2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSo, apparently, Correct the Record people are trailing Bernie in Iowa.
So says a Buzzfeed reporter:
Didn't their first foray into trying to attack the senator cause his supporters to raise $1.2 million on his behalf?
In any case, I doubt they found much of anything. Sanders has been mostly consistent for 30 years.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)daleanime
(17,796 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)roguevalley
(40,656 posts)"One thing Nancy Pelosi has said to me is, 'Burns, in politics, if you take a swing at somebody you can rest assured of one thing: They're going to swing back. So why not prepare in advance?'"
Let me see ... he has not and will continue to not 'swing' at her so they're preparing for something he won't do .. yeah, that makes people want to vote for you. I hope this makes ten million for him.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)paranoid much?
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Oh wait...they aren't.
tomm2thumbs
(13,297 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)Or did you just not bother to read the OP?
If you're going to throw snarky retorts like that out there you should at least know what you're talking about. Otherwise it makes you look pretty silly. Why on earth did you ever think you were on moral ground to call Sanders supporters childish and call for Hillary supporters to email his campaign with link to DUer's posts?
EDITED
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)portlander23
(2,078 posts)That Mrs. Clinton won't be attacking Mr. Sanders
WaPo: Clintons hands-off policy toward Sanders is a long bet with risks
I'm sure it's all a big misunderstanding...
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)can say that out of the other side of her mouth.
portlander23
(2,078 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)LOL.
I think he was billed as dramatic chipmunk, but he's definitely a prairie dog.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)So when the FBI finds business/federal emails among those she deleted as personal, she will have an "out."
Trajan
(19,089 posts)Thanks
jfern
(5,204 posts)And they are coordinating with the Hillary campaign, so basically this is a way for her campaign to get around the $2700 donation limit.
brooklynite
(94,302 posts)The fact that Sanders supports Corbyn and that Corbyn has been positive about Hamas and Chaves are true. The dispute is over whether that is in any way relevant to the campaign, and I agree that it isn't. However, "lying" is a stretch.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)You must be sucking conservative party fumes again.
brooklynite
(94,302 posts)Hours after the opening of the event in Brighton, Britains largest trade unions and the party membership spurned a call for the conference to hold a debate and a vote on Wednesday about whether Britain should renew Trident.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/27/corbyn-trident-vote-rejected-labour-party-conference
Corbyn is indeed the leader of the Labour Party, but the Party is seen as being fractured by the choice, and there are significant questions being raised about his ability to win in the next Parliamentary election.
brooklynite
(94,302 posts)Well his chances to win this last time were 250:1
I would suggest that you not try to predict the future. It looks pathetic.
jfern
(5,204 posts)And I think they fed that $18 trillion lie story to the WSJ.
onecaliberal
(32,775 posts)Like she changes her undies.
She's projecting now.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Creative Visions - and it was primarily a group of people of color. He interacted, took questions and was well received.
Camp Weathervane is getting scared.
onecaliberal
(32,775 posts)Volaris
(10,266 posts)99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)the last one netted Team Bernie $1.2 million in donations.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)in Iowa with a sickle in his hands and compare him to Lenin.
BuelahWitch
(9,083 posts)Or maybe Marx AND Lennon!
?fb
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)AppalachianAmerican
(42 posts)Truly nasty and unscrupulous guy.
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)daleanime
(17,796 posts)with enough $$$$$$$.
jkbRN
(850 posts)tomm2thumbs
(13,297 posts)what did vomit ever do to you?!!
jkbRN
(850 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)In March 1992, Brock had authored a sharply critical story about Hill in The American Spectator magazine which became the nucleus of the book, The Real Anita Hill.[1] It was positively reviewed by several people, including George Will in Newsweek, Jonathan Groner, then-associate editor of Legal Times, in The Washington Post ("a serious work of investigative journalism" , and by Christopher Lehmann-Haupt of the New York Times ("carefully reasoned and powerful in its logic" . Excerpts were also printed in the Wall Street Journal. It was negatively reviewed by Jane Mayer and Jill Abramson in The New Yorker, Anna Quindlen in the New York Times, Dierdre English in The Nation, and Anthony Lewis in the New York Times, as well as Molly Ivins, and Ellen Goodman.[2]
Legacy[edit]
Brock now describes the book as a "character assassination" and has since "disavowed its premise".[3] He has also apologized to Hill. In his subsequent book, Blinded by the Right, Brock characterized himself as having been "a witting cog in the Republican sleaze machine."[4]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Real_Anita_Hill
Really, does anything this man does for money surprise anyone?
BuelahWitch
(9,083 posts)And no surprise there.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)By ALEX KUCZYNSKI and WILLIAM GLABERSON
Published: June 27, 2001
The author of a best-selling book that attacked the credibility of Anita F. Hill has disavowed its premise, and now says that he lied in print to protect the reputation of Justice Clarence Thomas.
David Brock, the author of the book, ''The Real Anita Hill'' (Free Press, 1993), has also suggested, in a magazine article to be published this week, that Justice Thomas used an intermediary to provide Mr. Brock with damaging information about a woman who had come forward to provide support for Ms. Hill's accusations of harassment by Justice Thomas. Ms. Hill's accusations became the focus of Senate hearings into Justice Thomas's nomination to the Supreme Court in 1991.
Mr. Brock reported that he then used the information to force the woman to retract her statements about Justice Thomas. The article, in the August issue of Talk magazine, is excerpted from Mr. Brock's new book, ''Blinded by the Right: The Conscience of an Ex Conservative'' (Crown Publishers), which is scheduled to be published in September.
Describing an article he wrote for The American Spectator, a conservative magazine, in 1992, which became the basis for his book on Ms. Hill, he said he did everything he could to ''ruin Hill's credibility,'' using ''virtually every derogatory and often contradictory allegation I had collected on Hill into the vituperative mix.''
''I demonized Democratic senators, their staffs, and Hill's feminist supporters without ever interviewing any of them,'' he continued.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/27/us/book-author-says-he-lied-his-attacks-anita-hill-bid-aid-justice-thomas.html
He is a piece of filth, I don't care how much he says he's changed, what he did was unforgivable.
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)Whitewater, Paul Jones,etc. He worked for the rightwing rag, American Spectator. He was a total fucking sleazebag!
R B Garr
(16,950 posts)stupid accountability questions. Oh no!
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)helped raise over $Million Dollars for his campaign.
Some idiots just don't learn. Let's see what lies they come up with this time and how much they make for Bernie with those lies.
I'm guessing another dirty smear will double what they helped him get last time.
Why is Hillary associated with this slime?
MindfulOne
(227 posts)I think it's cute, but it's not posted by a Bernie fan, AFAIK:
http://election.democraticunderground.com/1251629865