Posted on 01/25/2016 3:29:40 PM PST by nickcarraway
The Hillary Clinton campaign has been engaged in an aggressive effort to accomplish one crucial political goal: Knocking off Bernie Sanders’ halo. One common thread running through many Clinton attacks on Sanders — whether it’s questioning his record on guns or suggesting his single payer dream isn’t going to happen — has been to try to portray Sanders as a conventional politician (after all) who is not quite as pure as the scenes of his rapt, transported crowds suggest and is promising more than he can deliver.
SNIP
What this really represents, I think, is Obama essentially taking sides in one of the fundamental underlying arguments of the 2016 Democratic primary: the battle between Clinton’s and Sanders’ theories of change. As I’ve argued, Sanders’ argument represents an intriguing mix of pessimism and optimism. His case is basically that America faces structural challenges so profound and immense (soaring inequality that has resulted in oligarchy paralyzing our government; climate change that threatens to undermine the future of human civilization) that only big, big solutions proportionate to the scale of these challenges will do. Sanders further argues that such ambitious solutions are possible despite the seeming GOP grip on at least one chamber of Congress, through mobilizing the masses, particularly young people, to force another transformational moment rivaling other moments of great change in American history.
SNIP
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
In short the Clinton's tried to right their sinking ship with threats about disclosure of Obama’s history if he didn't come out with a very supportive statement. Urkel fired back with Petraeus and then fulfilled his part of the bargain with effusive praise for Cankles. Quid pro quo
What proof, in the article, shows that Obama is undermining Sanders? All I see here is speculation.
He basically said Hillary can get things done. If you read that, you definitely know he is praising Hillary over Sanders.
Maybe, just maybe, Mike Bloomberg can show up at the Democrats’ doorstep and make them “a deal they can’t refuse”, if they want Bernie Sanders to go away, and Herself is going to be so badly damaged that no amount of “eruption control” is ever going to clean the stench of “loser” off.
Sure, Mikey is an “independent”, but then, Bernie Sanders, technically, is no Democrat either. And besides, isn’t the state of Herself’s health just a little suspect?
Herself has to be on some pretty strong stimulants to be able sit for an interview or to get up before a crowd and give an even semi-coherent address. And why do you suppose it took Herself so long to get back to the stage at the December 19th debate?
Duh. Obama hates Hillary and Sanders is Obama’s fellow socialist, but Sanders is Jewish.
Ergo, Obama hates Sanders more.
This is also why Hillary won’t be indicted.
This is also why Hillary won’t be indicted.
She won't be indicted because she is a Clinton and a Democrat. But Obama would never ever allow her to be indicted.
Obama wants Supreme Court or UN seat in 2017, and he needs Hillary to give it to him.
But that doesn't undercut her, which is the title and the premise of the article.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.