Bernie Sanders goes on the attack at Iowa Democratic dinner

[Rosa Luxemburg]

DES MOINES — Bernie Sanders is giving Hillary Clinton a pass on her “damn emails,” but he’s giving her hell on just about everything else.
On Saturday night, at the high-stakes Democratic Jefferson-Jackson dinner, the Vermont senator launched a new, frontal attack on Clinton’s record, caution and character — a direct response to her recent surge in the polls here and nationally, and fueled by her strong performance at the first Democratic debate earlier this month


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/clinton-iowa-215133#ixzz3paZLuPFI

[UglyGreed]

1. Time to set the record straight

No more beating around the bush the middle class is at stake.

[BlueCaliDem]

58. Bernie didn't attack Hillary Clinton. His supporters tried hard to, though,

and, as expected, he didn't try and stop them or rebuke them, which can only mean, he agrees with them.

Sanders, personally, never attacks Hillary Clinton. He's not stupid. He won't go toe-to-toe with the woman who can eviscerate him in any debate by using his own record against him that's far from anti-war and far from liberal. No, Sanders is very clever. He allows his supporters to attack Hillary Clinton at rallies, on blogs, on YouTube, on every commentary section of online newspapers...and says nothing about it.

From the OP's link:

The skirmish began even before each campaign's supporters — hundreds of them, each with their own signs, noisemakers and pre-rehearsed chants — began filing into a drafty hall at the Hy-Vee Center in downtown Des Moines, where the annual kingmaker’s ball takes place.

At a pre-dinner rally, Sanders’ supporters flew a single-engine plane with the banner “FEEL THE BERN” directly over a Clinton rally headlined by the pop singer Katy Perry — who got more shout-outs from the candidate than Barack Obama, Joe Biden or Bill Clinton. During Clinton’s introduction at the dinner, Sanders' supporters — many of them in their teens and twenties — tried to drown out her intro with cheers for the democratic socialist. And they filed out quietly when she took the stage to speak,

[Lisa D]

74. That kind of rudeness

won't play well in Iowa.

[sufrommich]

75. Especially in a room full of democrats.Bad optics.nt

[BlueCaliDem]

77. Which is why I predict now that he won't win Iowa or New Hampshire.

Whether those were homegrown Iowans or bussed in Sanders supporters, the optics are damning for the candidate they say they support. The sad thing is? They don't even realize it.

[Omaha Steve]

80. Guys and dolls place your bets

[BlueCaliDem]

81. Bookmark my post, OS. If I'm wrong, you can hit me with it

as hard as you like.

[Omaha Steve]

88. .

...

[BlueCaliDem]

118. Hahahahaha!

Good comeback!

[UglyGreed]

115. People are sick of

crony capitalism, the rich getting richer and large corporations telling us who will be the next POTUS. Occupy being pepper sprayed, spied on and jailed for protesting greed. Of course people get a little cranky when year after their voices are not heard nor respected. I can't blame the kids at all.

[BlueCaliDem]

116. I completely understand that.

But it doesn't negate the fact that Sanders supporters are attacking Hillary Clinton while their candidate stands idly by and says nothing, therefore, approving of those attacks that are happening right in front of him.

[mhatrw]

133. Why won't Hillary Clinton come DU to rein in her supporters here!

Since she has yet to disown them, she obviously must approve of every post made here by her supporters!

[Armstead]

138. Double Plus One

[BlueCaliDem]

140. Hillary Clinton supporters aren't being belligerent. Not by a LONG shot.

If their posts get testy, perhaps you should read the post they're responding to. It would help clarify their upset behavior.

However, Sanders really needs to step up and tell his supporters to stop attacking his opponent if he's truly sincere about running "a clean campaign". That strategy is currently failing, by the way, as he gets more antagonistic in tone.

[mhatrw]

141. LOL. There is no double standard because Clinton and her supporters are all saints!

[frylock]

144. Sure, okay. Let's see some examples then..

if the unprovoked attacks by Sanders supporters are so prevalent here, it should only be a matter of minutes for you to scare up a few threads to support your argument.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. Please bookmark this post...

I was right about

-Joe Biden not running
-Hillary Clinton would win the debate
-Hillary Clinton would get a bump in the polls as a consequence of winning the debate
-Hillary Clinton would come out of the Benghazi Committee hearing smelling like a rose.


Here is another prediction... The only thing an attack by a Democrat on Hillary Clinton will result in is his or her defeat.

[sufrommich]

4. I agree. nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. Here is another prediction...This one is for Mr. H.A. Goodman

-Donald trump will be out of the race by the SEC Primary if not before.

[sufrommich]

7. I would not be surprised if The Donald's ego forces him to run

3rd party.

[MADem]

143. Has he crossed the Rubicon on that score, yet?

I think many states will not allow you to run third party if you've filed to appear on a primary ballot.

It's a anti-spoilers spoil, if you will. Ohio has a sore loser law, I think other states do as well.

[pinebox]

48. Not with numbers like this however

AP-GfK Poll: Republicans view Donald Trump as most electable
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20151025/us-ap-poll-gop-2016-27a80beeda.html
WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican voters view Donald Trump as their strongest general election candidate, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll that highlights the sharp contrast between the party's voters and its top professionals regarding the billionaire businessman's ultimate political strength.
Seven in 10 Republican and Republican-leaning registered voters say Trump could win in November 2016 if he is nominated, and that's the most who say so of any candidate. By comparison, 6 in 10 say the same for retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson, who, like Trump, has tapped into the powerful wave of antiestablishment anger defining the early phases of the 2016 contest.
"It's the lifelong establishment politicians on both sides that rub me the wrong way," said registered Republican Joe Selig, a 60-year-old carpenter from Vallejo, California. "I think Trump is more electable. He's strong. We need strength these days."

[DemocratSinceBirth]

50. Well, my post is bookmarked./nt

[pinebox]

53. We'll see but

I would be skeptical because I don't think the GOP wants to see a mass exodus from its party and that's what would happen.

[BlueCaliDem]

60. Nah. Liberals fall in love. Righties fall in line. Righties hated Romney, but they fell in line

behind him in the G.E. and still helped to give him 47% of the popular vote. But with the lack of Black and Hispanic/Latino voters, Romney couldn't win from President Obama who got the lion's share. This is a good lesson for Sanders to take.

[pinebox]

119. I'm not so sure about that

Libs tend to fall in line as well. Gore, Kerry and Dean.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

64. He already lost his lead in IA

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ia/iowa_republican_presidential_caucus-3194.html



His nat'l lead is getting smaller:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html


His campaign is largely predicated on the fact that he is leading in the polls...Once he loses his lead in the polls he will lose his major talking point and his descent into the abyss will be precipitous. That's why smart politicians don't obsessively cite the polls like Trump does.

[UglyGreed]

6. Well when you have

the Corporate media doing your bidding it is not to hard to have others do the dirty work.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. The corporate media didn't give Hillary Clinton a spine of steel.

That is something you are born with and hone.

[UglyGreed]

15. Spine steel

like telling Wall Street to behave indeed!!!!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. When she is POTUS she will bring them to heed and bend them to her iron will./nt

[UglyGreed]

21. I really just

laughed out loud, nearly popped my stitches from the gall bladder surgery I had last week. Which of course I'm dreading the bill that will be coming in the mail even though we have insurance. Wish there was candidate that would help reign in healthcare costs and join other nations in providing healthcare for all.......

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. Wow... A buddy had it recently...

Watch out for fatty foods though he says he can still eat them in moderation.

[UglyGreed]

112. Thanks I have been

known to enjoy a slice of bacon or two. I guess those days are over. Had no idea until I suffered a attack last week. hope your buddy is doing OK.

[PatrickforO]

65. That's Bernie, because he wants Medicare for all Americans

Still have to get supplemental insurance and all that, but much better than the shitty, rationed healthcare most of us have. Hope you're feeling better! And try not to laugh too much...

[UglyGreed]

114. Thank you

and keep up the good fight. Like the late great Yogi use to say, it ain't over till it's over.

[SammyWinstonJack]

102. Yeah so did I LOL. Hillary going after Wall Street is LOL

funny.

[UglyGreed]

113. At least I was not the

only one to see the humor in that statement.

[truebrit71]

38. That's fucking funny!!!

Right after she cashes their checks, yes?

Fucking classic!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

44. Another testament to her tactical brilliance. She will take their money and do what she wants.

eom

[BlueCaliDem]

72. Sanders supporters don't seem to understand that savvy tactic.

They must've missed how President Obama, the beneficiary of the largest amount of cash from Wall Street in 2008, used their money to win and then turned around and helped set up the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau when he was elected, or how he turned TARP money into loans rather than a freebee giveaway, or how he had pushed to ensure that no bank could cash in on TARP money and disperse it as bonuses until those loans were paid up.

On the other hand, in 1990, as Bernie Sanders ran against a sitting Democrat (Peter Smith) who had flipped his position on "NO GUN CONTROL" to "sensible gun laws", the NRA spent about $18,000- $20,000 in Vermont against the Democrat Sanders was running against. When Sanders won the election, he voted against the Brady Bill FIVE TIMES; voted against a bill banning weapons on AMTRAK; voted against a bill that would've held gun manufacturers legally accountable, giving them legal protection NO OTHER company in America enjoys. They got a LOT for their $18,000-$20,000, didn't they?

Oh, and he's got an NRA D-rating while Hillary Clinton and Martin O'Malley got bold F's.

I'll trust any Democrat with an NRA F-rating over anyone with a D-rating, anyday.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

83. I am in Los Angeles, Woodland Hills to be precise...

Do you believe if Senator Sanders represented an urban or suburban Los Angeles congressional district instead of a rural Vermont congressional district he would have voted against the Brady Bill and for gun manufacturer immunity?

Seems like his commitment to progressive principles is,shall we say,flexible and case specific.


Oh, look at the big money contributions to HRC as a form of penance like Mafia figures contributing to their local parishes with the hope it will get them into Heaven. It won't.

[BlueCaliDem]

98. I'm in San Berdo County, North Fontana, to be precise; a district that was pretty red

but turning blue in the past four years.

Do you believe if Senator Sanders represented an urban or suburban Los Angeles congressional district instead of a rural Vermont congressional district he would have voted against the Brady Bill and for gun manufacturer immunity?

Not if getting reelected is more important than staunchly standing on one's principle, he wouldn't, which makes him no different than any other politician despite his claim to 'stand on principles'.

Seems like his commitment to progressive principles is,shall we say,flexible and case specific.

Yep. Totally.

Oh, look at the big money contributions to HRC as a form of penance like Mafia figures contributing to their local parishes with the hope it will get them into Heaven. It won't.

Or look at it that they know she'll be the Democratic nominee and she'll win the G.E. against Republicans. These big money donors don't back a losing candidacy.

To note, even though Hillary Clinton has fought against Big Pharma ever since they killed her healthcare reform bill in 1993 (and royally pissed her off), she tops the 2016 field in industry drug donations at $164,315. Why? Because they know she'll win the nomination and the G.E. and Big Pharma knows she's coming for them so they wanna play nice in the hope she'll go easy on them.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

104. I will tell you an interesting story...

Let me preface my remarks by saying I appreciate the work the Kennedys have done for our party and nation. John and Robert Kennedy are two of my heroes but they were politicians and not cardboard saints as was their brother, Ted.

One time I was having a discussion in the mid 80s with a grad school teacher of mine about Ted Kennedy and what a progressive politician he was and how brave his stances were... He was a garden variety liberal so it wasn't as if he was unsympathetic to Ted Kennedy...He asked me if I could name an issue where he differed from his Bay State constituents and would risk his electoral viability on. I really couldn't think of one.


That doesn't make him a bad guy...It makes him a politician...Bernie, Martin, and Hillary are politicians too...

[BlueCaliDem]

106. Point well taken, DSB. eom

[ejbr]

100. Yes, and Obama threw all those bankers

who wrecked the economy right in jail! Oh, wait...

[BlueCaliDem]

105. Yeah, because that would be so constructive to get the failing economy going again.

New laws enacted by a Republican Congress and signed into law by a Republican president prohibited Obama's Admin from doing all those perp-walks you appear to have wanted to see. Where they have broken the law, they've been prosecuted and sent to prison. Under Obama's Admin, they also enacted the Dodd-Frank Act.

To make sure that a crisis like this never happens again, President Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act into law. The most far reaching Wall Street reform in history, Dodd-Frank will prevent the excessive risk-taking that led to the financial crisis. The law also provides common-sense protections for American families, creating new consumer watchdog to prevent mortgage companies and pay-day lenders from exploiting consumers. These new rules will build a safer, more stable financial system—one that provides a robust foundation for lasting economic growth and job creation.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/economy/middle-class/dodd-frank-wall-street-reform

If you believe Dodd-Frank isn't significant, judge its significance to the rabid attempts by Republicans to repeal it.

[ejbr]

109. Some disagree

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/columnist/2015/08/18/delamaide-obama-banks/31939695/

As President Barack Obama burnishes his political legacy and lays the plans for a billion-dollar monument to himself, it is important to remember some of the administration's failures, and this is one of them. Ultimately, the responsibility for this dereliction of duty lies with him.

The legacy of this failure is a gigantic moral hazard. Bankers used to take it on faith that they were immune to prosecution. Now they know it is a fact, and that will embolden them in the future to once again violate the law with impunity.

[ejbr]

99. Let us pray...

[NorthCarolina]

32. ...

I imagine she chastised them kind of like this.

[Armstead]

24. Well I hope Bernie's rather mild coments are not what supporters consider as an "attack"

He didn't even fleck at Hillary's "spine of steel" by pointing out the differences withoout even mentioning her name.

If that is considered an "attack" then her supporters don't seem to have much faith in that invulnerable steel internal infrastructure.

[SusanCalvin]

69. Really. *What* "attack"? nt

[tularetom]

39. A "spine of steel"???!?

That "spine of steel" melts pretty quick when it comes to standing up to the Pentagon, the CIA or Goldman Sachs.

"Spine of steel"! Oh jesus thats funny.

[lewebley3]

71. Agreed! DemocratsSinceBirth: Hillary is her own person

[Rosa Luxemburg]

126. The spine of steel wasn't there on the Iraq war vote

It must have melted on a few issues?

[JaneyVee]

34. You think corporate media has Hillary's back???

Where have you been for the past 25 years?

[retrowire]

42. on CNN's Facebook page post debate. :) n/t

[JaneyVee]

43. Good thing you added a smiley face, I thought you were serious.

[retrowire]

62. no! nothing serious

about a corporation that actively scrubs pro bernie comments and anti Hillary comments from their Facebook!

nothing serious about a corporation that funds your candidate actively controlling and suppressing freedom of information!

you must have thought I was talking about those polls huh?

be careful who you vote for. that is, unless you approve of Orwellian information control in support of a big money candidate. lmao

but anything necessary right? keep buying those twitter followers Hillary!

all this fakeness and people wonder why the public can't trust her. then we wonder why you do.

[bravenak]

8. I will bookmark this.

[onehandle]

12. Good thing no Democrat has attacked her.

You are right about an attack by a Democrat on Hillary resulting in their defeat.

If Democrat Martin O'Malley attacks her, and I mean a substantial attack, not just politicking, his chances for VP are over.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. I like M O M and his supporters./nt

[Baitball Blogger]

17. It's not an attack if he sticks to the facts.

We know mudslinging when we see it, but a politician's public record is fair game.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. I stand by my post

However you, him, and his supporters choose to characterize it reeks of desperation and will only hasten his demise.

[Baitball Blogger]

27. I don't mean to be difficult, but, the voters lose if the primary is a lovefest.

We need to vote, not based on what people look like, but on the issues. And how can we tell the difference between the two if they don't advocate their positions by explaining their political differences?

That's like buying a car without checking the spec sheet.

Whatever Bernie brings up is going to be tame compared to what the Republicans plan to do to Hillary in the General. And best of all for you, Bernie is to the left of Hillary so whatever he says is not something the Republicans can use, anyways.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

33. I tend to view a candidate's evolution/conversion on the issues from a Christian perspective.

I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent.

-Luke 15;7

I tell you that in the same way there is more rejoicing in the heart of DemocratSinceBirth over one person who agrees with me after disagreeing with me than over ninety nine people agreeing with me who agreed with me all the time.

Or as David Axelrod so cogently said "folks don't care if you're flip flopping as long as you're flopping in their direction."

I would also add that politicians tend to heed to the concerns of their constituents, hence the Vermont senator voting against the Brady Bill and for gun manufacturer immunity.

[Baitball Blogger]

40. If you don't like flip-floppers, brace yourself if Hillary wins.

Most of us seem to know what triangulation is all about. Triangulation is telling your constituents that you're a Democrat during election time, and then voting with Republicans on financial issues if you get elected.

And, the biblical rule for politicians is do unto others as they do unto you:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141241655

[DemocratSinceBirth]

46. Not a huge fan of flip floppers but I make a dispensation for those who flop in my direction./nt

[Baitball Blogger]

59. At least you admit it.

[truebrit71]

41. Ah, now that makes sense...

...

[AlbertCat]

87. reeks of desperation

If telling the truth is "reeking of desperation".

Here's real desperation:

"he said I shouted... that's misogynist!"

[DemocratSinceBirth]

91. Albert, you are allowed to demur from my characterization. I prefer to stand by it.

It's called an exchange.

Maybe in your rarefied milieu you have the last word but this isn't your rarefied milieu.

[AlbertCat]

120. Albert, you are allowed to demur from...

Excuse me, but I don't need you permission to do anything.


"but this isn't your rarefied milieu. "

Neither is it yours, Dear.

Besides, I thought DU was supposed to be overrun with Sanders supporters.... or something... so it's not rarefied, now is it.

Everything Sanders has said about Clinton is demonstratively true.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

121. Albert, I respectfully submit reading comprehension is not your forte.

Please carefully read what I wrote and then respond.

I will you throw you a lifeline...When one quotes somebody and omits the full quote one should use ellipsis points to indicate part of the quote was omitted. By not quoting me in entirety you misinterpreted what I had to say.


Then we can address you and the septuagenarian senator's remarks about Madame Secretary.


Thank you in advance.

[AlbertCat]

122. Stop being so condescending.

My punctuation is not what's wrong here.

Your looking down your nose is. I understood every ridiculous thing you said.

Stop pretending you want an adult conversation. You don't.

Again.... everything Sanders has said about that weathervane Clinton is true... and verifiable.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

123. I am not being condescending, Albert...

I am not being condescending, Albert, just deflecting your attacks on me and Madame Secretary with the grace she would.

[AlbertCat]

124. I am not being condescending, Albert...

Now you're just lying.


Go to the Hillary Group. You'll be safe there.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

125. The irony is I have never posted there:

The irony is I have never posted there:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=128959

No need for DemocratsInceBirth to seek a safe environment, Albert, as it was from the most unrarefied[ environment from which he came.

[Goblinmonger]

129. You might want to clean up your own punctuation mistakes

before you point out the sliver in someone else's eye.

And in case you are wondering:
1. That is not the correct use of the ellipsis points after lifeline.
2. You need a comma after "full quote."
3. You need a comma after "entirety."

[DemocratSinceBirth]

132. I was merely pointing out that the omission of ellipsis points in my quote...

I was merely pointing out that the omission of ellipsis points where I was quoted resulted in the misrepresentation of what I said. That was the horror, not the pointing out of picayune grammatical errors. I couldn't care less about period or comma placement but I want to be quoted correctly...That's how we roll in America.



If you are going to not quote someone directly the intellectually honest thing to do is to include ellipsis points to indicate the person wasn't quoted in his or her entirety. My intent was not to be some board pedant and point out picayune grammatical errors. I want to be quoted correctly.

[workinclasszero]

22. You are right...

...again.

[stonecutter357]

55. +1

[PatrynXX]

57. except she didn't win the debate but other than that

would seem so although conservatives are starting to find things in that hearing.

as for Attacking another Democrat thats Hillary's job so far. zzzzz quit making up stuff work for CNN?

[INdemo]

61. So its ok for Hillary to attack Bernie Sanders with

a ridiculous notion that Bernie attacked her during the debate but how dare Bernie Sanders attack Hillary on real issues.
Hillary Clinton is following her corporate script and will only go so far with her rethoric as what her Wall St money bags will allow.
This article was based on the premise that its OK for Hillary to attack but "how dare you Bernie Sanders"

Bernie Sanders is absolutely correct. Hillary Clinton will change on the issues like lo/high tides.That is not an attack.

This reminds me of George W. Bush,he would change his stance on issues from city to city and he was criticized
for that heavily.But its different with Hillary

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251723110

[Smarmie Doofus]

3. +1. By defining Clinton, he defines himself.

Isn't that what these things ( political campaigns) are supposed to be about?

Time for some substantive debate.

(That said: "attack" is a media word. "Horserace" stuff. Which i will trust the senator to avoid.)

[wyldwolf]

9. After claiming all summer he wouldn't.

[Baitball Blogger]

18. Hillary can take it.

I'm sure there will be more than a few who will step up and say something if he steers away from fair game. If there really is something we should hear, might as well clear that hurdle during the primaries, and not when she's up against a Republican in the General.

[Omaha Steve]

47. But when Hillary did the same thing Friday night not a word from the Hillary camp

IF you think that Bernie last night was an attack, then so is what Hillary did Friday night!

In LBN Friday night: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1241655

Source: Time

Hillary Clinton sharpened her attacks against Bernie Sanders Friday as her campaign gains confidence, criticizing his gun control record and subtly accusing him of making a sexist remark in the recent debate. During a sunny campaign event in Alexandria, Virginia, on Friday, Clinton apparently referred to a moment in the Democratic debate when Sanders said that “all the shouting in the world” will not improve gun laws.

“I’ve been told to stop shouting about guns,” Clinton said to cheers. “Actually I haven’t been shouting, but sometimes when a woman talks, some people think it’s shouting!”

She used the same line earlier in the day at the Democratic National Committee’s Women’s Leadership Forum. Friday was the first time Clinton has implied Sanders showed sexism in the Democratic debate by remonstrating Clinton for raising her voice. (Sanders also said in the debate in response to former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley that “we can raise our voices.”)

...

Gun control is one of the few issues where Clinton is further to the left than Sanders, and it is an issue she believes will help her win over the Democratic base. One of her strongest moments during the debate last week came when host Anderson Cooper asked Clinton whether Sanders is strong enough of on gun control. “No,” Clinton said in the debate, “not at all.”

Read more: http://time.com/4085578/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-sexism/

[Baitball Blogger]

56. Yup. I saw that.

Bernie has to explain why he's willing to seek solutions through socialist-style programs. He can't do that without explaining the detrimental effects that free market methods have had on the life savings of hard working, ordinary people. People in the financial industry knew what it would mean. They knew that people are not going to be able to retire at the age of 70 because of the kind of programs that Hillary would have supported, and will probably support if she gets elected.

I don't understand what these triangulators are thinking. The savings accounts have been pilfered. There is nothing safe about being an American anymore, so people are cannibalizing their own communities to try to score the big one. She must be so disconnected from ordinary people that she can't see how our communities are virtually imploding.

[BlueCaliDem]

76. Has Hillary promised, publicly and ad nauseam, that she wouldn't go negative on her opponent?

I must've missed it if she had. If she hadn't, you're comparing apples to oranges because Sanders has promised he wouldn't.

And he's kept his promise so far, but his supporters are doing the dirty work for him.

Sanders claimed he wouldn't campaign negatively (and knowing Hillary's penchant for hitting back hard, that was a smart thing to say) but he doesn't even try to stop his supporters from attacking her on blogs, websites, Democratic communities online, liberal blogs, news comments sections, and rallies (as the article of the OP's link shows). That's what I call, having his cake and eating it, too, and I find that disingenuous of him.

[Omaha Steve]

78. So Hillary didn't promise to not attack, so her comments are OK???

Since you don't address her comments from the night before, I want to be sure that is what you just said.

[BlueCaliDem]

79. No. I'm pointing out your comparing apples to oranges.

I thought I made that clear?

[Omaha Steve]

82. So were Hillary's comments Friday of the same type NOT AN ATTACK?

They read the same to me. IF one is an attack, so is the other.

[BlueCaliDem]

86. I don't know. I haven't heard them. eom

[Omaha Steve]

93. Reply # 47 above Hillary Clinton sharpened her attacks against Bernie Sanders Friday

IF you think that Bernie last night was an attack, then so is what Hillary did Friday night!

In LBN Friday night: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1241655

Source: Time

Hillary Clinton sharpened her attacks against Bernie Sanders Friday as her campaign gains confidence, criticizing his gun control record and subtly accusing him of making a sexist remark in the recent debate. During a sunny campaign event in Alexandria, Virginia, on Friday, Clinton apparently referred to a moment in the Democratic debate when Sanders said that “all the shouting in the world” will not improve gun laws.

“I’ve been told to stop shouting about guns,” Clinton said to cheers. “Actually I haven’t been shouting, but sometimes when a woman talks, some people think it’s shouting!”

She used the same line earlier in the day at the Democratic National Committee’s Women’s Leadership Forum. Friday was the first time Clinton has implied Sanders showed sexism in the Democratic debate by remonstrating Clinton for raising her voice. (Sanders also said in the debate in response to former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley that “we can raise our voices.”)

...

Gun control is one of the few issues where Clinton is further to the left than Sanders, and it is an issue she believes will help her win over the Democratic base. One of her strongest moments during the debate last week came when host Anderson Cooper asked Clinton whether Sanders is strong enough of on gun control. “No,” Clinton said in the debate, “not at all.”

Read more: http://time.com/4085578/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-sexism/

[BlueCaliDem]

103. Those weren't attacks. She was pointing out facts - facts Sanders hopes to hide.

It's what Sanders has been doing, too - pointing out facts, not personally (he's too smart to do that) attacking her or anyone else.

But believe me, when Hillary actually does have a reason to go negative on Sanders, no person on this Earth will miss it.

As I've stated in my post, the one you've responded to, Sanders has NOT gone negative on Hillary Clinton despite the OP's headline. His supporters are an entirely different issue. They have done nothing BUT attack, here and on every blog where they can leave a comment. It was Howard Dean who pointed this out a week or so ago.

Sanders supporters are doing his dirty work for him. The fact that he's yet to rebuke them for it tells me he agrees with it. This way, he can have his cake and eat it, too: play statesman and above the fray while watching his supporters go after Hillary Clinton in an attempt to take her down - and that speaks of a disingenuousness character flaw that I can never support.

[Omaha Steve]

108. Sorry

I'm involved in several threads and got lost.

Hillary has a lot to hide as she evolves too.

[BlueCaliDem]

111. An honest mistake. :-)

Hillary has a lot to hide as she evolves too.

If that's the case, she'll be exposed by tens of millions of dollars of Republican attack ads soon enough.

[Bohemianwriter]

90. Not only does she goe dirty....

She has a super PAC with the founder of MM to do it for her as well.

She is as dishonest as they come.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. Well, Tad Devine's "strategery" worked so well for Al Gore...

I particularly enjoyed Senator Sanders' ham handed paean to President Obama last night after doing everything possible to disassociate himself from his legacy.

[Baitball Blogger]

29. Politicians are supposed to talk issues.

I wish we could comb through Gore's debating performance. For one thing, it was not wise to walk up to Bush and appear to bully him when Bush was speaking. Where did that come from?

But, we want to hear about the issues. Hillary has proven time and time again that she can handle pressure, but what about the issues? Can she relate to the plight of ordinary people as well as she can take on a room full of grumpy old men? Does she understand the grief she creates to ordinary people when she makes it easier for banks to take their life savings and get away with it?

These are the things we want to hear about.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. Perhaps from Tad Devine

I wish we could comb through Gore's debating performance. For one thing, it was not wise to walk up to Bush and appear to bully him when Bush was speaking. Where did that come from?

Perhaps from Tad Devine who was one of his senior strategists.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

127. No personal attacks only on issues - that's what he said

[Thinkingabout]

10. He has been on the attack before, it will not get him votes, it will show he is capable of "change",

a sign of he is having issues with the ability of Hillary on the debate stage, her ability to testify over a period of eleven hours, ability of putting important issues on the front.

[restorefreedom]

13. telling the truth about differences in policy is not an attack

msm is trying to stir the pot and get readers/viewers. anything to increase the drama. this morning Jake Tapper was continually trying to goad Bernie into saying something negative about Clinton by talking about the shouting comment hillary made. he basically laughed it off and stuck to the policy issue and repeated that he has known Clinton for a long time and respects her but they have different opinions. he has not changed one bit in his approach to this campaign.. People really have to stop getting information from MSM its poison.

[Ed Suspicious]

28. This. He was in no way on the attack. More horse-race journalism.

[restorefreedom]

92. i wish we could get the word out more

to stay away,from m$m....they are only in it to make money and keep their corporate owned candidates. they stopped looking for truth a long time ago. m$m has become a toxic presence that is only out to screw with people and influence elections

in other words, they are scum.

[emulatorloo]

36. Agreed. MSM is notorious for this. Bottom line is increasing ad revenue.

You are right, this is all about manufacturing drama for ratings. The higher yr ratings, the more money you can charge for ad time.

[restorefreedom]

89. they are so sleazy they don't even hide it anymore. nt

[emulatorloo]

94. IMHO Politico is especially egregious

Some how I missed politico was the source of the article until now.

[restorefreedom]

96. politico...blec. wapo too now..i get most info online..ring of fire, ed, and the young turks

a lot of the rest is pure garbage hype

[workinclasszero]

19. Men yelling at Hillary for 11 hours increased her popularity immensely

Go on the attack Bernie, its a sign your campaign is a fail and it will get you nowhere.

[Armstead]

26. Men and Women Yelling at Hillary

yo conveniently overlooked that some of the harshest criticisms and pointed exchanges in that panel came from its women GOP members

[BlueCaliDem]

85. No. The hashest bullying came from Gowdy, Pompeo, Jordan, and Roskam...

and last I looked, they were White males.

The women were subdued compared to them in tone and criticism...and when it comes to Roby, in intelligence as well.

[azmom]

30. #hellno we don't want Hillary.

Bernie voted the correct way when it really mattered.

Give her hell Bernie! The Revolution starts Now.

[Armstead]

31. That was an "attack"?!?

That was lukewarm comparing.

Geeze if people think that was an "attack" then they might rethink their contradictory position that she is the only candidate capable of standing up to the GOP.

[stupidicus]

49. sad, ain't they?

like with rightwingers, they seem to have a need that's satisfied with efforts like this -- keep the troops simmering so that they might boil over with little effort, and irrationally, when the need arises.

that contradictions arise is the least of their concerns, because they also share the "the ends justify the means" rationale...

[BlueCaliDem]

37. I'm certain Hillary Clinton welcomes Sanders' attacks just as she had the Republicans' attacks.

And we saw what she did to them when they did.

GO BERNIE!

[stupidicus]

45. good for him. Comparing and contrasting their records is sure to

get her minions boiling over/poutraging.

He should, and perhaps may eventually given that he'll be charged as guilty for such "incivility" crimes whether he's innocent or not by the Hillary henchman, give her something more akin to this treatment of her rightwing cousins. http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/10/25/bernie-crushes-the-gop-with-his-latest-republican-amnesia-speech-funny-because-its-true-video/

[99Forever]

51. Sighting her record is not an attack. It's called honesty.

If she can't stand what her record says about her, she should have behaved differently. And I could give a flying turd if she or her supporters like it or whine about it.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

136. Her voting record and her stances are well-documented

Bernie was merely pointing out differences. He didn't even name names.

[pinebox]

52. Good.

We can start with sniper fire and Chelsea jogging around the WTC on 9/11 and go from there. There's more ammo to show and prove she's disingenuous than should be allowed by law.

[MohRokTah]

54. So Sanders is a liar now.

HE promised he would not attack his opponent.

He lied.

[stonecutter357]

66. You are going to get a stern talking to, a hide even?

[MohRokTah]

68. Hiding for a legitimate criticism?

That's typical for what BU has become.

[Larkspur]

67. B.S. on your insipid logic

Attaching Hillary's record and position on issues is a FAIR attack, not a personal attack.

[MohRokTah]

73. The surest sign of a losing campaign.

The campaign promises no attacks, just talk about their positions on policies...

Then when they are losing miserably, they go negative.

Yep, Sanders is toast, and he knows it.

[Larkspur]

110. Wrong again. Bernie never said that he would be a welcome mat for the Clinton campaign

And it was Hillary who called Bernie a sexist. So are you and the Hillary camp projecting a Hillary loss?

[MohRokTah]

117. Defend him al you want.

It's a lie that Hillary called him a sexist. You cannot provide a link to Hillary EVER calling Sanders a sexist.

Sanders is a liar. This is now undeniable.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

130. Politico sensationalized the headline.

[MohRokTah]

131. IT was an honest assessment. eom

[Spitfire of ATJ]

135. LOL!!! Suuuure it was.

[Larkspur]

63. Good he is doing this but

Bernie should have qualified his support for Hillary over her emails at the debates with a strike at her recent flip-flop on TPP and Keystoner XL pipeline. That was a missed opportunity for him. Nice guys finish last, especially in American national politics.

Hillary had a great PR week aided and abetted by the clownish House Republicans.
Fortunately for Bernie, election campaigns are marathons and not sprints.

Bernie will withstand this Hillary PR hurricane and needs to bring the primary debate back to the issues and attack her flip-flops on key issues, like TPP and Keystone and on her sudden conversion to calling herself a progressive, when weeks before the debate she proudly called herself a moderate. Hillary is triangulating and she needs to be called out on it.

Regarding the Honduran ousted leaders description of Hillary, the first words that popped into my mind were "Lanny Davis" -- Lanny Davis, Hillary and support for the Coup in Honduras

Lanny Davis is a scumbag and Hillary and Bill seem to like to swim with those kinds of people.

[Fred Sanders]

70. If Politico says it's an attack then it must be so!?? All sides.....you are all being played.

[AlbertCat]

84. fueled by her strong performance at the first Democratic debate earlier this month

I don't think this is true.

It was fueled by the fact she suffered fools for 11 hours.... since Sanders obviously "won" the debate.

He's not "giving her hell"...he's just pointing out how she constantly changes positions to suit her ambitions... which she does.


For instance, she's mentioning BLM now because she got called out on not doing so in the debate.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

142. O'Malley just pointed out how she changes her positions - tonight on MSNBC

[Fawke Em]

95. Comparing records isn't an "attack."

It's... comparing records.

An attack is if he'd said she's a big poopey head who wears Underroos.

[senz]

107. + 1000

This OP (by someone who calls themself a Bernie supporter) is an attack on Bernie and an attempt to prevent him from making further comparisons with his opponent.

[Oilwellian]

97. I can understand why citing Hillary's record is considered an attack

It's basically admitting her record doesn't paint her in a very good light.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

128. Voters need to be reminded

[Eric J in MN]

101. Sanders has contrasted their records before.

As he should.

[mhatrw]

134. Clinton attacks Sanders' record on gun control. Crickets.

Sanders contrasts his consistent voting record and policy stances with the ever evolving records and stances of unnamed others.

"Oh my God! Sanders is on the scorched earth warpath!"

[olddots]

137. "Down Goes Forman "

Down goes politico , The Hill ,and all the lame stream newsey news sources .

[treestar]

139. He admits he would do what he wants regardless of what the People want:

“I promise you tonight as your president I will govern based on principle not poll numbers,” he said, echoing the 2007 speech here by Obama, who also drew a distinction with Clinton and said he would govern “not by polls, but by principle.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/clinton-iowa-215133#ixzz3pg0QdQkF