Hillary to blame Bernie in a chapter in her new book

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

I guess it's fair to ask how Hillary would have done in a wide open race where there were a full stable of Democratic candidates for President in 2016.  How would the thing have played out of Hillary didn't have DWS clearing the decks for her at the DNC, and she went up against a field of, say, VP Joe Biden, Sen. Bernie Sanders, Gov. Martin O'Malley, former Gov. Deval Patrick, former Sen. Jim Webb, Sen. Sherrod Brown, and a few other challengers.  Would she have still won the nomination?  Indeed, if the decks hadn't been cleared, I think O'Malley (for example) would have done better. 

I think it's fair to ask if Hillary would have even run in 2016 if she didn't know in advance that the decks would be cleared, and she had to prove her mettle.  Certainly, Biden would have run had the fix not been in.  Who else may have jumped in?  Think about it.

[Mr. Morden]

I guess it's fair to ask how Hillary would have done in a wide open race where there were a full stable of Democratic candidates for President in 2016.  How would the thing have played out of Hillary didn't have DWS clearing the decks for her at the DNC, and she went up against a field of, say, VP Joe Biden, Sen. Bernie Sanders, Gov. Martin O'Malley, former Gov. Deval Patrick, former Sen. Jim Webb, Sen. Sherrod Brown, and a few other challengers.  Would she have still won the nomination?  Indeed, if the decks hadn't been cleared, I think O'Malley (for example) would have done better. 

DWS and the DNC aren't that powerful.  The decks weren't cleared by them.  They were cleared by party elites (including elected officials and the like) and big money donors, not the DNC itself.  These folks basically signalled to Cuomo, Klobuchar, Patrick, etc. that they were going to back Clinton, and so there was no space for a non-Clinton establishment candidate in the race.  It's similar to what happened with Romney in 2015, where the big $ donors and other elites who he was hoping would back another run by him ended up migrating to Jeb Bush, leaving no space for a Romney candidacy.  That was something that happened because of the party elite, not the actual RNC.

So I'm not sure exactly what you mean in your hypothetical about the decks not being cleared.  If the question is "What would have happened if the 200 or so Congressional Dems and a couple of dozen governors hadn't all endorsed Clinton early on, or if her Super PAC backers hadn't backed her, and had instead spread their money around to folks like Cuomo and Biden?", then I think the answer is that Sanders would very likely have won a plurality of the vote, because the "establishment lane" would have been split, while the "insurgent lane" would have all been Sanders.

[Beet]

Lol, there' some Fuzzy Bear projection going on right here. Trump was more disliked than Hillary on election day, and it wasn't just because he was perceived to be losing. Had votes like mine (which was an expression of support for Hillary personally as well as politically) counted equally, she would be POTUS.

[Mr. Smith]

I said as early as 2014 that a left wing primary challenge would hurt Hillary in the end. Just like Reagan did to Ford, Kennedy did to Carter, and Buchanan did to Bush. And I hate to say "I told you so, but...

You're treating Hillary as if she was an incumbent President, and not a challenger for an open Presidency, are you not?  This post is a precise illustration of the sense of entitlement Hillary Clinton possessed regarding the Presidency.  "It's my turn!"  And you wonder why folks don't like her?  Most folks can't say "It's my turn!" at much of anything and have a valid claim.

Isn't an open Presidency a time where there are multiple challengers?  Not since 1960, when Richard Nixon was virtually unopposed for the GOP Presidential nomination, was a nomination for the open Presidency so uncontested.  Bush 41 wasn't derailed by Dole.  Bush 43 wasn't derailed by McCain.  Obama wasn't derailed by Hillary, and McCain didn't lose because of a rigorous challenge for the nomnation.  

Hillary lost because (A) people didn't like her, and (B) close scrutiny emplified the reasons why they didn't like her.  She's someone who should, very much, take her defeat personally.  2016 was a very, very PERSONAL rejection of Hillary Clinton.  It was also an event that those clearing the decks for her should have seen coming.

You conveniently forgot about Al Gore, aka the guy that won 2000 but got screwed out anyway.

[Alabama_Indy10]

I said as early as 2014 that a left wing primary challenge would hurt Hillary in the end. Just like Reagan did to Ford, Kennedy did to Carter, and Buchanan did to Bush. And I hate to say "I told you so, but...

You're treating Hillary as if she was an incumbent President, and not a challenger for an open Presidency, are you not?  This post is a precise illustration of the sense of entitlement Hillary Clinton possessed regarding the Presidency.  "It's my turn!"  And you wonder why folks don't like her?  Most folks can't say "It's my turn!" at much of anything and have a valid claim.

Isn't an open Presidency a time where there are multiple challengers?  Not since 1960, when Richard Nixon was virtually unopposed for the GOP Presidential nomination, was a nomination for the open Presidency so uncontested.  Bush 41 wasn't derailed by Dole.  Bush 43 wasn't derailed by McCain.  Obama wasn't derailed by Hillary, and McCain didn't lose because of a rigorous challenge for the nomnation.  

Hillary lost because (A) people didn't like her, and (B) close scrutiny emplified the reasons why they didn't like her.  She's someone who should, very much, take her defeat personally.  2016 was a very, very PERSONAL rejection of Hillary Clinton.  It was also an event that those clearing the decks for her should have seen coming.

You conveniently forgot about Al Gore, aka the guy that won 2000 but got screwed out anyway.

Gore had a challenger

[Lord Admirale]

I think Bernie does deserve a share of blame as he tacitly pushed "crooked Hillary" and also spurred lots of division in our party.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

I think Bernie does deserve a share of blame as he tacitly pushed "crooked Hillary" and also spurred lots of division in our party.

Hillary created the division. Bernie just exposed it.

[McGovernForPrez]

I just think this is in poor taste. I do think Sanders definitely played off of Hillary's negative image to some extent, but not nearly to the level he could have taken it. He could've easily brought up the emails more. Sanders had every right to launch a primary challenge and Hillary shouldn't be so annoyed that someone dare challenge her. By making claims like this she just sounds like a sore loser. May she have won without Sanders challenging her? Maybe, but it really doesn't change anything. I was really hoping this book would be more of an explanation of her campaign and many of the mistakes she made, not something to further the divides in the party.

[Lord Admirale]

I think Bernie does deserve a share of blame as he tacitly pushed "crooked Hillary" and also spurred lots of division in our party.

Hillary created the division. Bernie just exposed it.

Care to explain? Because I hear that quite a lot, and usually without explanation.

[Mr. Smith]

I said as early as 2014 that a left wing primary challenge would hurt Hillary in the end. Just like Reagan did to Ford, Kennedy did to Carter, and Buchanan did to Bush. And I hate to say "I told you so, but...

You're treating Hillary as if she was an incumbent President, and not a challenger for an open Presidency, are you not?  This post is a precise illustration of the sense of entitlement Hillary Clinton possessed regarding the Presidency.  "It's my turn!"  And you wonder why folks don't like her?  Most folks can't say "It's my turn!" at much of anything and have a valid claim.

Isn't an open Presidency a time where there are multiple challengers?  Not since 1960, when Richard Nixon was virtually unopposed for the GOP Presidential nomination, was a nomination for the open Presidency so uncontested.  Bush 41 wasn't derailed by Dole.  Bush 43 wasn't derailed by McCain.  Obama wasn't derailed by Hillary, and McCain didn't lose because of a rigorous challenge for the nomnation.  

Hillary lost because (A) people didn't like her, and (B) close scrutiny emplified the reasons why they didn't like her.  She's someone who should, very much, take her defeat personally.  2016 was a very, very PERSONAL rejection of Hillary Clinton.  It was also an event that those clearing the decks for her should have seen coming.

You conveniently forgot about Al Gore, aka the guy that won 2000 but got screwed out anyway.

Gore had a challenger

A really really week challenger who was done after NH. Arguably that was a token challenge.

Sanders was much stronger than that.

[Rookie Yinzer]

I think Bernie does deserve a share of blame as he tacitly pushed "crooked Hillary" and also spurred lots of division in our party.

Hillary created the division. Bernie just exposed it.

Care to explain? Because I hear that quite a lot, and usually without explanation.

He's making it up. There were many, many young people who were #ReadyforHillary but jumped ship once Bernie started going on and on about Goldman Sachs speeches and letting lies perpetuate about the primary process while benefiting from the undemocratic caucus system.

He is fraudulent, playing coy about his tax returns, and when he finally released something it was just the summary page from 2014. Let's not even get into the shady land deals his wife participated in and the bank and wiring fraud. Bernie Sanders is a saboteur and if he runs in 2020 I will actively campaign against him.

[Shadows]

These same people blasted Jfern & others for not supporting Clinton when 90% of Sanders supporters voted for Clinton & now they talk of campaigning against Sanders when Trump is the GOP Nominee.

They basically do this because they don't want to hate themselves for helping elect Trump by supporting a terrible candidate in the Dem primary.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

This Hillary vs Bernie feud is so tiring. I liked Hillary over Obama in 2008, and Hillary over Bernie in 2016, but it's clear that her role in the party as a major player is over with. I think we are beyond the point where arguing about the past is helpful. There were many factors that both hurt and helped Hillary in this election, but the only constant is herself. There's always annoyed people after every primary when people don't get the candidate they want, especially if it's even remotely competitive of a primary.

[publicunofficial]

If you're madder at Bernie for mentioning the Wall Street speeches than at Hillary for making them, you might be a neolib!

[Illini Moderate]

If you're madder at Bernie for mentioning the Wall Street speeches than at Hillary for making them, you might be a neolib!

Lol no one is mad at him for mentioning it. He had every right to. The fact was simply stated that him implying that she changed votes/was corrupt due to giving those speeches hurt her. Never did she say it cost her the election, never did she "blame" him for losing. She was frustrated that he made all these insinuations about her being crooked, but couldn't provide her with an example when she challenged him to. I don't understand why everyone is taking this further than what she herself stated

[ProgressiveCanadian]

^^^
LOL of course she changed her votes because of money she received. How Naive can you be?!

[Bidenworth2020]

If you're madder at Bernie for mentioning the Wall Street speeches than at Hillary for making them, you might be a neolib!

Lol no one is mad at him for mentioning it. He had every right to. The fact was simply stated that him implying that she changed votes/was corrupt due to giving those speeches hurt her. Never did she say it cost her the election, never did she "blame" him for losing. She was frustrated that he made all these insinuations about her being crooked, but couldn't provide her with an example when she challenged him to. I don't understand why everyone is taking this further than what she herself stated

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/07/us/politics/the-vote-for-bankruptcy-reform-that-haunts-hillary-clinton.html?mcubz=0

[BudgieForce]

F.Y.I, Hillary's books is fantastic. Worth a read, even if you dislike her.

[West_Midlander]

Personal responsibility seems to be foreign to someone like HRC.

[West_Midlander]

What I would ask Hillary is, didn't Trump have to overcome the same obstacle? He got his own party members to condemn his candidacy and told him to drop out.