2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumNBC: Bernie Sanders hasn't played his hand well -- at all
NBC News:Here's the reality: Sanders hasn't played his hand well. Many of his demands from yesterday (wanting Debbie Wasserman Schultz out of the DNC, ending superdelegates, having more open primaries) seem small. By not conceding a race he trails by every measure possible, he seems even smaller. And smaller still is the real leverage he holds, especially after losing eight out of the last 11 contests, after Obama and Warren have already endorsed Clinton, and after polls show Clinton increasing her lead over Trump.
The irony here is that Sanders already won -- he performed better than anyone imagined, and he already effectively moved Clinton and her campaign to the left. But one of the arts in politics is declaring victory after you've already won. But Sanders continues to march on Here's the delegate math after last night's DC primary:
In pledged delegates, Clinton is ahead by 392 delegates
Clinton 2,217 (55%)
Sanders 1,825 (45%)
In overall delegates (pledged + super), Clinton leads by 925 delegates
HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)n/t
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)This is a legitimate source discussing Bernie's course of action. It's not attacking any Democrat. Why would it be banned after tomorrow?
HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)you sure you want to press that after tomorrow?
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)But yes, it's clearly not an attack on Bernie, it's a discussion of his course of action and whether it's wise or not.
HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)n/t
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)Tarc
(10,472 posts)if you think this sort of post is going to be out-of-bounds tomorrow, prepare for some bitter disappointment
HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)just noticing a trend by HRC supporters and their posts on DU today...
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)n/t
Red Knight
(704 posts)Bashing Bernie doesn't help that cause. It just creates more anger and people may well just say, "screw it."
But if you don't care, at least don't say you weren't warned.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)I was replying to the other poster who said this kind of post would be banned after tomorrow. I don't think it will be.
stonecutter357
(12,682 posts)auntpurl
(4,311 posts)But we will still have GD: Elections, and I believe these sorts of posts will still be allowed.
LoverOfLiberty
(1,438 posts)You don't get to censor what a major news source says just because you find it uncomfortable.
HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)n/t
LoverOfLiberty
(1,438 posts)Criticism of any Democrat (or any other politician) isn't what is the problem here. It is the slander, innuendos, outright lies, CT, and Republican talking points about our candidates that is the problem.
HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)after tomorrow, I'll let the reality of the new rules clarify the new 'understanding'
LoverOfLiberty
(1,438 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)you are looking for a loophole in what Skinner posted... you won't fare well after tomorrow if you try to exploit a 'loophole' that's not there
Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)n/t
HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)interesting to know that you want to dance on that line...
tonyt53
(5,737 posts)No. But I'm sure you wish he had none.
tonyt53
(5,737 posts)He has zero leverage. By not conceding now, the lost most credibility and it is very apparent that he is a bitter person. Of course, he might need to keep raising funds to pay his campaign debt.
metroins
(2,550 posts)He'll get accomolished.
Bernie outlined 3 things. Which of them will his leverage get done?
He played poorly.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)I do not believe they ever did, so I reject the premise of your question. The only way to make progress is to force concessions (unless you won -- and then you govern)
metroins
(2,550 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)That too when she is a centrist candidate. Sanders has done a lot already by succeeding with placing progressives on the platform committee. Last night's meeting was about what issues Clinton would personally embrace (since the platform is a piece of paper).
I see this NBC "analysis" as fairly myopic.
GeorgeGist
(25,294 posts)MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Now the world knows.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Bernie seems to have blown his chance to actually make a difference by dragging this out to the bitter end and becoming increasingly irrelevant.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)And when her ambition is criticized it's sexist?
But Bernie fighting make sure that 43 percent of the primary voters will continue to be represented and fought for it is a bad thing?
He has toned down his personal campaigning against Clinton to almost nothing. He is pressing for the points he made in his campaign on issues and the need for political reform.
I think even a lot of Clinton supporters don't disagree with him that DWS has not done a good job, and should be replaced at some point.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Its time to focus on the general election and Trump. Bernie is increasingly becoming a distraction.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)And, i guess, among many individuals.
But 43 percent is a substantial number of people who were and hopefully will continue to care about what Bernie has been fighting to inject into the larger political dialogue.
Yes the GOP has to be stopped....Always. But there is a lot more at stake and a lot more issues involved than just the Bad GOP.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)I suspect he'll be pretty much ignored. People will be polite of course, but that's about it.
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)it is like reading the Washington Post.
this will so help in unifying the democrats and encourage getting money out of politics.
charlyvi
(6,537 posts)A new report from Harvard Kennedy Schools Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy analyzes news coverage of the 2016 presidential candidates in the year leading up to the primaries. This crucial period, labeled the invisible primary by political scientists, is when candidates try to lay the groundwork for a winning campaignwith media exposure often playing a make or break role.
The report shows that during the year 2015, major news outlets covered Donald Trump in a way that was unusual given his low initial polling numbersa high volume of media coverage preceded Trumps rise in the polls. Trumps coverage was positive in tonehe received far more good press than bad press. The volume and tone of the coverage helped propel Trump to the top of Republican polls.
The Democratic race in 2015 received less than half the coverage of the Republican race. Bernie Sanders campaign was largely ignored in the early months but, as it began to get coverage, it was overwhelmingly positive in tone. Sanders coverage in 2015 was the most favorable of any of the top candidates, Republican or Democratic. For her part, Hillary Clinton had by far the most negative coverage of any candidate. In 11 of the 12 months, her bad news outpaced her good news, usually by a wide margin, contributing to the increase in her unfavorable poll ratings in 2015.
The Shorenstein Center study is based on an analysis of thousands of news statements by CBS, Fox, the Los Angeles Times, NBC, The New York Times, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post. The studys data were provided by Media Tenor, a firm that specializes in the content analysis of news coverage.
CorkySt.Clair
(1,507 posts)floriduck
(2,262 posts)floppyboo
(2,461 posts)And aside from endorsing 'Not Trump' you should perhaps not expect anything else. 43% of primary voters likely feel you shouldn't. Anything more you have to earn. A certain attitude is required when making friends. Plenty of self-help books out there.
Clinton 2,217 (55%)
Sanders 1,825 (45%)
floppyboo
(2,461 posts)w4rma
(31,700 posts)TwilightZone
(25,342 posts)This isn't difficult.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)He should have bowed out gracefully a long time ago.
CrowCityDem
(2,348 posts)floppyboo
(2,461 posts)Even the 'party faithful' are holding their noses.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)auntpurl
(4,311 posts)Protalker
(418 posts)He used the party rather than run third party. I am cool with that, but selecting our nominee is a decision for party faithful. If you register Democrat you have a say. His views are beliefs I share, but without support just air.
floppyboo
(2,461 posts)I thought one of the goals of the party was to expand its base?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)stonecutter357
(12,682 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)Triana
(22,666 posts)It's not so much a slam on Sanders is it is self-contratulatory on the part of the media which much preferred Clinton (whom we know won't force them to pay/pay their fair share of taxes once in office since she is a big proponent of corporate welfare and he isn't).
Just some perspective on that.
So yea, keep celebrating your entrenched Oligarchy like blinkered sheep to slaughter. It's unfortunate the rest of us get dragged along too. Everyone loses. Except GE of course. And the Koch bros. And Wall St and the MiC and PiC and Big Pharma, Big Insurance, Big AG and the Saudis. All of them win. And win BIG. ...except We the People.
Yee ha.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)JCanete
(5,272 posts)inconvenient truths anymore after tomorrow. Cognitive dissonance is painful. Best to just live in the bubble of your own narrative. But whatever will you do after you can't post such thorough, and so very thought provoking comments about Sanders and the Sanders camp? What will we do without all that wisdom?
Octafish
(55,745 posts)You know, the kind who know how to buy lots of advertising on COMCAST?
aikoaiko
(34,127 posts)This is what it looks like when a liberal behave as a sheepdog for the more conservative wing of the party and its terribly inconvenient for them.
Response to brooklynite (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
arcane1
(38,613 posts)No bonus!
floriduck
(2,262 posts)Orsino
(37,428 posts)It's probably not easy to grasp what Sanders is fighting for, but this story manages to fuck it up even after identifying the most significant victory: cleaner campaign financing and the demonstrable success it yielded without celebrity or a party's Establishment defaulting support to another candidate.
"By not conceding a race he trails by every measure possible" is another contradiction, and merely shows us the edges of a writer's comfort zone.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)Just the Main Stream Media continuing to rewrite the context of Sander's campaign and its purpose. "he won by moving Clinton to the left." First of all, what fucking fantasy is that shit? He didn't move her to the left. He forced her to alter her rhetoric some. And for the favor, her surrogates and the media did everything they could to tarnish the man's history and record, painting him as a candidate for white voters so as to diminish every early win, talking out the sides of their mouth about how he wasn't a "real democrat" even while they supposedly "welcomed him with open arms," and twisting his votes on the auto-bailout and the gun lawsuits.
What Bernie has done, and is continuing to do, while he has the resources to do it, is to bring his message to people across the United States who would otherwise not hear it. What the media is doing, because it hates his message, is trying to discredit the man. Discredit the man, discredit the message.
So kudos brooklynite, for continuing to do your part to support the corporatocracy.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)They've been in the bag for Hillary since before she announced that she was a candidate