If you think a few measly actions show the Repubs want Bernie, I have a bridge to sell you
in the middle of the desert.
You seriously think this stupid crap means they want Clinton?
And answer this Question: Do these piddly, non game changing moves support Clinton's argument that she is most electable? Answer: Yes (a simple direct question which no one seems to want to answer). Since their actions are intended to HELP Clinton I can understand your invading the question.
Have the Republicans went after Bernie YES! And the corporate media has either ignored or hammered him.
The last thing the corporate, big money paid for politicians want is Bernie Sanders, the only honest man in the race.
Per the article:
During Sunday night’s Democratic debate, the Republican National Committee made the unusual move of sending no fewer than four real-time e-mails to reporters defending the self-described democratic socialist from attacks by Hillary Clinton or echoing his message against her. Based on their content, one could be forgiven for thinking the RNC communiques came from the Sanders campaign. (Wow, what a game changer. I'm sure Clinton's poll numbers plummeted overnight.)
Sean Spicer, the chief strategist and spokesman for the RNC, spent much of the evening tweeting Sanders-friendly commentary on the debate, often with the pro-Sanders hashtag #FeelTheBern. At one point, Spicer gently chided Sanders for what he deemed a poor response to a question and added, “come on we are trying to help u.” (Do you realize how stupid this sounds?)
After the debate, the Republican political action committee America Rising promoted the narrative that Sanders won the debate. “Clinton needed a win last night. Instead, everyone is talking about how well Bernie Sanders, her chief rival, did,” spokesman Jeff Bechdel wrote to reporters. (Wow, this should knock Clinton down at least 5 points)
Meanwhile, American Crossroads, a group co-founded by Karl Rove, is airing an ad in Iowa bolstering a core tenet of Sanders’s case against Clinton: that she has received large sums of campaign contributions from Wall Street, and therefore can't be trusted to crack down on big banks. “Hillary rewarded Wall Street with a $700 billion bailout, then Wall Street made her a multi-millionaire,” a narrator in the ad says. “Does Iowa really want Wall Street in the White House?”
(Another post said 10k was spent and it was a digital ad (so did it only show on the internet?). And this issue is already out there.)
NOTE: Now they are putting out unsubstantiated information from an unnamed Democratic Source that they have spent so much money attacking Clinton. Really? Where were the ads run?
Have the Republicans making BIG MONEY buys (that people see) that discuss ALL the speaking fees, the Clinton Foundation deals (uranium, etc). No. So they want to take down Clinton but ignore these goldmines. Yeah right.
I thought the industry I worked in was bad. Well at least they started covering ethics in college courses. I would recommend they do the same for journalistic students (not that I think you can really teach ethics but maybe it will give some people pause). Where is the journalist integrity?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Of course they don't want to run against her.
