BLOG II
The Sanders Movement 2016 – An Ongoing News Collection
Lucy Maness Warner



May 23, 2016

NYT -- http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/23/us/politics/bernie-sanders-campaign-legacy.html?_r=0

Bernie Sanders Makes a Campaign Mark. Now, Can He Make a Legacy?
By JONATHAN MAHLER and YAMICHE ALCINDOR
MAY 22, 2016

Photograph -- Senator Bernie Sanders at a rally on Saturday at Kimball Park in National City, Calif. Credit Sam Hodgson for The New York Times
RELATED COVERAGE:
Bernie Sanders’s Feud With the Democratic Leadership Heats Up MAY 21, 2016
Bernie Sanders, Eyeing Convention, Willing to Harm Hillary Clinton in the Homestretch MAY 18, 2016
From Bernie Sanders Supporters, Death Threats Over Delegates MAY 16, 2016
Graphic: How the Rest of the Democratic Delegate Race Could Unfold
Photograph -- Supporters of Mr. Sanders at his campaign event on Saturday at Kimball Park. Credit Sam Hodgson for The New York Times


Congressional candidates who speak of “liberating the American underclass” are flush with campaign donations. The likely Democratic presidential nominee has not only moved to the left on a range of issues, but now routinely rails against the influence of “big money.”

There are plenty of signs that Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont has left a mark on the political moment. But some liberal Democrats are beginning to worry that as Mr. Sanders continues his quest for the nomination, his chance to build a lasting legacy may be slipping away.

Liberals who remember watching with fear and awe how the Christian Coalition rose from the ashes of Pat Robertson’s 1988 campaign — using his mailing lists and leftover cash to build a grass-roots organization, publish conservative voter guides and promote candidates at every level — are asking when, or if, Mr. Sanders will help do the same for the left.

Far from laying the foundation to transform his campaign into a movement, Mr. Sanders is wrapped up in the race itself, sharpening his attacks on Hillary Clinton and demanding she debate him before the June 7 primary in California. And many of his supporters are following his cue.

In an ugly series of events this month that, if nothing else, showed how difficult they may be to herd, Sanders supporters disrupted the Nevada Democratic convention and later threatened the state party chairwoman in a fight over delegates.

“He has the greatest appeal of any progressive candidate we’ve seen probably since Teddy Roosevelt, but that has to be converted into an on-the-ground machine that delivers,” Howard Dean, the former governor of Vermont who ran his own insurgent campaign for the Democratic nomination in 2004, said about Mr. Sanders. “There have to be candidates who are supported. There have to be issues that are put forward. There have to be opportunities to put pressure on legislators. That is not the same thing as a political campaign.”

Thus far, Mr. Sanders has offered little support for a broader progressive movement, beyond using his email list to solicit money for a handful of congressional candidates, including Washington State’s Pramila Jayapal, New York’s Zephyr Teachout and Nevada’s Lucy Flores.

Even if he does try to redirect the energy behind his candidacy into a new liberal organization, the task may not be easy. His campaign has brought together disparate individuals and volunteer groups that might be inclined to go their separate ways after the primary. His regular diatribes against the influence of big money in politics could make it awkward, if not impossible, for him to raise money from wealthy liberals.

And Mr. Sanders himself does not have a reputation for leadership; in Congress, he is seen as more of a lone wolf, known more for introducing symbolic legislation than for methodically building constituencies.

Mr. Sanders, who declined to be interviewed, has offered few hints about his post-primary plans, saying that he remains focused on winning the nomination, even taking the fight to the party’s convention in July.

A group of former Sanders campaign workers and volunteers circulated a document last week urging him to suspend his presidential bid after California, and to turn his attention to building a liberal organization whose first effort would be to help defeat the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald J. Trump.

The group compared Mr. Sanders’s situation to that of Barack Obama after he energized millions of supporters during his 2008 campaign. They said that Mr. Obama subsequently failed to capitalize on the opportunity to change “the distribution of power” in America, and they warned that Mr. Sanders could wind up following in his footsteps if he does not move swiftly.

Calling it a crossroads, the authors wrote, “Does Bernie Sanders and his campaign facilitate the growing voice of a new generation of activists?”

“Or does he raise hell at a party convention and leave the remains of his organization to be picked over by groups on the left that, to date, have been mostly marginal to the broad majority of Americans and Sanders supporters alike?”

Few dispute that Mr. Sanders has already had an effect. His campaign has not only galvanized young voters, but also produced an invaluable email list, several million strong, of fervent activists and donors.

Mr. Sanders has inspired candidates pushing policies like tuition-free public colleges and universal health care, initiatives that were once regarded as radical but that now have the support of many millions of Americans. Echoing the senator’s fiery tone, Democrats from his wing of the party are regularly railing against billionaires, lamenting the disappearing middle class and demanding reforms to campaign finance laws.

Mr. Sanders has also created a road map for other insurgent candidates by eschewing “super PACs” and raising more than $212 million through small donations.

“The Sanders movement brought Occupy Wall Street into Democratic Party presidential politics,” said Jamie Raskin, a Maryland state senator running for Congress. “He occupied the Democratic primaries.”

Mr. Raskin, 53, is among those who have already benefited, winning his Democratic primary against a field that included David Trone, a self-funded multimillionaire who owns the nation’s largest independent wine retailer, and the former TV reporter Kathleen Matthews, whose husband, Chris, hosts “Hardball” on MSNBC.

So is Timothy Canova, 56, a law professor running an upstart campaign in Florida against Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee. Mr. Canova has raised more than $1 million — an average of $18.55 at a time — and has railed against his rival, saying she took money from large corporations and voted in favor of Wall Street banks.

“Bernie Sanders could disappear from the scene and what he has helped ignite is going to keep going on,” Mr. Canova said. Mr. Sanders has endorsed Mr. Canova and is using his prodigious email list to help him raise money.

A new organization that emerged from the Sanders campaign would not necessarily require his leadership. Many of the economic issues at the heart of his campaign have been bubbling up for years, finding expression in the protests of the Occupy movement and in the speeches of Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts.

And some of Mr. Sanders’s supporters are not waiting for him to act. One new initiative, Brand New Congress, is aimed at recruiting progressives to run against almost every incumbent Democrat and Republican up for re-election in 2018. A number of independent groups that supported Mr. Sanders are planning to meet next month in Chicago to discuss the future of the movement at a three-day conference they are calling the People’s Summit.

Indeed, if the movement is going to endure beyond the primary, the responsibility for driving it forward may fall less on Mr. Sanders than on the next generation of progressives.

“We need people running for school boards,” said Representative Keith Ellison of Minnesota, who has endorsed Mr. Sanders. “We need people running for City Council. We need people running for state legislatures. We need people running for zoning boards, for park boards, to really take this sort of message that Bernie carried and carry it and lead it in their own local communities.”


Ralph Reed, the longtime executive director of the Christian Coalition, once spoke in similar terms, talking about creating a “farm team” of socially conservative candidates at every level of government.

“The Republican Party is manifestly more hard-line than it would be had the Christian Coalition never existed,” said the MSNBC host Rachel Maddow. “That’s what I thought would happen on the left with Obama in 2008, but it never did. It seems like Bernie has the same option, but he’s also not working on it.”


COMMENTS (GO TO WEBSITE FOR OTHERS, 576 AND COUNTING!)

--- Howie Lisnoff is a trusted commenter Massachusetts 4 hours ago

Amazing premise from the Times, but perhaps not all that interesting or new. There you go again... if Bernie Sanders does not halt his bid for the Presidency, then he risks leaving a lasting legacy.

In other words, fight for equality in US politics and the system will devour you. Since the Reagan administration, the US has moved steadily to the political right. Income inequality has grown, as has extreme wealth and the influence of wealth in the political system. One man [sic], one vote no longer exists because of the alignment of the political system with the influence of money.

Bernie Sanders stands for the opposite of this move to the right and the purchase of the political, economic, and social system by the forces of extreme wealth. Working in his campaign is a privilege that I will not soon forget, and that campaign is far, far from over. A generation of young and informed people have been energized by the Sanders campaign. The latter in itself is quite a legacy!


--- Beverly Maine 3 hours ago

We need senate leadership that acts on behalf of the greater good of our country and beyond. Corrupt liars like Oklahoma's senator should not head a committee on environment and energy. The US Supreme Court should not undermine for decades the safety, sustainability and choices of our young grandchildren. We should not have to be ashamed of ourselves as a country when our leaders are so out of touch with the rest of the world.

I have taken part in vigils and protests on behalf of the climate movement. I have friends passionate about altering the direction of our destructive consumption and its consequences. And yet many of these people say they won't vote if Clinton is the nominee--denying the integrity of her platform which is very similar to Sanders', they say they may vote green party or stay home.

The worst thing we can do in these times is to abandon reality for purist ideals. If we do, we deserve what we get.


--- G. Sears Johnson City, Tenn. 3 hours ago

Lots of speculation about Bernie’s post convention role -- in due time.

The note in this piece regarding the comparison to Obama’s failure to mobilize his base after the election in 2008 is interesting in and of itself. That decision and lack of action is worthy of reflection. Had a different approach been taken to draw on the potential power of an energized constituency, the tenor and effectiveness of Obama’s turn at the helm could have been far more powerful and productive. It would be interesting to hear from ex-president Obama a candid commentary on why he chose thusly.

As for Mr. Sanders, there is no question but that he struck a tremendously resonant chord, whether it continues to play on and evolve and flourish certainly depends on his actions, but likely more on whether there is a second tier of advocacy and leadership capable of long term mobilization of broad support and sustained political action.

It does seem that much of the apprehension about Bernie’s intentions and actions in furthering the cause he has so energetically championed discounts his savvy, integrity and genuine personal commitment to the principals and positions he has espoused so consistently.


--- Paul Long island 3 hours ago

The Tea Party succeeded in moving the Republican Party farther and farther to the right before it became the dominant force in the Republican Party. Given the failure of the Democratic Party to live up to its New Deal and Fair Deal legacy of the FDR-Truman era as it has become a corporate, rather than pro-labor, entity under Bill Clinton with NAFTA and even Barack Obama with the TPP and his complete unwillingness to prosecute anyone on Wall Street, it is very likely that the leftward swing in the Democratic Party will continue. Sen. Sanders has built a unique populist funding operation that, as you note, he's starting to use to back others and could easily be taken over by others such as Elizabeth Warren. While I'm a progressive who favors such a shift, I also worry that it will produce an even more polarized society. However, America has reached an economic "tipping point" where the concentration of wealth by the few has given us the political rebellions of Trumpism on the right and "Feel the Bern" on the left. I hope the democratic process will leave us with the real change we need rather than being short-changed by the elite once again.


--- Gretchen M 3 hours ago

He already has a legacy. His main policies are supported by the majority of the population. His support amongst independents and people under 40 is off the charts. He may not win the nomination but he has created a blueprint for every future candidate on how to lead a campaign funded by working people rather than relying on big money donors. Bernie Sanders and his ideas represent the future of the United States.


--- Clyde Hartford, CT 3 hours ago

Senator Sanders' campaign indeed contains the very fertile seeds of a movement on the left to rival the old Christian Coalition. The question is whether followers of the Sanders campaign are willing to do all the grunt work necessary to grow and continue the movement into a real force in American politics and government. That is the true test. Or will it go the way of the Occupy movement, which no longer exists as a cohesive, defined force? Creating movements like this requires diligent and lifelong effort and hard work, not just showing up to events and giving a few dollars now and then. I hope the base created by the Sanders campaign is up to this difficult challenge. It would be a great and positive influence on the American political scene.


--- jpduffy3 New York, NY 1 hour ago

It is interesting that is has come to this, when only a short while ago, there were concerns about Trump and the Republicans having a falling out coupled with a possible third party run on the Republican side. That does not now look like even a remote possibility. So, the Republicans seem likely to avoid what would be for them a disastrous third party candidacy.

The Sanders/Clinton situation is quite different. Sanders has a number of polls that show he is the stronger candidate, and he appears to be very popular with independents and young people, two groups that were not very able to participate in the Democrat primaries and who have little or no loyalty to the Democrat Party. The machinery for a Sanders third party run is in place, and the organization he has created could well support a viable third party candidacy. It is even conceivable that he could manage this through a write-in campaign in those states where he could not get on the ballot. This could be a disaster for the Democrats. So, they had better pay attention.


--- Jamie Nichols Santa Barbara 1 hour ago

Oh ya! We're going on the 8th year of "compromise and diplomacy" with President Obama in his dealings with the Congress. Where has that gotten us with all his promises of "hope and change"? A watered-down health care plan and an even more watered-down reform of our out-of-control financial services sector. Virtually every other arguably progressive measure during his administration resulted from his unilateral executive action. Nearly all of his compromising and meeting with Republicans and conservative Democrats in Congress got him nowhere.

If America is to reverse the spiraling upward of the income disparity between the wealthiest and the middle class and poor, we need a new kind of president. Not the same old centrist, warmed-over, catering-to-southern-Dems, Bill Clinton that Hillary has threatened us with as her main economic advisor. We need to try a president who is willing to go over the heads of Congress, and make his case as often and as strongly as possible directly to the American people. We need to give Sanders that chance. He certainly seems curmudgeonly enough to ignore naysayers! If he can't convince the People to change Congress into one willing to support his proposals, he won't be reelected. But that is not likely to stop him from trying. We already know that Hillary will do and won't do whatever is needed to reelect her.

But you know, we probably won't elect Sanders. The NYT and others in the Clinton crowd are too stuck in the same old failed ways.


--- Pam Conover Durham NC 1 hour ago

This article touches a nerve for Sander's supporters. But it shouldn't. It identifies an important dilemma for Sanders and all progressives who care about the future of the movement that he has started. And the dilemma is a common one that has faced many social movements: how do you transition from the exciting days when some inspiring leader has awakened people to what they have in common to the harder task of actually accomplishing something.

Typically that transition includes a transition in leadership. If this young progressive movement is to survive and grow, we should welcome every sign that new leadership may be emerging, and organizations developing. Sanders can divert needed energy from that into convention battles, but the important action is taking place elsewhere.



http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/23/politics/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-donald-trump-2016/index.html

Bernie Sanders digs in
By Stephen Collinson, CNN
Updated 1:01 PM ET, Mon May 23, 2016

Video -- Bernie Sanders ramps up feud with establishment 01:47
READ: Will Trump vs. Clinton be a nailbiter?
23 photos: Bernie Sanders in the spotlight
50 photos: Hillary Clinton's career in the spotlight
READ: New polls show Clinton and Trump neck-and-neck
CNN Politics app: Quinnipiac University polls in swing states Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania this month also had the rivals effectively neck-and-neck.
Nightcap: The latest news and political buzz from CNN Politics | Sign up


Washington (CNN)The stakes of Bernie Sanders' take-it-to-the-convention strategy are rapidly rising as fresh polls underscore Hillary Clinton's vulnerabilities and predict a tight race between her and Donald Trump in the fall.

After months of talk about the potential of a contested Republican convention, Trump, the presumptive GOP nominee, is quickly consolidating his party's support -- something Clinton is unable to do with Sanders still in the race.

With only a few major nominating contests left, including California and New Jersey on June 7, Sanders lacks a credible mathematical path to overhauling Clinton's wide lead in pledged delegates. And with polls showing Clinton's general election advantage over Trump evaporating, a lingering fracture in the Democratic party could be perilous for its chances to keep the White House.

Still, Sanders is not heeding calls from some Democrats to get out of the race -- or at least cool his rhetoric during the final weeks of the primary season. Instead, he kept up his blistering criticism of Clinton over the weekend and deepened his feud with the party establishment, including endorsing the primary challenger to Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Bernie Sanders in the spotlight

"The last I heard is that we are a democratic country, and that elections are about vigorous debates over the issues. Secretary Clinton and I disagree," Sanders told Jake Tapper Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union." "What the Democratic leadership has got to understand is that not all of my supporters go to these fancy fundraising dinners. They're working people who are hurting now, who want real change in the economy."

He added: "I hope the Democratic leadership understands they have to open up the process, bring those people in."

'Uphill fight'

Sanders acknowledged in the interview that he has a "very, very uphill fight" in his quest to overtake Clinton, given that he has won 46% of pledged delegates so far and she has won 54%. But he rebuked Democratic superdelegates -- party office holders and lawmakers who can vote however they choose at the convention -- for overwhelmingly coming out for Clinton early on in what he said was an "anointment" by the establishment and big money interests.

Clinton's failure to finally put away the Sanders campaign is grating on the former secretary of state.

"I will be the nominee for my party,'' Clinton told CNN's Chris Cuomo in an interview last week. "That is already done, in effect. There is no way I won't be.''

Hillary Clinton’s life in the spotlight

On Sunday, she said there will be an "obvious need of us to unify the party" once she becomes the presumptive nominee.

"I will certainly do my part, reaching out to Sen. Sanders, reaching out to his supporters," she said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "And I expect him to do his."

The internal conflict comes at a time when polls show that Trump is getting a dividend from closing out the Republican primary race, and setting up what could be a close election against Clinton in November.

A CNN/ORC poll from the beginning of May found Clinton leading Trump by 13 points. But in more recent surveys, there is increasing evidence of a bump in polling as Trump consolidates GOP support.

A Fox News poll last week showed Trump leading Clinton 45% to 42%, findings that were within the survey's margin of error. Meanwhile, a New York Times/CBS News national survey released Thursday had Clinton up by six points.

A Washington Post/ABC News poll Sunday found a statistical dead heat, with Trump leading Clinton 46% to 44% among registered voters, figures that represent an 11-point swing since March. The former secretary of state leads by six points among all adults -- down from an 18-point lead in March.

Polls this far out from a general election cannot offer a reliable picture of what will happen in November. But they can shape the political environment in which the early stages of the race evolves [sic] and, if they continue to show Trump gaining in strength, are likely to increase pressure on Sanders to bring the Democratic Party together.

But Sanders does not see such polls as an argument that he should get out of the race or dial back attacks on Clinton. In fact, he sees them as proof that he would be a superior general election candidate to the former first lady -- most polls show him leading Trump.

'I have been vetted'

In the NBC interview, Clinton suggested Sanders simply hasn't been subjected to the rough and tumble of politics the way she has.

It's "fair to say that I have been vetted and tested, and I think that that puts me in a very strong position," she said.

Referring to Sanders, she said, "let me say that I don't think he's had a single negative ad ever run against him."

Sanders disputed the notion that he is only doing better than Clinton because he has not had to endure the years of partisan warfare that have shredded her approval ratings.

"Any objective assessment of our campaign versus Clinton's campaign, I think, will conclude we have the energy, we have the excitement, we have the young people, we have the working people, we can drive a large voter turnout, so that we not only win the White House, but we retain, regain control of the Senate, do well in the House and in governor's chairs up and down the line," Sanders told Tapper.

Latest polls clearly show that the lingering Democratic Party divisions are a challenge for Clinton.

The Washington Post/ABC poll released Sunday showed that in a match-up equation with Trump, Clinton currently gets 86% of Democratic voters, meaning that a slice of the party coalition that is not yet sold on her as nominee.

With party divided, Clinton doesn't rule out Sanders as VP pick

Making a decision to leave a primary race or to tone down attacks on a rival who appears headed for victory is the toughest choices any candidate faces. It is a particularly acute dilemma for Sanders, given that he has won millions of votes, ignited a populist uprising in the Democratic Party that no one saw coming and is basking in an unprecedented reception to his democratic socialist ideas that left him in the political wilderness for years in the Senate.

He and his campaign team have dismissed the idea that he could wreak lasting damage on Clinton if she becomes the nominee, saying he will do whatever it takes to ensure that Trump does not win the presidency. But if his arguments about the process of the Democratic primary race leave the impression that he has been unfairly treated and that Clinton is somehow not the legitimate nominee, the task of uniting the party becomes far more difficult.

Sanders vs. DNC

That's where Sanders' clash with Wasserman Schultz is particularly concerning to some Democrats. The Vermont senator's campaign has consistently accused the DNC chairwoman of tilting the race in favor of Clinton and criticized the scheduling of debates on Saturday nights when television audiences are lower, and the closed primaries that bar independents in big states like New York.

Sanders says he's backing DNC chair's primary opponent

Sanders is now backing Wasserman Schultz's primary opponent in her Florida district, Tim Canova, and left no doubt about the strengths of his feelings about her on Sunday.

"Well, clearly, I favor her opponent," Sanders told Tapper. "His views are much closer to mine than as to Wasserman Schultz's." "In all due respect to the current chairperson. If (I was) elected president, she would not be reappointed to be chair of the DNC."

Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver also sent out a fundraising email to supporters Sunday seeking contributions for Canova.

Bernie Sanders, Democratic establishment battle boils over

For all the sudden handwringing in Democratic circles, it's still likely that Clinton will enjoy her own boost in the polls once she finally becomes the presumptive Democratic nominee similar to the one Trump is enjoying now.

For now, veteran Democrats appear to be ready to give Sanders some room. But the clock is ticking.

"After (Clinton) has actually won, after she actually has enough delegates to win the nomination, I think Bernie needs to think about his legacy," said Mark Alderman, a top Democratic Party donor who was part of President Barack Obama's transition team. "Bernie is in the middle of the tsunami -- he doesn't have any perspective yet. It will take a little time. Unfortunately, he only has a little time. He has got to get it together by July."




Clinton says Democratic Party accepts Wall Street funds --


http://time.com/4212575/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-wall-street-donations/

Clinton: Sanders Accepted Wall Street Money Too, Indirectly
Sam Frizell @Sam_Frizell
Updated: Feb. 8, 2016 9:54 PM

"And like President Obama, I have donations. There's no doubt about that."

In an effort to level the playing field with Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders on Wall Street regulation, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton argued Monday that he accepted money indirectly from financial institutions.

Speaking at a community college in Manchester, N.H., Clinton noted that Sanders received donations from the Democratic Party’s main Senate fundraising arm, which had in turn gotten money from Wall Street.

In a twist on the usual political arguments over donations, she didn’t say the money had influenced him, though.

“Senator Sanders took about $200,000 from Wall Street firms,” Clinton said, speaking to a crowd at the community college. “Not directly but through the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee. There is nothing wrong with that. It didn’t change his view. Well, it didn’t change my view or my vote, either.”

Sanders received funding $37,300 directly from the DSCC to help win his 2006 campaign for Senate, and the party spent $60,000 on ads for Sanders and contributed $100,000 to the Vermont Democratic Party, according to a recent CNN report. Some of the DSCC’s top contributors that year included Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and other major banks. There is no evidence that Sanders sought donations directly from Wall Street institutions for his 2006 campaign.

Sanders’ campaign manager shot back later on Monday afternoon. “Bernie Sanders, who has never accepted corporate PAC money in his life, is now accused by Secretary Clinton of taking ‘about $200,000 from Wall Street firms.’ How do they reach that false and absurd conclusion?” Jeff Weaver said. “They assume that every nickel Bernie Sanders received from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee for his Senate campaign came from Wall Street.”

Clinton’s allies have attacked Sanders by saying he is not as ideologically pure as his campaign has claimed. By pointing to Sanders’ campaign finances via Wall Street, Clinton is suggesting his record is inconsistent with his fiery speeches.

Clinton told her audience that she has a tougher plan than Sanders to regulate Wall Street. “I haven’t just talked,” she said. “I haven’t just given speeches. I have introduced legislation. I’ve called them out. I’ve gone up to Wall Street. I said they’re going to wreck the economy over the mortgage markets.”

Sanders has repeatedly suggested that Clinton cannot be trusted to regulate Wall Street because of campaign contributions she has received from major financial institutions. Clinton’s campaign and her associated super PACs have received $21.4 million from donors at banks, hedge funds and financial-services firms through December, according to a Washington Post analysis.

On Monday, Clinton also brushed off claims that she has been influenced by Wall Street, saying that President Obama received money too. “And like President Obama, I have donations. There’s no doubt about that,” Clinton bristled. “But ask yourself: President Obama had a lot of donations. Did that stop him from signing Dodd-Frank, the toughest regulation against the financial sector?”

Sanders has called for legislation to reintroduce Glass-Steagall and break up investment and commercial banking, a call Clinton has resisted. Clinton has touted praise from economists that call her plan on Wall Street the toughest in the field.

Clinton said she is facing the toughest opposition from Wall Street because they are most afraid of a Clinton presidency.

“I have been speaking out against and working to rein in powerful forces for many years. I have the scars to prove that,” Clinton said. “They have spent a lot of money against me. I just want people to think about this: If Wall Street were so interested in supporting Democrats like the President and like me for their own reasons, whey [sic] are they spending $6 million trying to defeat me in this election?”

A spokesman for Sanders did not immediately respond to a request for comment.



https://berniesanders.com/press-release/california-voter-registration-surges-sanders-candidacy/

PRESS RELEASE
California Voter Registration Surges Under Sanders Candidacy
MAY 18, 2016

CARSON, Calif. — Voter enthusiasm in California is surging with more than 1.5 million newly registered or re-registered voters since January 1, according to the latest data from Political Data Inc. With that number expected to surpass 2 million before the May 23 deadline, U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders has shown he is the candidate who can build the energy and excitement to attract new voters to register and participate in the Democratic process.

Voter registration has seen a boost of 218 percent among Democrats, with more than 1.1 million Democrat and Independent voters now eligible to vote in the presidential primary. The increase is largely due to drastic increases among voters under the age of 30 and Latinos, both core demographics of Sanders’ supporter base.

“Sen. Sanders’ message of income inequality and corrupt campaign finance are resonating so strongly with the people of California they are registering to vote in record numbers,” said Campaign Manager Jeff Weaver. “If this is any indication of voter excitement and turnout, Bernie has a strong chance of winning in California.”

The surge in Democratic voter registration will benefit down ballot races, with many districts seeing 10 percent or more of their voting population registering to vote in the last 90 days. With high turn out and a large swath of new progressive voters, Sanders has excited the future of the Party to help Democrats win across the board in California.



CALIF -- http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/280853-sanders-supporters-sue-to-extend-californias-voter-registration

Sanders supporters sue to extend Calif. voter registration
By Rebecca Savransky
May 22, 2016, 02:36 pm

Supporters of Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders have filed a federal lawsuit asking that voter registration in California be extended until June 7, the day of the state's primary.

"Mistakes are being made," said William Simpich, an Oakland civil rights attorney who filed the lawsuit Friday, according to the Los Angeles Times.

The suit alleges that there is confusion over the rules for the presidential primary and requests that voter registration be extended until June 7. May 31 is the current deadline to request a ballot by mail.

In the state's presidential primary, the parties control the contests. The Democratic primary has been opened up to voters who have "no party preference," but the lawsuit says that isn't being made clear to all voters.

"There's mass confusion," Simpich said in an interview on Saturday night with the Los Angeles Times. "This is a situation that really shouts out for some uniformity."

The Republican presidential primary is not open to unaffiliated voters.

The lawsuit plaintiffs are two Bay area voters, the American Independent Party and the Voting Rights Defense Project, which is an "organization campaigning to heighten voter education and voter turnout for their candidate, Bernie Sanders."

The suit is centered around whether unaffiliated voters who want to cast ballots by mail know they can get ballots from the Democratic Party, the Libertarian Party and California's American Independent Party.

A recent poll by Political Data Inc. found that a small percentage of voters with no party preference had asked for a ballot with presidential candidates.

California does not yet have same-day registration but plans to vote on that system in 2018, according to the Los Angeles Times.



SANDERS VS DNC ISSUES AS OF JANUARY 2016


http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/1/2/1465551/-Why-didn-t-Bernie-Sanders-raise-any-money-for-the-DNC

Why didn't Bernie Sanders raise any money for the DNC?
By Kortadler
Sunday Jan 03, 2016 · 2:03 AM EST

Photograph -- Bernie Sanders Speaking, VIA Chicago Tribune


Fundraising totals are in for the fourth quarter of 2015, and the leading Democratic candidates really knocked it out of the park. Hillary Clinton raised $37 million this quarter, bringing her total to $115 million. Impressively, Bernie Sanders’ small-donor powered campaign (with only several hundred people having given the maximum of $2700) nearly matched her, raising $33 million for a total of $73 million so far. Clinton’s burn rate is somewhat higher, leaving her with $38 million cash on hand to Bernie’s $28 million. Both appear to have out-raised any and all Republican candidates.

One particular difference between the campaigns has been generating attention on this site: Clinton raised $18 million dollars for the Democratic National Committee, to be used in the general election to support Democratic candidates, while it appears Bernie Sanders has raised none. This is causing some consternation, with supporters of Clinton claiming that Sanders is not holding up his end of the bargain and is not interested in helping the Democratic party, while Sanders supporters claim he was given no opportunity to fundraise and that there is no reason for him to work for an organization that has been working against him. The money goes into the Victory Fund, to be shared by the national and state parties for whomever gets nominations in 2016.

This diary will explore a few likely reasons why Sanders hasn’t raised money for the DNC like Clinton has, why this shouldn’t be too surprising, and why it’s not really a strike against him.

Sanders has not been invited to raise money in this way.

The first thing to do is to ask the Sanders campaign themselves what they think of the situation.

"We remain happy to work with them," Sanders spokesman Michael Briggs said Saturday, when asked about joint fundraising efforts. "The party hasn't given us any dates for events.
This makes sense given the behavior of the DNC so far—preach equality and impartiality in public, but focus on electing Hillary behind the scenes. It echoes other situations where the DNC and the Sanders campaign have tossed the blame back and forth—like when Debbie Wasserman-Schultz claimed the Sanders campaign hadn’t shown the DNC the info they needed to reinstate VAN access, and then Jeff Weaver held up his cell phone (~12:30) to the camera to show an email he had earlier sent to the DNC with the info they needed. It also reminds me of earlier comments by the campaign I can’t place, where they implied that the ball was in the DNC’s court and they were simply waiting for instructions that never came. To say the least, the two are not on the same page.

If he were invited, its doubtful he could make it work.

Clinton and Sanders have very different styles of raising money. Clinton headlines many ticketed events where patrons are often asked to pay a high price—sometimes the entire $2700 limit for one ticket—for the privilege of seeing her speak. By contrast, all of Bernie’s rallies are free and open to the public, and the campaign does not ask for donations at them, instead relying on strong online donations. He doesn’t schmooze with the elites and ask them for money, or attend blockbuster ticketed events with top-billing. He says his message, and if you like it you can go online and donate. In fact, the few times Sanders has attended paid fundraisers, he’s been treated like a hypocrite. It’s doubtful Sanders could solicit cash for the DNC the way Hillary has. His constituents donate online, and as you can find in his reddit community, people make a point of finding the service with the lowest overhead that delivers the most cash directly to Sanders. It seems unlikely, especially given the hard feelings many supporters have towards the DNC, that Sanders has much hope of raising any significant funds for them. The establishment Dems who support Hillary are more likely to support the DNC and donate to it. Additionally...

Hillary’s donors have a lot more money to give.

The average donation to the Sanders campaign is always changing but hovers around $27-30 dollars. Clinton, by contrast, typically doesn’t release her average, no doubt because it would be significantly higher. Instead she focuses on statistics about what percentage of her donations were small, or what percentage of her donors were women (though Bernie has more female donors in total), rather than the money itself. But it can’t conceal the fact that Hillary's donors give more, and more of them give the maximum amount. When your wealthy supporters have already given the most they legally can to you, what more is there to do? Donate to the DNC, which, if Hillary wins the nomination (and even if she doesn’t, given the DNC’s favoritism), is like donating to Hillary a second time. If Bernie were to headline a fundraiser for this crowd, would there even be anyone in the audience who supported him? Bernie hasn’t just been avoiding this type of event with the DNC—he’s been avoiding it, period, refusing to raise funds for himself through elite fundraisers.

Hillary has a super-PAC to help her out.

When you’re the wealthiest person in the race and you’ve raised more money than any other candidate, its [sic] not going to bring you down to take a little time and effort to raise money for the DNC. But its even easier to do this with the cushion of a super-PAC. Last quarter, Clinton raised $77 million and her super-PAC raised an additional $20 million, while Sanders raised $40 million and had no money from a super-PAC. While super-PACs cannot spend this money directly on candidate expenses, they are free to spend it on advertising. This saves Hillary Clinton $20 million dollars on ads that Bernie has to pull directly from his campaign funds. Since Clinton raised $18 million for the DNC, and since her super-PAC likely raised much more than $20 million this quarter, she’s got a big cushion for down-ticket fundraising that Bernie lacks. Her greater name recognition, and all the other advantages she enjoys, also give her more time to devote to party politicking. If Bernie takes time out of his schedule to fundraise for the DNC, it’s time he’s not spending meeting voters and getting his name and campaign out there. It’s also time he’s not spending in the Senate, where he has a full-time job and is one of the most active Senators. Its also important to note that Sanders has in fact helped other Democrats fundraise before, such as a letter for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee that helped bag $1 million.

The DNC has not been supportive of the Sanders campaign.

The DNC, headed by a former Clinton campaign co-chair, has needless to say been less than enthusiastic about Bernie’s candidacy. Most people understand by now that Debbie Wasserman Shultz has been improperly using her position to favor Hillary Clinton. There is the matter of the pathetically small number of debates, hidden during Saturday nights, holidays, and football games to lower viewership and protect Hillary. Two DNC co-chairs have already come out and said that they were not consulted about the schedule, meaning DWS lied to the public about consulting them. Then one of those co-chairs was disinvited from the debate as retribution.

Then there was the matter of “Datagate” and the DNC’s ham-fisted handling of the incident—running to the media before Bernie himself even heard about it, sharing info selectively with the Clinton campaign, locking the Sanders campaign out of their ability to even investigate the incident, and throwing a monkey-wrench into their fundraising and outreach right before a major debate. Regardless of the motivations of the Sanders’ staffer (who was recommended by the DNC), which very well may have been malicious, the DNC handled the incident in a way that should leave very little doubt where their loyalties lie. As a result, a DNC national committeewoman threatened to resign if Bernie’s VAN access was not restored, and a super-delegate from Nevada joined the Sanders campaign. Why should Sanders raise money for a group that hates him and wants to elect Clinton at any cost?

Sanders has virtually no support from elected Democrats.

Despite the support of roughly 30-35% of the Democratic electorate and major grassroots groups like the WFP and DFA, Sanders has the backing of only two Representatives and zero Senators, compared to literally hundreds who support Hillary Clinton. Even those who represent natural constituencies for Sanders have not endorsed him. Governors and Senators whose own electorates overwhelmingly support Sanders—such as Vermont politicians Howard Dean, Pete Shumlin, Madeline Kunin, and Patrick Leahy—have endorsed Clinton. Natural progressive allies whose agendas and rhetoric match Sanders’ agenda nearly perfectly—such as Bill DeBlasio and Sherrod Brown—have also endorsed Clinton. Clearly there is a disconnect between the party base and it’s elected officials, or we would see roughly 30% of them supporting Sanders. This is what people mean when they say their elected officials don’t represent them. No doubt there is massive top-down political pressure to endorse Clinton. Everyone knows that since she’s favored to win, if they want a seat at the table they need to support her—and that if they cross her, like Nina Turner did, they can expect to be slandered for stepping out of line.

Why should Sanders raise money to re-elect a group of people who don’t support him or his candidacy? Despite voting with the Democrats over 90% of the time and helping them secure major victories like Obamacare, Democratic Senators have repeatedly gone to the media to denounce him as a lightweight, an irritant, or a fickle ally (meanwhile, Republicans seem more willing to praise him). Some of them have even denounced the very concept of having a competitive primary. It makes little sense for Sanders to raise money for down-ballot Democrats who don’t want to see him elected.

Nominating Sanders will do more for down-ballot Democrats than all the DNC money in the world.

Those worried about the success of other Democrats in 2016—about retaking the Senate and making the House more even—should be concerned more about turnout on election day than the status of party fundraising. The Republicans are hyper-motivated to vote this year after eight years of what they consider to be oppression, the continuing collapse of white working-class America, and threatening social changes such as gay marriage. They already vote in higher numbers than Democrats, and you can bet that when they perceive their entire world to be on the line, they’re going to turn out. The Democrats need a candidate who can inspire high turnout, not only to win the presidency, but because in Congress, Dems lose when turnout is low.

Bernie Sanders is the candidate most likely to win in the general election—as new polls continue to show—meaning he is the most likely to score down-ballot victories for Democrats. This makes sense, because there are several demographic factors giving him an advantage. He has the overwhelming support of independents, whereas Hillary has lukewarm support from them at best, giving him a huge general election advantage. He also has crossover appeal to Republicans, earning up to 25% of their support in his home state. Already, numerous Republicans for Bernie have been documented. But Bernie is also best positioned to win because he will bring new voters to the polls, who are then likely to vote Democrat—the young, the poor, and the disillusioned. While it’s true that these groups only vote in low numbers, anyone who has been paying attention to the Sanders campaign should realize he has a better shot than anyone ever has had at getting them to turnout. And Bernie will also enjoy the support of the main Dem base, which has been growing with recent Demographic changes. Most Democrats, who seem more motivated by the fear of a Republican than the hope of nominating a great candidate, are not going to stop voting Democrat just because Bernie got the nomination.

Sanders is trying to transform the Democratic party, not preserve the status quo.

Sanders believes the Democratic party has drifted too far to the right in recent years (due in large part to the first Clinton and the Third Way) and abandoned the constituency that needs it most—the working class. It makes little sense for him to put his effort into fundraising for an organization whose disastrous 2014 plan for electing more Democrats under DWS was “distance yourself from Obama and his achievements.” Until the Democrats stop trying to imitate the Republicans, until they stop drifting rightward to counter them, and until they stop throwing the working class under the bus with trade agreements and corporatism, its not his party. Sanders knows he doesn’t belong in the current Democratic Party, but this election is a referendum on the future Democratic Party—will it be a centrist, corporatist, neoliberal organ of the wealthy, or will it be a democratic, representative, social, progressive party of the people?

And the existence of super-delegates in the Democratic primary should tell you how the DNC feels about the wisdom of the people.

That being said, Sanders could still make an effort to fundraise for the DNC.

Its never too late to make a change. Because Sanders will benefit from the Victory Fund if he gets the nomination, fairness would dictate that he contribute to it. And, because he’s said that he will not run as an independent and that we need to prevent a Republican from becoming president, its a good practical investment as well. Others have commented that if Sanders were a good leader, he would seek out and create opportunities to fundraise with the DNC rather than waiting for them to come to him. This seems like a valid criticism, though the bad blood of Datagate may keep this off the table. A party fundraiser also seems like an awkward place for him, and I’m not sure many people would even show up. One could argue that the entire Sanders candidacy is a rebuttal to this form of politicking—to gladhanding and baby-kissing, to expensive fundraisers with CEOs and bankers, to managed, scripted appearances to beg for cash, and to blind allegiance to the Party apparatus.

I don’t expect to see Sanders fundraising for the DNC anytime soon. And I’m not upset about it.

Edit: punctuation.



Bernie goes for the hamstring

http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/21/politics/bernie-sanders-debbie-wasserman-schultz/

Sanders says he's backing DNC chair's primary opponent, wouldn't reappoint her to DNC
By Eugene Scott and Jake Tapper, CNN
Updated 4:12 PM ET, Sun May 22, 2016

RELATED: Sanders campaign manager: DNC chairwoman 'throwing shade' on Bernie


Washington (CNN)Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders on Saturday said he supports Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz's Democratic opponent in her August 30 primary, adding that if he is elected president, he would effectively terminate her chairmanship of the DNC.

Sanders, whose campaign has engaged in an increasingly bitter feud with the DNC chairwoman during his presidential bid, said in an interview set to air on CNN's "State of the Union" that he favors Tim Canova in Florida's 23rd congressional district. Canova is supporting Sanders.

On Sunday afternoon, Canova accused Wasserman Schultz of ignoring her home district's economic issues.

"In her own votes in the House of Representatives, I think she's making the problems worse," Canova told CNN's Fredricka Whitfield.

He also expressed doubt that his political rival could heal intra-party rifts created during the primary.

"If the Democrats come out of their convention united, it might not be because of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, but in spite of her efforts," he said.

Sanders sent out a fundraising email on behalf of Canova on earlier in the day.

"The political revolution is not just about electing a president, sisters and brothers. We need a Congress with members who believe, like Bernie, that we cannot change a corrupt system by taking its money," the email said.

Sanders also told Tapper that if he's elected president, he wouldn't reappoint Wasserman Schultz to head the DNC.

'Neutral'

In a response to Sanders on Saturday afternoon, Wasserman Schultz insisted she would remain neutral in the Democratic presidential race despite the Vermont senator's endorsement of her primary opponent.

"I am so proud to serve the people of Florida's 23rd district and I am confident that they know that I am an effective fighter and advocate on their behalf in Congress," Wasserman Schultz said. "Even though Senator Sanders has endorsed my opponent, I remain, as I have been from the beginning, neutral in the presidential Democratic primary. I look forward to working together with him for Democratic victories in the fall."

Sanders' campaign has long been critical of Wasserman Shultz's performance as head of the committee, claiming that the DNC has favored his presidential primary challenger, Hillary Clinton. Sanders and his supporters have complained about the nomination process and ways they believe it has helped Clinton, including debates held on Saturday nights, closed primaries in major states such as New York, and the use of superdelegates -- essentially free-agent party and union stalwarts who are overwhelmingly backing Clinton.

Canova, who teaches at Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad College of Law in Fort Lauderdale, was asked in 2011 to serve on Sanders' Wall Street reform advisory panel.

"I'm so proud to know that Bernie Sanders favors our campaign for progress for all. Like Sen. Sanders, I'm running a campaign that's truly backed by the people, not big corporations -- one that stands up to Wall Street interests instead of cozying up to them," Canova told CNN in a statement Saturday. "Together, I feel confident that our campaign of nurses, teachers, students, seniors and working-class Floridians can work together to demand accountability from our leaders, and offer a more positive path forward to the people of Florida's 23rd district."

Canova has called for greater regulation of Wall Street, writing on his campaign website that "we are now in a new Gilded Age." Like Sanders, he also opposes the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal.

"Time and time again, (Wasserman Schultz) has voted to protect the pools of dark money in politics," Canova recently told the New Times newspaper of Broward-Palm Beach.

While Sanders has a strong ability to raise money and thus could impact the race, he did not fare well in Wasserman Schultz's congressional district during the March Florida presidential primary, scoring 30.1% of the vote compared with Clinton's 68%.

'Throwing shade'

On Wednesday, Jeff Weaver, Sanders' campaign manager, slammed Wasserman Schultz after she told CNN the Vermont senator did not do enough to condemn his supporters' behavior at the party's raucous Nevada convention last week.

"We can have a long conversation about Debbie Wasserman Schultz just about how she's been throwing shade on the Sanders campaign from the very beginning," Weaver told CNN's Chris Cuomo on "New Day."

"It's not the DNC," Weaver added. "By and large, people in the DNC have been good to us. Debbie Wasserman Schultz really is the exception."

Wasserman Schultz has pushed back against Sanders' accusation that the party had rigged the system against him.

"We've had the same rules in place that elected Barack Obama. These rules were adopted for state parties all across the country in 2014," she said earlier this week.

Asked about the "throwing shade" line on Wednesday, Wasserman Schultz told CNN's Wolf Blitzer, "My response to that is hashtag SMH (shake my head)."

'Absurd' process

Sanders also said it is "absurd" that superdelegates began supporting Clinton even before she had a competitor.

"There's something absurd that I get 46% of the delegates that come from real contests, real elections, and 7% of the superdelegates," he told Tapper. "Some 400 of Hillary Clinton's superdelegates came on board her campaign before anybody else announced. It was anointment. And that is bad for the process."

Sanders, who has frequently cited polls saying he does better than Clinton in a matchup against Trump, also said there's "a good chance" the former secretary of state can beat the presumptive Republican nominee.

"I'm not saying she cannot beat Donald Trump. I think she can. I think there's a good chance she can," the Vermont senator said. "(But) I am the stronger candidate because we appeal to independents -- people who are not in love with either the Democratic or the Republican Party, often for very good reasons."

CNN's Chris Moody contributed to this report.




http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-idUSKCN0YD0VS

Sanders steps up feud with Democratic establishment
WASHINGTON | BY JOHN WHITESIDES
Politics | Mon May 23, 2016 5:43am EDT

Video -- "We are going to the convention": Sanders
Video -- Sanders calls for path to citizenship for Mexicans


Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders cranked up his fight with party leaders on Sunday, backing a challenger to the Democratic National Committee's chairwoman and accusing the party's establishment of trying to anoint Hillary Clinton as the nominee for president.

In a series of television interviews, Sanders remained defiant despite what he acknowledged was an uphill fight to overtake front-runner Clinton.

Clinton has said she already considers herself the de facto nominee and is increasingly turning her attention to Donald Trump, saying on Sunday that the rhetoric of the presumptive Republican nominee was dangerous.

Sanders told ABC's "This Week" program that Americans should not have to choose between "the lesser of two evils" in the Nov. 8 election.

Sanders said that if he won the White House, he would not reappoint U.S. Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz as DNC chairwoman. He also endorsed law professor Tim Canova, who is challenging the Florida congresswoman in the August Democratic primary.

"Do I think she is the kind of chair that the Democratic Party needs? No, I don't," Sanders told CBS' "Face the Nation."

"Frankly, what the Democratic Party is about is running around to rich people's homes and raising obscene sums of money from wealthy people. What we need to do is to say to working-class people – we are on your side," he said.

The defiant tone by Sanders, a U.S. senator from Vermont, has worried some Democrats anxious to see Clinton begin to unify the party and turn her attention to an election showdown with Trump.

Clinton painted Trump as a risk of the sort voters had not seen before in an interview with NBC's "Meet the Press" that aired on Sunday.

"I do not want Americans, and, you know, good-thinking Republicans, as well as Democrats and independents, to start to believe that this is a normal candidacy," she said. "It isn't."

Trump has gained ground in opinion polls as Republicans begin to rally around his candidacy. A Washington Post-ABC News poll released on Sunday showed Trump with a 2-point lead over Clinton, within the margin of error. In early March, Clinton led Trump by 9 points in the same poll.

But Sanders has ignored growing Democratic calls to step aside and repeated his vow to stay in the race until the party's July 25-28 nominating convention in Philadelphia despite Clinton's nearly insurmountable lead in pledged convention delegates who will choose the nominee.

He said he wanted to do away with superdelegates - party leaders who are free to support any candidate. Their rush to back Clinton even before votes had been cast amounted to "an anointment process," Sanders said.

'LESSER OF TWO EVILS"

He promised to influence the party platform and party rules even if he was not the nominee, but said if Clinton did not move toward his views on reining in Wall Street, reducing income equality and other issues, "she's going to have her problems."

"I don't want to see the American people voting for the lesser of two evils. I want the American people to be voting for a vision of economic justice, of social justice, of environmental justice, of racial justice," he said on ABC.

After Sanders' endorsement of her opponent, Wasserman Schultz said in a statement that she would remain neutral in the Democratic presidential race.

Democratic worries about party unity were exacerbated by last weekend's state party convention in Nevada, where unhappy Sanders supporters disrupted the proceedings in a dispute over rules.

That raised fears about possible chaos at the national convention in Philadelphia. But Sanders disputed media reports describing the Nevada incident as violent.

"What happened is people were rude, that's not good, they were booing, that's not good, they behaved in some ways that were a little bit boorish, not good, but let's not talk about that as violence," he said on ABC.

Sanders said he was not encouraging protests at the Philadelphia convention, "but of course people have the right to peacefully assemble and make their views heard."

Clinton said in the NBC interview that she would talk to Sanders about his policy demands and take them into account "when he's ready to talk."

(Additional reporting by David Morgan and Valerie Volcovici in Washington; Editing by Alan Crosby and Peter Cooney)



***********************************************************************
***********************************************************************