What happens when only one candidate runs a clean campaign

[thesquanderer]

Only one candidate has used complicated votes to mis-represent the other's position.

Only one candidate has run ads using the name, images, and words of the other candidate to try to diminish that candidate.

Only one candidate has used innuendo to imply that the other candidate holds views that candidate clearly does not hold.

Only one candidate has mischaracterized the other's programs to make them sound frightening.

But that is the candidate that is winning.

I wonder how much of a factor that is.

[firebrand80]

1. one candidate's campaign hacked DNC data

then claimed the whole incident was a conspiracy against him

[gcomeau]

2. You need to learn what the word "hacked" means.

Because what you just said makes you look ridiculous.

[corkhead]

3. Yup, that's why I started getting spammed by Hillary campaign about that time

be must have done it to throw us off the trail

[UglyGreed]

15. UMMM

DNC officials and a staffer at NGP VAN recommended Josh Uretsky. Also NGP VAN had the same type of problem in 2008.....not too good at the job they are hired to do........or are they doing what the client requested HMMMMM



Also why did the DNC not let the lawsuit which the Sanders campaign filed run it's course??? Perhaps they felt it would reveal some interesting secrets that they felt best to be left out of the public's view......

[Ken Burch]

36. hack89, is that YOU in the back in the Bruins shirt? n/t.

[UglyGreed]

39. I hope you don't

think I'm a sockpuppet account of Hack89, I'm sure he would be pretty offended by that remark

[Ken Burch]

41. Not what I was thinking at all.

I was addressing that to him, not you.

[UglyGreed]

43. I did not think so

sorry

[Ken Burch]

44. No problem. Have a nice weekend. n/t.

[Hoyt]

4. One candidate's supporters slammed long-term Democrats for endorsing Clinton. A candidate is what

he attracts as supporters, see Trump for instance. Heck, they even slammed Elizabeth Warren for not endorsing him.

[thesquanderer]

6. The supporters are out of the control of the campaign. More to the point...

...EVERY campaign has its share of distasteful supporters. Well, okay, maybe Trump's campaign has more than its share.

[Bluenorthwest]

7. What a hugely false statement that is, I just now finished reading a thread in the Hillary group

slamming Bernie supporting Democrats a thousand ways, it is thread that exist simply to do that very thing. None so blind, Hoyt, none so blind.


" The Bern supporters remind me so much of the Ron Paul supporters. They clap loud and drown you out with their swarming assholiness."
""The Bern supporters remind me so much of the Ron Paul supporters"

That's because they are one and the same mostly. They deserve what is about to happen to them and I love it."


"To them its all about power. Until Skinner dropped the hammer on them yesterday they were in control of this site, not anymore and until they stop disrespecting Secretary Clinton I won't stop calling them Bernie Bro."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110776426


The entire thread is about the horrible flaws they see in the sinners who support Bernie. They have entire websites doing the same.
Your post seems so inaccurate as to be simply dishonest, really.

[Hoyt]

19. None of that compares to you guys slamming of good democrats Lewis, Clyburn, even E Warren because

they aren't supporting Sanders. Heck, the way Sanders supporters portrayed minorities who don't support Sanders is disgusting. I'd give anything for us to be like Sanders' favorite Denmark, with the exception of Denmark's racism. And I saw some of that right here. Sorry.

[Lizzie Poppet]

16. Whereas the other candidate's supporters fuck the US worker repeatedly.

Her real supporters, that is. You don't think you guys matter to her in the least, once she's got your vote, do you?

[workinclasszero]

5. A clean campaign

that just admitted it is using the democratic party for media coverage only?

Yeah Bernie is Mr Clean alright.

His candidacy and campaign is based on a lie!


Bernie Sanders says he ran as Democrat for the media attention

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-sanders-says-he-ran-as-democrat-for-the-media-attention/

[pdsimdars]

12. Not like using the whole democratic party to lean on the scales . . . . .

[thesquanderer]

8. In a way, he's campaigning with one hand tied behind his back,

because he's trying to stay true to not wanting to run a negative campaign, which has never been his style anyway. And also, I suppose, you don't really want to bloody up the likely nominee.

But you know, this campaign is in no way preparing Hillary for what she's going to face in November. Trump is certainly not going to be tired of hearing about her damn emails, or sketchy assertions about the foundation, etc. It looks to be a pretty ugly campaign.

[fun n serious]

9. clean campaign?

https://twitter.com/YourAnonCentral/status/708670762262110208

https://twitter.com/djred678/status/709927446443724800

[thesquanderer]

11. Again, I'm talking about the campaigns, not the supporters.

Both campaigns have their over-the-top and even just plain offensive supporters.

[fun n serious]

13. It came from his campaign originally

it's been proven..

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/709894680658513920

[thesquanderer]

17. A few things...

1. Hillary-Rahm is a more valid political statement than "Bern the Witch" which, based on your previous post, is what I first thought you were going to tell me came from his campaign!

2. I don't think that drawing attention to the Hillary-Rahm mutual support qualifies as a lie or misleading statement.

3. From your "proof," it does not appear that "it came from his campaign originally," though they did pass it along.

4. Even then, it does not fall into any of the categories of negative campaigning of substance that I listed in my OP.

Heck, a Hillary-Rahm sticker isn't even necessarily a negative, right? I mean, it depends what you think of Rahm. AFAIK, Obama still likes him. http://fusion.net/story/253345/obama-rahm-emanuel-chicago-police-scandals/

[fun n serious]

21. Bern the witch did come from his campaign directly

They deleted it from their website but admitted it after they could no longer deny it. There is more.. a lot more. But who cares... We ( Hillary supporters) have to motivate and work hard on out base. Bernie supporters have already made it clear The won't unify with us so we are looking to other options to stop Trump.PLEASE Hillary supporters... leave DU'ers alone they are not our voters anyway.
Phone bank, talk to your social media peeps, canvas your neighborhoods and please donate what you can.

[Number23]

30. I am laughing at how in this OP designed to "catalogue" how "pure" Sanders' campaign has been

it's actually done nothing but exacerbate how much decidedly NON-pure crap has come out of it.

And no one has even touched on his campaign using logos and pictures from organizations and politicians that had endorsed Clinton to sell itself, how they actually FUNDRAISED off of the failed attempt to improperly access Clinton's DNC records, or the maligning of Planned Parenthood as part of the"establishment" that Sanders is trying to take down because they dared to endorse Clinton.

[thesquanderer]

32. Is there any point listed in the OP that is not true?

As for Planned Parenthood, as has been mentioned here often, the political arm of PP (that which endorsed Hillary) is a separate entity. Usually that comes up to assure people that their contributions to PP are not being directed to their political actions unless they specifically contribute to that entity. But it is also relevant here... because that arm is, in effect, part of the political establishment, i.e. a lobbying group.

As for things they fundraise off of, both candidates fundraise off any point that could motivate people to contribute. There was no lie in the fundraising materials, at least from what I saw.

I will grant you that there may be some legitimate issues concerning things like the use of logos. How high up it went, how egregious the violation, I can't tell you. But looking at the campaigns overall, do you think any such transgressions are really in the same category as any of the four big ones I mentioned? Three of which have been repeatedly out of Hillary's own mouth?

Yeah, I do think that Bernie is running a fundamentally clean campaign, and Hillary is running, well, the same kind of campaign she ran against Obama in 2008. I winced then, too.

[pdsimdars]

10. It presents a real problem for the good, smart voters who don't like the lies, etc.

A real problem.
I've lived a good life and really don't think I can vote because of guilt. I have to vote FOR something.

[fun n serious]

22. So don't vote. nt

[Betty Karlson]

14. She may have sacrificed an empire to win a war, though. eom

[lumberjack_jeff]

18. Worse, the winner is now going to be subject to the full force of a real campaign.

You can bet that those transcripts are going to be released by one of the banksters the day after the nomination.

It will be a pants-soiling moment of buyers remorse for democrats.

[Hoyt]

20. Won't show a thing. If Clinton were there carving up the poor's money for the oligarchs, you

would have heard about it from the hundreds of investors attending, many good Democrats, wait staff, audio visual and lighting people, those with cameras and recorders, political enemies of Clinton, etc. She got up there, said Hello, told a few stupid jokes and said Bill is doing well; said Banksters weren't the only ones with a hand in the financial debacle (which is true because others fools included government, auditors, those promoting the housing industry, real estate agents and appraisers, those promoting homes as the epitome of the American dream, those who should have thought what would happen if home prices dropped rather than kept increasing, etc.); that she supports regulations to avoid this in the future; talked about foreign policy; said investment is the key to many future jobs in this country and the world because the workers themselves don't have the money to spend millions on the technological advancements needed for a viable start up nowadays other than a consignment shop or something on that order; maybe even encouraged them to give to the Clinton Foundation which actually does some very good projects despite what detractors say; closed by answering a couple of softball question; etc.; smiled and left. Goldman Sachs was happy, because the investors -- including many good Democrats -- were happy, and perhaps they left with a little better feel for where things will be if Clinton jumped in the race.

But you can be sure if she said anything like Romney's 47% comment, that stuff would have been on youtube long ago.

[thesquanderer]

25. re: " that stuff would have been on youtube long ago."

We don't know that a video exists.

I tend to agree with you that there may well be nothing truly out-and-out devastating in these speeches... but I suspect there's at least enough there that can "sound worse than it is" that it would create major headaches.

Again, if there were nothing potentially damaging to her campaign in releasing the transcripts, she'd surely release them rather than have to deal with all this.

[Hoyt]

27. If she released them, then we'd hear -- did she go off script; what was said afterwards;

was she winking at people as she talked; who did she talk to on the way to the restroom; what exactly does this phrase mean; Clinton lied about her account of Libya; etc. And as we've seen in this campaign, folks would just make things up.

If I were her, I'd hold off just like Obama did with his birth certificate.

[thesquanderer]

29. Yeah, I talked about that a bit also...

...in post #8. The general will not be an easy campaign for Hillary.

But as for the transcripts, supposedly by contract, no one has a copy of them except Hillary. But whether someone may have surreptitiously kept a copy, or recorded a video of the event on their phone (a la Romney's famous 47% speech), who knows...

[MohRokTah]

23. What happens when only one candidate runs a clean campaign?

She wins.

[Lucinda]

45. Ding ding ding! We have a winner!

[astrophuss42]

24. I got the instinct impression

Bernie didn't clarify those false comments because they were outright lies. And it is indeed hard to prove a negative. But oh what fun he will have until the convention letting all of them know exactly what the HRC voters are asking for because most of them don't seem to understand.

[upaloopa]

26. Maybe after the general you all can get a petition going to get his excellence canonized.

Saint Bernie of Vermont, the only honest politician.


?format=750w

[pinebox]

35. Touche!

[azurnoir]

28. I hate this but I have been thinking for months now that this campaign reminds me of the 1980

Reagan vs Carter campaign and we all know how that worked out for the honest politician

[GreatGazoo]

31. One of HRC's campaign consultants had THIS to say back in 2008

when he was running Obama's campaign against her. They saw a risk in going overtly negative. It can hurt YOUR candidate, especially if the other candidate is perceived as more honest and likable:

“Frequently, in campaigns, when we say ‘contrast,’ it’s a euphemism for a frontal attack,” Grisolano explained. “You can see in the memo, and this is important about the constraints that the message put on us, because if you are the unity guy you can’t come out with a crowbar against your opponent. We had to show we were different, but do it in a way that wasn’t as direct as most campaigns do.”

In the memo, Obama was counselled to attack Clinton subtly but not “so subtly or obtusely that the press doesn’t write about them and the voters don’t understand that we’re talking about HRC.” Obama agreed with the strategy. “One thing I recall was that he was willing to draw contrasts with Hillary but was very intent on doing it in ways with which he felt comfortable,” Axelrod told me.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-to-beat-hillary-clinton

In other words, Benenson saw the risk in going negative when he worked for Obama against HRC yet decided for whatever reason that it was okay this time for the HRC campaign to go overtly negative. Perhaps they believe that her neg number can't go any higher.

[thesquanderer]

33. Or maybe Benenson's advice hasn't changed...

...but someone else in the campaign overruled him.

[thesquanderer]

38. about negative campaigning backfiring...

Picking up from what you said, I think there's also the fact that some of Bernie's support derives from the very fact that he doesn't do negative campaigning, so then yes, negative campaigning could provides some blowback if he were to attempt it, especially in particularly blatant ways. OTOH, Hillary has already done so much negative campaigning (see the 2008 campaign against Obama), that people don't necessarily expect a clean campaign from her. Therefore, the fact that she doesn't run a clean campaign is not as likely to backfire on her.

Which also gets back to your point about her high negs, i.e. that in a way, this kind of stuff may already be "factored in" to people's perceptions of her. Not that she has high negs specifically because of negative campaigning, but rather that negative campaigning is consistent with some of the other things that people dislike that have driven up her negs (i.e. perceived lack of scruples) so it doesn't necessarily drive her negs up much further, instead only reinforcing perceptions that are already there.

[seabeyond]

34. She wins.

[Octafish]

37. Like fighting with one hand tied behind your back.

It ain't fair.

Then again, it's win at all costs for some people -- like war.

[thesquanderer]

40. Yeah, I said something similar...

... in post #8.

But as for your point about "winning at all costs," it may not simply be that Bernie is unwilling to use Hillary-style tactics, it may also be the fact that, even if he did, it wouldn't work for him the way it works for her. I also talked about that in post #38.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

42. Getting into politics is like stepping in dogshit. From The Motorycle Diaries