Bernie Sanders Is Democrats’ Top Beneficiary of Outside Spending, Like it or Not

[kennetha]

The guy is a holier than thou hypocrite!

Mr. Sander’s unlikely rise to super PAC pre-eminence is, in part, the story of an unusual alignment of strategies by different outside groups, including Republican ones eager to bloody Mrs. Clinton and lift Mr. Sanders, whom conservatives believe will be easier to defeat in a general election. While the nurses’ super PAC is the biggest left-leaning outside spender in the Democratic primary, conservative organizations have also spent at least $4.3 million attacking Mrs. Clinton in recent months.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/29/us/politics/bernie-sanders-is-democrats-top-beneficiary-of-outside-spending-like-it-or-not.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=photo-spot-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

[immoderate]

1. Hilarious R Us

--imm

[RobertEarl]

2. The pubs hate H

Bernie is not even on their radar.

The OP is just another Bernie hater.

[synergie]

3. It's a bit much to say he's a hypocrite, he has no control over

what the Republicans do with their money. That he's the hand picked candidate that has the Karl Rove endorsement speaks volumes about their confidence in facing him in the general and their terror of Bernie's opponent.

[Fawke Em]

10. Terror?

Bernie's opponent might be in Sing Sing come the election.

Republicans are hardly terrified of her.

[synergie]

14. I think you know not of what you speak, Republicans have been terrified

of her running for quite some time, it's why they're trying very hard to support Bernie, unless you truly think he's the candidate of Karl Rove for the policy positions he's taking.

That you so unquestioningly repeat the right wing talking points, including silly references to prisons, when no investigation has found any evidence of a crime, no matter how many Republicans have tried to create one, speaks to either the gullibility of the Bernie supporters, or is testament to the Republicans infiltration.

Get your facts straight.

[Fawke Em]

15. She'll lose Ohio, Florida, North Carolina and Colorado

Maybe you should get your facts straight.

[synergie]

20. Well, it's because I have actual facts that I'm aware that your claims

with regard to "Sing sing", and the polling of the states you've randomly listed don't quite fit with reality. Nor do you seem to be in touch with the Republicans or the big bear hug so many Republicans, CONservative sources and Karl Rove are giving their chosen candidate, Bernie.

The facts, the polls and reality do not support your assertions. Maybe you should start researching what facts are and how reality is playing out, you don't seem to be aware of what's going on.

[Fawke Em]

27. She IS being investigated by the FBI.

That's a fact that YOU don't seem to be aware of. This isn't Benghazi. I work in cyber security (not as an analyst, but in PR) and all the analysts I work with who have security clearance say that if they'd done what she did, they would be prosecuted and their opinion isn't based on whether they like her or not - it's based on their professional opinion.

And, polls aren't the be-all, end-all they used to be. Too many rely on landlines, which is dated.

FWIW, I don't care what Rove does. I think most political insiders believe this election is like all the others and its shaping up not to be. Rove just expects Hillary to win and wants to damage Sanders. It's not that hard to suss.

[synergie]

30. Yes, all of the right wing sources are indeed spreading that lie.

This quite literally BENGHAZI.

The sources who are reporting what you're pinning your political attack on should tell you how credible it is. Your friends don't know what happened here, and their opinion really is meaningless.

Um, the polls that you're referring to aren't relying on "landlines" any longer, go to real clear politics and Nate Silver's site and see how they're conducted, who they're asking, and what questions they're asking them, the PDFs are available.

You're making assertions that are not based on anything, not even the polls, and your understanding of how they're conducted is rather dated.

It's not about whether you care or not what Rove does, it's the fact that you're DENYING what he's doing to make your baseless assertions.

Rove is not damaging Sanders at all, he's SELLING him, and if you bothered to get your facts straight, you'd realize that his intent isn't hard to suss at all, since it's pretty blatant how much the GOP is cheering for Sanders and why that might be. They are worried about Hillary, they know they can beat Sanders.

[hrmjustin]

4. K&R!

[99Forever]

31. Gee, what a surprise...

... you supporting a hate-filled, lying hit-job on Bernie.

I'm shocked!

Fucking SHOCKED I say.

[hrmjustin]

32. Do you need a kleenex?

[99Forever]

37. Nope.

I told you before, I welcome your hate. I relish your hate.

BRING IT ON.

It makes us ever stronger and more determined.

Watching Hillary lose another Presidential bid is GLORIOUS.

[hrmjustin]

39. I don't think about you enough to hate you.

[riversedge]

33. yes, REC.

[cali]

5. Bulloney.

He had nothing to do with setting up that SuperPac. And damn, nurses are not Wall Street. They aren't there to make a profit. Their concern is the public welfare.

[KittyWampus]

19. But he sent the nurse's a thank you video, after condemning Super Pacs. He's a hypocrite.

[synergie]

25. That didn't really stop you guys from attacking PP, NARAL or anyone else who didn't

endorse your way.

The pro-Bernie ads from Karl Rove are funded by Wall Street. It's convenient fact, but an unavoidable one.

[Fawke Em]

28. And Bernie has no recourse to stop them.

He can't help what Wall Street does - but he IS trying to change that.

[synergie]

50. They seem to think they have less to fear from him than her.

[beam me up scottie]

47. Funny you should mention "funded by Wall Street", Hillary supporter...

Last edited Fri Jan 29, 2016, 04:52 AM - Edit history (1)

[synergie]

49. What's funny is that I wrote you a very nice explantion of my stance and you failed

to read it because apparently you are fond of making up things, no matter what the facts and reality are. I'm not surprised at all that the most belligerent and aggressive of the "Bernie Supporters" like to skip over their boss's endorsement of Bernie and his $600k wall street derived investment in promoting his chosen candidate.

[beam me up scottie]

51. "Bernie Supporters" like to skip over their boss's endorsement of Bernie"?

What does that even mean?

[DanTex]

35. Not sure you understand the whole SuperPac thing...

[gyroscope]

6. Desperate headline

Getting money from a nurses union?

You have to come up with some impressive mental acrobatics and tortured logic to claim Sanders is the biggest beneficiary of campaign money, that is a fraction of what Clinton takes in from her Wall street SuperPACS and hedgefund fundraisers.

[KittyWampus]

21. Ah, so Sanders' decries SuperPac's and stops when one spends for him>>>

and makes them a nice thank you video… but IOKIYAB.

[uponit7771]

7. Hmmm, Sanders can easily say... "please no advocating for me from outside groups please".

[gyroscope]

8. Just like Hillary has right?

oh wait...

[uponit7771]

11. She the revolution candidate? no... she's not, not expected of her and that doesn't take away

... from her either for most democrats

Sanders doesn't hold up to the standards he chides everyone else for

[gyroscope]

12. LOL

Sanders never said he won't take money from unions.

[DanTex]

36. But he preaches against SuperPACs, pretends he doesn't have their support.

And yet he's the biggest recipient of SuperPAC money of all Dems in the primary.

He's not dumb. He's just calculated that his supporters don't care about facts. And he's probably right. The problem is trying to get people outside the Bernie bubble onboard.

[kristopher]

42. You sound like you are unable to distinguish between Corporations and Labor.

[DanTex]

43. If Bernie had said "labor SuperPACs are OK"...

But he didn't say that, did he?

[uponit7771]

54. +1

[frylock]

18. Sanders to Nurse's Union: CUT IT OUT!

[KittyWampus]

22. Yes, but instead he sent the nurses a nice thank you video.

[Nanjeanne]

9. Them damn nurses

I wonder how many of those Wall Street guys are going to switch fields now.

[Art_from_Ark]

13. The stench of desperation is getting stronger and stronger

with each passing pathetic attempt like this to bash the best candidate in this primary.

[KittyWampus]

23. No, that's denial from Sanders supporters.

[Skwmom]

16. Oh yeah, they've really attacked her - NOT.

[frylock]

17. I'll never forgive the Nurse's Union for nearly destroying the economy.

[KittyWampus]

24. Can't refute the hypocrisy so you change the subject.

[frylock]

52. Show me the hypocrisy.

[PatrickforO]

26. So....HOW is that his fault???

Because I'm just not seeing that part of your argument.

Sanders has nothing to do with super pacs spending big bucks attacking her.

And, what about the Wall St. funded super pac that is spending $600K this week in anti-Bernie ads in IA??? How does THAT fit into your spurious argument?

Because again, I'm just not seeing it your way.

And the NY Times article? You know what that is? That's the establishment RAT trying to FUCK Bernie.

[99Forever]

29. I feel stupider for having tried to read that steaming pile of dog shit.

You're a on roll kennetha, don't stop now. You can find something even more asinine and ridiculous if you REALLY try.

Bwahahahahahahhaha...

[DanTex]

34. Well, well. A lot of Bernie myths are crumbling.

[Beacool]

38. I thought that he didn't accept money from super PACs.

But he does, indirectly. How convenient.........

'But the union is not just busing nurses into Iowa. The union’s “super PAC” has spent close to $1 million on ads and other support for Mr. Sanders, the Democratic presidential candidate who has inspired liberal voters with his calls to eradicate such outside groups. In fact, more super PAC money has been spent so far in express support of Mr. Sanders than for either of his Democratic rivals, including Hillary Clinton, according to Federal Election Commission records.

“I do appreciate the irony,” said RoseAnn DeMoro, the executive director of National Nurses United. “All things being equal, we would rather not be doing this. On the other hand, we want to see Bernie as president.”

“This is almost a morality play,” Ms. DeMoro said. “It’s Clinton’s David Brock versus Bernie’s nurses.”'

To summarize, super PACs are bad, unless they're helping Sanders raise money. This means that Sanders' supporters better hold their tongue about Brock and his super PAC. Right?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

40. Another development I find profoundly disappointing./nt

[beam me up scottie]

41. Naughty nurses, how dare they support Bernie???

Who do they think they are, Wall Street?

The pharmaceutical industry?

A private for profit prison?

[Beacool]

44. That's not the point.

Then point is that it's hypocritical to bash super PACs while receiving money from them, whether it be the nurses' or anyone else's.

[beam me up scottie]

45. No the point seems to be recycling last year's manufactured outrage.

But you guys go with that, I'll watch.

[Beacool]

46. Unlike you guys who become blind and deaf when something is pointed out using facts

against your candidate. You all can dish out vitriol against his opponents, but can't take it in return.

[beam me up scottie]

48. We're "taking" it just fine, watching the desperate flailing is hillarious.

[Skwmom]

53. That the NY Times could argue the Ricketts ad benefits Bernie and not Clinton is disgusting and

shows the 4th estate is in the toilet.

[Gothmog]

55. Republicans Take Their Sanders Advocacy to the Next Level

This ad was designed to support Sanders just as McCaskill's ads against Todd Akin were designed to do http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-01-28/republicans-take-their-sanders-advocacy-to-the-next-level

Add Republican operatives to the list of strong Bernie Sanders supporters in the Democratic primary, along with progressive activists and young voters.

A super-PAC founded by Republican billionaire Joe Ricketts is making its first foray into the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, spending $600,000 on a television ad in Iowa calling Sanders "too liberal," according to The New York Times.

The ad then spotlights two of the policies that have helped fuel his rise in the Democratic primary—his calls for "completely free" college education and more taxes on Wall Street and the "super-rich."

"It's exactly the same thing we did with Todd Akin," said Caitlin Legacki, who served as communications director to Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill's during her successful campaign in 2012. "They're clearly trying to use the exact same playbook."

Four years ago, McCaskill spent nearly $1 million in TV ads calling Akin "too conservative" in an effort to promote him, rather than his two opponents. He won the primary, then McCaskill trounced him on Election Day.

"More than anything that should be a concern for Democrats, because you don't make those kinds of investments in support of a candidate from another party unless you believe there's a good reason for it," Legacki added.

[Gothmog]

56. Anti-Sanders attack ad isn’t quite what it seems to be

This so-called attack ad is really an ad designed to help Sanders. The fact that the Sanders supporters think that this is an attack ad and do not realize that the purpose of this ad is to help Sanders is amusing http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/anti-sanders-attack-ad-isnt-quite-what-it-seems-be

Republicans have made no secret of the fact that they’d prefer to run against Bernie Sanders in the general election. Whether or not their assumptions are correct is a separate question, but GOP officials, convinced that the senator would be easy to defeat, have gone out of their way to help Sanders in the Democratic race.....

At first blush, the move may seem encouraging to Sanders supporters. After all, if Republicans have gone from defending Sanders to attacking him, maybe it means GOP insiders are getting scared of the Vermont independent?

It’s a nice idea, but that’s not what’s going on here. In fact, far from an attack ad, this commercial, backed by a prominent Republican mega-donor, is the latest evidence of the GOP trying to help Sanders, not hurt him.

Indeed, in this case, it’s hardly even subtle. This commercial touts Sanders’ support for tuition-free college, single-payer health care, and higher taxes on the “super-rich.” It concludes that the senator is “too liberal,” which isn’t much of an insult in an ad directed towards liberal voters in Iowa.

In other words, we’re talking about a Republican mega-donor investing in a faux attack ad to help Sanders win because he sees Sanders as easy to beat in November.

It’s the mirror image of the tactic Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) used in the 2012 U.S. Senate race in Missouri, when she invested in ads intended to boost then-Rep. Todd Akin (R) in his primary race, with commercials touting his far-right positions and calling him “too conservative.” The point was to make Akin look better in the eyes of Missouri Republicans so he’d win the primary, making it easier for the incumbent Democrat to defeat him on Election Day.

This ad is just another example of the GOP trying to help Sanders become the nominee because the GOP knows that Sanders is the weaker candidate.

[Gothmog]

57. Clinton Camp: GOP Attacks On Hillary Show They'd Rather Face Bernie In Fall

The GOP really wants to run against a weaker candidate http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-karl-rove-attack

The Hillary Clinton campaign on Tuesday said that recent attacks from conservatives show that Republicans are hoping Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) will win the Democratic nomination because they believe he would be easier to beat in the general election.

In a Tuesday evening statement, the Clinton campaign's communications director, Jennifer Palmieri, mentioned an ad from the Rove-aligned super PAC American Crossroads, which accused Clinton of being in Wall Street's pocket. Palmieri said the ad suggests that Republicans want to face Sanders in the general election.

"While Senator Sanders tries to make a case on electability based on meaningless polls, Republicans and their super PACs have made clear the candidate they’re actually afraid to face. The Sanders argument falls apart when the GOP spokesman is trying to help him and the Republicans run ads trying to stop Hillary Clinton in the primary," she said in the statement.

Karl Rove is running an attack ad against Clinton in the Iowa primary. Rove is doing this for one purpose which is to weaken the strongest candidate