2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWTF did Hillary Clinton have to gain from this?
Shes raised more money than Sanders, shes leading in all of the polls, she has a good sized lead in the Iowa polls, shes within the MOE in New Hampshire, she has a huge lead in South Carolina, she already HAD institutional support among Democrats, she has a LOT of endorsements, etc, etc, etc.
Why would she need to collude with DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz on anything like Datagate? (and, yes, there are hundreds of allegations of collusion between DWS and the DNC and the Clinton campaign on this issue)
Bernie Sanders staffers improperly accessed proprietary data of the Clinton campaign.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, I believe, overreacted and should really be fired, IMO...but I fail to see why Hillary Clinton would be any kind of participant in Datagate when she had NOTHING to gain from it and everything to lose.
Look, I am aware of many the Clintons' political sins of the past. Bernies supporters never fail to remind us of that.Thats not the issue here (and its also the reason I dont support Hillary Clinton at this time but that's not the issue here, either).
When I was a kid, very often I would get caught doing something and I would excuse it by reminding my parents of what my brother had done the day before...or two days before...or two years before.
I assume that you know how my parents responded to that...Because your parents probably responded the same way.
Please read the outstanding article of David Atkins in the Washington Monthly on Datagate.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_12/an_explanation_of_what_bernie059035.php
Yes, what 4 Sanders campaign staffers did was serious...as were DWSs actions.
And would any Sanders' supporters be willing to admit that what tht Sanders' campaign did was wrong?
(This is a diary that I modified somewhat from an earlier diary at DK)
Leftyforever
(317 posts)to any casual political observer... Bernie has more integrety and is more principled than hrc... so this is now an attempt to undermine Bernie's long history of principled governance....
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Leftyforever
(317 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)He's decided to attack you on your strength of seeing Karl Rove everywhere!
Leftyforever
(317 posts)Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)have you had enough popcorn yet, lol?
If I were an O'Malley supporter (and I can still be persuaded on that score), I would be FULL.
TDale313
(7,820 posts)And despite the polling, I don't see the Clinton campaign passing up opportunities to attack Sanders or treating him like he's irrelevant. Now, whether that's based on him having a real shot or nervousness/an abundance of caution cause she's been "inevitable" before and seen it slip away I'll leave it to others to decide.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)and backfired big time.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Complied by the Clinton campaign. The question is what did Sanders campaign gain, probably gave a clue to how data is compiled and information. Now Sanders has to face the questions about the breach. Whatever was gained in information will be lost in getting his story out. Shameful decision on the part of a staff worker has damaged Sanders.
Number23
(24,544 posts)did was wrong, was stupid, corrupt etc. But as post #1 in this thread shows you, there are still a group of people that are determined to see this as Hillary's fault/wrong doing.
Even after you lay out the facts saying that not only would she have had nothing to gain by somehow "making" the Sanders campaign steal her information, she didn't FUCKING NEED TO. She is in such a prominent lead and in such a strong position, there would have been absolutely no benefit whatsoever to her using her mystical powers to make a rival candidate's campaign do something like this.
The whole "it's Hillary's fault" is going down as one of the stupidest, most dishonest bullshit tactics I've ever seen. IMO It's up there with the Obama wasn't born in America crap. It is that stupid and says far more about the people touting it than it ever will about the target.
Leftyforever
(317 posts)why did dws take this directly to the media... you are not that naive....
Number23
(24,544 posts)Snip:
Still, the Sanders camps reactions have been laughable. It was their team that unethically breached Clintons data. It was their comms people who spoke falsely about what happened. The Sanders campaign wasnt honeypotted into doing ittheir people did it of their own accord. NGPVAN isnt set up to benefit Clinton at Sanders expenseand if the violation by the campaigns had been reversed, Sanders supporters would have been claiming a conspiracy from sunrise to sundown.
Leftyforever
(317 posts)from the logs I have been able to see.. the folders in question were named "not sanders" don't think that leads one to believe they were trying to do anything nefarious.. and to imply so seems to me to be nefarious itself..
Number23
(24,544 posts)Leftyforever
(317 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)If you were trying to do something nefarious, why would you make the query name obvious?
Logical answer: You wouldn't.
Cha
(295,971 posts)jfern
(5,204 posts)Meanwhile, no one ran to the media or punished the Hillary campaign when they did similar things.
Number23
(24,544 posts)going to be punished for this?
I'm thinking there had to be some reason for your reply other than the "Hillary did it too" thing. Which I'd just love a link to, by the way. A link that shows a Hillary staffer inappropriately accessing and downloading information from a rival campaign. I'm sure you've got that all ready to go.
jfern
(5,204 posts)When Hillary did it, there was no punishment, no running to the media, and probably no one got fired. Quite a double standard.
Number23
(24,544 posts)inappropriately accessing and downloading information from a rival campaign? It doesn't even have to be MULTIPLE times like the Sanders' campaign did and I certainly won't ask for video of her campaign rep hollering at the media even though her campaign was the one in the wrong and I most assuredly won't ask for a link where she sued a Democrat org which is probably one of the things that led to the media focus in the first place.
Just a link to a Hillary staffer accessing and downloading info from a rival campaign would be great.
And I won't even get into the desperation that goes into the level of word parsing that you're trying to do in this thread.
jfern
(5,204 posts)LuvLoogie
(6,855 posts)And who was involved?
Number23
(24,544 posts)Right?
jfern
(5,204 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)23 (AWESOME number by the way) -
Do I really need to draw your attention to the word UNINTENTIONAL in that paragraph? Are you going to say that you didn't see that before now??
I'm just spitballing here, but do you think it was because -- by the lawsuit's OWN ACCOUNT -- unintentional??
So let me get this... because nothing was done to fix an UNINTENTIONAL sharing of info, the Sanders campaign is now saying that makes it perfectly okay for them to jimmy up a couple of 100% INTENTIONAL ones seven fucking years later??! This is probably the stupidest thing I've ever seen.
jfern
(5,204 posts)As for the intentional part, that staffer was immediately fired.
Number23
(24,544 posts)Or are you saying he's now part of the vast Clinton conspiracy against him now???
jfern
(5,204 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)Really?
jfern
(5,204 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)That should give you a very strong sense of how feasible/reasonable/good the minimizing is.
LuvLoogie
(6,855 posts)And three of his team members. Better?
MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)... but you are a FN treasure on this board!
Number23
(24,544 posts)That is very kind of you.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)DonnaM
(65 posts)a rev to her "It's my turn" campaign. What a shame.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Think about clinton's campaign then. all the shit that was going on. What did she have to gain then? She was in the lead all the way up to Super Tuesday, but still the dirty attacks and cheap shots and all manner of hacky bullshit kept coming. It was actively detrimental to her campaign, but she didn't stop, and even kept it going a little while after the convention!
Why?
because it's not enough to just win. Nah, all opposition - especially potential rivals - must be utterly destroyed. Ruined. Burned to the ground, and the dirt salted. It's the Clinton's style of politicking, they're both famed for nasty scorched-earth campaigns.
There's really nothing to gain in this race. But if your goal is to own a political party, the utter demolition of all potential rivals and competitors, no matter the cost, might be considered a sound strategy.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)than Sanders ever has been.
Obama had leads in Iowa as early as July 2007. Obama had basically tied Clinton in SC even before the Iowa caucuses.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)It's not about this race. It goes further than that.
Hepburn
(21,054 posts)Unlike HRC, Sanders is seen as honest and trustworthy. Damage that and maybe Clinton does not look like the totally corrupt political tool that she truly is.
JMHO
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)wildeyed
(11,240 posts)Bernie Sanders is also a politician and plays political games when it suits. You can't win if you don't play. It is like the law of gravity or something. New politicians always think they can ignore the rules and still win. But they never do. They either adapt, or they lose.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)She's been doing great, these accusations of skullduggery from Weaver just show some deep problems in the Sanders camp. Tonight's debates should be interesting.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Cha
(295,971 posts)their way out.
The proof data is critical to a campaign is how devastating the DNCs punishment was to Bernies campaign. Given that, do you understand how the Clinton camp feels knowing their data was accessed by their opposition? If the shoe was on the other foot, the level of hysteria would be outrageous.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=922340
arcane1
(38,613 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)bigwillq
(72,790 posts)I think those who did wrong should be held accountable. They should face criminal charges, if crimes were committed, and then the campaign needs to move on. Staffers have often made mistakes in past elections. It happens. You take out the trash and move on. The voters will ultimately decide the campaign's fate.
I think the DNC is also accountable for this fiasco. It seems like this situation could have been handled better on their part.
I don't see what Hillary did wrong in this situation. Believe me, I am not a HRC fan, but don't see how her or her campaign are responsible for this situation. Her relationship with DWS has little to do with what the Sanders campaign did, imo.
This situation may have legs for a few days, but I don't believe it will influence or affect the primary or GE. Folks will vote or not vote for Bernie, Hillary or Martin because of other issues.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)I think this is the first response by a Bernie supporter I've seen here since yesterday that is rational. I agree with all you said.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Still voting for Bernie. I think he has more to offer than this situation.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)This whole thing has actually driven me towards Hillary. I was more or less neutral until now, but I did not like what I saw from the operation Bernie is running. However, I like him a lot.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Ron Green
(9,821 posts)for sound-biters and low-information voters.
I think as the story fleshes out the bigger issues of HRC protection by DWS and DNC will become their own sound bites.
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)Will she shout today"Shame on you Bernie, shame on you"!?
Of course, she is trying to undermine the trust people
have in him, in comparison to her. Oh, yes, she might
play the innocent victim tonight, but I doubt that it will
work for her. He can point out among other things, that
he filed the case in court, which no one with a guilty
conscience would do.
Laser102
(816 posts)zazen
(2,978 posts)She's our Katherine Harris, also of Florida. Entitled, smug, petty, & unapologetically biased with no appreciation of the impartiality of the role to which she was elected/ appointed.
She reminds me of Harris' smug behavior in December 2000 when Harris proudly participated in stopping every fair attempt to recount votes in Florida, with that attitude that the Presidency was Bush's (her buddy's) inherent right. Her condescension and entitlement were enraging, as is Debbie's.
I really, really don't want Clinton to win the nomination. However, if she does, I want our party's candidate to be above this kind of pettiness. And I want the leader of our DNC to have the best interests of our nation and party at heart, not the interests of a particular candidate. Diminishing our debates and letting the extremist right control the airwaves like this is shameful.
For Hilary's and everyone's sake, I hope Debbie finally resigns.
I hope we can all agree on that. This is hurting your candidate far more than it's hurting mine. And hurting America.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Hillary Clinton IS NOT my candidate.
Otherwise, I agree with your post...DWS is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over the top and needs to go.
Jarqui
(10,111 posts)On June 17, 1972, burglars broke into the Democratic National Committee (DNC) headquarters at the Watergate office complex in Washington, D.C.
In Aug, 1974, after a couple of years of trying to cover it up, Nixon resigned.
Nixon was a chronic liar too.
If Hillary could take Bernie out quick, it would save her campaign a bunch of dough and she'd collect more dough for her campaign that would otherwise have gone to Bernie. It might be as simple as a campaign money motive. If you look at the Clintons history, and all the money they've taken in, money does appear to have been a motive for them in the past.
jfern
(5,204 posts)But those candidates who have their own enemy's list tend to take the low road in other aspects.
senz
(11,945 posts)for starters ...
tularetom
(23,664 posts)One slimy Cliinton scandal after the next. Little or no progressive legislation passed or even proposed. Endless congressional investigations culminating in articles of impeachment. Slim chance of surviving impeachment proceedings since a congressional majority is impossible with a no-coattails candidate like Clinton. 50-50 chance that Clinton will not serve out her full term due to removal from office.
Some of this gloomy future may already be cooked into the process. But it might help Clinton gain some badly needed traction with actual Democrats if she disavows Wasserman Schulz right now and in no uncertain terms. Conversely, her failure to do that will convince her doubters that she was in on it from the beginning.
I have no idea what she thought she would gain from this but if she wants to stop the bleeding she needs to toss Wasserman Schulz under the bus right fucking now.
randome
(34,845 posts)Sounds to me like a threat!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)but Bernie supporters.
Hillary Clinton and her campaign has done nothing wrong in this instance. To extrapolate this into all the other off-the-wall bullshit is unnecessary.
Now the DNC...have at it.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)That backfires once again
randome
(34,845 posts)Fear the Bern!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)she is. People aren't going to take kindly to her pals undergoing investigation. Lord, we've been here with the Clintons before. She is supremely stubborn and letting DWS go would seriously reflect a lot more than just her judgment. Plus, she still has to contend with the staff of, what we now know, is a list of her buddies. And I'm going to make a wild guess that if HRC did fire her, she could scorch the earth with her own information.
I saw a more complete list of the officers of this IT place...and it's more than just the top people.
And as to that last sentence, it doesn't deserve an answer...where have you been?
ismnotwasm
(41,922 posts)It's all a conspiracy theory driven deflection. Sanders staffers fucked up. To what extent? Not sure. Some analysis indicate it's fairly serious, which is apparently is what led DWS to react-or overreact if you prefer the way she did. My guess is it was seriously stupid, but not criminal. I could, of course, be wrong.
(BTW, referring to another situation, calling a woman the "C" word does NOT up ones feminist cred)
Then the Sanders campaign and on-line supporters got into it and made the whole thing worse with even more conspiracy theories, blaming Hillary because reasons and generally looked a fool.
I expect the situation to be over by Monday, and I expect both candidates to conduct themselves with decorum tonight.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)She was reacting to what she saw as being bullied.
From what I've read, she called the Bernie campaign about cooperating regarding the breach and that was when things blew up.
Is it possible, she called and they told her to F-off and she lost it, as the DNC head.
Pissing matches, that get out of control are not unknown in the political world.
ismnotwasm
(41,922 posts)Sanders' on the ground campaign has had a number of issues with organizational procedure in general, so who knows?
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)created by this vendor who is at best fully incompetent. Sanders instantly fired the responsible party on his side, which is what should have happened to these vendors, who instead are collecting more fees from the DNC, which claims to be broke, for not delivering important services promised. Party data not being secured is a big, big issue. VAN and DWS did that, not Sanders and not even the man who looked at files. Who else looked? What other back doors and flimsy firewalls are they employing?
And Debbie, she went to the press. She did not follow the contractually agreed process. She needs to be fired or just step down.
I am not comfortable with bogus data security in a world with Republicans in it.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Apparently, uploading the code (and it was the uploading of the code that exposed the data) is a 40 minutes-hour process.
Why not notify the campaigns that the voter database will be closed "for maintenance" for that length of time.
I assume that the campaigns have other limited databases/files of their own creation with which they can work with for ~an hour why the new code is being uploaded.
As people have noted, this happened in 2008...but neither Obama nor Dean went all "drama queen" about it and went to the press...and it really wasn't to Hillary's advantage for DWS to that.
If I were Hillary Clinton, I don't think that I would hesitate to throw DWS "under the bus" for these histrionics.
Cha
(295,971 posts)Califonz
(465 posts)and act like they're panicking but don't let that fool you. They really are panicking.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I mean, she's got it in the bag, right?
But for the past 5 months Sanders amd his supporters have had a neverending stream of inane, lowest valence rhetorical ad hominem turds flung at our heads. Why?
It's certainly not contributing to party unity and victory next November.
But someone must think they're accomplishing something productive.
Derp.
Edited to add: i agree DWS is a clusterfuck and needs to go.
merrily
(45,251 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Very informative article.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)It takes attention away from the fact Hillary is a pro-war, anti-healthcare, anti-minimum wage, pro-wall street, pro-TPP, pro-XL, corporatist republican.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)I have my own reasons for not supporting HRC at this time.
Many Sanders supporters think that Hillary was the one ultimately behind THIS incident right here.