In New Ad, Bernie Sanders Hits Clinton on Wall Street Campaign Donations

[cali]

Bernie Sanders suggests in a new ad that Hillary Clinton’s practice of taking campaign money from Wall Street undercuts her ability to police these firms, part of a broader argument that casts her as an establishment figure incapable of bringing about the changes needed to shore up middle class families.

In the 30-second ad, “Two Visions,” Mr. Sanders speaks to the camera and says, “There are two Democratic visions for regulating Wall Street. One says it’s OK to take millions from big banks, and then tell them what to do.”

He contrasts that vision with his own plan, which includes breaking up large banks – a step that Mrs. Clinton opposes.

Mr. Sanders doesn’t mention Mrs. Clinton by name. A campaign spokesman, Michael Briggs, said Thursday that the ad isn’t “directed at Secretary Clinton exclusively,” but also at everyone in the “Democratic establishment who believe you can take Wall Street’s money and then somehow turn around and rein in the greed, recklessness and illegal behavior.”

<snip>
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/01/14/in-new-ad-bernie-sanders-hits-clinton-wall-street-campaign-donations/

Here's the ad. I think it's a very good one and in no way can it be characterized as negative.

https://m.

[rhett o rick]

1. We need a change from the corruption of big money in our politics.

[libdem4life]

2. I don't know how he does it. He is so forceful without overwhelming. He is clear and very firm.

He exudes confidence and trust and that's how he's going to be able to develop "coattails". It's already happening. The biggest news I've read is a D replacement for DWS...Canova, I think it is. Same thing. No Big Money...and that's Florida.

He will show not only that it can be done, but how to do it. A national Mentor.

Great ad. Thanks for sharing it.

[Qutzupalotl]

3. It is a good ad.

My only gripe is that he doesn't explain here WHY he wants to break up the big banks. It's a scary-sounding proposition for people who don't follow politics or the news closely ("All my money is in the bank!&quot , and don't get that the largest ones pose a systemic threat. WE get it, but we're news junkies.

Maybe what I want is not possible to distill into a 30-second ad.

[winter is coming]

6. +1. It would be good for him to have a "So why should we break up the big banks?" ad.

If it won't boil down into a 30-second spot, have a link at the end, or make a second ad. And somewhere in there, the phrase "Gambling with your money" should figure prominently.

[Agschmid]

10. That's important in the GE, not so much in the primary.

Most of the people voting in the democratic primary get his point.

[R B Garr]

4. This will be easily juxtaposed by him being unable

to articulate when interviewed HOW he would break up Bank of America. BofA was the example given in the interview, but he said he didn't know. Great applause line, but no follow-through.

[ejbr]

5. Anthing

that shines a poor light on Hillary is negative around these parts.

[silenttigersong]

7. Its good

Right before the debate.

[lastone]

8. A shot right between the eyes to the corp canadate

and right in time for the debate - this one should be interesting!

[CharlotteVale]

9. K&R

[Cassiopeia]

11. Bernie goes scorched earth on HRC!!11!1!!!

I'm sure there will be more than a few posts like that tonight.

Excellent ad Bernie.

[cali]

12. Yep. Funny because it's utter bullshit to call it negative

[Bernblu]

23. That's not scorched earth

Harry Truman said I tell the truth and they think it's hell.

[dsc]

13. Of course it is negative

when you attack your opponent, and he did in that ad, then it is negative.

[cali]

14. Have you even watched it? It's insane bullshit to claim it's negative

Be specific, what does he say that makes it negative campaigning? Personal attack? No. Lies? No.

[dsc]

15. negative doesn't mean personal attack nor does it mean lie

it means saying something negative about your opponent. He did even in your description of it. Again, that doesn't make it unfair, nor untrue, nor a personal attack but it is, by any sane definition of the word, a negative ad. It is designed to make people not want to vote for Hillary and instead vote for him.

[HerbChestnut]

16. That ad wasn't directly strictly at Hillary

It was aimed at the entire political establishment. Hardly a negative ad.

[dsc]

18. ads that say bad things about a person or group of people are negative

again, I don't think it is a sin to run a negative ad ( I loved Jon Bel Edwards ad) but we should call things by their names.

[HerbChestnut]

19. Say bad things or be honest?

Because that's what this ad is. Honest.

[dsc]

20. you can say a bad thing and be honest

like the ad I sited in my post.

[winter is coming]

22. If taking millions from Wall Street is a bad thing, maybe we shouldn't vote for folks who do it. nt

[cali]

17. Here's what he said and it proves how batshit

It is to claim it's negative.furthermore, it's all about why to vote for him. Oh, and negative campaigning has a specific meaning. You don get to just rewrite that so it means what you want it to.

One says it’s okay to take millions from big banks and then tell them what to do. My plan: break up the big banks, close the tax loopholes, and make them pay their fair share. Then we can expand health care to all and provide universal college education. Will they like me? No. Will they begin to play by the rules when I’m president? You better believe it.”

[shawn703]

24. It's only negative if you think taking millions from Wall Street is a bad thing

Do you think it's a bad thing?

[mhatrw]

21. If you think this ad is negative, then you must think it is bad for your candidate to

take millions from Wall Street and the big banks.