TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on Sanders Appeal!

TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on Sanders Appeal!: Why Sanders holds potential appeal for Trump voters For years, conservatives have accused Democrats of being socialists. And for yea...

The Bottom Line on Sanders Appeal!

Why Sanders holds potential appeal for Trump voters

For years, conservatives have accused Democrats of being socialists. And for years, liberals have accused Republicans of being fascists. It’s never been true — until maybe now, when there is an actual democratic socialist in the 2016 presidential race, along with a Republican whom many, including some in his own party, say borders on fascistic.

While Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders could not be farther apart ideologically, both have built nontraditional movements around their presidential candidacies by appealing to some of the same disaffected voters, those who appreciate blunt talk and an anti-establishment message.

Now, Sanders and his aides are making a direct attempt to woo at least some would-be Trump fans away from the dark side of populism, especially in New Hampshire, which has an open primary system that allows even a small number of independent voters to make a big impact.

“Bernie’s ability to appeal to a broad swath of voters, and not solely triple-prime Democrats, can make a crucial difference in the Live Free or Die state, where unaffiliated and independent voters play an enormous role,” said Sanders’ New Hampshire communications director Karthik Ganapathy. “Bernie’s message speaks to people who feel that frustration, but instead of channeling it towards hatred and xenophobia, offers voters a forward-looking and hopeful vision for the future.”

Both candidate share reliance on independents and those who have not voted before, and both have strong support among similar demographics, like middle-aged white men. Both have accused his rivals as being in the pocket of special interests, arguing for a systematic overhaul — they just disagree on what the country should look like afterward. And even operatives with rival campaigns privately say they’re surprised at how often they’ve encountered voters who say they like both Trump and Sanders.

How many Sanders-Trump voters actually exist, and whether they actually turn out to vote — let alone make a real difference — remains dubious. But Sanders will take what he can get.

He’s pulled no punches on Trump, whom he’s called racist sexist xenophobe. But he separates Trump from his supporters, whom Sanders says are primarily driven by economic anxiety.

“What Trump has done with some success is taken that anger, taken those [economic] fears which are legitimate and converted them into anger against Mexicans, anger against Muslims,” Sanders said Sunday on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” “I think for his working class and middle class supporters, I think we can make the case that if we really want to address the issues that people are concerned about … we need policies that bring us together,” he said.

Sanders has made a direct appeal to Trump voters while on the stump in Iowa. And in New Hampshire, aides said they found a larger-than-expected number of voters who say they’re deciding between the socialist and the billionaire. “We hear it a lot,” said one Sanders aide.

While any other Democrat would likely write off a voter who expresses a preference for Trump, Sanders canvassers are told to pitch their candidate to those voters. The campaign even prepared a script specifically for the situation.

“A lot of people feel like this country isn’t working for them — because it’s not,” Sanders canvassers are instructed to say, according to the script shared by the campaign. “[T]he solution is not to turn to someone like Trump, with a message of hate, xenophobia, and division — it’s to elect a leader with integrity like Bernie, who’s proven time and again that he won’t be held hostage by moneyed special interests. That’s the right way to address the challenges we face.”

It’s not hard to see why Sanders, the longest-serving independent in Congress, would be excited by the idea of winning non-partisan voters in New Hampshire. “Undeclared” voters vastly outnumber registered Democrats — 383,000 to 229,000, according to the secretary of state’s office — and made up 40 percent of those who voted in the 2008 Democratic primary.

Sanders and his aides believe he is the Democrat best positioned to make a play for that swath in a critical state they say is a “must-win.”

Experts are skeptical. “Past results show that registered Democrats are likely to make up a majority of the primary electorate. Sanders either has to convince more of these voters to support him or he has to turn out an unprecedented number of independents and brand new voters,” said Patrick Murray, director of the independent Monmouth University Polling Institute.

Andy Smith, the director of the University of New Hampshire Survey Center, said that every year some candidate attempts to capitalize on the “myth of the independent voter.” “It’s just never been the case that independents have really swung an election for a candidate here,” he noted.

At least two-thirds of the state’s undeclared voters are really Republicans or Democrats who vote consistently in their party’s primary, while the remaining third are largely low-propensity voters mostly detached from politics. Only about 4 percent to 5 percent of the undeclared electorate was genuinely up for grabs between the parties in most recent election when both parties had contested primaries, according to Smith.

In the 2000, Democratic challenger Bill Bradley made a show of appealing to independent voters in New Hampshire and succeeded in winning the bloc — but front-runner Al Gore swamped him with registered Democrats and carried the contest.

Still, in a tight election, as the Feb. 9 primary is expected to be, a few thousand voters could make a big difference. And if anyone can break the mold, Sanders thinks it’s him. His campaign is predicated on the idea of sparking a political revolution with a flood of new voters to the poll.

And he’s done it in Vermont, where Sanders is the most popular senator in the country with an 83% approval rating, according to a recent Morning Consult poll. That’s 12 points higher than Vermont Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy’s rating, presumably thanks to support from non-Democrats — no small feat in a polarized era where it’s typically impossible for a politician of one party to win voters on the other side.

TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on Aide Who's Rankling!

TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on Aide Who's Rankling!: TOP BERNIE SANDERS AIDE RANKLES THOSE IN AND OUT OF CAMPAIGN Jeff Weaver spoke at a news conference about the data breach this month...

The Bottom Line on Aide Who's Rankling!

TOP BERNIE SANDERS AIDE RANKLES THOSE IN AND OUT OF CAMPAIGN

Jeff Weaver spoke at a news conference about the data breach this month in Washington.Credit Shawn Thew/European Pressphoto Agency

When Senator Bernie Sanders’s campaign team was about to address a throng of media about a breach in which his data director and at least two other staff members accessed Hillary Clinton’s proprietary voter data, reporters and political watchers braced for some sort of apology.

Instead, the campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, stood before the cameras and portrayed his campaign as victims of a voracious Democratic National Committee. He threatened to sue to party to restore its access to its own voter file data, which the party had suspended access as it investigated what had happened. The D.N.C. had refused to provide them with tools to investigate the issue themselves, the Sanders campaign claims, while the Clinton campaign had access to audit logs of the breach. In one fell swoop, the Sanders team had painted itself as the victim of the Democratic establishment.

The aggressive maneuver struck many political observers as daring. It caught Mrs. Clinton’s campaign by surprise, which believed the basic facts of what had happened would speak for themselves. But the person delivering the message, Mr. Weaver, is a long-trusted adviser to Mr. Sanders, who has developed a reputation inside and outside his campaign as a hard-charging operative often willing to go further than the candidate himself, with his handling of the data breach one more instance of top Sanders advisers getting under the skin of the Clinton campaign.

“Jeff is a Marine,” said Michael Briggs, the spokesman for Mr. Sanders, when asked about Mr. Weaver’s tone. “You wouldn’t want to be in a foxhole with anybody else.” Mr. Weaver declined to be interviewed.

He added, “Is Bernie nicer than Jeff and me? I’ll grant you that.” But “like others he is sometimes very protective” of Mr. Sanders, Mr. Briggs said, noting that Mr. Weaver had “put a lot of blood, sweat and tears into the effort” of the Sanders presidential bid.

Mark Longabaugh and Tad Devine, business partners and senior advisers to Mr. Sanders, also defended Mr. Weaver’s methods. The campaign “won the day” after the data breach, Mr. Longabaugh said, because Mr. Weaver had made the right call. Mr. Weaver’s allies suggested that he had an unflinching ability to detect a rival’s weak spot, and pounce.

Bill Clinton has privately told friends he was astonished by the Sanders’ team’s handling of the data breach, and that it risked depicting the Vermont senator as a typical politician and not the political outsider he is seen to be.

Mr. Weaver, who worked for Mr. Sanders in Congress for years and has the candidate’s trust, took a break from a store in Virginia, Victory Comics, to return to the candidate’s fold (his cell phone voicemail still identifies him as with the comic-book store.) Mr. Weaver has become the most visible of a small handful of top advisers to Mr. Sanders who have, in a series of interviews, denounced Mrs. Clinton and pushed back angrily at some of her campaign’s critiques of their candidate. They ran, and then took down, a negative digital ad after reporters questioned how that fit into the candidate’s pledge not to run negative ads. And more recently, an unidentified Sanders campaign adviser told Yahoo News that the Sanders campaign’s fired data director had actually been recommended by the party committee, suggesting that raised more questions about what had gone wrong and how it was that Mrs. Clinton’s data was visible by the Sanders team.

Some of Mr. Sanders’ campaign aides were troubled by the claim, and felt it reflected a misstep by the top advisers. Mr. Sanders at times has urged a few top aides to tone down their language, but he also believes that the campaign is being treated unfairly by the media.

The sparring between the campaigns reflects other underlying tensions between the Clinton and Sanders camps.

Mr. Sanders’ aides were genuinely incensed when Mrs. Clinton invoked sexism after Mr. Sanders spoke generally about people “shouting” on the issue of gun control, and believed she was twisting his words.

But the question of sexist language came back to haunt the Sanders campaign internally after the first debate, when Mr. Weaver appeared to be condescending toward Mrs. Clinton in an October interview with Bloomberg Politics.

“Look, she’d make a great vice president,” Mr. Weaver said. “We’re willing to give her more credit than Obama did. We’re willing to consider her for vice president. We’ll give her serious consideration. We’ll even interview her.”

The blowback outside the campaign was fierce. But there was also blowback within the Sanders campaign as well, as some aides said the language crossed a line. Mr. Sanders said on MSNBC that the comment “was inappropriate,” although it is not clear whether he suggested that Mr. Weaver apologize.

However, others in the campaign did. The Sanders campaign’s New Hampshire state director, Julia Barnes, asked Mr. Weaver to apologize for the comments, and voiced her displeasure to him in clear terms. He never did, telling unhappy staffers on a conference call after the report aired that their team needed to be mindful that the Clinton campaign was about to unleash attacks on Mr. Sanders, according to three people with direct knowledge of the episode.

Mr. Briggs declined to discuss the incident, saying he wouldn’t discuss his campaign’s conference calls. Ms. Barnes did not respond to a request for comment.

As for the Sanders campaign’s approach to the party committee, people briefed on the flap about the number of debates believe that Mr. Sanders has fed on outrage against the D.N.C. that was created by others, not his own team, in efforts to deal with the data issue. These people described Mr. Sanders’ team as decidedly less emphatic in private discussions about having more primary debates than they have been in public, realizing that debates are not his strength.

Mr. Briggs denied that claim. But in an interview on MSNBC on Tuesday morning, Martin O’Malley, the low-polling Democrat who has pushed the hardest for more debates, seemed to confirm that Mr. Sanders had not been aggressively seeking to buck the party establishment.

“I asked Senator Sanders” to do more, said Mr. O’Malley. “Senator Sanders didn’t want to do more debates either. He kind of liked where it is.”

Aides to Mr. Sanders said they couldn’t speak to Mr. O’Malley’s assertion, although Mr. Briggs said the team would “welcome more debates” that included Mrs. Clinton as well.

For now, the Clinton team is still surprised to find itself playing defense over the data breach. Days after the breach, a bemused Clinton campaign chairman, John Podesta, told NBC’s “Meet the Press” about Mr. Sanders, “I think he’s got a problem in his campaign with the culture of that campaign and I think that was shown in this incident. And I think that we are the victims of this, not the Sanders campaign.”

TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on a Trump Line!

TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on a Trump Line!: Bernie Sanders hits back after being called a ‘wacko’ by Donald Trump Democra...

The Bottom Line on a Trump Line!

Bernie Sanders hits back after being called a ‘wacko’ by Donald Trump

Democratic Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders speaks during a rally in Boston in October.

Hours after being called a “wacko” by Donald Trump, Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders fired back Monday at the Republican front-runner, saying he was pushing “pathetic policies” designed to benefit billionaires such as himself at the expense of misguided working-class voters who support him.

Sanders and Trump have been engaged in an escalating war of words since Sunday, when the Vermont senator asserted during an appearance on “Face the Nation” that he is better-positioned than Trump to represent the economic interests of some the real estate mogul’s followers.

Trump opposes raising the minimum wage and supports some tax cuts for higher-income earners, positions that Sanders argued during the CBS program are contrary to the interests of Trump’s lower- and middle-class supporters. Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist, has made that argument before, but it gained greater prominence with the Sunday show exposure.

On Monday morning, Trump took to Twitter to argue that if anyone is going to poach another candidate’s supporters, it’s him.

“Strange, but I see wacko Bernie Sanders’ allies coming over to me because I’m lowering taxes, while he will double and triple them — a disaster!” Trump tweeted.

Trump echoed those sentiments during a rally Monday night in Nashua, N.H., where he again called Sanders a “wacko” and warned that Sanders’s election would mean “massive, massive, massive tax increases” because he wants to “give everyone everything free.”

“I don’t think there’s too many Bernie Sanders people here,” Trump said, surveying his crowd.

Sanders, who is seeking to upset Hillary Clinton in his bid for the Democratic nomination, responded following a rally of his own Monday night in North Las Vegas.

“Being called wacko by a pathological liar like Mr. Trump makes me think he is getting nervous that the American people are catching on to his pathetic policies, which include giving hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks to billionaires like himself while refusing to raise the $7.25 an hour minimum wage,” Sanders said in comments relayed through a spokesman.

Sanders had previously called Trump a “pathological liar,” citing his debunked claim that thousands of Muslims in New Jersey were shown on television cheering after 9/11.

In remarks at his rally Sunday night, Sanders also took aim at Trump, citing his proposals to temporarily ban all Muslims from coming into the country and to deport millions of undocumented immigrants.

“There are people out there, Donald Trump and others, who are attempting to do what demagogues have always done, and that is instead of bringing people together to address and solve the real problems that we face, what they try to do is tap the anger and the frustration that people are feeling and then divide us up,” Sanders told a crowd estimated at 3,200 people. “So we have a message to Trump and all the others out there who want to divide us up: No, we’re not going to hate Latinos, we’re not going to hate Muslims, we are going to stand together.”

The balance of Sanders’s speech was devoted to issues he’s been pushing for months, including addressing income inequality, reforming a “broken” criminal justice system and combating climate change.

His appearance at a North Las Vegas high school wrapped up a two-day swing through Nevada, which holds its Democratic caucuses on Feb. 20, shortly after the first two nominating contests in Iowa and New Hampshire.

TheBottomLine: The Bottom line on Democratic Socialism!

TheBottomLine: The Bottom line on Democratic Socialism!: 5 Ways Democratic Socialism Isn't What You Think Ever since Bernie Sanders announced his candidacy, much attention has been focused o...

The Bottom line on Democratic Socialism!

5 Ways Democratic Socialism Isn't What You Think


Ever since Bernie Sanders announced his candidacy, much attention has been focused on the fact he calls himself a democratic socialist. Socialist, in the American lexicon, has a negative connotation, mainly because of common misunderstandings.

Sanders himself has tried many times to explain the difference between "socialism" and "democratic socialism," but the right still seems hung up on misrepresenting his views and exploiting people's fears. America has a rich socialist history many people are unaware of, but still fear the "S" word and picture evil dictators and red flags.

To quell any fears and to put a great deal of misinformation to rest, here are five things that democratic socialism is not.

1. Democratic Socialism Is Not Marxism
When Sanders spoke at the Georgetown University, he said clearly that he is NOT in favor of "workers owning the means of production," which is one of the most important aspects of Marxism. Marxism would replace the corporate ownership of business and would hand the companies to the workers to manage and control. This eliminates the capitalist structure, something democratic socialism does not do.

2. It Is Not Communism
In Karl Marx's writing, he often used the terms "socialism" and "communism" interchangeably. Many still do today in the Marxist movements, but outside of that, most people see Communism as the political structure of the (now-separated) USSR and China. Marxist communism is impossible to enact wholely, so these regimes did not represent true Marxism. Even so, they are much closer to Marxist communism than to democratic socialism.

3. It Is Not A Replacement For Capitalism
True socialism would replace the capitalist economy we live in now and replace it fully with a socialist one. While this is the dream of Marxists and socialists everywhere, this is not the plan under democratic socialism. Democratic socialism would instead put more restrictions on corporations and owners. This would include limitations on how much more money a CEO can make compared to their employees, and granting employees more rights and higher minimum wage.

4. It Is Not The Same As Regular Socialism
Democratic socialists have historically rejected the belief that the economy should be centrally planned (a centrally-planned economy is a socialist keystone belief). Instead, democratic socialism believes that some parts of society may be better if they are democratically planned: mass transit, medical care, minimum wage, etc. Democratic socialism still believes the capitalist market is best for consumer goods and services.

5. It Is Not Outside The Democratic Party
When Sanders announced he was running for President, he switched his party from Independent to Democrat, and many wondered why a socialist would run as a Democrat. Yet, what many didn't understand was that Democratic Socialism is not a party in itself and is an ideology that actually exists inside the Democratic Party.

Democratic socialists only hope to strengthen the party by improving upon issues the nation faces today such as healthcare, college tuition, and a strengthened social safety net.

TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on Sanders Donations!

TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on Sanders Donations!: Where Did Bernie Sanders' Two Million Donations Come From? Regardless of what you think of Bernie Sanders, there's no denying he ...

The Bottom Line on Sanders Donations!

Where Did Bernie Sanders' Two Million Donations Come From?


Regardless of what you think of Bernie Sanders, there's no denying he has a talent for grassroots fundraising. The U.S. Senator from Vermont hit the two million donations mark this week thanks to a diverse group of small-money supporters and the internet.

Pinpointing the source of much of Sanders' campaign funds is difficult, in large part because of campaign laws that allow small donations to be kept under wraps.

"The vast majority of his money comes from donors with $200 or less, and he doesn't have to disclose who they are," said Viveca Novak, editorial and communications director of the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-profit research group that operates campaign funding website OpenSecrets.

Must Read: 4 Things to Watch for at Saturday's Democratic Debate
Sanders has raised $41.5 million in the 2016 election cycle through the end of the third quarter and ended the period with $27.1 million on the books, according to the FEC website. About three quarters of the contributions received have been un-itemized, meaning individuals have contributed $200 or less during the calendar year and their identities do not have to be disclosed.
This is in stark contrast to frontrunner Hillary Clinton, whose campaign has brought in $77.5 million, roughly 80% being itemized -- as in, bigger-ticket and therefore public -- donations. Her super PACs have raised millions more.

According to the Sanders camp, just 261 backers have contributed the maximum allowable amount of $2,700, accounting for 1.7% of the total reported money raised. This week, a fundraising push brought the campaign an additional $3 million, the average donation being just $20.

The internet has helped to spur much of Sanders' success on the campaign trail, and that has converted into funding, too. For example, through ActBlue, an online fundraising committee that backs Democratic campaigns, FEC filings indicate Sanders has brought in more than $4.5 million.

"The Sanders campaign has been very effective at coming up with a message that appeals to [the progressive] wing of the party, mobilizing that wing of the party and then using digital media very effectively to translate that enthusiasm into money," said Daniel Kreiss, assistant professor of political communications at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Sanders' widespread grassroots support not only highlights the reach of his campaign but also helps to sustain his core message, explained Bob Schmuhl, professor of American Studies at the University of Notre Dame.

"By...reaching the mark of two million donation, the campaign reinforces its principal theme of economic inequality, with Sanders squarely on the side of those who are struggling to get by today." Schmuhl said.

The Sources
In terms of where donations are coming from, Sanders appears to have found friends in the tech community.

The New York Times noted in September that technology professionals from all over America had volunteered to support Sanders and his internet-focused campaign. And tech employees are donating both their time and money.

OpenSecrets' list of contributors to the Vermont senator's campaign (meaning organizations that gave through PACs or individuals donors connected with organizations) is topped by Google parent company Alphabet. Microsoft falls third, Apple fourth and Amazon sixth (the University of California and Columbia University occupy the second and fifth positions). IBM and EMC are listed as contributors as well.

The money is coming from rank and file employees, and not the higher-ups, Politico noted, pointing out that Sanders has largely avoided courting California's left-leaning tech super-wealthy, a group coveted by most Democrats.

Sanders' lack of concern with the golden state's rich and famous hasn't put much of a dent in his support statewide. California residents have contributed 23% of his campaign contributions, more than any other state (and significant, given that California comprises 12% of the U.S. population). Los Angeles area donors are his top contributors, followed by those in New York, Boston and San Francisco. The leading zip code for Sanders contributors is his hometown of Burlington, Vt., followed by Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Sanders finds his biggest group of supporters among retirees, who have donated $870,161 to his campaign, followed by education professionals ($404,375), health professionals ($232,564) and those employed as lawyers and at law firms ($230,233).

How Clinton Stacks up to Sanders
Tech appears to have an affinity for Clinton, too, though she is getting the bulk of her individual contributions from elsewhere. Alphabet also appears as a top contributor to the former first lady's presidential campaign, but it falls farther down the list. Her most significant contributors are New York law firm Morgan & Morgan, pro-female PAC EMILY's List and materials science company Corning Inc.

Clinton counts California as the top source of her donations as well. Those with zip codes in the Pacific Palisades, Los Angeles and Beverly Hills have contributed the most to her campaign, though it is all of New York City that, as a metropolitan area, has given the former New York senator the most.

Retirees are also Clinton's biggest group of supporters, followed by the law community. But the industry offering her the third highest amount of monetary support is television, music and movies (her birthday well-wishes indicated she has more than a few famous friends), followed by the securities and investment industries (she has been known to have a pretty cozy relationship with Wall Street).

Clinton does have an edge over Sanders when it comes to men and women donating -- 50.2% of her campaign funds have come from women, while just 36.7% of his have. The Vermont senator still beats out former Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley in this regard, as only 28.7% of his campaign donation funds have come from women.

The Data Breach Wildcard
News broke late Thursday of accusations by the Democratic National Committee that Sanders' staffers had improperly reviewed Clinton campaign data made available as a result of a software error could make the going tougher. The DNC suspended the campaign's access to the national voter database.

The database breach won't affect money, said Candice Nelson, professor at American University and expert in presidential and congressional elections, but it could hurt elsewhere. "The data is more related to the ground game and targeting turnout," she said.

The suspension of database access handed down by the DNC could negatively impact Sanders' field organizing and campaigning efforts. And with the Iowa caucuses just six weeks away, the Democratic debates virtually hidden in plain sight and the media's ongoing obsession with GOP frontrunner Donald Trump, Sanders needs all the resources he can get if he wants a shot at the nomination.

The Sanders campaign has reacted quickly to the events. It fired national data director Josh Uretsky, who allegedly directed three other staffers peruse the information, and hit back at the DNC. Campaign manager David Weaver accused the committee of trying to derail Sanders' bid in an effort to secure Clinton's path to the Democratic nomination in a press conference Friday.

"The leadership of the Democratic National Committee is now actively attempting to undermine our campaign. This is unacceptable," he said. "Individual leaders of the DNC can support Hillary Clinton in any way they want, but they are not going to sabotage our campaign, one of the strongest grassroots campaigns in modern history."

He called on the DNC to release the freeze on campaign data and said the Sanders camp would go to federal court to seek an injunction.

The Sanders campaign sent an email to supporters recently accusing the DNC of "tipping the scales for Hillary Clinton." At the bottom of the email: a "contribute" button.

TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on Sanders and DNC

TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on Sanders and DNC: The Sanders campaign is taking its fight with the DNC to the next level Presidential candidate U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders speaks during a n...

The Bottom Line on Sanders and DNC

The Sanders campaign is taking its fight with the DNC to the next level

Presidential candidate U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders speaks during a news conference in December about police reform and preventing people of color from being victimized by police officers. (Photo: Joshua Lott/Getty Images)

The dustup over a data breach that briefly erupted in the Democratic presidential primary last week isn’t over as far as Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and his team are concerned.

In a conversation with Yahoo News, a top Sanders campaign adviser made a series of explosive allegations about how the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and a political technology company that works with the party handled the incident. According to the Sanders adviser, the DNC and NGP VAN, a firm that has a contract with the party organization to operate a voter file, have responded to the data breach by “leaking information” and “stonewalling an investigation” into the matter.

“We have demanded a full investigation from top to bottom,” the Sanders adviser said.

Sanders’ adviser noted that a lawsuit the campaign filed in federal court about the data breach last Friday, Dec. 18, is still ongoing, and described it as an attempt to get answers despite the party’s lack of cooperation.

According to a blog post published by NGP VAN, the data breach occurred on Wednesday, Dec. 16. The company said it involved a “bug” in the software NGP provides to the DNC. NGP VAN software is used by the DNC to operate a massive file of voter data that is shared by the party and all of the Democratic presidential campaigns. Both campaigns also rely on NGP to store their private files. The data in the shared and private files is essentially the lifeblood of a modern presidential campaign. It includes information vital to campaigns’ day-to-day organizing and strategy, including potential supporters they are targeting and how many voters they expect to turn out in key primary states.

Because of the software issue, members of the Sanders campaign were able to access information that belonged to Hillary Clinton’s campaign. On Dec. 17, news of the incident broke and the Sanders campaign announced it had fired its national data director, Josh Uretsky, for taking advantage of the breach to access data belonging to Clinton. The top Sanders adviser told Yahoo News one of the remaining concerns is that Uretsky was recommended to the campaign by people with ties to the DNC and NGP VAN.

Sen. Bernie Sanders’ campaign manager, Jeff Weaver (right), talks to reporters in December. Sanders’ campaign was disciplined by the DNC after a software error enabled a staffer to review Hillary Clinton’s private campaign data. (Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

“It’s not as if we conjured this guy Josh from thin air. This is an individual … who was recommended to us by the DNC and NGP VAN,” the adviser said.

According to the adviser, one of the references that Uretsky gave when he applied to work with the campaign was the DNC’s National Data Director Andrew Brown, who works closely with the shared voter file program.

“Andrew Brown spoke to us and gave him a positive review, as did this guy Bryan Whitaker,” the adviser said.

The adviser identified Whitaker as the COO of NGP VAN. Whitaker is no longer with the company. His LinkedIn page lists Whitaker as having left the firm for a job at another political data company in August of this year. Uretsky’s LinkedIn says he began working on the Sanders campaign in September.

Brown and Whitaker did not respond to requests for comment on this story. A spokesperson for the DNC declined to comment.

The Sanders adviser described the fact Uretsky was recommended to the campaign by people with links to the DNC as astonishing in light of what happened. Specifically, the adviser pointed out that the campaign was slammed by Clinton’s team for the breach and punished by the DNC.

“I just think it’s utter hypocrisy on their part,” said the adviser. “I mean here we are being attacked for the behavior of an individual, which we ultimately fired. We agree he acted improperly, but it’s just amazing to me that this … individual that actually caused this trouble in our campaign was recommended by these guys.”

Uretsky was not the only person the Sanders campaign disciplined for being involved with the data breach. The campaign announced the suspension of two additional staffers after the Democratic presidential debate last Saturday night. The Sanders adviser did not say anyone other than Uretsky was recommended by people affiliated with the DNC or NGP VAN.

Heading into the debate, the Sanders team was under fire for the breach. The Clinton campaign released several statements to the media describing the incident as theft that was potentially even criminal. It produced audit logs showing multiple Sanders staffers accessed Clinton files on over 20 occasions. The DNC temporarily locked Sanders’ team out of the shared voter file, which contains information that is vital to the campaigns’ day-to-day operations and organizing efforts.

The adviser suggested the DNC and NGP VAN are “ignoring their own responsibility,” arguing that Uretsky’s references from people linked to the party and the company show both the DNC and NGP VAN “bear responsibility” for the incident. The world of progressive political consulting is a small one, and, as in other professions, it’s common for people to provide recommendations for those in their network. Still, given what happened with the breach, the adviser suggested Brown’s recommendation of Uretsky could be evidence of a conspiracy.

“I don’t know how you can more centrally connect this thing than those two entities,” the adviser explained. “Here we are being attacked by both of those entities when, in fact, they recommended this guy to the campaign.”

Lorraine Joseph, right, a student nurse at Broward College, makes a sign supporting candidate Bernie Sanders as Jenny Ellis, left, looks on, in Pembroke Pines, Fla. (Photo: Wilfredo Lee/AP)

Though Sanders’ team has not denied there was wrongdoing by members of its staff, it has objected to the fact Clinton’s team went public with its concerns. Sanders’ campaign also has described the DNC’s decision to close it out of the shared file as draconian and part of a pattern that shows the party is unfairly working to help protect Clinton’s frontrunner status in the primary.

According to the adviser it was ”outrageous” the Clinton campaign was given the audit logs that it showed to the media and Sanders’ team was not. The adviser said these logs were unquestionably given to the Clinton campaign by NGP VAN or the DNC.

“This is one of the things that we were whipsawed in over the course of the, you know, 48 hours,” the adviser said. “NGP VAN was leaking information, clearly provided documents to the DNC and the Clinton campaign — or the DNC was providing those documents to the Clinton campaign. Documents that we didn’t have.”

The adviser said the Sanders campaign was “trying to scramble around and find out what happened” in the immediate period after the breach was revealed. According to the adviser, it was hard to determine the extent of the incident because campaign staffers were locked out of the DNC software and not given the logs. Meanwhile, with the logs in hand, the Clinton campaign was able to make detailed public allegations about improper activity by members of Sanders’ team.

“It would have been fair play to provide us the info in proper time … they basically locked us out and then started throwing stuff under the table,” said the adviser.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks during a town hall meeting in Keota, Iowa, in December. (Photo: Charlie Neibergall/AP)

Over the weekend, a Clinton spokesperson told Yahoo the audit logs were believed to have been provided to the Clinton campaign by NGP VAN. When asked about the documents, a spokesperson for NGP VAN pointed out to Yahoo News that the company’s contract for the voter file is with the DNC, which would mean it is not working directly with the campaigns for that software.

The Sanders campaign filed a lawsuit on Dec. 18 demanding that its access to the file be restored. At a press conference announcing that suit, Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver described the DNC’s behavior as an effort to “undermine” Sanders’ attempt to mount a progressive challenge to Clinton.

“By their action, the leadership of the Democratic National Committee is now actively attempting to undermine our campaign. This is unacceptable. Individual leaders of the DNC can support Hillary Clinton in any way they want, but they are not going to sabotage our campaign — one of the strongest grassroots campaigns in modern history,” Weaver said.

The campaign was able to reach an agreement with the DNC to have its access to the data restored late on the night it filed suit. NGP VAN’s blog post noted the company played “no role” in making the decision to lock the Sanders campaign out of the file and that its staff worked long hours to quickly restore the campaign’s access following the agreement with the DNC. The Sanders campaign is still working with NGP VAN.

Even after having its access restored, the Sanders campaign did not drop its dispute with the DNC. It has used the situation to appeal for donations and in messages to allies described its dissatisfaction with the party as long simmering. In one note to supporters, Weaver pointed to the fact the DNC has scheduled multiple debates on weekends when television viewership is generally low as evidence the party is improperly helping Clinton.

“The reality is that the huge turnouts that we’ve had at our meetings, our strong fundraising, our volunteer base and quick rise in the polls have caused the Democratic National Committee to place its thumb on the scales in support of Hillary Clinton’s campaign. You see that fact evidenced in their decision to bury the Democratic debates on weekends during nationally televised football games. It’s more or less an open secret,” Weaver wrote.

Both the Clinton campaign and the DNC have dismissed the Sanders team’s arguments about the debate schedule and claimed it is decided by the networks that air the forums.

Hillary Clinton listens as Sen. Bernie Sanders speaks during the Democratic presidential debate in Manchester, N.H., in December. (Photo: Ida Mae Astute/ABC via Getty Images)

At the debate on Saturday, Sanders personally apologized to Clinton for the incident. He also called for “an independent investigation” and blasted the DNC’s decision to lock the campaign out of the voter file as an “egregious act.” Clinton accepted the mea culpa and said she agreed on an independent inquiry. However, the Sanders adviser said the DNC is blocking efforts to review the matter.

“We have demanded a full investigation from top to bottom,” the adviser said. “Hillary Clinton agreed to it in the debate Saturday, and the DNC continues to stonewall a full investigation.”

TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on Dems Debate

TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on Dems Debate: Sanders defeated Clinton in last debate and achieved victory over DNC Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) is the only presidential candidate ever...

The Bottom Line on Dems Debate

Sanders defeated Clinton in last debate and achieved victory over DNC


Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) is the only presidential candidate ever to achieve 2.3 million individual campaign contributions, and the only Democratic candidate to defeat the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in the court of public opinion. In less than two days, the DNC blocked the Sanders campaign from their own voter database and then quickly acquiesced to public pressure. The Wall Street Journal explains how DNC Chair and Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz struck at the campaign, but Sanders supporters and the momentum behind his movement struck back:

The Democratic National Committee abruptly reversed course Saturday, restoring Sen. Bernie Sanders' access to party voter data after suspending it following a breach. ...

The party's early-morning decision to restore Mr. Sanders' access to the master voter file puts to an end to an interparty drama that threatened to drag the two main Democratic rivals into an ugly spat with the national party.

DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz said the Sanders campaign had satisfied the party's conditions and that its access to Democratic Party data would resume.

While the FBI's investigation of rival candidate Hillary Clinton's emails has expanded, the DNC tried and failed to undermine the Sanders campaign. Although Sanders did apologize to Clinton during the debate, the breach of data was in large part caused by a DNC vendor's incompetence.The heavy-handed response, however, backfired on Wasserman Shultz and the DNC, especially since the truly progressive base of Sanders voters is needed for any Democrat to win the White House. As for the debate, Clinton failed to circumvent relevant issues pertaining to her hawkish and aggressive foreign policy record. In addition to voting to authorize the Iraq War, Clinton's advocacy for the bombing of Libya as secretary of State caused untold chaos and helped further destabilize the region.

An article in The Week explains exactly why Clinton can't escape responsibility for her decision-making:

Death and civil war in Libya were unacceptable outcomes for America when Moammar Gadhafi was alive. But death and civil war continue unabated, the difference being that the Islamic State is now one of the players — and somehow it's not in the American interest to stop it or to help Libyans establish some kind of law and order. The lessons of Iraq have been internalized: Once you create a total power vacuum that will attract terror gangs and radical Islamic fundamentalists, it's best to not have any boots on the ground to stop them.

Clinton's chapter [in her book] on Libya ends on exactly this note, disavowing any responsibility for death and destruction from here on out.

In addition to evading responsibility for Libya during the debate, Clinton engaged in the usual bouts of doublespeak.

Clinton accused Sanders of supporting her disastrous bombing campaign as secretary of State, but in reality, he voted for an "an orderly, irreversible transition to a legitimate democratic government in Libya." This isn't the language of the Iraq War Resolution (opposed by Sanders), overtly giving the George W. Bush administration authority to invade Iraq, nor can it logically be correlated to Clinton's Iraq vote.

Clinton tried to tie Sanders into her failed decision and make a morally relative link to her Iraq vote by inferring that he wanted her to bomb Libya because of a Senate vote. The truth, however, is that she was secretary of State, and her advocacy to bomb meant infinitely more than a symbolic vote meant to back the president against Libyan dictator Gaddafi. There were a number of avenues any secretary of State could have taken, but Clinton chose the most aggressive approach.

Sanders didn't vote for regime change, and here's the name and description of the bill he voted for:

S.Res. 85 — A resolution strongly condemning the gross and systematic violations of human rights in Libya, including violent attacks on protesters demanding democratic reforms, and for other purposes.

"Strongly condemning" doesn't mean bombing. Clinton wrongly accused Sanders of supporting her failed bombing campaign.

In contrast, the Iraq War Resolution led directly to President Bush's invasion, and Sanders opposed it while Clinton supported the Iraq War. While she calls her vote a "mistake," Clinton’s foreign policy is still aggressive and considered "neocon," even to a conservative historian quoted in The New York Times. This neoconservative approach on foreign affairs, expressed by a Democrat, just recently led to the usual Clinton flip flop.

As the International Business Times points out, Clinton supported using U.S. ground troops to fight the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), then quickly backtracked and evolved:

Tuesday morning's announcement that the U.S. would be deploying troops to fight the so-called Islamic State militant group in Iraq likely caught Hillary Clinton off guard, considering she said earlier in the day that she didn't think putting boots on the ground was such a prudent idea. Clinton's latest opinion on the topic was an abrupt departure from her previous stance, when the Democratic presidential front-runner less than two weeks ago expressed her support to "broaden" anti-ISIS efforts by bringing U.S. troops to the conflict-ridden region.

As with every major issue, from ground troops to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Clinton starts from a conservative stance and emerges with a progressive viewpoint, being all things to everyone, and standing for everything at once.

In contrast, Sanders was the only candidate during the debates to speak about ending our perpetual wars and America's involvement in quagmires. He's the only candidate in 2016 to earn the Congressional Award from the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the only candidate to describe the consequences of war. Most importantly, he's the only person who says "I'll be damned" if more Americans are sent to fight in the Middle East.

In one weekend, Bernie Sanders bested Hillary Clinton, Debbie Wasserman Shultz and the DNC's attempt to undermine his campaign. As a result, supporters rallied even stronger around his message and the momentum created can't be measured in polls. Sanders won the debate and was also victorious in the court of public opinion. In 2016, he'll defeat Clinton and become the Democratic nominee because, like then-candidate Barack Obama eight years ago, Sanders is the true progressive on foreign policy.

TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on Trump getting Schlonged by Sand...

TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on Trump getting Schlonged by Sand...: Poll: Against Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump Would Get 'Schlonged' Bernie Sanders would beat Donald Trump 51-38 in a general-election...

The Bottom Line on Trump getting Schlonged by Sanders!

Poll: Against Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump Would Get 'Schlonged'

Bernie Sanders would beat Donald Trump 51-38 in a general-election match-up, according to the latest poll from Quinnipiac University. Or — to put it in the course vernacular that Trump introduced to America this week — the billionaire would get "schlonged" by the democratic socialist. 

"Sen. Bernie Sanders hammers him," said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac poll. Hillary Clinton, the poll suggests, would also put Trump in his place — "Hillary Clinton tops him," added Malloy — though by a more modest 47-40.

That wasn't the only bad news for Trump, and by extension the GOP, to come out of the national poll: 61 percent of Americans say the Republican frontrunner "does not share their values," 58 percent believe he "is not honest and trustworthy,"and 57 percent say he "does not care about their needs and problems."

Most striking is the disconnect between GOP voters and the rest of the electorate of Trump's viability as a general-election candidate. Fully 70 percent of GOP voters are convinced Trump would have a good chance of winning in November 2016. Just 41 percent of Americans at large hold the same view, with a majority (51 percent) holding that Trump "does not have a good chance of winning."

In the race for the Republican nomination, the poll shows Trump still leading a divided field. With 28 percent support, Trump bests Texas Sen. Ted Cruz by 4 points, and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio by 14 points. The poll finds that both Cruz and Rubio would prove more formidable general-election competitors. Against either Clinton or Sanders, both Cruz and Rubio make the 2016 election, effectively, a tossup.

TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on Home Sales

TheBottomLine: The Bottom Line on Home Sales: Existing Home Sales Tumble as New Loan Rules Take Effect The National Association of Realtors (NAR) reports that the seasonally adjuste...

The Bottom Line on Home Sales

Existing Home Sales Tumble as New Loan Rules Take Effect

The National Association of Realtors (NAR) reports that the seasonally adjusted annual rate of existing home sales in November fell 10.5% to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 4.76 million from a downwardly revised total of 5.32 million in October.

November sales mark the first time since September of 2014 that existing home sales have fallen compared with year-ago sales in the same month. Sales are now 3.8% lower than in November 2014.

The consensus estimate called for sales to reach 5.32 million, according to a survey of economists polled by Bloomberg.

The sharp decline could be the result of implementation of a new "Know Before You Owe" rule that extends the closing time on new loans. The NAR's chief economist said:

Sparse inventory and affordability issues continue to impede a large pool of buyers' ability to buy, which is holding back sales. However, signed contracts have remained mostly steady in recent months, and properties sold faster in November. Therefore it's highly possible the stark sales decline wasn't because of sudden, withering demand.

It's possible the longer timeframes pushed a latter portion of would-be November transactions into December. As long as closing timeframes don't rise even further, it's likely more sales will register to this month's total, and November's large dip will be more of an outlier.

Housing inventory decreased by 3.3% in November to 2.04 million homes, which is equal to a supply of 5.1 months, an increase of 0.3 months compared with October, but 1.9% lower than the 2.08 homes in inventory in November of last year.

According to the NAR, the national median existing home price for all housing types in November was $220,300, up 6.3% compared with November 2014, the 45th consecutive month of rising home prices. In September the national median price was $219,600

The percentage of first-time buyers slipped to 30% in November, down from 31% in October.
Sales of single-family homes fell 12.1% from the October total to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 4.15 million, down 4.6% compared with November a year ago. Sales of multi-family homes rose 1.7% in November at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 610,000 units.

Foreclosed and short sales accounted for 9% of November sales, up from 6% in October and flat with November of 2014. Foreclosures and short sales both sold at an average 15% discount to the November median price.

All homes were on the market for an average of 54 days in November, down from 57 days in October. Foreclosed homes were on the market for an average of 47 days, and short sales took a median of 91 days to sell. Non-distressed homes took 54 days to sell, and 37% of homes sold in November were on the market for less than a month.

The NAR also reported the following regional data:

• November existing-home sales in the Northeast fell 9.2% year over year to an annual rate of 690,000 and are now 1.5% above a year ago. The median price in the Northeast was $254,800, which is 3.2% higher than November 2014.
• In the Midwest, existing-home sales plunged 15.4% to an annual rate of 1.1 million in November and fell 2.7% below November 2014 sales. The median price in the Midwest was $169.300, up 5.3% from a year ago.
• Existing-home sales in the South fell 6.2% to an annual rate of 1.98 million in November and are now 5.7% below November 2014 sales. The median price in the South was $489,400, up 6.3% from a year ago.
• Existing-home sales in the West decreased by 13.9% to an annual rate of 990,000 in November and are now 4.2% lower than a year ago. The median price in the West was $319,700, which is 8.3% above the November 2014 median.