As the Democratic primary moves to New York, Bernie Sanders would like to debate Hillary Clinton to make sure their differences are well defined,
if he has any hope of trying to steal more of Hillary's momentum - which would be a major accomplishment in her home state.
This is proving difficult, as Hillary for America Chief Strategist Joel Berenson explains to CNN's Kate Bolduan:
Apparently, Bernie has been a naughty boy. In the latest attempt to lobotomize Democrat voters, Berenson references a Washington Post article claiming that Sanders' campaign was poll testing negative ads. Except that they weren't, not really. Quoting the article:
"His advisers, spoiling for a brawl, have commissioned polls to show which contrasts with Clinton - from Wall Street to fracking - could do the most damage to her at home."Berenson uses this as an excuse to chastise Sanders as if he is puerile little toddler:
"Let's see the tone of the campaign he wants to run, before we start talking about any other questions... if he goes back to the kind of tone he says he was going to set early on - if he does that, we'll talk about debates. "
For those people who really despise the culture that has arisen in the past couple of decades - everyone getting trophies, playing sports with no points so no one loses, college kids whining about every little thing that offends their fragile sensibilites - I point you to Joel Berenson and Clinton's campaign as an example of where that mindset might be fostered.
The Democratic primaries have been the friendliest in decades, mostly because of Bernie. Hillary's campaign against Obama in 2008 showed she has no problem going negative. But that poses a problem against Bernie Sanders, because there is really very little to go negative on. So little, in fact, that they had to go back 30 years for quotes on Cuba and the Sandinistas. So little that they have tried several times to hint, with a wink, at Sanders as racist, despite him having a big head start on race relations activism in Chicago in the early 60's. So little that the strategy has become the invention of a narrative with Bernie as a negative campaigner. Does not matter if it is true. Perception is reality, especially in politics. So Bernie not only magically becomes a negative campaigner, but one who needs to be chastised by Joel Berenson of the Clinton campaign for being so. This strategy says more about Hillary than it does about Bernie.
The reality is that Sanders' momentum has been growing at the same time Clinton's negative ratings have been increasing. And the last thing Clinton needs is Sanders taking a big chunk of her home state's pledged delegates. If he gets much closer, the unpledged delegates (superdelegates) start becoming part of the conversation. Sanders, for his part, needs to make a big showing in New York and, with it being Clinton's home state, he needs to find as many issues as possible to contrast himself. So he polls the issues that are most important to New Yorkers to figure out where Clinton is most vulnerable. That's simple politics, that's not negative campaigning. This is the same Washington Post that ran an editorial accusing Sanders of running a "fiction-filled campaign," that Clinton's team redistributed ahead of the New Hampshire primary. But Sanders is negative, and should sit in a corner without his dinner and think about what he has done. Bad boy.
Clinton better be careful. New York is home to high taxation (especially New York City) and Wall Street, where a big chunk of her funding comes from. The frustration over the economy is most starkly represented there, from both sides of the spectrum. There is potential for Hillary to do as much damage to herself as Bernie might do. Having an adviser give a verbal spanking to one's opponent. particularly one who does not deserve it, could come back to bite later on.
