Insiders: Bad night for Bernie

[sufrommich]

Nearly half of Democrats surveyed said the Vermont senator lost the debate, and only 10 percent of Democrats said he won. Those insiders who said Sanders had the worst night argued that he appeared out of his depth on foreign policy a day after terrorist attacks rocked France. He spent just a few seconds addressing the matter in his opening statement before pivoting to his familiar pitch about the economy, in stark contrast to rival Hillary Clinton, a former secretary of state who devoted her entire statement to the Paris attacks.

“He made a mistake right off the bat in switching from Paris to the economy, and had an uneven performance,” a New Hampshire Democrat said.

"He was clearly not comfortable discussing detail on foreign policy matters," agreed another New Hampshire Democrat.

Others said the self-described democratic socialist made no effort to appeal to the broader Democratic Party, and reinforced perceptions Saturday night that he is unelectable.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/insiders-bad-night-for-bernie-215901#ixzz3rZAy7ooJ

[merrily]

1. Bernie: Senator Clinton voted for Iraq. Hillary: I've already said Iraq was a mistake.

Wait until that percolates down.

People don't have life or limbs or sanity now as a result of that mistake.

Unraveled the entire area. Wait until that percolates down.

Maybe a multi-casualty, multi-trillion dollar war doesn't mean much to some people on DU, but it means a lot on Main Street and to troops and their families and to veterans and their families. I think they will also agree that the area did unravel after Iraq. Doesn't matter if its causation or correlation. It happened and they know it.

O'Malley and Sanders both got Hillary on regime change, too. What happens the day after a dictator is removed was a good line.

And this is supposed to be her strength. Ability to rattle off facts is good in school. But if you make horrendous decisions with horrific consequences even though you can rattle off facts, what good is it? Impressing the Beltway?

Beltway, Wall Street Main Street. Of the three, Main Street has the most votes.

[Fred Sanders]

7. Factual grasp is kind of important in making the right decision. Look at Bush's "facts"!

Here is another fact - No one in America can touch Clinton on her foreign policy knowledge.

It is not just Sanders that will come in second to Clinton.

I prefer a ranking system rather than the preferred mass and social media desire to pick one winner and one loser.

1. O'M
2. Hillary
3. Sanders

I think they all had strong performances yet again, and the debate proved just how close they all really are on policy....proud of them all.

Debate 1

1. Clinton
2. Sanders
3. O'M

[merrily]

12. Not if you make horrific decisions despite your "factual grasp." The right decision matters, period.

It's not Junior year. You don't get part credit on a war vote or on the horrific consequences on regime change that was not handled properly.

And btw, the ability to rattle off facts does not equal "factual grasp." It equals memorization. That's good for a test or a debate, when you can't look at a computer or a book or phone a friend, but that's about it. In other circumstances, you can get the facts in seconds.

Besides, Sanders knows plenty of facts and so does O'Malley. It's a different style, that's all.

[Fred Sanders]

14. I am sorry to hear you do not value a President having a good grasp of facts.

At least having all the facts at your fingertips, as you admit Clinton has, would perhaps assist a teeny-tiny bit in making the right decision?

[merrily]

17. That's bs, Fred. You didn't hear that from me and you know it. What are you trying to prove?

How quickly you can twist my words?

would perhaps assist a teeny-tiny bit in making the right decision

Could have. Didn't. Iraq, Libya. Epic fails. There are others as well. Facts don't prevent poor judgment.

[Bluenorthwest]

55. Fred is among those who don't say what they mean about Bernie....

I offer for context this story about a Paris synagogue arson. Fred took great, great issue with the story...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026050140

[merrily]

64. Wow. Thank you. DU's right says criticism of Hillary's

record makes DU like FREEP. No, it doesn't. What makes DU like FREEP are things like anti-Semitism, the desire to silence legitimate political discussion, etc.

We saw very openly anti-Semitic posts in screen shots from the other site and we've been seeing them here as well, though, here, an effort is made to be more circumspect. Repugnant is an understatement. And when one stops to remember they are Democrats, the heart contracts and the spirit despairs.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027341056
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026050140

[arcane1]

106. The truth hurts! Here are the Jury results.

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Impugning the character of a fellow DUer. Implying said DUer is a freeper.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Nov 15, 2015, 08:40 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Get over yourself, alerter.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The alerter ahould be getting pizza
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

[merrily]

115. Thank you, arcane1. I knew before I hit Post My Reply that post would be

alerted on. I did not hesitate.

Who would want to be a board where that post got hidden, anyway?

Thank you, jury.

[arcane1]

118. And surely not the only one around here n/t

[KingCharlemagne]

70. He is supporting someone with the blood of a million innocent

People on her hands.

He will twist words just like Lady Macbeth tried to get rid of that damned spot. Didn't work for her and won't work for him or his chosen candidate.

[merrily]

75. The TV's been on while I've been posting. Sanders's comment on her war vote

and de-stabilization of the region seems to be the first sound bite people are playing. Perhaps the last minute decision to switch to foreign policy backfired.

I assure you, while the blood and treasure of that war may compress on DU to "one vote, fifteen years ago," Main Street will not see it that way. And certainly not when it's tied to increased terrorism.

[bread_and_roses]

96. It hasn't helped her much in the past, now, has it?

Iraq war exhibit #1 but then we could go on - to Wall Street, Welfare Deform - and on, and on ......

[Joe Turner]

51. You can have experience and knowledge

but it is irrelevant if you don't have character and judgement. That describes Hillary.

[Fred Sanders]

59. That does not describe Clinton but it does describe how the RW wants to describe Clinton.

[Joe Turner]

68. No that's how Progressives describe 3rd-Way democrats like Hillary

that are Republicans in disguise. And yes that does describe Clinton. Her and her husband consistently bend to the ideological wind of RW. It's all about power and whatever it takes to get there.

[Fred Sanders]

72. Interesting then how everyone else thinks Clinton has been moving to the left, not to the right?!

[zalinda]

94. She only moves to the left

when polls tell her to move to the left. We've noticed it takes about 10 days.

Z

[merrily]

116. Like that famous right wing site, Kos

[thebighobgoblin]

81. Remember another president who was against the Iraq war who has largely continued occupation?

Maybe talking about what you'd do and actually living the reality of being president are two entirely different things. I would rather have someone who is occasionally shifty and adapts to the real world than someone who foolishly clings on to an ideal and campaign pledges made without full knowledge of the situation.

[zalinda]

95. He campaigned on a lot of promises

many, many didn't come to pass. He catered to the left to get their votes, and then after elected, immediately turned right. Should we trust that she won't do the same thing? Sorry, fool me once.

Z

[thebighobgoblin]

107. Obama pivoted because he had to -- just like anyone would.

Sorry, but when you're president of the United States, you have to work out deals with other constituencies, not just the ones you like. That's not how it works.

[zalinda]

109. Except that he negotiated from the middle

Any one who has ever been successful at negotiation will tell you to NEVER negotiate from the middle. You ask for way more than what you want and then negotiate down. Obama never did this, which makes one wonder if it ended up exactly where he wanted it to end up, because he's not stupid.

Now, the TPP, is a total betrayal of the people of the United States, but he is pushing hard for it. And, don't get me started on H1-B visas and the raids of marijuana businesses instead of the crack down on the militarization of police. All of which, he wasn't forced to do.

Z

[Betty Karlson]

16. VERY good points. eom

[merrily]

19. Thank you. I appreciate it.

[brooklynite]

22. Clinton has already gone through an election where the Iraq vote was brought up...

...she got as many votes as Barack Obama.

[oasis]

120. John Kerry in 2004, when the IWR vote was fresh in the minds of Democrats.

This obsession with the IWR vote is limited to very few Democrats and will have no effect in the General Election.

[yardwork]

35. The US elected the Obama-Biden ticket twice, despite Biden's vote.

Among the population who realize that invading Iraq was a bad idea, virtually nobody thinks that the Senate vote had anything whatsoever to do with it. BushCo would have invaded anyway

[merrily]

37. Obama spoke out against that war. People don't vote for President based on a VP.

With McCain, the VP may have been a factor due to age, but not with Obama. Biden was much older than Obama.

[yardwork]

43. Obama spoke out against the war in 2008. He wasn't in the senate in 2003.

Nobody knows how he would have voted in 2003.

[merrily]

45. Wrong year, by a lot. If he had been a Senator at the time, I would have posted about

a vote, not a speech.

[KingCharlemagne]

76. Do you even bother to check facts before you post??? - nt

[BootinUp]

44. How many years

do you think it takes to percolate? MAYBE something hasn't percolated into YOUR consciousness? For example, after her 2008 campaign, she was made the Secretary of State. Further, she has been praised by many for the job she has done there. Currently, Democrats, are solidly behind her. People know the history, they are not stupid.

[merrily]

50. Oh, please. It's obvious I know she was Secretary of State. I was not impressed.

Neither were many others. As far as that on DU, mention something that went wrong then and her fans point out she was subordinate to Obama; the final decisions were his.

Yes, Democrats decided on a coronation this time. I've been posting that for maybe two years now. They and corporate media may get their way, which would be such a shame for democracy, or they may win the ugly game they've been playing. And? Either way, we'll soon see.

It's not going to be decided by you or any message board, that's for sure.

[olegramps]

77. Is this to become a one issue campaign analogous to the Republicans and abortion.

[thebighobgoblin]

79. It was also a mistake based in part on Bush's manipulation of intelligence

or did you forget that already? I was a critic of the mostly unilateral invasion then, too, but the context is important. She voted for the authorization, but left it to the intelligence and national security apparatus to deal with. There were no easy answers in 2003, just as there are no easy answers now.

[zalinda]

98. You don't vote to give any President

the authority to go to war. You lay out facts to Congress and get their approval for war. That had to have been the dumbest vote ever.

Even after a direct attack, some how we got it right in 1941.

"On December 8, 1941, the United States Congress declared war upon the Empire of Japan in response to its surprise attack on Pearl Harbor the prior day. It was formulated an hour after the Infamy Speech of US President Franklin D. Roosevelt."


Z

[merrily]

119. Damn! Is Bush running again?

There were no easy answers in 2003, just as there are no easy answers now.

Bull. Saddam was not Isis and 2003 was not today. He never attacked us. He even asked us before he moved on Kuwait. We said it's not our business; he went ahead--and Poppy still bombed him. He was not going to attack us.

She left it to the intelligence and national security apparatus to deal with

Bull. She didn't even bother to read the NIE. Besides, those are both Executive Branch. Not only does the Constitution say that only Congress has the power to declare (or authorize) war, but the Executive was Bush! Bush, who had stolen the election! Any Democratic politician who says now that they trusted Bushco then is not being truthful ior is not smart, even a little. Either way, shouldn't be President,

The easy answer in 2003 was the one every Democrat I knew IRL knew: Saddam had nothing to do with 911 and he was never going to attack the US. If she didn't know that, she shouldn't be President. If she knew that, but voted for war anyway, she shouldn't be President. Either way....

The easy answer was not to authorize Bush to wage war ever and most surely not before the inspectors finished.

[peacebird]

2. Clinton's invoking 9/11 to deflect away from her Wall$treet donations was a disaster

Sounds like she pulled a page from Rudy Guilliani's playbook there....

[merrily]

20. Rudy didn't say women.

[MissDeeds]

36. Or straight out of Rove's playbook n/t

[Weidman]

3. I think it is Clinton who had a very bad night last night.

Invoking 9/11 and pulling yet ANOTHER gender card to "defend" herself.

She's done.

[Betty Karlson]

18. It certainly doesn't inspire confidence. eom

[merrily]

23. If you're driving, don't make first woman President your drinking game meme.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. Welcome back to DU and may the rest of your life be the best of your life.

[oasis]

121. "She's done"???

[JaneyVee]

4. Wow. That poll has Hillary winning debate 77%.

[R B Garr]

5. Right off the top, he showed how limited and

out of his depth he was. The same rote talking points regurgitated about billionaires when he was asked about the terror attack. He diminished himself considerably.

[SusanCalvin]

63. I let out an audible gasp when he went back to a standard talking point.

That opening statement really threw me, and made me think that maybe there *was* consternation in the Bernie camp in general, not just that one aide's remark. And I'm a huge Bernie supporter.

[thebighobgoblin]

83. Bernie has no clue.

He immediately started talking about billionaires -- in a debate over foreign policy.

[Cha]

6. “He made a mistake right off the bat in switching from Paris to the economy, and had an uneven

performance,” a New Hampshire Democrat said."

His opening statement didn't go over with these NH Dems.

from your link..

"Focused entirely on his base which demands the pure," said an unaligned Iowa Democrat. "Worst answer: Asked directly how he would work with a GOP Congress, he argued that the Political Revolution would sweep aside all in its path.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/insiders-bad-night-for-bernie-215901#ixzz3rZFddBKv

Unreal. Thank you, su.

[mmonk]

8. What some see as factually correct others demean as "pure".

[Cha]

21. "Seventy-seven percent of Democratic insiders surveyed called Clinton the winner, saying that of

the three candidates on the stage, she showed the most presidential stature."

These Dems in NH get it.

Just go on being "pure" and avoid issues you don't want to talk about, Bernie. It's working so well.

[mmonk]

24. Have a nice day.

Ignorance isn't a trophy.

[jeepers]

93. ignorance is free

requires no work or effort.

[bravenak]

110. True. Ignorance of foreign policy can be a huge problem for a President.

Thank goodness Hillary showed them that a statesperson must be knowlegeable about current events and world affairs. He really made a blunder with his opening statement.

[haydukelives]

101. Seventy-seven percent of Democratic insiders

better cancel the primary, looks like its been decided for us.

[arcane1]

114. Some Dems say Clinton is inherently amoral.

[6chars]

34. the first answer was a mistake

[ismnotwasm]

9. This

The democratic socialist made no effort to appeal to the broader Democratic Party, and reinforced perceptions Saturday night that he is unelectable.
“Focused entirely on his base which demands the pure," said an unaligned Iowa Democrat. "Worst answer: Asked directly how he would work with a GOP Congress, he argued that the Political Revolution would sweep aside all in its path.”

Has been his major problem all along---widening his base is crucial for success, and I don't see him being unaware of this. It will be interesting to see how he reaches out.

[sufrommich]

15. Yep, I thought that explained his problem succinctly.nt

[tomp]

26. widening his base?

what is usually meant by this is moving to the right to pick up voters who have different ideas from his. I think Sanders wants to CONVINCE voters to change their ideas. I support this strategy. I certainly don't want him to move to the right to seem more like clinton to try to steal her votes. I want him to tell it like he sees it and hope voters respond. win or lose, he is making more progressive ideas part of the national debate. clinton is promoting the same old shit that IS the problem.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

42. ^^THIS!^^

[XemaSab]

84. Clinton is running for the 10th Reagan term

n/t

[Fred Sanders]

27. Sanders has to stop trying to widen his supporter base to include the extreme RW...he is predictably

losing liberals in droves with that strategy....he has to win the party nomination before trying that plan out!

O'M is doing it right....slow and steady....evolution over revolution....tortoise over hare.

[ismnotwasm]

38. Yes I agree with that

He apparently thinks appealing to a broad and diverse swath of Democratics is not worth his effort, concentrating on independents, 3rd party and disaffected votes from Democrats AND Republicans. I think he counted on enough toxic anger to carry him forward. I suspect he will change this approach if he's serious about winning the white house

[Fred Sanders]

39. Counting on anger....who does that? That is not an attractive election strategy to me.

[ismnotwasm]

86. No it is not

On the other hand, Sanders himself has called for an "army of millions" and revolutionary action--as though the voting bloc was monolithic, from ANY demographic. Even a healthy percentage of millenials like Donald Trump.

[MrMickeysMom]

80. Except that THIS is not what's happening...

He's convincing by informing the voters as we finally talk about the issues.

He's not pandering to the voters to entice the RW mentality (if there IS such a thing)

This is what informing the populous is supposed to do, Fred, in spite of your not wanting to see it that way.

It is that way.

[Android3.14]

10. She effed up

And people are starting to notice how the corporate media is fighting dirty to make it seem like she is inevitable.

[merrily]

25. I don't know. Are they? If so, great. Americans don't like a rigged game. I wish they knew about

the DNC, too.

[lanlady]

11. I have to agree

Bernie sounded like the proverbial broken record. And when is he ever going to give the specifics of his tax plan? Enough with the tease already! He's dangerously close to sounding like a crank. A good man, to be sure, but a crank.

[reformist2]

13. Un-believable. As in not believable. I think all media outlet "analysis" on the debates is suspect.

[merrily]

28. They probably started writing their analysis of the next debate last night.

After all, by the Saturday before Christmas, time is at a premium.

[DCBob]

30. Totally agree.

"He was clearly not comfortable discussing detail on foreign policy matters," agreed another New Hampshire Democrat.
Others said the self-described democratic socialist made no effort to appeal to the broader Democratic Party, and reinforced perceptions Saturday night that he is unelectable.

“Focused entirely on his base which demands the pure," said an unaligned Iowa Democrat. "Worst answer: Asked directly how he would work with a GOP Congress, he argued that the Political Revolution would sweep aside all in its path.”

[AlbertCat]

52. He was clearly not comfortable discussing detail on foreign policy matters,

Just another "Hey...she was SoS" reminder and nothing more.

Maybe President Sanders can appoint her again.

[bravenak]

111. He did so terribly, that is all she really needed to say.

[Vinca]

31. Isn't Politico nearly an arm of the Clinton campaign?

I don't think I've ever read anything from that site that couldn't be used in a Clinton campaign ad.

[INdemo]

74. The founding editors are very close to the Clintons

Jim VandeHei( good friend of Bill Clinton) and John Harris both worked for the WaPo.

Also Jim VandeHei pretty much an insider with the Republican Congress during the era of Tom Delay
John Harris was closely associated with the Clinton's during the mid-90's.
Hillary seems to have all her ducks in a row as far as Wall St,the Networks,the Corporate Mafia but the problem is they don't caucus or vote.

[thebighobgoblin]

87. None of that matters.

Nothing in the debate is changing opinions about the candidates substantially. I stopped watching the debate after 15 minutes and most people did unless they're pathologically addicted to watching people rattle off scripted answers to scripted and loaded questions.

Most people watch debates to see who looks 'presidential', to get a sense of how someone might look when they're giving press conferences in the West Wing. I can see Hillary giving press conferences in the West Wing. I could possibly see O'Malley doing that. I absolutely cannot -- not in a million years -- imagine Bernie Sanders setting foot in the White House. I actually do like Sanders a lot as a senator, but he's not presidential material.

The biggest danger threatening our democracy now is the American voter, many of whom on both sides are convinced that we need some sort of 'revolution' in order to make our democracy work better. We don't. What we need are our own virtues as citizens. We need laborers with a work ethic. We need families who manage their money better. We need executives with a conscience and who value things other than just money. We need shareholders who can see past the next earnings report and the next dividend. It starts with our own behavior first, and how we live our lives. But beyond that, in terms of our political discourse, we need to stop relying on Facebook chain mail, twitter posting (twitter trolling), and we need to get more civil. We need to get more educated, and more practical. We need to trust institutions and mechanisms that have worked in the past, but fail to work now because we don't maintain them.

[zalinda]

104. YOU may not need a revolution

but those of us at the bottom sure do. More and more we are becoming serfs. More and more people are doing gig jobs, because real jobs don't exist. A friend, just got 'laid off' again (after working months of overtime). He works on electronic systems and was assembling antennas for Verizon. It took him months to find that job. He has worked for 3 companies in the last 5 years that all went out of business.

I've been hearing about it over and over again at the food pantry and food bank, where people are scrambling to keep a roof over their heads.

Z

[INdemo]

108. This is your oppinion and millions of other voters will disagree with you

If Hillary was running for President of the United States because she wanted to make some real
changes in Washington and the rest of the Country,her criticisms would be quite different.and it would be much different with the liberal base.
But Hillary wants to be President because of the "power". She has wanted to be POTUS since the mid 90's
She has, along with her handlers, have been setting this up to become President for nearly 25 years.
Her loss in 2008 was was a shocker to her and she probably thought" that will never happen again"
Her strategy of setting up millions or should I say a billion dollar war chest is her priority to what she thinks will be a guaranteed
win. She will lie,she will buy media support and she will make promises to those that fund this life long dream and she believes she has this election in the bag because it is being bought for her and she probably thinks never mind the issues "i'll just wing it" as she tried to do in last nights debate.
If Hillary would refuse to take any PAC money,repay all of the PAC money she has accumulated and finance her campaign strictly with her voting public supporters then you know I might consider voting for her. How's that

[newfie11]

32. Bullshit nt

[Doubledee]

33. Hillary supporter grasps at straws, film at eleven

Sander's strengths are in the field of US economic weaknesses and reform, so that is where he sticks to speaking. This post, sorry t note, sounds like so much partisan sour grapes.

[Metric System]

40. He showed he's a one-issue candidate.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

41. What a load of crap! Bernie took Hillary's positions apart, piece by piece, like a skilled surgeon. Typical Politico tripe.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[mvd]

90. I thought he consistently showed Hillary's weaker positions on issues progressives..

care about most. Hillary was on the defensive much of the night. A Politico group of insiders isn't very convincing anyway. Did Sanders have a perfect night? Perhaps he went off Paris too quickly and should have apologized for his gun vote. But he was even better than the first debate! People who say he doesn't have knowledge of the issues just don't like his positions.

[AzDar]

46. Ell.Oh.Ell.

[perdita9]

47. I don't agree

And I watched the whole thing.

I thought all 3 candidates did well with serious questions from the moderators. I'd give Bernie the win for this one.

[SusanCalvin]

67. I gotta find it to watch again.

I found out the hard way I should not do tablet and substantive TV at the same time. I hated Bernie's opening remarks, but beyond that I have no idea.

[bahrbearian]

48. So are we going to let a bunch of "Insiders" choose our candidate, can't think for yourself?

[Helen Borg]

54. The "Insiders" know better, apparently

[DCBob]

69. I suspect they do..

If you read the article "insiders" refers to: "a bipartisan group of influential strategists, operatives and activists in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada".

[Jester Messiah]

58. Remember "superdelegates"?

So the answer to your question is "yeah, kinda." It's not cool at all.

[cantbeserious]

49. HRC - Neocon Enabler - Wall Street Sycophant - Member Of The 1% - Bernie Won The Debate

eom

[Harcourdt Fenton Mud]

53. The key word here is "insiders."

The "insiders" are in the tank for HRC. Does anyone really think that they would ever say that Bernie won?

[Jack Rabbit]

105. Welcome to DU, Harry

No, DWS and the other insiders -- all Republicans in Democrat's clothing, most crooked down to their socks -- would never say Bernie won, no matter how obviously he won.

A Democratic presidential candidate does not win a debate by declaring that she insn't influenced by the bribes generous campaign contributions she gets from Wall Street and then declare that Glass-Steagall doesn't need to be reinstated. The insiders may think she won, but for me its the point where I say:

Thank you for your interest in the open position, Madam Secretary.

Please don't call us. We'll call you.

[NorthCarolina]

56. "Insiders" striking a narative, hoping it sticks. eom

[DCBob]

66. Insiders refers to: "a bipartisan group of influential strategists, operatives and activists..

in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada".

[Persondem]

57. Clinton did well. K & R nt

[Bluenorthwest]

60. Insiders: If you are not one of us fuck you, you outsider.

That's why I love them so!!!!!!! That PPP poll they bought to enhance their bullshit just adds to the stench. Purely Prejudiced Polling.

[DCBob]

65. If you read the article..

Insiders refers to: "a bipartisan group of influential strategists, operatives and activists in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada".

[INdemo]

61. Of course.ABC,CBS,CNN NBC and even Faux had Hillary winning (early afternoon before Debate began)

ABC even had her winning the debate Friday afternoon commenting that foreign policy being a hands down win for her but in fact this is the topic that she got her _________________(cant be sexist here) on

Isn't Politico....known for bashing Democratic opponents and praising Republican candidates..check the history,I think so

[artislife]

62. Is this poll scientific enough for you?

[James48]

71. Bernine won hands down.

There isn't even a question.

[Bobbie Jo]

73. Ouch. nt

[thebighobgoblin]

78. Bernie's handling of questions raises huge red flags.

Can any of you who support Bernie imagine how his responses would have played out had this been a general election debate? Imagine him going up against Bush or God forbid, Cruz, and basically saying "Yes terrorists are bad but it's America's fault that we have terrorism in the first place."

Yeah, that would play well. He would surely clinch the general election and reassure everyone that he's fit to lead this country with that one.

Bernie voters can't accept the truth, but the fact is he would be an absolute disaster if he were to get into the national election.

[Fred Sanders]

82. Sanders did not say what you made up he said, "basically". But enjoy ripping into your strawman!

[ChiciB1]

85. As I Said Last Night & Just Posted Another Post Here...

I REALLY don't think what anyone of us thinks... Hillary was ALWAYS going to be the winner! Even when he had a good performance the first time, and people said he had a great performance the consensus ended up being that Hillary won.

Did people say what they said, could be. But Hillary made many comments that made my stomach churn. Even O'Malley gets NO recognition of any sort. Hillary could have said she wanted to go full force for 100,000 troops to be sent right away and I doubt this statement would have raised any problems.

It has saddened me and is very upsetting that it's come to this but at this moment in time I can only express how I feel. Im a Boomer and have seen many, many ups and downs that this country has fought for and stood tall for, but I don't think I ever experienced what I'm seeing now.

Even with all these odds and blocks in the way I will remain a Bernie supporter and will work for what I believe in. It's what I've always done and have to stay true to who I am. I don't feel Hillary's policies and what I feel she will do should she be elected will be best for this country. It's MORE OF THE SAME and it's hard for me to see how "more of the same" has fixed anything or WILL fix anything.

I AM very worried and have a lot of fear about where we're headed, but mostly I wonder how those of us who have lost so much and are struggling to make ends meet will find real answers.

JMHO

[Cha]

88. KICK!

[Demeter]

89. NO, it wasn't a bad night for Bernie

Bernie wasn't the one to flip out.

[PotatoChip]

91. The 'Politico Caucus' really seems to *love* their establishment candidates.

...On both sides of the aisle, and for many months now, apparently...

Based on what I'm seeing of these 'Politico Caucus' cited articles, the favorites appear to be Clinton and Rubio. But JEB! would probably have been acceptable too, had he gotten more traction.

To check them out, click on 'Politico Caucus' above the OP's linked article headline. -Or- just click here... http://www.politico.com/news/the-politico-caucus

Hmmm

[TwilightGardener]

99. Politico exists for hatchet jobs against anyone who threatens the status quo or is

an outsider. Gossipy crap that serves a larger agenda.

[SoapBox]

92. Nice try to put him in a negative spot.

...more spin.

And who tried to invoke 9/11?

[Robbins]

97. totaly bullcrap

bernie lost debate my ass.Clinton was terrable.

[NCjack]

102. Ultimately, when folks vote, they will think of their economic well-being and vote for Bernie. /nt

[ibegurpard]

100. Insiders?

And right there is Hillary's problem in a nutshell.

[raindaddy]

103. This poll is a pantload...

I don't know who these insiders are, but Hillary's tirade about 9/11 in connection to her receiving millions of dollars from Wall Street and the naive notion those favors aren't going to be returned was almost shocking....

But the strategy is clear.. Hold a limited number of debates at times the public won't see them and let the media regurgitate what ever BS they want...

[cantbeserious]

112. Six Questions

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251812060

[bravenak]

113. He did so bad. Terribly.

No ability to multi task. Just right into the stump speech.

[99Forever]

117. Fuck a whole bunch of "insiders."

That's the same fucking crowd that cheered Bush the War Criminal on.

[Cha]

122. HaHa! They can't handle the Iowa and NH Dems giving their views on the 2nd Debate!

[Cha]

123. And, why was bernie "caught flat footed".. his aide pitched a fit when he found out there were going

to talk about Paris. So he knew.. why didn't he prepare?

Circumstances change fast.. it's too bad he didn't expect to talk about the tragedy in Paris.. they didn't expect it to happen either.

Life changes on a dime especially if you're POTUS.. After a brief condolences to Paris he went to his "token stump speech on economics".. really? that's just a little robotic.

snip//

Sanders said he was “shocked” and “disgusted” by the attacks, for which ISIS terrorists have claimed responsibility, and vowed that the U.S. would lead the world to “rid our planet of this barbarous organization.” But immediately thereafter shifted back to his domestic policy.

“I’m running for president because,” Sanders said, “what I hear is people’s concerned that the economy we have is a rigged economy.”

http://time.com/4113452/democratic-debate-bernie-sanders-opening-remarks/

Bottom line is .. Why was he unprepared?