I wonder if it becomes some sort of messiah / Stockholm syndrome between candidates and their campaign managers, where the candidate implicitly trusts their campaign manager in everything, and no matter what kind of screw up, the campaign manager isn't going to fire themselves.
Agreed its a shit situation, but just imagine how thick that bubble is inside the campaign, and what it would take to get the candidate to take sides against their campaign manager.
Doesn't mean I will ever forget/forgive Mark Penn though.
the Keeping it 1600 podcast guys had a pretty good chat about this, how after months without a day off and constantly competing against your opponent it's just inevitable that you totally hate them and want to sling shit.
The difference for those guys is that when they wanted to Obama told them, "No." The candidate set the tone for his staff.
For Bernie, well, either he's in control of his staff or he's not, and I'm not sure which looks worse on him.
I get the very distinct impression Clinton herself wants to be able to just tell Sanders to fuck off and die at this point.
I don't know, I feel like from the way she's talked recently in stuff that his constant attacks have pissed her right off.
At the debate she definitely looked like she was genuinely relishing being able to respond to some of his claims
Like he'd be midway through his turn and you could see her face just light up
When he starting to scoff during her answer about gun control she snapped up like he activated her trap card
During the debates the candidates need to play Yu-gi-oh or Pokemon. To liven it up. The moderates wear Pikachu costumes.
+3
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
Okay so if Sanders gets schooled in NY tomorrow by over 10 points, do you think we'll see the tone of his campaign change? Like, the past month or so has seen his staff really digging in with no apparent pushback from Bernie. Do you think they're constitutionally able, at this point, to draw down gracefully?
TLDR: Lots of words and pretty charts and graphs, but Sanders has been misrepresenting himself all along. The actual average donation is $27.89. Go to hell Bernie Sanders!
If the point of the article is satire, then why the misleading headline in an otherwise serious editorial (WaPo's "The Fix")? I'm pretty sure the point is to make Sanders look bad at a crucial point in his campaign.
As for the official complain from the Sanders campaign, it's kind of "damned if you do damned if you don't." The point was to put Clinton on blast, but by sending it to the DNC instead of the FEC it's obviously not credible. But if he sends it to the FEC first then he's obviously trying to hurt the Democratic Party. The financial restructuring may not be illegal but it does seem shady and worthy of a closer look. Which is exactly what the media started to do a few months ago for the same reason.
I can't see it. They know they're going to lose big tomorrow and they accused Clinton and the Democratic party of being in a conspiracy to illegally raise money and then fundraised off it.
The most cynical version is that Devine is running a scam to get paid and needs to keep these massive fundraising numbers going so he can get the percentage off the ad buys.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
If he loses badly I don't think his campaign will change much, except California will now be the big prize and NY will get downplayed as not being that essential.
If he loses badly, the tone I do think will change will be from the media. The questions about how he's still viable and when he will suspend will be louder and more frequent.
Okay so if Sanders gets schooled in NY tomorrow by over 10 points, do you think we'll see the tone of his campaign change? Like, the past month or so has seen his staff really digging in with no apparent pushback from Bernie. Do you think they're constitutionally able, at this point, to draw down gracefully?
We'll have a better idea when we actually see him calming them, until he does that the chances go down. That is if he hasn't fucked up to much by letting it get out of his control.
0
Options
SurfpossumA nonentitytrying to preserve the anonymity he so richly deserves.Registered Userregular
There are still people out there who are surprised when I point out that Hillary is winning the popular vote, so I don't think whether he wins or loses really matters much to his campaign in terms of how they want to proceed.
As for the official complain from the Sanders campaign, it's kind of "damned if you do damned if you don't." The point was to put Clinton on blast, but by sending it to the DNC instead of the FEC it's obviously not credible. But if he sends it to the FEC first then he's obviously trying to hurt the Democratic Party. The financial restructuring may not be illegal but it does seem shady and worthy of a closer look. Which is exactly what the media started to do a few months ago for the same reason.
It's happening regardless, the difference is whether it's genuine or bullshit. I'm leaning on bullshit since it's not going to the SEC.
About half way through so far and this is a good listen. Dean is always at least interesting guy to hear talk (Dean Scream still stupid these 12 years later) and his thoughts on the whole situation going right down are pretty insightful on how one keeps a movement going after the campaign is over (and how his campaign did that and basically turned into Obama's campaign in many ways).
Pertinent to the thread, Dean seems to think Sanders won't actually personally convert his movement into a non-campaign based organization on his own, since he believes Sanders is not a guy that really does political organization like that. He describes him as having a history of "being an iconoclast who is not willing to run movements" and as being a guy who always wants to do things his way and doesn't like parties.
He does seem to believe the people's he has excited will go on to do stuff within the political apparatus though and join up with existing progressive movements or form their own.
I don't really buy his thinking on young people though and their future within either Democrats or the Republicans. I don't think they are near as economically conservative as he seems to believe.
I'm seeing a lot of Bernie ads on here and not many Hillary ads
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
These are apparently real and being handed out by the Sanders campaign in Harlem
"You are ignorant/stupid non-white people, vote for Bernie" Or "Don't do as others tell you, do as i tell you, vote for Bernie"
I may be reading this wrong...
It's important to remember, every time you hear about how Sanders is "out spending!" or "out raising!" Clinton, or about how he has "more money than he knows what to do with!" that of course, overall, Clinton is the one with big spenders on her side, and team Clinton has received more money than team Sanders, especially when you take SuperPACs into account.
It's important to remember, every time you hear about how Sanders is "out spending!" or "out raising!" Clinton, or about how he has "more money than he knows what to do with!" that of course, overall, Clinton is the one with big spenders on her side, and team Clinton has received more money than team Sanders, especially when you take SuperPACs into account.
Clinton has raised more money and has more money on hand. Sanders has raised more in 2016, but is spending it as fast as it comes in. He's spent twice as much as she has on advertisements this year. She's saving her resources for the general as much as possible
Bernie Sanders is outspending Hillary Clinton over the airwaves by nearly a 3-to-1 margin in Wisconsin, while the campaigns and outside groups opposed to Donald Trump have the overwhelming ad-spending advantage, according to the latest data from SMG Delta.
The Democratic presidential candidates are spending a combined $10.5 million on advertising in New York, reports Politico.
Bernie Sanders is set to spend almost $7 million, nearly doubling Hillary Clinton's $3.7 million.
The amount Sanders has been able to raise is much more impressive than Clinton because he has no Super PAC, his average donation is less than 30$, and he's still so far behind in delegates.
But he just keeps raking it in. It's nuts.
If anything it was nice to see in this election instances of having PACs and mountains of money get you literally nothing (Jeb) and not using any PACs or multiple wealthy large donors and still seeing substantial backing by actual everyday people.
The amount Sanders has been able to raise is much more impressive than Clinton because he has no Super PAC, his average donation is less than 30$, and he's still so far behind in delegates.
But he just keeps raking it in. It's nuts.
If anything it was nice to see in this election instances of having PACs and mountains of money get you literally nothing (Jeb) and not using any PACs or multiple wealthy large donors and still seeing substantial backing by actual everyday people.
More impressive yes, yet futile. Bernie can raise as much money as he wants - the game is over.
These are apparently real and being handed out by the Sanders campaign in Harlem
"You are ignorant/stupid non-white people, vote for Bernie" Or "Don't do as others tell you, do as i tell you, vote for Bernie"
I may be reading this wrong...
Also, those silly women. They just want to vote for Hillary because she's a woman.
The amount Sanders has been able to raise is much more impressive than Clinton because he has no Super PAC, his average donation is less than 30$, and he's still so far behind in delegates.
But he just keeps raking it in. It's nuts.
If anything it was nice to see in this election instances of having PACs and mountains of money get you literally nothing (Jeb) and not using any PACs or multiple wealthy large donors and still seeing substantial backing by actual everyday people.
More impressive yes, yet futile. Bernie can raise as much money as he wants - the game is over.
Yes I covered that with mentioning how far behind in delegates he is. That's why it's so crazy how he's still pulling in so much say last month.
I did make a post that didn't openly criticize him though. Thank god that got fixed so quickly. It'd be awful if someone said one good thing about the man or his campaign.
A lot of it is the sunk cost fallacy. "If I put enough money into Sanders's campaign, then Sanders is going to win and get me off my college debt". Donating is THE way Bernie supporters channel their support. Just like, for example, Trump supporters channel theirs in social media campaigns aka meme bombs.
The amount Sanders has been able to raise is much more impressive than Clinton because he has no Super PAC, his average donation is less than 30$, and he's still so far behind in delegates.
But he just keeps raking it in. It's nuts.
If anything it was nice to see in this election instances of having PACs and mountains of money get you literally nothing (Jeb) and not using any PACs or multiple wealthy large donors and still seeing substantial backing by actual everyday people.
More impressive yes, yet futile. Bernie can raise as much money as he wants - the game is over.
Yes I covered that with mentioning how far behind in delegates he is. That's why it's so crazy how he's still pulling in so much say last month.
I did make a post that didn't openly criticize him though. Thank god that got fixed so quickly. It'd be awful if someone said one good thing about the man or his campaign.
it's important to emphasize how hopeless/futile/pointless/irrelevant he is as an aside every time you mention him
alternatively you can make fun of his supporters or link to a tweet of something awful his campaign staff said
A lot of it is the sunk cost fallacy. "If I put enough money into Sanders's campaign, then Sanders is going to win and get me off my college debt". Donating is THE way Bernie supporters channel their support. Just like, for example, Trump supporters channel theirs in social media campaigns aka meme bombs.
I think a large chunk of Sanders supporters don't realize that it's all but over, first the media wouldn't cover Sanders but now they're committed to the horse race, one of my recorded shows last week got interrupted with breaking primary news and they made it sound like it was neck and neck
Okay so if Sanders gets schooled in NY tomorrow by over 10 points, do you think we'll see the tone of his campaign change? Like, the past month or so has seen his staff really digging in with no apparent pushback from Bernie. Do you think they're constitutionally able, at this point, to draw down gracefully?
I hope he starts to walk his campaign back, it's time to start winding things down, but he probably won't
I'm disappointed he's focusing so hard on Hillary, his staff must've convinced him he can still win, I want him to stay in to focus on his income inequality talking points
A lot of it is the sunk cost fallacy. "If I put enough money into Sanders's campaign, then Sanders is going to win and get me off my college debt". Donating is THE way Bernie supporters channel their support. Just like, for example, Trump supporters channel theirs in social media campaigns aka meme bombs.
I think a large chunk of Sanders supporters don't realize that it's all but over, first the media wouldn't cover Sanders but now they're committed to the horse race, one of my recorded shows last week got interrupted with breaking primary news and they made it sound like it was neck and neck
There's also the constant message of system being corrupt and Bernie being the only hope for improvement.
Some donors are just passionate, others are dedicated, and some may just be panicking.
And some probably are delusional, utterly convinced that, yes, Bernie is going to win (and everything to the contrary you hear is just the establishment conspiracy panickng and trying to destroy Bernie).
That goes without saying though. All of those people always exist for every candidate. Just like the large number of people voting for Hillary out of nothing but sheer name recognition over Sanders and are completely ignorant of actual policies and politics.
I feel the need to specifically note, that this statement is not a criticism of Hillary Clinton in any way, or a criticism of these voters. I am not saying that if they knew more about Clinton they would disagree with her or find her scandalous in any way.
While i agree that there are probably plenty of people voting Hillary on name recognition alone, there is probably also a sizeable group of people voting Sanders on Hillary's name recognition alone as well.
As well as Bernie's message of anti establishmentarianism and how everyone (not supporting Sanders) is corrupt.
How big of a % any of these groups make of either candidates voters, or how large they relative to each other, i can't even make a guess.
+1
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
The amount Sanders has been able to raise is much more impressive than Clinton because he has no Super PAC, his average donation is less than 30$, and he's still so far behind in delegates.
But he just keeps raking it in. It's nuts.
If anything it was nice to see in this election instances of having PACs and mountains of money get you literally nothing (Jeb) and not using any PACs or multiple wealthy large donors and still seeing substantial backing by actual everyday people.
More impressive yes, yet futile. Bernie can raise as much money as he wants - the game is over.
Yes I covered that with mentioning how far behind in delegates he is. That's why it's so crazy how he's still pulling in so much say last month.
I did make a post that didn't openly criticize him though. Thank god that got fixed so quickly. It'd be awful if someone said one good thing about the man or his campaign.
it's important to emphasize how hopeless/futile/pointless/irrelevant he is as an aside every time you mention him
alternatively you can make fun of his supporters or link to a tweet of something awful his campaign staff said
well, for most of us, the writing is on the wall that Hillary is going to win the primary
so really the only thing meaningful about the Sanders campaign at this point is how is he going to lose? Is he going to go down swinging and scorching the earth? Is he going to figure out a way to draw his supporters into the Democratic fold? Is he going to figure out a way to promote his issues in the Democratic mainstream?
Because at this moment it seems like he's doubling down on petulance and letting his campaign be defined by his horrible campaign managers and worst surrogates.
Posts
During the debates the candidates need to play Yu-gi-oh or Pokemon. To liven it up. The moderates wear Pikachu costumes.
TLDR: Lots of words and pretty charts and graphs, but Sanders has been misrepresenting himself all along. The actual average donation is $27.89. Go to hell Bernie Sanders!
If the point of the article is satire, then why the misleading headline in an otherwise serious editorial (WaPo's "The Fix")? I'm pretty sure the point is to make Sanders look bad at a crucial point in his campaign.
As for the official complain from the Sanders campaign, it's kind of "damned if you do damned if you don't." The point was to put Clinton on blast, but by sending it to the DNC instead of the FEC it's obviously not credible. But if he sends it to the FEC first then he's obviously trying to hurt the Democratic Party. The financial restructuring may not be illegal but it does seem shady and worthy of a closer look. Which is exactly what the media started to do a few months ago for the same reason.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
If he loses badly, the tone I do think will change will be from the media. The questions about how he's still viable and when he will suspend will be louder and more frequent.
We'll have a better idea when we actually see him calming them, until he does that the chances go down. That is if he hasn't fucked up to much by letting it get out of his control.
It's happening regardless, the difference is whether it's genuine or bullshit. I'm leaning on bullshit since it's not going to the SEC.
Make Donald Trump Bankrupt Again
About half way through so far and this is a good listen. Dean is always at least interesting guy to hear talk (Dean Scream still stupid these 12 years later) and his thoughts on the whole situation going right down are pretty insightful on how one keeps a movement going after the campaign is over (and how his campaign did that and basically turned into Obama's campaign in many ways).
Pertinent to the thread, Dean seems to think Sanders won't actually personally convert his movement into a non-campaign based organization on his own, since he believes Sanders is not a guy that really does political organization like that. He describes him as having a history of "being an iconoclast who is not willing to run movements" and as being a guy who always wants to do things his way and doesn't like parties.
He does seem to believe the people's he has excited will go on to do stuff within the political apparatus though and join up with existing progressive movements or form their own.
I don't really buy his thinking on young people though and their future within either Democrats or the Republicans. I don't think they are near as economically conservative as he seems to believe.
These are apparently real and being handed out by the Sanders campaign in Harlem
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Sanders has been outspending her 2 to 1
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
When I first started reading this my brain got this impression:
"Who are you voting for?"
"I dunno, maybe Hillary..."
(Passive Agressive) "Maybe you should."
I may be reading this wrong...
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/election-2016-campaign-money-race.html
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
But he just keeps raking it in. It's nuts.
If anything it was nice to see in this election instances of having PACs and mountains of money get you literally nothing (Jeb) and not using any PACs or multiple wealthy large donors and still seeing substantial backing by actual everyday people.
More impressive yes, yet futile. Bernie can raise as much money as he wants - the game is over.
Also, those silly women. They just want to vote for Hillary because she's a woman.
That picture says "Berniecrat Meme Warehouse" on the bottom.
I'm not saying that you're definitely wrong, but do you happen to have a picture of the actual printed flier?
Because right now all I see is someone on Twitter retweeting something dumb from someone else on Twitter.
Yes I covered that with mentioning how far behind in delegates he is. That's why it's so crazy how he's still pulling in so much say last month.
I did make a post that didn't openly criticize him though. Thank god that got fixed so quickly. It'd be awful if someone said one good thing about the man or his campaign.
it's important to emphasize how hopeless/futile/pointless/irrelevant he is as an aside every time you mention him
alternatively you can make fun of his supporters or link to a tweet of something awful his campaign staff said
I think a large chunk of Sanders supporters don't realize that it's all but over, first the media wouldn't cover Sanders but now they're committed to the horse race, one of my recorded shows last week got interrupted with breaking primary news and they made it sound like it was neck and neck
9pm est
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
I hope he starts to walk his campaign back, it's time to start winding things down, but he probably won't
I'm disappointed he's focusing so hard on Hillary, his staff must've convinced him he can still win, I want him to stay in to focus on his income inequality talking points
Some donors are just passionate, others are dedicated, and some may just be panicking.
And some probably are delusional, utterly convinced that, yes, Bernie is going to win (and everything to the contrary you hear is just the establishment conspiracy panickng and trying to destroy Bernie).
I feel the need to specifically note, that this statement is not a criticism of Hillary Clinton in any way, or a criticism of these voters. I am not saying that if they knew more about Clinton they would disagree with her or find her scandalous in any way.
As well as Bernie's message of anti establishmentarianism and how everyone (not supporting Sanders) is corrupt.
How big of a % any of these groups make of either candidates voters, or how large they relative to each other, i can't even make a guess.
well, for most of us, the writing is on the wall that Hillary is going to win the primary
so really the only thing meaningful about the Sanders campaign at this point is how is he going to lose? Is he going to go down swinging and scorching the earth? Is he going to figure out a way to draw his supporters into the Democratic fold? Is he going to figure out a way to promote his issues in the Democratic mainstream?
Because at this moment it seems like he's doubling down on petulance and letting his campaign be defined by his horrible campaign managers and worst surrogates.