Bernstein: The White House Is Terrified the Clinton Campaign "Is In Freefall"

[Karmadillo]

This is before the release of the Cheryl Mills transcript and the possibility Hillary won't submit to an interview with the FBI, so one can imagine the White House is even more terrified now.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/06/gaius-publius-bernstein-the-white-house-is-terrified-the-clinton-campaign-is-in-freefall.html

Gaius Publius: Bernstein – The White House Is Terrified the Clinton Campaign “Is in Freefall”
Posted on June 1, 2016 by Yves Smith

<edit>

In that context, listen to the current “White House” message about the Clinton campaign via Bernstein and video at the top (my italics):

Bernstein: The implications of all of this [the email server issue] are that Hillary Clinton did not want her emails subjected to the Freedom of Information Act or subpoenas from Congress. And that’s why she set up a home-brew server.

I think we all know that. People around her will tell you that in private if you really get them behind a closed door.

I was in Washington this week, I spoke to a number of top Democratic officials and they’re terrified, including people at the White House, that her campaign is in free fall because of this distrust factor. Indeed, Trump has a similar problem, but she’s the one whose numbers are going south.

And the great hope in the White House, as well as the Democratic leadership and people who support her, is that she can just get to this convention, get the nomination — which they’re no longer 100% sure of — and get President Obama out there to help her, he’s got a lot of credibility, it’s an election that’s partly about his legacy.

But she needs all the help she can get because right now her campaign is in huge trouble…

[tonyt53]

1. Bernstein has been out of the loop for way too long. He has no idea.

[arendt]

7. Yes. But, as article says, he's an errand boy, not a reporter.

If the WH thought he had said anything they didn't want said, he would have been dumped on.

It's the dog that did not bark.

[Baobab]

14. WTO

just testing. Thanks.

[senz]

61. Good point.

Insight such as yours is needed around here (in the time that's left for such things.) Please contribute more often.

[CorporatistNation]

88. In Loop? Out Of Loop? It Does Not Matter...No Need To Be "In The Loop" In Order To Understand THIS!

e.g., MSNBC To the deniers... Watch THIS Video... It is not comforting to think that she may well be the Democratic Nominee...

Hillary really betrayed Andrea Mitchell... The entire context of this report was of a solemn nature... A Funeral so to speak...

Andrea Mitchell "I do not see this report as ...ANYTHING BUT... DEVASTATING!"

Chuck Todd "After this I don't think that she could get confirmed for Attorney General!"

Lots of FIBBING by Hillary here.. for more than a year!

[bkkyosemite]

2. she lied

[shanti]

48. regularly

[brush]

55. Sad that all you have left is hope for an indictment when Sanders and his campaign . . .

have only themselves to blame for coming up short.

"They committed a series of fatal strategic errors mostly attributable to incompetent staff work and an unforgivable lack of preparation against the Clinton Machine.

Among the bullet points in the campaign’s post-mortem, we can’t help but to note that Bernie & Company mistakenly went negative against Hillary, unnecessarily careening onto and embracing the low-road. Bernie, meanwhile, deeply excoriated the Democratic Party establishment and the superdelegate system, only to circle back, groveling now for establishment support after it’s too late. The Bernie get-out-the-vote effort failed to turn impressively massive rally crowds into actual votes, time and time again. Bernie himself stoked discontent and conspiracy-mongering within the party by misleading his supporters about delegate math while also failing to properly educate his ground-game activists about voter-registration and primary rules state-to-state. Perhaps his deadliest error occurred when he pledged to run his campaign solely on individual donations famously averaging $27 when, in a general election matchup, he would’ve suddenly confronted a stratospheric pile of GOP cash that would’ve invariably crushed his chances unless he backpedaled. The list goes on and on. And now he’s willing to participate in a stunt — a debate between the GOP winner and the Democratic loser. A political exhibition bout.

These are all factors to take into consideration, and a farcical stunt-debate between Bernie and Trump wouldn’t have ameliorated Bernie’s self-inflicted damage, nor would it have sufficed as a last-minute Hail Mary. At the end of the day, it only would’ve managed to illustrate how a failed Democratic candidate was just as willing as Trump to debase himself within the idiocratic narrative."

— Bob Cesca is a regular contributor to Salon.com.

[Scootaloo]

101. Considering the juggernaut he went up against, he did exceptionally well

Make no mistake, the Democratic party was fully behind Clinton at absolutely every turn. There was no neutrality from the DNC, Clinton was, and is their anointed choice. And yes, it was an anointing, ask O'Malley about it. She had the connections, the total party support, the name recognition, the funding, and yet some nobody from nowhere with no party pulled a little over 40% of the party from under her.

I think that maybe instead of sneering at that 40% and spitting at us and denigrating our candidate, you and the rest of the party might want to think about how the fuck that even happened. 'Cause that's kind of a big deal.

[brush]

103. Why didn't he just join the party years ago? Many of those super delegates would have . . .

committed to him. That would have been a game changer.

[Scootaloo]

105. You mean like they lined up behind O'Malley?

MO'M made a good point in that initial debate - he was the only person on that stage who had been a lifelong Democrat. Three former Republicans and an Independent shared that stage with him. And he went nowhere. No party support whatsoever.

[brush]

113. True. O'Malley didn't get much of a chance.

“I think that when President Obama was running for reelection, I was glad to step up and work very hard for him, while Senator Sanders was trying to find someone to primary him,” Mr. O’Malley said. “I am a Democrat. I’m a lifelong Democrat. I’m not a former independent. I’m not a former Republican. I believe in the party of Franklin Roosevelt, the party of John F. Kennedy.”
(the above is a quote from O'Malley).

Clinton had an advantage because of her national profile. Even Sanders, the way he made a splash by joining the party got more press play than O'Malley (Sanders, who had assiduously avoided and even criticized the Democratic Party in the past, even commented on primarying Obama, knew he had to have the Dem party brand to get the national profile, name recognition and TV exposure that he would never get as a little known independent socialist from a small state). It was a smart move even though some see it now as him using the party for his own ambition.

O'Malley, already a Democrat and no longer Governor of Maryland, didn't have the option to hold a press conference and announce his decision to join the party. The timing was just not right for him as he got neglected in the backwash of two dynamic forces that took all the attention away from his legitimate Democratic Party bona fides.

I do think it's unfair to tout that Clinton was once a Republican. That was in her high school years, living in a Republican household. Once independent and old enough to form her own political opinions she became a Democrat and worked for McCarthy in 1968 and McGovern in 1972.

Not many can say they've been a Democrat since 1968.

[LiberalFighter]

116. The problem with that statement is nobody knows they are a Republican or Democrat

when they are born.

Hillary has been a Democrat longer than O'Malley has been. O'Malley was only 5 years old when Hillary became a Democrat. Did O'Malley know he was a Democrat then or is he using his parent's or family's political affiliation? She was a Democrat 3 years before she first met Bill Clinton.

O'Malley really does not have the qualities of leadership for the national level.

[libdem4life]

108. Probably had No Desire to

be a DINO or Third Wayer. The only to continue with good old-fashioned Democratic ideals was to stay out. Many are feeling that "bern" currently.

[libdem4life]

109. What is even sadder is that this is

One of our choices. On the brink of disaster. And, the firstt female "role model ". Sad, very sad.

[brush]

114. Nah! She'll beat the carnival barker/fake university founder easily.

It won't even be close. Sanders would too but he can't beat her.

[libdem4life]

118. My statement /opinion is that it is sad

I'll add...for democracy but peachy for oligarchy.

[adigal]

112. After watching "The Big Short" the other night, I FINALLY fully realized how much the deck is stacke

against the little guy and anyone who tries to stand up for the middle guy. NPR had a story on the successful lobbying of the Pay Day Loans industry against any meaningful regulation today.

Make no mistake - if Elizabeth Warren had gone against Hillary, they would have photoshopped her in an Indian warbonnet and face paint to discredit her. The powers that be want Hillary, and Hillary they will get.

[Herman4747]

75. to the American people

[berni_mccoy]

3. And So, She Suffers from Lack of Confidence among the Establishment. So the end begins.

[Betty Karlson]

51. An end that can't come quick enough.

I'd rather avoid the possibility of a Trump presidency, which is one more reason to nominate Bernie. He'd make West-Virginia swing state. Just saying.

[MFM008]

102. Sanders is burning his bridges

He hates the democratic party.
He wont be able to do anything alone, including slinking back to the Senate.
He can make best friends with a pariah named Ted Cruz.
I don't think either of them will have much to do.

[Cobalt Violet]

106. got a link? or are you just making stuff up?

[stillwaiting]

54. How can the Establishment see the CLEAR lack of trust and support that HRC engenders in so many

people and think SHE'S the one we need to have in power.

They struck it rich with Obama. He had the charisma and not much of a record to give lots of us progressives actual hope that he would fight for a progressive future.

HRC has none of Obama's charisma and a record which is clearly not going to satisfy most progressives on foreign policy, trade, and domestic economic policies. HRC will get pushback from the right wing AND from many progressives if she tries to do many of the things Obama and Bill Clinton were able to do during their Administrations. Lots of good Democrats don't like or don't trust HRC. There is a chance that she will not be able to do things that TPTB want her to do without major disruptions happening in this country.

She has the potential to really stir up lots of anger in this country.

I think it's possible that TPTB may be wanting someone else at this point. It's possible. How likely, I have no idea. She clearly would be much more than willing to do just about everything that TPTB want her to do.

[Trust Buster]

4. June 16th baby.........Stay thirsty my friends.....LOL

[Jester Messiah]

5. Your camp's version of Fitzmas.

It's going to be just tragic for you guys if she doesn't last that long.

[Trust Buster]

6. Sure thing "messiah"........LOL

[Jester Messiah]

11. You forgot the Jester bit.

I know Clintonistas trend right-wing, but must you Breitbart my name?

[Karmadillo]

12. Be forgiving. Clinton folk apparently forget most everything.

[Jester Messiah]

13. Hah! Nice. n/t

[GreatGazoo]

28. LOL

[senz]

62. If you think mass censorship/bannings on DU

will swing the election your way, then you need to step outside of the DU cavern and have a look around.

[BillZBubb]

8. If she refuses to testify to the FBI, she should be dumped ASAP for the good of the party.

No ifs ands or buts.

[global1]

17. When Will Trump Start Using In His Speeches That 'She Refuses To Testify To The FBI'?......

That looks like something he could latch on to and hammer home and make hay of.

[Yurovsky]

41. Yep, that's not a complicated narrative ...

Hillary is under investigation and refuses to cooperate with Obama's justice department (of which the FBI is a part).

That is simple, and it is damning.

She needs to talk to the FBI. She can't put them off forever without risking Her candidacy.

[John Poet]

90. Hillary can't talk to the FBI without LYING,

and THAT's the problem.

That would add another charge on top of her other crimes, lying to Federal Agents.

[senz]

64. If that's what he actually wants to do.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512101643

https://www.quora.com/Could-Trump-be-a-Democratic-plant-1

[gordianot]

78. I suspect he is counting on running against Hillary.

It also allows him to double down on childish insults. So far now, crickets; then again he may not be that bright.

[workinclasszero]

9. It's in "freefall" alright (massive sarcasm)

[Joe the Revelator]

18. This cute little graphic doesn't even address the actual topic here.

Try harder.

[workinclasszero]

20. Oh you mean the pathetic and weak republican character assassination attempt?

That crap will end on the 15th.

[morningfog]

77. Whistle whistle whistle.

[libdem4life]

110. right past the Democratic graveyard.

[KittyWampus]

117. Nope. Past Ideologues and third-party disruptors.

[Buddyblazon]

89. You believe upon that date...

You're going to magically stop hearing about her emails?

[TimPlo]

21. Nixion

Electoral vote 520
States carried 49
Popular vote 47,168,710
Percentage 60.7%

George McGovern
Electoral vote 17
States carried 1 + DC
Popular vote 29,173,222
Percentage 37.5%

Sorry I don't have time to make pretty graphics with numbers on it trying to prove someone was not in wrong. I mean she just can't be in the wrong because a bunch of people voted for her. One would think that a country where people make Kim Kardashian worth millions of dollars a year off of no talent would never be voting based on stupidity.

[Meteor Man]

32. Freefall

As in a string of losses to Bernie and falling in the polls against Trump.

[leftynyc]

42. Except that LIE

is still a lie:

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/6/1/1533155/-National-Q-Hillary-Bernie-14-New-polls-with-good-news-for-Hillary-against-Bernie-and-Trump

6-1-2016 QUINNIPIAC POLL: HILLARY 53% TO 39%

The bottom looks to be falling out from underneath Bernie in national polling. Quinnipiac, QUINNIPIAC, the most Hillary-skeptical poll of them all (outside of GOP shill Rasmussen), now shows Hillary leading Bernie nationally by 14%.

Combined with the most recent ABC/WaPo poll, which also shows a 14% race, and the double-digit lead Hillary now shows over Bernie in the aggegates of both RealClearPolitics and Pollster.com, and there goes Bernie’s argument on national polls, or any kind of national poll tightening. Instead, the bottom is falling out from under Bernie when it comes to national polling.

The latest Quinnipiac poll out today shows Hillary ahead of Bernie 53% to 39%, a 14% lead.

Interesting diary with actual numbers and polls. You may want to read the entire thing before you embarrass yourself further.

[Meteor Man]

44. Nice bank shot

I said Hillary had a string of losses against Bernie.

I said she was falling in the polls against Trump. Your Kos link is non-responsive.

[leftynyc]

52. From the VERY SAME LINK

that you obviously didn't take the time to read or you wouldn't still be embarrassing yourself:

As for the overall polling picture Hillary vs. Trump, there WAS a polling bounce Trump received when Cruz and Kasich decided to bow out of the GOP race, but that appears to be receding now. Illustrative here is that oft cited Rasmussen poll, that actually showed Trump ahead by 5% on 5/19. That led to a lot of hand wringing in the media. However, a week later that same pollster (a GOP pollster) showed Hillary leading by 1%, a 6% turnaround in numbers for Hillary in just 1 week.

Polls are showing Hillary winning again with growing numbers, and once the Democratic race is decided expect a very good polling bounce to come Hillary’s way, putting more distance between herself and Trump again.

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/6/1/1533155/-National-Q-Hillary-Bernie-14-New-polls-with-good-news-for-Hillary-against-Bernie-and-Trump

[Meteor Man]

67. From the very same link

Yep. Looks just terrific for Hillary:

But voters say 44 – 39 percent that Trump is more honest and trustworthy;

49 – 45 percent that he is a stronger leader

48 – 39 percent that he is more inspiring.

Voters say 47 – 39 percent that they would rather invite Trump to a backyard barbecue,

47 – 41 percent that they would turn to Clinton during a personal crisis.

I try my best not to spend any time at The Pie Fight Place.

[leftynyc]

72. Nice cherrypicking

Wonder why you skipped this:

The Q poll shows Hillary leading Trump by 4%. 45% to 41%.

“This is a very tight race that will divide Democrats and Republicans, the young and the old, white, black and Hispanic voters – and husbands and wives – in the months ahead,” said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll.
But a closer look reveals that Hillary is in the driver’s seat. As women make up between 53% to 56% of a general election, Hillary’s advantage with women over Trump, compared with Trump’s advantage among men, looms large.

From the questionnaire:

5. If the election for President were being held today, and the candidates were Hillary Clinton the Democrat and Donald Trump the Republican, for whom would you vote?

Hillary 45% Trump 41%

Interesting info from the crosstabs:

54% of Women choose Hillary

30% of Women choose Trump

while

51% of Men choose Trump

35% of Men choose Hillary

As mentioned, more women vote than men, so you want to be in Hillary’s position of strength with women.

Also, interesting, the age breakdown:

18-34 yrs. of age: Hillary 48% Trump 32%

35-49 yrs. of age: Hillary 48% Trump 37%

50-64 yrs. of age: Hillary 41% Trump 47%

65 and older: Hillary 44% Trump 45%

Millenials are Hillary’s strongest age group, she wins them by 16%. Trump is strongest in the 50 to 64 age group.

American voters say

56 – 35 percent that Clinton is better prepared to be president than Trump;

51 – 37 percent that she is more intelligent

47 – 36 percent that she has higher moral standards.


Q analysis:

“Trump may be the guy voters want flipping burgers in the backyard and flipping companies in the board room, but when it comes to making deals in DC and stepping up to confront an international crisis, voters want Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office,” Malloy said.

“Voters want Hillary Clinton in the Oval office.” I like the sound of that.


Edited to add: This whole subthread started because your claim was that her support was in freefall. Still want to make that claim?

[okasha]

94. Bernstein is being nominated

for a Nobel Prize in physics.

He's just discovered negative gravity.

[Skink]

10. Skinks under no obligation to speak to the FBI either

[floppyboo]

15. But the FBI hasn't contacted her yet, so how could she refuse?

At least that's what I heard her say on a phone interview with Chris Hayes msnbc yesterday. Is this plausible??

[floppyboo]

16. link to Hillary re. FBI

On second listen, Hayes asks if she's been contacted, and she replies no, they don't have an interview set up. Guess she didn't hear the question.

It's at 5:20 - you have to go to the Clinton email clip. I'm sure there's a better link out there...
http://www.msnbc.com/all

[global1]

19. Will Somebody Explain To Me The Quote Above That "It's An Election That's Partly About His Legacy"..

I'm not understanding why Hillary's e-mail problems are about Obama's legacy?

[TimPlo]

22. For most of the primary

She used Obama as a shield for most things she was criticized on. That statement is not about the email but about her whole campaign that is trying to push that she is just like Obama.

[Hiraeth]

29. yes, I understand why She is pushing it but, why is he?

[Meteor Man]

34. Obama is pure DNC

Obama is for all practical purposes a Third Way Dem. Maybe you've heard of the TPP? V.P. Biden? Geitner? Summers?

[Hiraeth]

35. Obama is on his way out. Imo, his legacy as a statesman should NOT depend on HRC's future. Why he

doesn't see it that way is his issue. It all sounds weird, convoluted and slightly perverted TO ME.

[Meteor Man]

40. Convoluted is right

This whole crazy election is convoluted by any rational standard. To put it another way, bat shit shit fucking crazy.

[Hiraeth]

43. bizarre, surreal, otherworldly, parallel universe, down the rabbithole. yes, bsfc.

[senz]

65. It's an attempt to transfer Obama loyalty to Hillary.

For the primaries. She played on it heavily just before the Southern primaries. Many southern Dem voters love Obama, and the Party knows it.

She uses an assumed Obama connection to make Democrats comfortable with her, and anyone else who uses it in this way could also be a Hill supporter.

This is also why Hillies try to pit Bernie against Obama. Same game.

[Zen Democrat]

81. Hillary is no Barack Obama.

[senz]

83. I do believe Obama is fully aware of it, too.

Am getting the impression that in D.C. the Clintons are like sticky icky stuff -- hard to get rid of, once it's on you.

When they leave, the entire city will heave a sigh of relief, except for those who were expecting a loyalty reward.

[senz]

66. Another possibility: Hill camp trying to convince Obama

that the success of his legacy depends on her success -- in hopes of gaining his support for her FBI problems and her campaign in general.

"If your 'chosen' SOS fails, it will look like you failed..."

Could also see the Bill version, "If you don't back her, we will see to it that your legacy is ..."

Arm twisting.

[Waiting For Everyman]

47. That doesn't make sense to me either.

I mean why does she particularly have to follow him, especially in light of their past and her conduct against his orders at the State Dept.? It seems like something unknown is in the equation.

[floppyboo]

23. this has baffled me as well.

Wouldn't someone want their legacy to be one of a stand-up kinda person?

[Hiraeth]

27. Can I sit beside you because I don't get it either

[GreatGazoo]

30. because a GOP prez would roll back the gains we made and name 3 SCOTUS judges

They have had Biden cue'd up since last year.

[2banon]

58. Yep, it's looking more and more like a shell game as this plays out..

what other play can they make?

Keep the Justice Dept at bay until after the primaries as they set it up for her win, eliminating Bernie's right to the nom, JD makes their move, and DP slips in Biden. The party moves onward off the cliff for a Trump win.

Geebus

[arikara]

100. Thanks for bringing that up

I couldn't figure that part out either and was reading down the thread to see if it was addressed. I've heard more than once that Obama isn't particularly fond of her, why would she be tied up in his legacy?

[LoverOfLiberty]

24. Have to go back to Feb?

the shrill voices are desperate!

[Karmadillo]

93. The video is from May 25th. To quote the Sage:

"the shrill voices of the desperate!"

[grasswire]

25. notice that no one in Washington establishment seems to be...

....concerned about the implications for national security and for her reliability as POTUS/CoC. They are concerned about the politics of the matter and the viability of the campaign.

[elleng]

33. except silly folks like me, I guess.

[Hiraeth]

37. and me.

Politics Uber Alles

[vintx]

69. This is why both parties are dying. nt

[Samantha]

97. and that really bothers me quite a bit

One of the first posts I placed here on this entire subject was on that very issue. If I can find it, I will come back and add it to this post. It is very disturbing the discussion on national security has not been elevated above the political.

Sam

[grasswire]

98. please do, Sam nt

[highprincipleswork]

26. This all could have been predicted so easily so long ago, if people would take their heads our of

Hillary's ass.

A lie? Yes. Not only that. A repeated and blatant lie. You can spin it all you want, but the American public will be the final judge.

Not the candidate I want holding all my chances in November.

[GreatGazoo]

31. yes and it won't matter if the lie was "lawyer true"

if the intent was to create a false impression while speaking words that are technically or parsable true, that is still a lie in CW.

[BillZBubb]

39. "...that is still a lie..."

It depends on what the definition of "is" is.

[vintx]

70. Ugh

[Meteor Man]

36. Let's cut to the chase

Hillary is uniting the Republican party. The M$M is pivoting from pro Hillary against Bernie to their traditional Clinton bashing.

Hillary Clinton's campaign is in freefall against Trump.

[Hiraeth]

38. Gotta admit She makes a good punching bag.

[MisterP]

53. they LOVE the feeling of vicarious persecution, of righteously circling the wagons

and it's not like she made it hard for the bashers

[B Calm]

45. Has Obama endorsed her yet? I'm

sure he will, but why is he taking so long?

[jwirr]

57. He is being smart. When it is this close and there is this

kind of trouble he is better standing back.

[Faux pas]

46. Kickin'

[Tarc]

49. When was the last time a Bernstein prognostication turned out to be accurate?

It has been awhile.

[AzDar]

50. ...

[BootinUp]

56. Shorter Bernstein: "I AM still relevant!"

[imagine2015]

59. It is in freefall. Democrats can't beat Trump if Clinton is the candidate. That's becoming clear.

[senz]

60. The Dems need a better front runner.

Ideally -- though anathema to corrupt entrenched establishment -- would be Bernie Sanders. He has a huge enthusiastic following, voters on both sides of the aisle like him, and his presidency would be good for the people of this country and therefore good for the country itself.

Secondly -- though also anathema to the corrupt entrenched establishment -- would be Elizabeth Warren. She is very popular with Democrats, including progressives, gender voters, and some of the Democratic establishment. She does not have a campaign organization, but she can make similar appeals to Bernie's and her presidency would also be good for the country.

Thirdly -- an establishment Democrat who could capture the trust of most Democrats and many moderate Republicans. Biden, Kerry, O'Malley. They don't have campaign organizations either, but the DNC would give them Hillary's. They are normal human beings, and their presidency would maintain the status quo until we can do better.

Bernie stands the best chance against Trump, but I think any of them could beat him.

[strategery blunder]

99. Of the three mentioned plausible establishment substitutes, I feel Kerry is the strongest.

Yes, he's establishment, but he has a long history of investigating the types of financial corruption that plague our government. Things like BCCI and Iran-Contra. DU researched this well in the 2004 election cycle, and the superdelegates could bring this history out during the convention to try to educate Bernie's delegates and convince them to unite behind Kerry if a brokered convention becomes necessary.

Biden IMO is too close to the elite to have that kind of credibility. While John Kerry has been in close proximity to it, at least he has done some work to ameliorate it behind the scenes. O'Malley made a good impression on me early in the primary but I am not sure what his record is on this matter, or if he even has a record on this subject to be evaluated.

Kerry's tenure as SoS has also been successful, and I've read reports that he asked State to investigate Hillary's...lack of a paper trail during her tenure (including the omission of appointing an IG for the department). That might be another selling point to those suspicious of the "establishment's" motives.

I'm not really thrilled with how the severity of Hillary's off-the-books server has been slow-walked during the primary. The whole thing reminds me of Rahm Emannuel's re-election campaign in Chicago, which he won in part by suppressing the release of the Laquan case evidence until after the election. When the truth came out by a judge's order months later, oooh how I bet Chicago wished it could take that election back. Bernie himself didn't want to "go there" wrt Hillary's off-the-books server until it was too late and too many of the primary votes had already been cast. (Not that I blame him--without compelling evidence like last week's OIG report coming out, he would have looked like he was trying to destroy the party, not save it from ignominious scandal and defeat, and he still looks like that in the eyes of too many Hillary supporters.)

It would have been much better imo if the OIG report had been available in March, with many voters (and a high proportion thereof) still to vote. It certainly would have given the party more time to come to terms with the issue and figure out a solution.

The implications of a national-level re-enactment of the Chicago evidence suppression handing the primary to such a compromised candidate are not something that I wish to contemplate.

[senz]

104. I agree, Kerry stands out, especially with his current very real success at State.

He's intelligent and capable. He has some negative history with the Clintons, bad feelings on both sides. I get the impression that he's widely respected and much appreciated by Obama. Am not sure how good he is at campaigning; he was snookered by the Swift Boaters and seemed a little clumsy at times ("I was for it before I was against it&quot . His voice is a bit of a detriment. Biden has a reputation for talking too loosely, is ridiculed by Republicans and has offended progressives in the past. O'Malley is young, smart and pleasant; some say that he's more establishment conservative than he appears.

Yes, it's too bad the Clinton situation was allowed to ride so long disguised as a rightwing attack. It's awkward and unfair for the Democrats to be dealing with something this heavy now. I'm not sure how much the pace may have been orchestrated for political reasons but sense that it may have been.

Bernie has campaigned his heart out. He's old but his judgment is solid and he knows his way around D.C., though not from an insider vantage. I think he'd be a wonderful president, not in the traditional ways; he's unusual. But he would have the best interests of the American people at heart. He could help bring back positive feelings about, and trust in, the government. A lot of good could come to the country and the world from a Sanders presidency.

[strategery blunder]

107. I believe Kerry has learned from the swiftboat attacks and their effect upon his campaign.

2004 was very different than now. For one, he was running against an incumbent wartime president, incompetent though such president was. Kerry, being a statesman, expected to conduct the campaign with a certain degree of comity that was not reciprocated.

But this year is not like the 2004 election. Expecting comity from Donald Trump would only lead to, well, comedy. Trump cannot wrap himself up in the flag to insulate himself from attacks as Bush was able to do in 2004, when Democrats had to constantly be on the defensive wrt Republicans obfuscating the distinctions between policy criticisms and "being unpatriotic." In fact that obfuscation had a lot to do with Kerry's reluctance to forcefully discredit the swiftboat attacks, because let's face it, the American voting public is easily misled by shit like that.

In the meantime, Kerry has built up national credibility during his tenure as SoS, whereas in 2004 he was not well known going into the primary election. Donald Trump has had his casinos in Atlantic City encounter, shall we say, financial trouble since this time. The contrast is glaring, and Trump does not have access to the same faux-patriotism defenses that Bush did because he has never served in any capacity whatsoever, be it military or public service. He is fully open to scrutiny of a business record that is, shall we say, highly questionable.

Donald Trump won't be able to get away with the same kind of shit that Bush did. Even more so, Trump's style of negative campaigning invites return scrutiny in a way that even Bush never did. At least Bush was subtle enough to use surrogates to make these attacks while looking the other way.

[libdem4life]

111. I can't imagine John Kerry able to get any more

people to a rally than Hillary. After the excitement around Bernie, he'll sink like a stone. Has absolutely No Charsma

[pdsimdars]

63. I don't get the hang up. Hillary is horribly flawed, under criminal investigation by the FBI

greater negatives than any candidate in Democratic history, AND polls show she doesn't do well against her KNOWN opponent in the GE.

On the other hand, you have another candidate with the highest positives of any candidate, huge support and energy, attracting large numbers of new voters, and does GREAT in all the polls against Trump.

What is the problem? The solution is obvious. I don't get all the hand wringing. . . . choose the better candidate. Period.

[senz]

68. lol, there must be something we don't understand. Yet.

Wonder if the Bernie camp knows what it is? Hope so.

[reddread]

82. to lose at any cost they triangulated themselves into a corner

it could be that greed is its own problem.

[vintx]

71. The problem is obvious. He would shake up the system

and those who benefit from the status quo would rather that not happen

[Darb]

73. Viewed as flawed by baggers

and end-timer bernies. Sensible people know that she is by far the best qualified to run the country and will do a fine job.

[democrattotheend]

74. Repeal the 22nd!

Instead of Obama having to play savior for Hillary, can't he just run for re-election?

I am mostly joking, but part of me really wishes he could serve another term.

[lostnfound]

85. Me too! Maybe Michelle can run and they can say...

"Two for the price of one"...

[Ed Suspicious]

76. I just want to state for the record that Gaius Publius is an awesome name.

[Babel_17]

87. Yarp!

I'd buy the bread he endorsed. And I don't eat bread.

"A true Roman bread, for true Romans" lol

[Demsrule86]

79. No Democrat

would ever talk to Bernstein who became a GOP pretend Dem...he knows 'nothing' all these secret sources...honey you are so out of the loop you don't even know who is in the loop...go home and stop embarrassing yourself...a judicial watch BS hearing and you are so excited and a transcript was released.

[gordianot]

84. A good part of the country has no idea what Judicial Watch represents nor do they care.

People tend to view these things from an uninformed perspective this has been a Clinton failing for decades. This time around the RW smear jobs seem to have hit pay dirt the best smear money can buy. You and I know what Judicial Watch represents the vast majority of voters do not have a clue. So let us all sit back as the magic evolves.

[dflprincess]

95. "GOP pretend Dem" aren't they generally called "Third Way"?

Formerly DLC or "New Democrats"; I just call them Vichy Dems.

[Babel_17]

80. Yarp, it's painfully obvious

Ironically, the Clinton insiders are totally free to fret about it. Presumably because reality matters.

[SidDithers]

86. Get 'em in while you still can...nt

Sid

[EffieBlack]

91. He said this back in February...

But it interesting to see how well and faithfully you're following the Republican playbook. . .

[Karmadillo]

92. Wrong. The first quote is from Feb. The second (from the linked video) is from May 25.

Keep trying.

[brooklynite]

96. President Obama being terrified...

ELKHART, Ind (Reuters) - President Barack Obama said on Wednesday he expected the winner of the Democratic presidential nominating race would be clear next week after Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders compete in races in California and New Jersey.

“I think that there has been a healthy debate in the Democratic Party, and it’s almost over,” Obama said during a town hall-style event broadcast by PBS.

People will “probably have a pretty good sense next week,” of who the nominee will be, Obama said.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obama-democratic-primary_us_574f78ece4b0ed593f134465

[NorthCarolina]

115. I've said it before, and I'll say it again...Hillary will never be 45.

Way, way, WAY too unpopular, not trusted, Clinton fatigue..and on, and on, and on. She has more baggage than Samsonite.