2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumDoes anyone actually think that Jeff Weaver and Team Bernie didn't have nasty email conversations?
Again, this is NOT to re-hash the primary. We are talking about the timely issue of the wikileaks matter.
I do and always liked Bernie in general and his passion on progressive issues, and I agree with him on much. He is focused on beating Trump as we all should be.
CONTEXT is very important. Weaver and Devine were very harsh with the DNC, especially after BERNIE's guy was found to have gotten into Hillary's database information. Bad blood arose between Weaver and the DNC administration over that, and that is OLD news.
Of course there would be negative comments from Wassserman and others. They don't like each other at all.
Do you think if we could listen to Weaver and Team Bernie's private conversations and read their private emails we wouldn't also find nasty things being said about Wasserman and the DNC?
On the whole, I am seeing the DNC remaining neutral and no "big conspiracy" of any kind at the DNC to undermine the Sanders campaign. There were a tiny number of communications out of THOUSANDS.
That said, I have long said that Wasserman stinks, should have been replaced long ago, and am now saying that anyone who sent the dumb email messages should go and action needs to be taken now to both make sure communications are better secured and that such dumb comments are not said, and that neutrality rules are strictly enforced. No argument there.
But as with so many things, there is much LESS here than some are purporting. MUCH less.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)reddread
(6,896 posts)particularly when death is dealt.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Saying private things in private communications is normal.
RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)And you also need to be fair. Private views are perfectly fine. People are allowed to not like each other.
There is NO evidence of any major effort to undermine Sanders' campaign. Please give it up.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)LuvLoogie
(7,082 posts)coming from the outrageously spurned Leftapalooza. They act as if the DNC should lap up their self-righteous disdain as if it were ambrosia.
Enjoy the Fart-In.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Some of us believe that the Democratic Party should exemplify fairness and democracy.
RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)TENS OF THOUSANDS OF EMAILS, a tiny few with people saying some dumb things showing some level of impartiality does not make for some vast conspiracy to undermine Bernie. That did not happen. The indisputable record is that Bernie got all the SAME resources, etc. as Hillary. TINY number of emails comparatively out of THOUSANDS, and some personal nasty comments that team Bernie was surely doing too.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)spinbaby
(15,096 posts)misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)I'd love to hear team sanders personal conversations about the "innocent" data theft.
But wiki & their Russian hackers only targeted the DNC.
Why do you suppose they chose only the one & no one else?
The bigger reveal is the trail that connects them all in discrediting Team Hillary, and not the emails of the DNC. Show us where the DNC actually acted on those conversations?
Yet the act & timing of the created scandal is brushed off as nothing.
What steps to sabatoge actually followed those conversations?
Chirp..
LuvLoogie
(7,082 posts)The DNC are not thought police.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)LuvLoogie
(7,082 posts)nomination? If you're pet sitting and that cute cuddly dog comes in and poops on your carpet, maybe you talk about keeping him on the porch, but you still feed and water him and take him for walks right?
Scuba
(53,475 posts)LuvLoogie
(7,082 posts)But then say it isn't about the primary. As if the accusations exist in a vacuum outside of the primary process.
Also, the article you post includes a couple "violated" surrogates. Nothing undermining the campaign itself.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)LuvLoogie
(7,082 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)Sadly, I'm not optimistic about that.
TonyPDX
(962 posts)LuvLoogie
(7,082 posts)In a different venue? What exactly about the debate schedule was undermining of Bernie?
BobbyDrake
(2,542 posts)What you're talking about is called "hypocrisy," and it's easier to spot than I think you suspected.
Madam Mossfern
(2,340 posts)and the supposedly neutral leadership of the party acting in favor of a specific candidate. They are supposed to be entirely neutral.
alfie
(522 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)way out of proportion. Also, see my comments where I agree with you and those who said the dumb things should GO and Wassernman should GO.
PatSeg
(47,778 posts)We aren't talking about what went on within the individual campaigns, but what was said within the DNC.
RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)Still, Wasserman has long needed to GO, those who said these dumb things should go, and this needs to be cleaned up. No argument there.
Renaissance Man
(669 posts)These were "private opinions and sentiments" that used official DNC servers (transmitted through e-mail addresses associated with the Democratic National Committee).
If the interest was in avoiding the appearance of being impartial, discussion about strategy against one of the candidates attempting to secure the nomination should have been had without use of that medium (official DNC e-mail addresses and servers).
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Do you think office chatter is not allowed among DNC staffers?
RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)think
(11,641 posts)Cattledog
(5,923 posts)They all do it. If you believe otherwise you're living a fantasy.
Tal Vez
(660 posts)Anyone at the DNC who was involved should resign or be removed now. Let's get this over with!
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Peacetrain
(22,881 posts)that they shared with others in moments of passionate disagreement put on review later.. and that goes for the Sanders campagin also..
DWS screwed the pooch on this one as they old saying goes.. I do not think anyone could disagree with that.. but looking at it from the long view.. it was not a DNC war on Sanders..but I am sure Sanders people feel it was.. I am not sure if the tables were turned I would not feel that way.. I sure as heck did after the caucus.. it was such a zoo.. but you look back through the lens of time, and see..people say things that were inappropriate.. it is did they do something inappropriate.. and I am not seeing that at all..
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Renaissance Man
(669 posts)You're comparing a political party (that, in its bylaws, requires the DNC to remain neutral in the nominating process) and the campaign for an individual candidate.
Apples and Oranges
RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)Renaissance Man
(669 posts)When two candidates are working to secure the nomination of a party, there is actual strategy that is discussed in an effort to secure the nomination, and this often involves "dirtying up" the opposing candidate.
There should NEVER be strategy discussed by alleged "impartial" staffers of the party to either help or harm a candidate attempting to secure its nomination.
RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)ongoing conspiracy to undermine Bernie. In fact there were also exculpatory comments. Conversations about doing something that may have been unfair is not the same as actually following through and doing that thing. As I am seeing it, little to nothing was actually DONE here. Talk is one thing. DOING is another.
In one respect, it's much ago about not much at all. Bernie got all the same resources etc. as Hillary, and overall the DNC was very neutral throughout that long primary campaign.
However, we hopefully all agree it was still wrong, that those who made any biased suggestions or comments should GO, and that Wasserman should have GONE long ago since she stinks as DNC chair.
Renaissance Man
(669 posts)"... overall the DNC was very neutral throughout that long primary campaign."
Very neutral, but not completely neutral. The DNC Bylaws don't include the qualifier "very" before the word neutral. The fact that you had to add the qualifier lets me know that even you agree that this process wasn't completely neutral.
We agree that it was still wrong, that those who made biased suggestions or comments should go, and that DWS is a complete disaster as our our chair.
CrowCityDem
(2,348 posts)Dawgs
(14,755 posts)It's very big of you.
RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)Response to RBInMaine (Original post)
johara This message was self-deleted by its author.
Kathy M
(1,242 posts)Something is off about this whole thing . The two democratic campaign's should work this out behind the scenes on this . Media should stop fueling story . This whole thing seems to be a diversion and topic that divides . Heck how do we know the supposed leaks are real ? If anyone has not looked into the players on Rep ticket meaning Trump , manafort , stone do not forget Trump has been friends with Ailes for decades every story is suspect . Ask who benefits from story .......
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)You mean the two news posts about the leaks that I posted that got locked about the Wikileaks matter so people would know about it, locked because they were considered "rehashing the primaries," and several other posts also locked, and now there are repercussions that people are talking about here because it's impossible not to? That timely issue of the Wikileaks matter?
ismnotwasm
(42,030 posts)Are surprisingly benign. Just gossipy and speculative in areas.
DemonGoddess
(4,640 posts)There are only a few which are decidedly troublesome. THOSE need to be addressed, and the parties involved need to be removed. Bigotry of ANY kind has no place in our party.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)if emails like that turn up in the releases. Imagine that, the DNC colluding with both of their top candidates for the defeat of both.
cannabis_flower
(3,771 posts)It would be all fine if we were talking about nasty emails between Hillary and her team. That's fine and all good.
We are talking here about nasty emails between leaders of the DNC and they are supposed to be impartial.
aikoaiko
(34,186 posts)Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Politics is a contact sport. I bet there were private conversations in the Sanders camps that would be embarrassing if publicly released.
Make no mistake, this attack by Wikileaks is a thinly veiled effort to crush the Democrats.