youth vote. Predictwise is reasonably stable showing a 67% chance of a Democratic win. Hillary is a weak candidate who is disliked and distrusted by many of the voters she needs but at the end of the day Trump is an even weaker candidate.
