Tuesday Open Thread [4.19.16]
NATIONAL—NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl–Clinton 50, Sanders 48
NATIONAL—NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl–Trump 40, Cruz 35, Kasich 24
NEW JERSEY—Rutgers-Eagleton–Trump 52, Kasich 24, Cruz 18
NEW JERSEY—Rutgers-Eagleton–Clinton 51, Sanders 42
NATIONAL–NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl–Clinton 50, Trump 39 | Clinton 46, Cruz 44 | Sanders 52, Cruz 40
So Bernie Sanders decided to distract from his coming landslide loss tonight and falsely accuse Hillary Clinton and the DNC of campaign finance violations. Leave it to Rachel Maddow to expose Bernie’s false allegations:
Rick Hasen, an elections law expert, says that there doesn’t seem to be any basis for Sander’s allegations:
Clinton, like Sanders and other presidential candidates, has set up a joint fundraising committee with her political party. The JFC allows you to raise a huge chunk of change (more now than in past campaigns, thanks to the Supreme Court blowing out the aggregate federal limits in the McCutcheon case). A small bit goes to the candidate’s committee under the federal limits (currently $2,700 for the primary and $2,700 for the general). The next bit goes to the DNC, and the rest so state parties in $10,000 chunks. Sanders is accusing the joint committee of raising really big donations, and then having the JFC using some of those really big donations to engage in direct mail and internet targeting of small donors. When those small donors donate small amounts, contributions up to the first $2,700 benefit Clinton under the JFC agreement, and because these are small donors, it means Clinton gets all that small donor money.
The [Sanders campaign’s] letter cites no authority showing that this use of the JFC is not allowed, and it is hard to see what provision of the law it violates when donors give only small amounts that happen to benefit only Clinton. The letter says that maybe this is like an in-kind contribution from the DNC to the Clinton campaign, but I don’t see how it is that if the money is coming from the JFC not from the committee. The letter even says this means that those giving big checks to the DNC might thereby be giving more than the $2,700 to Clinton, which is not literally true – it is what the JFC is doing with the money, over which the donors have no control.
Steve Benen says the false accusations were only made to help with Sander’s own fundraising:
It’s not altogether clear how serious the Sanders campaign is about the allegations themselves. The “proof” of wrongdoing is a Washington Post article from two months ago, which doesn’t actually point to any specific misdeeds, and there’s been no explanation as to why Sanders waited two months to complain about it.
What’s more, the Sanders campaign didn’t take its complaints to the Federal Election Commission, which is responsible for reviewing such allegations, but rather, to the DNC itself – the entity that already believes there’s nothing improper about its own operation.
It didn’t help matters when, less than 30 minutes after making the accusations, the Sanders campaign sent out a new fundraising message to its donors, asking for more financial contributions in response to the allegations.
When this Democratic primary ends tonight, Bernie Sanders is going to have a lot of work to do if he hopes to speak or win any policy or process reforms at the Convention. He will have to fully and publicly retract his allegations, and then enthusiastically endorse Hillary within the next two weeks. If he doesn’t and he continues this Ralph Naderesque Kamikaze mission to destroy Hillary and the Democratic Party, then he will be shut down and shut out. All of the super delegates will immediately endorse Hillary the moment she clinches a majority of the pledged delegates (which will be on April 26 I believe, I have to check the schedule and the math), which would then ensure that the nomination is clinched. And then it is over. He will be shut out of the convention, and shut out of the Democratic caucus in the Senate in 2017, and forbidden any committee membership or chairmanship. All because Bernie can’t handle losing, or at least cannot lose in a respectful or dignified way.
Now, Sanders partisans, both here at DL and elsewhere, will react quite negatively to this, saying that instead Hillary and the Democrats will have to come crawling to them, and if they don’t, they will vote Trump or stay home. I am calling your bluff on that. Those who want respect, give respect. So Bernie and his supporters are going to have to change their tune first before any considerations are expected from Hillary and her supporters.
So when a rich person is a liberal and agrees with you and your liberal political and policy positions, and wants to fund your political party and all its candidates up and down the ballot, and all you have to do is attend a fundraiser and share inane small talk and cocktails with them, what the fuck is the big deal, and why wouldn’t you do it? The center failing of all purist progressives and rabid BernieBros and Naderites is that they assume that if you are wealthy, you are evil, even if you are a liberal. You are assumed to have nefarious goals, you are assumed to be corrupt and crooked, in the pocket of corporations and Wall Street. It is idiotic.
[The Press and the BernieBros] completely ignore [George Clooney’s] rationale for raking in so much money. A rationale that has been repeated by Clinton and completely ignored.
CLOONEY: But, you know, I think what’s important and what I think the Clinton campaign has not been very good at explaining is this and this is the truth: the overwhelming amount of money that we’re raising, and it is a lot, but the overwhelming amount of the money that we’re raising is not going to Hillary to run for President, it’s going to the down ticket. It’s going to the congressmen and senators to try to take back Congress. And the reason that’s important and the reason it’s important to me is because we need, I’m a Democrat so if you’re a Republican, you’re going to disagree, but we need to take the senate back. Because we need to confirm the Supreme Court justice because that fifth vote on the Supreme Court can overturn Citizens United and get this obscene, ridiculous amount of money out so I never have to do a fundraiser again. And that’s why I’m doing it.
Bingo!
It is not enough to have a Democrat elected to the Oval Office. For said occupant to deliver on their promises they are going to need a Congress filled with as many like-minded elected officials as possible. That requires the national and state parties to coordinate “get out the vote” operations, staffing phone banks, sending email blasts and a host of other things for the Democratic presidential nominee and congressional candidates down the ballot. Not only does this require dedicated supporters, but also it requires money to finance it all. And such financing cannot be left until the general election.
Sanders talks about his revolution. Clinton is the only one building the infrastructure that will allow such a revolution to take place. And it costs money. Clooney and like minded rich liberals want to give their money to Clinton and the Democrats to do it. And Bernie complains?? And says George Clooney, and all the rich liberals, and the DNC and Hillary are corrupt??
In response to Sanders’ statement about Clinton winning in the “most conservative part of this country,” Nate Silver notes that she is winning the states that look like the Democratic Party.
The most representative state by this measure is New Jersey. We expect its primary electorate to be about 57 percent white, 26 percent black, 11 percent Hispanic and 6 percent Asian or other, quite close to the national Democratic electorate. New Jersey won’t vote until June 7, although Clinton was well ahead when the last poll was released there in February.
After New Jersey comes Illinois, which Clinton won narrowly — and then Florida, where Clinton won going away. Then there’s New York, which votes Tuesday, and where Clinton is 15 percentage points ahead in our polling average. Virginia, another Southern state, ranks as the next most representative; Clinton won it easily. Then there’s Nevada, another Clinton state, before we go back to the South to North Carolina, also won by Clinton. The next group of four states (Maryland, Tennessee, Arkansas and Michigan) are roughly tied and include some further representation for the South, along with, finally, one state (Michigan) that Sanders won.
In other words, Clinton has won or is favored to win almost every state where the turnout demographics strongly resemble those of Democrats as a whole.
Paul Waldman has an interesting post up at The American Prospect, “Why Hillary Clinton Could Be the Kind of President Bernie Sanders Supporters Will Love.” As Waldman frames his argument:
It’s frustrating to be a Bernie Sanders supporter right now. Your candidate has plenty of impressive wins behind him, Hillary Clinton is still far from having the nomination wrapped up, and yet everyone is talking as if the race is over. First they didn’t take your guy seriously, and now they want to push him out of the race. With the expectedly raucous New York primary coming up Tuesday, it’s no wonder that there’s no small amount of animosity coming from Sanders fans toward Clinton. In fact, in a recent McClatchy/Marist poll, 25 percent of Sanders supporters say they won’t vote for Clinton if she’s the party’s nominee.
They may not want to hear it yet, but those who support Sanders might start thinking about how they could exert influence over Clinton’s presidency. Because some of what they don’t like about Clinton–her caution, her propensity for difference-splitting, her inclination to seek the path of least resistance–is exactly what will enable liberals to pull her to the left once she’s in the White House.
I reject part of this argument. Hillary has always been the liberal Clinton. When her husband was the squishy moderate, Hillary was called a feminazi. She is already there. She doesn’t have to be pulled anywhere. The difference here is not between liberalism and centrism, it is between purity and pragmatism or radical chaos and incrementalism.
The Supreme Court “seemed sharply divided during an extended argument over a challenge to President Obama’s plan that would shield millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation and allow them to work in the country legally,” the New York Times reports.
“The case, brought by 26 states, may produce a significant ruling on presidential power and immigration policy in the midst of a presidential campaign in which both issues have been prominent.”
Washington Post: “Instead, the court’s conservatives and liberals seemed split, and a 4-to-4 tie would leave in place a lower court’s decision that the president exceeded his powers in issuing the directive. It could affect about 4 million undocumented immigrants who have been in the country since 2010 and have family ties to U.S. citizens and others lawfully in the country.”
I am looking forward to Cassandra’s analysis of last night’s debates.
“When this Democratic primary ends tonight, Bernie Sanders is going to have a lot of work to do if he hopes to speak or win any policy or process reforms at the Convention.”
One would hope the DNC isn’t so petty that they would disregard good policy because Sanders doesn’t grovel enough… Or if they are, they would deserve to lose this election.
“One would hope the DNC isn’t so petty…”
LOL. Oh my God. Thanks for the morning guffaw.
“When this Democratic primary ends tonight…”
My esteemed colleague, Delaware Dem, is dreaming. Whatever happens in New York, one thing is clear. This contest is continuing.
“He will be shut out of the convention, and shut out of the Democratic caucus in the Senate in 2017, and forbidden any committee membership or chairmanship”
Crucifying Bernie won’t win over the under-45s, which the party will need soon enough.
“One would hope the DNC isn’t so petty…”
Look at the bullshit the Dem establishment is doing to Joe Sestak right now.
The DNC will not decide who speaks at the convention, or what policy reforms are inserted into the platform. That will be decided by the nominee apparent and the platform committee.
If Bernie Sanders is not the nominee, he will not be shut out of the Democratic caucus in the Senate. That is just absurd. Though an Independent, he has caucused with the Democrats since entering Congress because that is beneficial to him and to the Democrats.
Primaries are divisive because of what is at stake, what the candidate and supporters seek to gain. That divisiveness is almost always healed for the same reason-it is mutually beneficial……and the alternative is unacceptable.
According to DD, all of Sanders’ supporters will have to beg him personally for the privilege of voting for Clinton.
I do love how all this prep work is being done, so when Clinton loses to Cruz, it won’t be because she’s a bad candidate, but because hippies did some hippie stuff.
Yep. Pretty much. “Keep quiet and accept your fate” is always the campaign slogan tested and calibrated to win. Why it doesn’t is clearly the hippies fault.
Agreed, Paul Calistro. Anyone know if an online video of the debate is available? Wasn’t able to attend, but I’d like to watch it.
Nope, the message here is that Sanders supporters and Bernie himself need to stop being such disrespectful sore losers. You are not going to be treated like a winner if you aren’t one.
Both candidates need each others supporters to win. That’s it. That’s the way it’s always been. And that’s why I have always said I would vote for whoever won the Dem primary. No caveats.
Bernie Sanders’ supporters are mean to me! Hillary Clinton’s supporter are mean to me! Get over yourselves. It’s not always about you. I know, hard to believe.
“Bernie himself need to stop being such disrespectful sore losers.”
LOL. Like I said, lock up the booze and guns.
DD would have been writing threads slamming DavidDorks and talking about how all those dumb slaves need to be more supportive of Goliath.
Pandora.. The language used in these open threads are provocative and a challenge. They are dismissive of a large chunk of the party and are written to start a fight… Or to be a dick. If the comments are combative it’s because it is a response.
DETV recorded debate. They take about a day.
Ben, probably why I included both sides, no?
One side isn’t putting up daily threads mocking the other and insulting almost half (source, the poll at the top) the party. Its a false equivocation.
Jason put up a funny post a few weeks ago calling the election for Sanders, and DDs hair has been on fire ever since.
Exactly, Ben. That post by Jason was the moment I realized I had to go on the attack against you all. And I am insulting (and I admit it, I am) because you and Jason and Puck and all the rest, have engaged in Republican smears against Hillary, and have refused to even accept the reality of simple math. It’s like you are now tea partiers of the left saying stupid shit like Bernie will be the nominee and Hillary will be indicted with the certainty only the insane possess. Being insulting in response to that is the only appropriate response. I suppose I could just ignore you, but that runs the danger of you all living in your own bubble world without someone poking it to let some reality in. So consider these threads your daily wake up call.
But here is a promise I will make: in June, after the last primary, we will be holding a happy hour for all our beloved DL commenters, and I will personally buy you a drink. That will be my mea culpa to you all.
” have engaged in Republican smears against Hillary”
In my defense, I have tried to avoid the Republican smears. I have my hands full with the Democratic smears.
Well, there are one and the same. Purists and the right attack her for being corrupt, both without any evidence whatsoever.
When has insulting someone ever convinced them you are right? Ftr, I have accepted the math. I know Clinton will be the nominee. My problem is your attitude that the losers need their faces rubbed in the loss. Its unseemly. But I will happily accept a beer 🙂
DD just wants to round us all up in one place.
Did I miss your calling out yesterday’s poll as insulting, Ben? I found it funny, but if you have a problem with tone shouldn’t it apply to both sides?
Yesterday, you said about Hillary: “I’ve started to see signs of a “centrist” pivot which I wont be able to support.”
Can I ask what centrist pivot you’ve seen?
When has insulting someone ever convinced them you are right? ….My problem is your attitude that the losers need their faces rubbed in the loss.
Good point. One I will take to heart. Here is the thing: the tone of these open threads and my comments on them depends really entirely on the tone of the campaign, a tone that I take from both sides on Twitter, from the punditry, etc. When the Sanders campaign amps up its attacks, like yesterday, I will respond in kind. It may have no connection to you, Ben, or any other Sanders supporters here.
Further, I am not ever going to convince you that I am right and Hillary is right on the differences that Hillary and Bernie have. But right now, the analogy I suggest to you is that we are all, in this primary race, are focused in on those differences using a powerful microscope. As the primary ends, we will zoom out and then face the Republicans, and we will find that we have more in agreement with each other, and that our disagreements are really just over tactics rather than substance, and that we have more to fight for together, than we do with the Republicans. And that would be true no matter who won the primary.
And very funny, Puck.
@J “Whatever happens in New York, one thing is clear. This contest is continuing.”
What I fail to see is how this attitude is helping anyone except the GOP. This seems to be simply a threat to the Democratic party just because your chosen candidate didn’t happen to come out on top.
What’s the point of this petulance, when the real race is over?
If there was some particular policy goal, or some particular concession you’d like to see from Hillary, I could get behind that.
But this stuff???:: “This contest is continuing.”
Why?
@Ben “My problem is your attitude that the losers need their faces rubbed in the loss.”
No. We just want you to stop trying to damage the winner. That’s all. Really.
@DD “Further, I am not ever going to convince you that I am right and Hillary is right on the differences that Hillary and Bernie have.”
This isn’t helping. Clinton and Sanders agree on about 95% of the issues.
If you want Sanders supporters to also support Hillary, focus on that 95%.
Frankly, in that 5%, Sanders probably IS better, but let’s let that 5% go… It’s just not worth the divisive fight.
Focus on the 95%!!
LE, I think you are saying the same thing, just differently. I agree.
@DD “just differently.”
Maybe that’s the problem.
@J “Whatever happens in New York, one thing is clear. This contest is continuing.”
“What I fail to see is how this attitude is helping anyone except the GOP.”
What I fail to see is what “attitude” I have revealed. I’m simply stating a fact. The contest continues until there is a winner. I think that’s what is bugging Delaware Dem. He wants Clinton declared the winner early, because… reasons.
Watch this… Hillary Clinton is hurting Bernie, the eventual nominee, by not quitting.
See? I can say the same nonsensical bullshit. But you don’t see me getting all huffy.
@J “The contest continues until there is a winner.”
Yea… And we seem to be there.
Are you reading the same news feeds that I am?
Don’t come around here with your “New York doesn’t really matter anyway” stuff tomorrow.
Jason, how many Bernie supporters do you think made the October deadline? His momentum didn’t really start until January. I would say that he probably enjoys more support now than Clinton, but as far as people who can vote for him and make that support official…… I dont think he wins today.
I think you are buying into a media narrative that says something like, “Bernie supporters are young, first time voters.”
But, I’m old and have voted many times. So I haven’t bought into that narrative. If you are looking at demographic patterns, the only group Clinton consistently wins is people with over $250,000 of income per year. So anything can happen.
Also, finally, it isn’t winner take all is it? So even if Clinton wins, no knock out punch will be delivered.
And it wont be “NY doesnt matter” IF somehow Bernie wins. It will be “that win wasnt by a large enough margin to matter”… and much as I hate it, that will be correct.
Tonight is a literal win/win situation for Sanders.
If Sanders wins, even by a little, it is a disaster for Clinton. If Clinton wins, even by a lot, it will not knock Sanders out of the race.
The ever moving goalposts for the Sanders campaign.
“We will win New York”
Clinton vanquishes Sanders in a landslide.
“We will win Connecticut, New Jersey, California, Pennsylvania!”
The good news for Sanders is there are some more primaries coming up, so he can continue moving the goalposts.
The bad news is he will have to win all the rest of the states with 64% of the vote to even garner a tie in the pledged delegate race.
So good luck with all that.
Jason reminds me now of that screaming PUMA outside the DNC rules committee meeting in 2008.
If you haven’t noticed I don’t get into the state race discussion. It’s misleading.
I don’t have a problem with Bernie staying in the race. Do I wish he’d pull back on the rhetoric and personal attacks? Yep, but it’s his campaign.
Like I said yesterday, Hillary has pulled her punches with Bernie. So have I because there’s no point in going there. I’d like him to do the same – get off the personal/character stuff and get into policy detail. There’s a discussion to be had there and one that could actually benefit people.
Come on, DD. He’s not like that.
Thank you Pandora. I’m for Bernie… or for Clinton should that situation arise.
This:
The bad news is he will have to win all the rest of the states with 64% of the vote to even garner a tie in the pledged delegate race.
As If said, it will come down to Super Delegates, and the Super Delegates are lagging indicators. If Clinton limps into the convention having lost a long string of primaries, they will see the light.
I’ve received three separate mail pieces from the Sanders campaign in the last week or so. Nothing from the Clinton campaign. I wonder what that’s about.
@c’est “I wonder what that’s about.”
That happens to me too, but that’s because I send Hillary’s stuff to junk mail and I read the stuff from Sanders.
Did you look in your junk mail folder??
@C’est — I haven’t gotten anything from either candidate in the mail and I’ve sent funds to Bernie. On the other hand, my neighbor reports that a young son is getting non stop material from Bernie.
My oldest daughter and I each got a mailer from Bernie. Nothing yet from Hillary.
We’re getting Bernie mailers (a lot of them). All addressed to my kids.
I receive and open emails from both campaigns. My partner and I have not contributed to either candidate. The mailers are addressed to both of us, Gen Xers and registered Democrats in the city.
Maybe the Clinton campaign skipped a mail campaign in Delaware?