The DNC is a joke

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What Bernie Sanders should do is to make it clear that if the DNC does not treat him fairly, he will run a third party campaign.

Will Sanders win - no he will not. But it will for sure sabotage Hillary's chances of winning the presidency.

DWS, is so totally biased in favor of Hillary and wants to do everything she can to safeguard her candidacy. It is just pathetic and I would support Sanders all the way if he decided that enough is enough and unless there is some semblance of fairness he is ready to just run as an independent.

You're voting Republican anyway, so I'm sure you'd love a split. It's the only chance your candidate might win!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What Bernie Sanders should do is to make it clear that if the DNC does not treat him fairly, he will run a third party campaign.

Will Sanders win - no he will not. But it will for sure sabotage Hillary's chances of winning the presidency.

DWS, is so totally biased in favor of Hillary and wants to do everything she can to safeguard her candidacy. It is just pathetic and I would support Sanders all the way if he decided that enough is enough and unless there is some semblance of fairness he is ready to just run as an independent.

Well, he just sued the DNC, so you might get your wish. A lawsuit is a pretty massive escalation.

The DNC has been deliberately sabotaging Sanders for a long time now. This BS over the database was apparently the last straw.

Between the DNC and DWS, this is just nauseating.

Whether Sanders decides to run as an independent or not, the DNC is doing its best to make sure that Sanders supporters will not vote for Hillary if she is the nominee.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had pretty much decided that I could not possibly vote for Hillary and that I would sit out the election if she was the nominee.

This whole sorry episode has confirmed that I am doing the right thing.

Sure it has. I love it when Tea Partiers pretend to be Democrats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In my view, the headline should read "DNC can't protect candidates data." Of course, I have so many questions and thoughts -

1. What is the big deal anyway? The party should let all democratic candidates have access to all potential voter information. More open information will only serve the party to get the best candidate. Is it so bad that Berne and Hilary send an emails to each's others lists and supporters. i don't get it.

2. If this is a problem, why is the DNC even putting candidates at risk for headlines like this?

3. Bernie's campaign is pushing back aggressively. This makes me think there is more to the story. If this turns out to be some internal feud where the establishment folks are trying to make Bernie look bad, then I think this will backfire for the establishment folks and HRC.

4. The main argument I keep hearing against Bernie is that he can't win. That is not all that convincing to me. I even see polls where he would beat every Republican candidate. Many of us support Bernie/Warren types over Wall St candidates because we want change. Change is not going to come by just supporting the status quo. Someone has to take a risk. The world gets warmer, Wall St. get's richer, terrorists get bolder and the current policies keep on chugging...

1. That's ridiculous. The campaigns are going door-to-door talking to voters, marking down the issues important to individual constituents, and logging that data in the VAN. This isn't just Jane Doe lives at 123 Main Street and is a registered Democrat. It's microdata aimed at understanding patterns and targeting individual voters with certain mailings, calls, etc. The campaigns have had folks in the field for months gathering this data, and it's the backbone of their operation at the moment.

3. This has nothing to do with the "establishment" making Bernie look bad. His campaign did the wrong thing. When a technical glitch gave them access to the other candidate's hard work, they didn't report it, but rather downloaded the data and put it in their private files. The DNC would go hard against any campaign that did the same.

4. Your argument has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, which is about whether Bernie's campaign team effed up. They did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had pretty much decided that I could not possibly vote for Hillary and that I would sit out the election if she was the nominee.

This whole sorry episode has confirmed that I am doing the right thing.

Sure it has. I love it when Tea Partiers pretend to be Democrats.

You are a moron if you think that anyone who has misgivings about Hillary must be a tea partier. Given that 60% of the electorate don't trust Hillary, even a moron should realize that there must be some Democrats who feel the same way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What? DWS is favoring Hillary?? A progressive organization being led by a sexist? Is that even possible? Does the matriarchy have no limits?

Wasserman Schultz is bigtime in the bag for Hillary.

I mean, the whole DNC is probably in the bag for Hillary. That's because it is the Democratic National Committee and Sanders wasn't a Democrat until this year.

[Anonymous]

Read the article in the post, but I'm confused -- what exactly did the Sanders people do wrong? They had access, but did they actively seek access to proprietary information? Did they report the access they had?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Read the article in the post, but I'm confused -- what exactly did the Sanders people do wrong? They had access, but did they actively seek access to proprietary information? Did they report the access they had?

They reported the breach but during the 40 minutes before it was fixed, they downloaded a bunch of reports. This is from Bloomberg:

"The logs show that the Vermont senator’s team created at least 24 lists during the 40-minute breach, which started at 10:40 a.m., and saved those lists to their personal folders. The Sanders searches included New Hampshire lists related to likely voters, "HFA Turnout 60-100" and "HFA Support 50-100," that were conducted and saved by Uretsky. Drapkin's account searched for and saved lists including less likely Clinton voters, "HFA Support <30" in Iowa, and "HFA Turnout 30-70"' in New Hampshire."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the article in the post, but I'm confused -- what exactly did the Sanders people do wrong? They had access, but did they actively seek access to proprietary information? Did they report the access they had?

They reported the breach but during the 40 minutes before it was fixed, they downloaded a bunch of reports. This is from Bloomberg:

"The logs show that the Vermont senator’s team created at least 24 lists during the 40-minute breach, which started at 10:40 a.m., and saved those lists to their personal folders. The Sanders searches included New Hampshire lists related to likely voters, "HFA Turnout 60-100" and "HFA Support 50-100," that were conducted and saved by Uretsky. Drapkin's account searched for and saved lists including less likely Clinton voters, "HFA Support <30" in Iowa, and "HFA Turnout 30-70"' in New Hampshire."

Thanks!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my view, the headline should read "DNC can't protect candidates data." Of course, I have so many questions and thoughts -

1. What is the big deal anyway? The party should let all democratic candidates have access to all potential voter information. More open information will only serve the party to get the best candidate. Is it so bad that Berne and Hilary send an emails to each's others lists and supporters. i don't get it.

2. If this is a problem, why is the DNC even putting candidates at risk for headlines like this?

3. Bernie's campaign is pushing back aggressively. This makes me think there is more to the story. If this turns out to be some internal feud where the establishment folks are trying to make Bernie look bad, then I think this will backfire for the establishment folks and HRC.

4. The main argument I keep hearing against Bernie is that he can't win. That is not all that convincing to me. I even see polls where he would beat every Republican candidate. Many of us support Bernie/Warren types over Wall St candidates because we want change. Change is not going to come by just supporting the status quo. Someone has to take a risk. The world gets warmer, Wall St. get's richer, terrorists get bolder and the current policies keep on chugging...

This is my reaction too.

+2 Same here...

Me three. We'll find out more as the story unfolds. Wasserman doesn't strike me as trustworthy. Now Hillary increasingly less so, too. Better than the GOP wrt policy platforms? Absolutely, but right now I'm feeling the irk of bug party Democratic politics. Shame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my view, the headline should read "DNC can't protect candidates data." Of course, I have so many questions and thoughts -

1. What is the big deal anyway? The party should let all democratic candidates have access to all potential voter information. More open information will only serve the party to get the best candidate. Is it so bad that Berne and Hilary send an emails to each's others lists and supporters. i don't get it.

2. If this is a problem, why is the DNC even putting candidates at risk for headlines like this?

3. Bernie's campaign is pushing back aggressively. This makes me think there is more to the story. If this turns out to be some internal feud where the establishment folks are trying to make Bernie look bad, then I think this will backfire for the establishment folks and HRC.

4. The main argument I keep hearing against Bernie is that he can't win. That is not all that convincing to me. I even see polls where he would beat every Republican candidate. Many of us support Bernie/Warren types over Wall St candidates because we want change. Change is not going to come by just supporting the status quo. Someone has to take a risk. The world gets warmer, Wall St. get's richer, terrorists get bolder and the current policies keep on chugging...

1. That's ridiculous. The campaigns are going door-to-door talking to voters, marking down the issues important to individual constituents, and logging that data in the VAN. This isn't just Jane Doe lives at 123 Main Street and is a registered Democrat. It's microdata aimed at understanding patterns and targeting individual voters with certain mailings, calls, etc. The campaigns have had folks in the field for months gathering this data, and it's the backbone of their operation at the moment.

3. This has nothing to do with the "establishment" making Bernie look bad. His campaign did the wrong thing. When a technical glitch gave them access to the other candidate's hard work, they didn't report it, but rather downloaded the data and put it in their private files. The DNC would go hard against any campaign that did the same.

4. Your argument has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, which is about whether Bernie's campaign team effed up. They did.

I admit I am not a campaign person, but this also strikes me as something that should have been kept in-house. For whatever reason, it was leaked to the press. There is now a huge story among Bernie supporters that his campaign is getting sabotaged. Right or wrong, this will hurt Hilary. If she does win the nomination, she will need Bernie supporters, especially in close states like VA. If Hilary was smart, she would stop this mess. She could even look good by acting like the adult in the room and calming everyone down.

Meanwhile, if Bernie is president, this kind of stuff will happen all the time. People try to pin Benghazi-like scandals on him. He needs to get make sure his team is disciplined and he can handle these controversies. His message is inequality, but his opponents will try to distract away from that message constantly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the article in the post, but I'm confused -- what exactly did the Sanders people do wrong? They had access, but did they actively seek access to proprietary information? Did they report the access they had?

They reported the breach but during the 40 minutes before it was fixed, they downloaded a bunch of reports. This is from Bloomberg:

"The logs show that the Vermont senator’s team created at least 24 lists during the 40-minute breach, which started at 10:40 a.m., and saved those lists to their personal folders. The Sanders searches included New Hampshire lists related to likely voters, "HFA Turnout 60-100" and "HFA Support 50-100," that were conducted and saved by Uretsky. Drapkin's account searched for and saved lists including less likely Clinton voters, "HFA Support <30" in Iowa, and "HFA Turnout 30-70"' in New Hampshire."

They actually didn't report the breach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my view, the headline should read "DNC can't protect candidates data." Of course, I have so many questions and thoughts -

1. What is the big deal anyway? The party should let all democratic candidates have access to all potential voter information. More open information will only serve the party to get the best candidate. Is it so bad that Berne and Hilary send an emails to each's others lists and supporters. i don't get it.

2. If this is a problem, why is the DNC even putting candidates at risk for headlines like this?

3. Bernie's campaign is pushing back aggressively. This makes me think there is more to the story. If this turns out to be some internal feud where the establishment folks are trying to make Bernie look bad, then I think this will backfire for the establishment folks and HRC.

4. The main argument I keep hearing against Bernie is that he can't win. That is not all that convincing to me. I even see polls where he would beat every Republican candidate. Many of us support Bernie/Warren types over Wall St candidates because we want change. Change is not going to come by just supporting the status quo. Someone has to take a risk. The world gets warmer, Wall St. get's richer, terrorists get bolder and the current policies keep on chugging...

1. That's ridiculous. The campaigns are going door-to-door talking to voters, marking down the issues important to individual constituents, and logging that data in the VAN. This isn't just Jane Doe lives at 123 Main Street and is a registered Democrat. It's microdata aimed at understanding patterns and targeting individual voters with certain mailings, calls, etc. The campaigns have had folks in the field for months gathering this data, and it's the backbone of their operation at the moment.

3. This has nothing to do with the "establishment" making Bernie look bad. His campaign did the wrong thing. When a technical glitch gave them access to the other candidate's hard work, they didn't report it, but rather downloaded the data and put it in their private files. The DNC would go hard against any campaign that did the same.

4. Your argument has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, which is about whether Bernie's campaign team effed up. They did.

I admit I am not a campaign person, but this also strikes me as something that should have been kept in-house. For whatever reason, it was leaked to the press. There is now a huge story among Bernie supporters that his campaign is getting sabotaged. Right or wrong, this will hurt Hilary. If she does win the nomination, she will need Bernie supporters, especially in close states like VA. If Hilary was smart, she would stop this mess. She could even look good by acting like the adult in the room and calming everyone down.

Meanwhile, if Bernie is president, this kind of stuff will happen all the time. People try to pin Benghazi-like scandals on him. He needs to get make sure his team is disciplined and he can handle these controversies. His message is inequality, but his opponents will try to distract away from that message constantly.

An early PP is right. Hillary should do exactly what Bernie did in response to her emails -- Make it clear she doesn't care and is not going to be petty. You are right, this shouldn't have become so antagonistic and public. It reflects poorly on the DNC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my view, the headline should read "DNC can't protect candidates data." Of course, I have so many questions and thoughts -

1. What is the big deal anyway? The party should let all democratic candidates have access to all potential voter information. More open information will only serve the party to get the best candidate. Is it so bad that Berne and Hilary send an emails to each's others lists and supporters. i don't get it.

2. If this is a problem, why is the DNC even putting candidates at risk for headlines like this?

3. Bernie's campaign is pushing back aggressively. This makes me think there is more to the story. If this turns out to be some internal feud where the establishment folks are trying to make Bernie look bad, then I think this will backfire for the establishment folks and HRC.

4. The main argument I keep hearing against Bernie is that he can't win. That is not all that convincing to me. I even see polls where he would beat every Republican candidate. Many of us support Bernie/Warren types over Wall St candidates because we want change. Change is not going to come by just supporting the status quo. Someone has to take a risk. The world gets warmer, Wall St. get's richer, terrorists get bolder and the current policies keep on chugging...

1. That's ridiculous. The campaigns are going door-to-door talking to voters, marking down the issues important to individual constituents, and logging that data in the VAN. This isn't just Jane Doe lives at 123 Main Street and is a registered Democrat. It's microdata aimed at understanding patterns and targeting individual voters with certain mailings, calls, etc. The campaigns have had folks in the field for months gathering this data, and it's the backbone of their operation at the moment.

3. This has nothing to do with the "establishment" making Bernie look bad. His campaign did the wrong thing. When a technical glitch gave them access to the other candidate's hard work, they didn't report it, but rather downloaded the data and put it in their private files. The DNC would go hard against any campaign that did the same.

4. Your argument has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, which is about whether Bernie's campaign team effed up. They did.

I admit I am not a campaign person, but this also strikes me as something that should have been kept in-house. For whatever reason, it was leaked to the press. There is now a huge story among Bernie supporters that his campaign is getting sabotaged. Right or wrong, this will hurt Hilary. If she does win the nomination, she will need Bernie supporters, especially in close states like VA. If Hilary was smart, she would stop this mess. She could even look good by acting like the adult in the room and calming everyone down.

Meanwhile, if Bernie is president, this kind of stuff will happen all the time. People try to pin Benghazi-like scandals on him. He needs to get make sure his team is disciplined and he can handle these controversies. His message is inequality, but his opponents will try to distract away from that message constantly.

Would you say the same thing if the Clinton campaign had improperly accessed and saved confidential data belonging to the Sanders campaign?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my view, the headline should read "DNC can't protect candidates data." Of course, I have so many questions and thoughts -

1. What is the big deal anyway? The party should let all democratic candidates have access to all potential voter information. More open information will only serve the party to get the best candidate. Is it so bad that Berne and Hilary send an emails to each's others lists and supporters. i don't get it.

2. If this is a problem, why is the DNC even putting candidates at risk for headlines like this?

3. Bernie's campaign is pushing back aggressively. This makes me think there is more to the story. If this turns out to be some internal feud where the establishment folks are trying to make Bernie look bad, then I think this will backfire for the establishment folks and HRC.

4. The main argument I keep hearing against Bernie is that he can't win. That is not all that convincing to me. I even see polls where he would beat every Republican candidate. Many of us support Bernie/Warren types over Wall St candidates because we want change. Change is not going to come by just supporting the status quo. Someone has to take a risk. The world gets warmer, Wall St. get's richer, terrorists get bolder and the current policies keep on chugging...

1. That's ridiculous. The campaigns are going door-to-door talking to voters, marking down the issues important to individual constituents, and logging that data in the VAN. This isn't just Jane Doe lives at 123 Main Street and is a registered Democrat. It's microdata aimed at understanding patterns and targeting individual voters with certain mailings, calls, etc. The campaigns have had folks in the field for months gathering this data, and it's the backbone of their operation at the moment.

3. This has nothing to do with the "establishment" making Bernie look bad. His campaign did the wrong thing. When a technical glitch gave them access to the other candidate's hard work, they didn't report it, but rather downloaded the data and put it in their private files. The DNC would go hard against any campaign that did the same.

4. Your argument has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, which is about whether Bernie's campaign team effed up. They did.

I admit I am not a campaign person, but this also strikes me as something that should have been kept in-house. For whatever reason, it was leaked to the press. There is now a huge story among Bernie supporters that his campaign is getting sabotaged. Right or wrong, this will hurt Hilary. If she does win the nomination, she will need Bernie supporters, especially in close states like VA. If Hilary was smart, she would stop this mess. She could even look good by acting like the adult in the room and calming everyone down.

Meanwhile, if Bernie is president, this kind of stuff will happen all the time. People try to pin Benghazi-like scandals on him. He needs to get make sure his team is disciplined and he can handle these controversies. His message is inequality, but his opponents will try to distract away from that message constantly.

An early PP is right. Hillary should do exactly what Bernie did in response to her emails -- Make it clear she doesn't care and is not going to be petty. You are right, this shouldn't have become so antagonistic and public. It reflects poorly on the DNC.

You don't think suing the DNC reflects poorly on Bernie's campaign? Seems like a bit of an escalation to rush to court.

Hillary will be magnanimous about this, I feel sure. But Bernie needs to make sure his campaign isn't holding on to the data and needs to provide a full explanation.