Support NeoGAF

[Piecake]

I'm saying that Bernie Sanders' protest campaign (which has no chance of success) accessing voter information for a brief period, which was quickly discovered with the person responsible fired, should not be treated as a big deal by the campaign of the overwhelming front runner who will not be harmed by this breach.

If it makes you feel good to clamber up on a high horse and engage in moral grandstanding about this act of inconceivable perfidy, knock yourself out. I'm talking about how Hillary's campaign should treat it.

And, of course, you are right and the rest of us are just obtuse morons, huh? No high horse there, and I do love your use of exaggeration. Bravo. I also apparently learned that finding theft wrong is moral grand standing, so thank you for that keen insight.

I also like how you were completely dismissive of my previous argument that it would be pretty foolish for Clinton to dismiss this because the Republicans could use that dismissal to attack her on a weak cyber defense stance and just weak in general. But hey, that doesnt matter. Only your suggestion deserves consideration. My mistake

But if like you said, and that Bernie's campaign doesnt stand a chance, why should she concern herself with her campaign with Bernie? Why shouldnt she focus on the general election where taking a strong stance against the Sanders Campaign's theft would be beneficial?

My guess is that you will argue that it will lose Bernie supporters in the general election, but I disagree. The DNC actually hurt the Clinton campaign by restricting Sanders' data access because it allowed that campaign and their supporters to play the victim. With that gone, Clinton can still play the affronted and scandalized candidate who stands up for herself and is tough on cyber theft without alienating Bernie supporters because the only Bernie supporters who would be alienated by Clinton not liking that Bernie stole her campaign's data were long gone anyway. Doing nothing just makes her look weak.

But hey, I am sure I simply just can't comprehend your brilliance. Please enlighten me if you are able to use your intelligence to elucidate your points more clearly in the future.

 

[Cerium]

As for the second bold, heh...now that's true.

If anything this justifies Hillary's paranoia about enemies trying to sneak all up in her shit.

 

[Clefargle]

All relative. If the shoes were in the other pair of legs you know the mountain would be four times as big.

As for the second bold, heh...now that's true.

Except we have nothing suggesting Hillary did anything unauthorized at the time even though there have been months of investigations. Here we have a clear smoking gun after one day. Not the same

 

[Cerium]

Except we have nothing suggesting Hillary did anything unauthorized at the time even though there have been months of investigations. Here we have a clear smoking gun after one day. Not the same

Maybe Bernie should testify for 11 hours.

 

[Piecake]

Definitely. I just don't know if that applies for this data.

http://www.vox.com/2015/12/18/10623886/the-feud-between-bernie-sanders-and-the-dnc-explained

scroll down to find a tweet. And I said apparently because I don't take that tweet as confirmation.

 

[GnawtyDog]

Maybe Bernie should testify for 11 hours.

We do need a Berniebrushoff.gif

Help spread the Democratic tradition.

 

[danm999]

They made a mountain out of a molehill in the hope that Sanders would leak votes to Clinton. It's as obvious as the sun is bright. I just find the thought of Clinton supporters getting angry over data scandals to be hilariously hypocritical.

Makes sense to me.

Sure overreacting to it might shine the light on an incident that makes the entire DNC look terrible in terms of security and effectiveness and gives the GOP an issue to drive against them endlessly, but they had to do something to get Clinton more of Sanders supporters; the latest national poll only had her with a 31 point lead with Democrats and Democratic leaning independents.

 

[Abounder]

DNC is a goddamn shitshow. Yeesh

 

[pigeon]

Bernie is not a true Democrat. He's an independent. I'm not surprised at all that the Clinton lapdogs over at the DNC would try and hinder him.

Apparently I really need to dig into this point very clearly:

From the perspective of everybody at Hillary's campaign, and anybody at the DNC who actually cares, Hillary Clinton has already won the Democratic primary.

According to the mental model of these folks, there's no possible way for her to lose at this point. I'm not saying that's necessarily true, but it's definitely what people believe.

So all these ideas about Hillary trying to cheat to destroy Bernie's campaign, or the DNC secretly putting their thumb on the scale, just radically misunderstand the perspective of the people involved. Why would anybody engage in chicanery in order to win a race you've already won? It doesn't make any sense.

 

[Machina]

Makes sense to me.

Sure overreacting to it might shine the light on an incident that makes the entire DNC look terrible in terms of security and effectiveness and gives the GOP an issue to drive against them endlessly, but they had to do something to get Clinton more of Sanders supporters; the latest national poll only had her with a 31 point lead with Democrats and Democratic leaning independents.

If Clinton is such a shoe in, why did her camp find it necessary to capitalize on this at all?

 

[Clefargle]

Makes sense to me.

Sure overreacting to it might shine the light on an incident that makes the entire DNC look terrible in terms of security and effectiveness and gives the GOP an issue to drive against them endlessly, but they had to do something to get Clinton more of Sanders supporters; the latest national poll only had her with a 31 point lead with Democrats and Democratic leaning independents.

So now that the wrongdoing is clear and there is no more "they were doing it to expose flaws" or "they weren't contractually obligated to NOT steal" to hide behind. Bernie supporters are just gonna passive-aggressively sneer and suggest that data security breaches don't matter when they happen to someone leading in the polls? Cmon, you guys are better than that.

Edit: derp, disregard please

 

[danm999]

If Clinton is such a shoe in, why did her camp find it necessary to capitalize on this at all?

What capitalizing? Her campaign released a statement that basically said they were unhappy Sanders campaign stole their data.

So far as I know they haven't, you know, held a fundraiser over this incident like a certain campaign I might mention.

So now that the wrongdoing is clear and there is no more "they were doing it to expose flaws" or "they weren't contractually obligated to NOT steal" to hide behind. Bernie supporters are just gonna passive-aggressively sneer and suggest that data security breaches don't matter when they happen to someone leading in the polls? Cmon, you guys are better than that.

In case it wasn't clear, I was being extremely sarcastic.

 

[Piecake]

If Clinton is such a shoe in, why did her camp find it necessary to capitalize on this at all?

Because acting like a doormat is not a good impression to have as a President?

 

[Clefargle]

What capitalizing? Her campaign released a statement that basically said they were unhappy Sanders campaign stole their data.

So far as I know they haven't, you know, held a fundraiser over this incident like a certain campaign I might mention.

Agreed,

Sorry, but did I misunderstand your last post? Was it sarcastic or did I miss something. Not trying to mischaracterize you. Just checking

Edit: ok lol sorry man, I need sleep

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Everything I'm hearing from people who have been involved in campaigns before seems to say this kind of information is very important. I wonder what punishment can be appropriate for something like this.

Either way, at this point I don't think there's a thing Trump or Sanders could do that would make their supporters change their mind. If anything, it just makes them more likely to entrench further.

 

[Machina]

What capitalizing? Her campaign released a statement that basically said they were unhappy Sanders campaign stole their data.

So far as I know they haven't, you know, held a fundraiser over this incident like a certain campaign I might mention.

Why even release a statement? The race is won, after all. They knew the media would run with whatever comment came out of the camp regardless. The rest is the snowball effect.

 

[danm999]

Everything I'm hearing from people who have been involved in campaigns before seems to say this kind of information is very important. I wonder what punishment can be appropriate for something like this.

Either way, at this point I don't think there's a thing Trump or Sanders could do that would make their supporters change their mind. If anything, it just makes them more likely to entrench further.

Oh man now that's a thought.

"The RNC are total overrated hacks; my guys walked in and took the data. So what, it's not like losers like Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio need it; they'll choke like dogs if they ever tried to use it."

 

[GnawtyDog]

Why even release a statement? The race is won, after all. They knew the media would run with whatever comment came out of the camp regardless. The rest is the snowball effect.

Are you trolling or are you serious?

 

[danm999]

Why even release a statement? The race is won, after all. They knew the media would run with whatever comment came out of the camp regardless. The rest is the snowball effect.

So the Republicans don't run ads in the general to the tune of "that communist took your shit and you didn't even say anything; how can you possibly be strong when you lead America".

 

[Clefargle]

Why even release a statement? The race is won, after all. They knew the media would run with whatever comment came out of the camp regardless. The rest is the snowball effect.

Why would they release a statement about a data breach that prolly every major network was calling them about all day looking for a quote? Sorry, but do you understand how PR works? All the organizers and donors behind the Clinton campaign would have been clamoring for an update for hours. There is only one campaign actively raising money off this and playing up the victim angle. Cmon

 

[i_am_ben]

How much effort did Bernie's staffer need to go to in order to steal all this information?

was it just "oh the firewall's down let's just click on this link, and copy and paste her files" or something more?

 

[Holmes]

How much effort did Bernie's staffer need to go to in order to steal all this information?

was it just "oh the firewall's down let's just click on this link, and copy and paste her files" or something more?

It was pretty much that but they knew what to look for.

 

[Wafflecakes]

The victim and conspiracy shit that Bernie supporters are throwing around is utterly laughable.

 

[RedSparc]

You know, I honestly never planned to gloat over Hillary's primary victory.

Plans have changed.

Very bold, must be tough having to wait 8 years after her last assumed primary victory.

There is a lot of things not to like about HRC, especially her surrogates and DNC lackey DWS. But I'm sure she was as stern with her as she was with Wall Street. I'm not quite sure how she will sleep after being told to "cut it out" by Clinton.

 

[Wafflecakes]

Why even release a statement? The race is won, after all. They knew the media would run with whatever comment came out of the camp regardless. The rest is the snowball effect.

Have you ever turned on a TV or the internet before? I now wonder.

There is no way the Hillary campaign couldn't release a response to something like this. Someone stole THEIR data.

 

[Cerium]

Very bold, must be tough having to wait 8 years after her last assumed primary victory.

Wouldn't know. I volunteered with the Obama campaign in 2008.

 

[RedSparc]

Wouldn't know. I volunteered with the Obama campaign in 2008.

Then why are you hitching your wagon to Clinton? If she wasn't the candidate for you then why now? It's not like her positions have changed, they are still based on polling with no conviction. Even more so since her campaigns is now irrevocably tied to the decisions made by the DNC.

Hopefully wall street employs like a million people, right?

 

[Maledict]

Well, congrats to Sander's for fucking up the democratic primaries, losing control of his own staff, and making a republican win more likely. All because his campaign stole confidential, critical data from another campaign.

The fact his campaign is egging on these conspiracy theorists is appalling. What the *hell* are they doing? I can only assume they are now in this purely to line their own pockets rather than actually win a campaign.

 

[Clefargle]

Then why are you hitching your wagon to Clinton? If she wasn't the candidate for you then why now? It's not like her positions have changed, they are still based on polling with no conviction. Even more so since her campaigns is now irrevocably tied to the decisions made by the DNC.

Hopefully wall street employs like a million people, right?

Cause Obama can't run for a third term and the alternative is a republican in office. Sanders is great, but America isn't ready to elect a socialist. Look up the data on favorability polls about that label. And believe me the republicans would call him that forever. They already started

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Cause Obama can't run for a third term and the alternative is a republican in office. Sanders is great, but America isn't ready to elect a socialist. Look up the data on favorability polls about that label. And believe me the republicans would call him that forever. They already started

I don't get the people who would vote for Trump after Sanders. That feeling is clearly not mutual among his supporters given what they think of Sanders on just about every issue.

How are you sticking it to the billionaire class by voting for a billionaire that was born with a silver spoon in his mouth? Because he talks like a truck driver? Hillary Clinton has more humble beginnings than Trump, that's a sad reality.

 

[Cerium]

Then why are you hitching your wagon to Clinton? If she wasn't the candidate for you then why now? It's not like her positions have changed, they are still based on polling with no conviction. Even more so since her campaigns is now irrevocably tied to the decisions made by the DNC.

Hopefully wall street employs like a million people, right?

If Obama was running he'd have my allegiance again. I'd certainly take him over Hillary.

Bernie's got an attractive platform sure, but I haven't seen any indication that he'd actually be good at the nuts and bolts of being President. On the contrary, the people he's surrounded himself with and the way he's run his campaign tells me the opposite. Obama ran a perfect campaign in 2008, which was what was needed to beat Hillary. Bernie falls far short of that mark.

I also believe that Hillary has learned from working with Obama and is a better candidate today than she was eight years ago. She's certainly more electable, which I never believed was the case in 2008. I support almost the entirety of Obama's agenda, TPP included, and Hillary's is very similar.

Basically I'm confident that President Clinton 2.0 would be able to make more of a real, practical difference on issues I care about than President Sanders. And after the last eight years, I've come to realize that the GOP doesn't deserve to deal with a man as good as Obama.

They deserve Madam President.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Then why are you hitching your wagon to Clinton? If she wasn't the candidate for you then why now? It's not like her positions have changed, they are still based on polling with no conviction. Even more so since her campaigns is now irrevocably tied to the decisions made by the DNC.

Hopefully wall street employs like a million people, right?

What? So Sanders camp steals data but it's the Clinton camp who is revealed as corrupt over this? Is that your argument?

 

[RedSparc]

Cause Obama can't run for a third term and the alternative is a republican in office. Sanders is great, but America isn't ready to elect a socialist. Look up the data on favorability polls about that label. And believe me the republicans would call him that forever. They already started

So let them, it's not like that will work in the GE. But what will work for Republicans is the appearance that the fix is in for the Democratic primary by the DNC.

If you are scared of the electability of a "Democratic" socialist in the general election then why bother at all. Picking the lesser of two evils isn't winning, it's giving up. The Republicans haven't won a presidential election since 1988. In fact their wins in 00,04 were based on theft moreso then what occurred on Wednesday.

It's sad and pathetic resorting to fear when one casts a ballot. I have no patience for those of my generation who succumb.

 

[danm999]

So let them, it's not like that will work in the GE. But what will work for Republicans is the appearance that the fix is in for the Democratic primary by the DNC.

If you are scared of the electability of a "Democratic" socialist in the general election then why bother at all. Picking the lesser of two evils isn't winning, it's giving up. The Republicans haven't won a presidential election since 1988. In fact their wins in 00,04 were based on theft moreso then what occurred on Wednesday.

It's sad and pathetic resorting to fear when one casts a ballot. I have no patience for those of my generation who succumb.

Err.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

So let them, it's not like that will work in the GE. But what will work for Republicans is the appearance that the fix is in for the Democratic primary by the DNC.

So you're saying the DNC should have just let it slide or what? I'm not sure what an appropriate response to this kind of action is supposed to be but they can't just ignore it.

I also can't imagine how fucked many other candidates would be had they been caught like this. Can you imagine Jeb Bush surviving something like this? Sanders had built a lot of good will and people trust him but this is a black mark on his campaign.

 

[RedSparc]

What? So Sanders camp steals data but it's the Clinton camp who is revealed as corrupt over this? Is that your argument?

No, my argument is that the DNC is corrupt in trying to game the outcome of the democraric primaey for the candidate who is publicly supported by the woman who runs the DNC. Which will not be good for Clinton in the long run if she doesn't distance herself from DWS by calling for her resignation and blacklisting her from her campaign.

Axlerod makes a valid argument and so does Chamberlain from DFA, the blame and responsibility for this whole situation lies at the feet of DWS, and the CEO of NGP-VAN who are unabashed Clinton supporters. Sanders campaigb didn't create the breach, it was already there. A question that's needs to be asked and answered is whether the Clinton campaign knew about it prior to Wednesday.

Did you see DWS stammering interview earlier tonight? Her initial comments and capitulation help no democratic cadidate. None of her actions as the head of the DNC since 2010 have given me any assurance that foul play shoild be be ruled out. DWS is a rat.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

No, my argument is that the DNC is corrupt in trying to game the outcome of the democraric primaey for the candidate who is publicly supported by the woman who runs the DNC. Which will not be good for Clinton in the long run if she doesn't distance herself from DWS by calling for her resignation and blacklisting her from her campaign.

Axlerod makes a valid argument and so does Chamberlain from DFA, the blame and responsibility for this whole situation lies at the feet of DWS, and the CEO of NGP-VAN who are unabashed Clinton supporters. Sanders campaigb didn't create the breach, it was already there. A question that's needs to be asked and answered is whether the Clinton campaign knew about it prior to Wednesday.

Did you see DWS stammering interview earlier tonight? Her initial comments and capitulation help no democratic cadidate. None of her actions as the head of the DNC since 2010 have given me any assurance that foul play shoild be be ruled out. DWS is a rat.

So your only point is that this whole thing is a conspiracy setup? At least I know not to waste my time anymore responding.

 

[danm999]

No, my argument is that the DNC is corrupt in trying to game the outcome of the democraric primaey for the candidate who is publicly supported by the woman who runs the DNC. Which will not be good for Clinton in the long run if she doesn't distance herself from DWS by calling for her resignation and blacklisting her from her campaign.

Axlerod makes a valid argument and so does Chamberlain from DFA, the blame and responsibility for this whole situation lies at the feet of DWS, and the CEO of NGP-VAN who are unabashed Clinton supporters. Sanders campaigb didn't create the breach, it was already there. A question that's needs to be asked and answered is whether the Clinton campaign knew about it prior to Wednesday.

Did you see DWS stammering interview earlier tonight? Her initial comments and capitulation help no democratic cadidate. None of her actions as the head of the DNC since 2010 have given me any assurance that foul play shoild be be ruled out. DWS is a rat.

They don't need to "game" shit.

Clinton is 31 points up on Sanders as of a poll from ABC News/Washington Post yesterday.

Sanders support has also been trending down this past month as well.

So even if DWS and the DNC are trying to kill Sanders campaign there's no fucking reason to shoot themselves in the foot like this to fix a problem that is fixing itself anyway.

 

[RedSparc]

Err.

2000 election stolen by Bush/Rove via Florida. Calling those outright mandated wins by the republicans is giving them far more credit then they ever deserve. Then again allowing terrorist attacks to happen so you can start two wars and give away billions in tax refunds was clever move by a dimwit...

 

[danm999]

2000 election stolen by Bush/Rove via Florida. Calling those outright mandated wins by the republicans is giving them far more credit then they ever deserve. Then again allowing terrorist attacks to happen so you can start two wars and give away billions in tax refunds was clever move by a dimwit...

What's this now?

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

2000 election stolen by Bush/Rove via Florida. Calling those outright mandated wins by the republicans is giving them far more credit then they ever deserve. Then again allowing terrorist attacks to happen so you can start two wars and give away billions in tax refunds was clever move by a dimwit...

Bush didn't allow 9/11 to happen. He ran an incompetent administration that was looking forward to a possible war with Iraq and did not take seriously the early rumblings of Osama being up to something, despite the doctrine of "We need to destroy the U.S." having been public in Islamist circles U.S. intelligence was keeping tabs on.. Afghanistan was a total sideshow to his actual goal, which was toppling Saddam and creating a democracy, which he thought would be inherently friendlier to the U.S., in a country with vast oil reserves.

 

[RedSparc]

They don't need to "game" shit.

Clinton is 31 points up on Sanders as of a poll from ABC News/Washington Post yesterday.

Sanders support has also been trending this past month as well.

So even if DWS and the DNC are trying to kill Sanders campaign there's no fucking reason to shoot themselves in the foot like this to fix a problem that is fixing itself anyway.

Yet none of that explained the 2.1 million individual doners to the Sanders campaign.

This time in 07 Clinton had roughly a 20 point lead over Obama, how did that turn out? Clinching those poll numbers doesn't gurantee anything. 6 debates, including one 6 days before Christmas helps a lot more.

 

[excelsiorlef]

No, my argument is that the DNC is corrupt in trying to game the outcome of the democraric primaey for the candidate who is publicly supported by the woman who runs the DNC. Which will not be good for Clinton in the long run if she doesn't distance herself from DWS by calling for her resignation and blacklisting her from her campaign.

Axlerod makes a valid argument and so does Chamberlain from DFA, the blame and responsibility for this whole situation lies at the feet of DWS, and the CEO of NGP-VAN who are unabashed Clinton supporters. Sanders campaigb didn't create the breach, it was already there. A question that's needs to be asked and answered is whether the Clinton campaign knew about it prior to Wednesday.

Did you see DWS stammering interview earlier tonight? Her initial comments and capitulation help no democratic cadidate. None of her actions as the head of the DNC since 2010 have given me any assurance that foul play shoild be be ruled out. DWS is a rat.

So when you said no at the beginning what you meant to say was yes.

I mean it's impressive how the Sanders camp is the only truly guilty party in this fiasco and yet seems to be the only you don't hold responsible..

 

[danm999]

Yet none of that explained the 2.1 million individual doners to the Sanders campaign.

....?

It doesn't need to?

It's both possible Sanders has 2.1 million individual donors and Hillary Clinton has a commanding lead in the Democratic polls? I mean, I think there's something like 40 million registered Democrats.

This time in 07 Clinton had roughly a 20 point lead over Obama, how did that turn out? Clinching those poll numbers doesn't gurantee anything. 6 debates, including one 6 days before Christmas helps a lot more.

I'm saying if the DNC would do that, they'd wait until Clinton wasn't in a commanding lead, let alone building upon that lead as she has been doing the past few months.

And why would they worry about debates; polls of the first few have all said Clinton was the winner.

Simply expecting Sanders to turn the race around at this point because Obama did is a correlation/causation fallacy.

 

[RedSparc]

Bush didn't allow 9/11 to happen. He ran an incompetent administration that was looking forward to a possible war with Iraq and did not take seriously the early rumblings of Osama being up to something, despite the doctrine of "We need to destroy the U.S." having been public in Islamist circles U.S. intelligence was keeping tabs on.. Afghanistan was a total sideshow to his actual goal, which was toppling Saddam and creating a democracy, which he thought would be inherently friendlier to the U.S., in a country with vast oil reserves.

He did allow it to happen: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/09/1...-was-deaf-to-9-11-warnings.html?referer=&_r=0

Furthermore: http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline

I'm not going to have this argument. I lost a brother in iraq.

 

[RedSparc]

....?

It doesn't need to?

It's both possible Sanders has 2.1 million individual donors and Hillary Clinton has a commanding lead in the Democratic polls? I mean, I think there's something like 40 million registered Democrats.



I'm saying if the DNC would do that, they'd wait until Clinton wasn't in a commanding lead, let alone building upon that lead as she has been doing the past few months.

And why would they worry about debates; polls of the first few have all said Clinton was the winner.

Simply expecting Sanders to turn the race around at this point because Obama did is a correlation/causation fallacy.

See that is the problem, I never said sanders would turn it around because obama did. I said don't put any faith in polling data prior to February. Your the one posting polls as if it's all but guranteed for Clinton, when by past accounts it wasn't, and still isn't.

What does correlated is support, which Sanders had a lot of that can't be counted out. You need to realize that a far greater number of voters do not pay attention until it comes time to vote. Expecting them to choose Clinton because she's polling so high in late December is shortsighted.

 

[danm999]

See that is the problem, I never said sanders would turn it around because obama did. I said don't put any faith in polling data prior to February. Your the one posting polls as if it's all but guranteed for Clinton, when by past accounts it wasn't, and still isn't.

The DNC does though is my point.

Why would they ruin their own image if things were going the way they wanted, by their own metric.

It makes no sense.

 

[Coriolanus]

But if like you said, and that Bernie's campaign doesnt stand a chance, why should she concern herself with her campaign with Bernie? Why shouldnt she focus on the general election where taking a strong stance against the Sanders Campaign's theft would be beneficial?

Pragmatism. A fair assumption that if you antagonize him too much, he might enter no fucks given mode and run third party. Wouldnt put the risk at zero, anyway.

 

[RedSparc]

The DNC does though is my point.

Why would they ruin their own image if things were going the way they wanted, by their own metric.

It makes no sense.

That's a question for the motives of DWS and her fiefdom called the DNC. If 08 is used as a reference, it's obvious when Clintons support in the polls receded.

Furthermore, it's not like the DNCs image has been steller. The progessive left has been upset over DWS handling of the primary and the vast majority see it as a tactic to protect and shield Clinton from a serious challanger. Sanders isn't even my candidate of choice but he is far better then Clinton on the issues. I don't think he will win in the end. I just find it foolish to hold up year out polls and call it a wrap even before the first primary, especially with Clinton as the candidate.

 

[danm999]

That's a question for the motives of DWS and her fiefdom called the DNC.

You've shown absolutely no qualms about widely speculating the motives of the DNC and DWS so far, going so far as to call the latter a rat.

If 08 is used as a reference, it's obvious when Clintons support in the polls receded.

See, you're doing it again. You're implying that there will be a 08 style event that the DNC is preparing for, but when I called you on it you acted sheepish and pretended you said no such thing.

If you think Clinton is going to crumble in the polls in the near future, outline why. Otherwise your little conspiracy makes no sense.