If Bernie had gone negative

[Landslide Lyndon]

If Sanders had gone after over the emails back in the fall, then he might have moved the needle and could very well be the nominee.
Still, I think the only person who could have beaten Hillary this year was Warren.

Yes, peddling Republican talking points/witch hunts would surely play well in a Democratic primary.

Again, the emails are not a right-wing smear. It's very different from Benghazi.

Yes they are. If they weren't then they would have investigated Powell and Rice too.

They likely should. But there's a big difference: Neither of these two is running for POTUS.

So if you commit an offense but afterwards you retire from public life you get a pardon?
That's a new one.

[President Johnson]

If Sanders had gone after over the emails back in the fall, then he might have moved the needle and could very well be the nominee.
Still, I think the only person who could have beaten Hillary this year was Warren.

Yes, peddling Republican talking points/witch hunts would surely play well in a Democratic primary.

Again, the emails are not a right-wing smear. It's very different from Benghazi.

Yes they are. If they weren't then they would have investigated Powell and Rice too.

They likely should. But there's a big difference: Neither of these two is running for POTUS.

So if you commit an offense but afterwards you retire from public life you get a pardon?
That's a new one.

No, it shouldn't be that way. But you shouldn't be surpised that the public is more interested in Hillary than in Rice and Powell.

[Landslide Lyndon]

If Sanders had gone after over the emails back in the fall, then he might have moved the needle and could very well be the nominee.
Still, I think the only person who could have beaten Hillary this year was Warren.

Yes, peddling Republican talking points/witch hunts would surely play well in a Democratic primary.

Again, the emails are not a right-wing smear. It's very different from Benghazi.

Yes they are. If they weren't then they would have investigated Powell and Rice too.

They likely should. But there's a big difference: Neither of these two is running for POTUS.

So if you commit an offense but afterwards you retire from public life you get a pardon?
That's a new one.

No, it shouldn't be that way. But you shouldn't be surpised that the public is more interested in Hillary than in Rice and Powell.

The public wouldn't give a flying fyck if the Republicans didn't try to make it the biggest scandal ever in the history of the republic.

[Xing]

Attacks lose those would have pretty much ended his campaign. He'd immediately be attacked by hordes of Democrats, and his supporters who aren't cultists would turn on him.

[Hermit For Peace]

I just asked myself what had happend, if Bernard went negative on Hillary? Especially with the emails, Benghazi and her Wall Street transcripts. Would he have done better, equal or worse? Could he have won the nomination?

He did go negative about the transcripts. But when asked to give one instance where Hillary was swayed by Wall Street, he couldn't give one. Because there haven't been any. In fact, Hillary worked in Congress to curb Wall Street's influence.

He couldn't go negative on Benghazi because there was hearing after hearing after hearing, and with the final 13-hr marathon hearing, they still couldn't get her on anything.

And Bernie really doesn't think the email situation was a big deal.

So if Bernie tried to use those to any degree, well....as you see.

[Angrie]

It wouldn't have made much difference. Right wing attacks would not have materially helped him with Democratic primary voters.

The one thing he could have done is maybe to be more aggressive with left-wing attacks, like the Wall Street transcripts. But he was fairly aggressive with that already.

Also, what he really needed to do was to break through with black voters. He handled the questions about whether he supported Obama horribly. He should have cast his campaign as an effort to take the attempts at change that Obama began further, and he should have given more emphasis to GOP control of congress as a reason that has stopped Obama from being able to do everything that he wanted. He should have argued that for that reason, we need to keep pushing hard for more progressive reforms, and that's what his campaign is about.

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

Bernie's not the candidate that could have gone negative like that.

You'd need someone younger, and less dedicated to being the Incredibly Pure Pureness.

Also, he could have won. He was an inspiring candidate with a good historical moment, and a uniquely uninspiring opposition.

His campaign was poorly run at the top, by an inner circle that mostly had never had significant electoral experience outside of a state of 600,000 people, or not even statewide races.  And those that did were last relevant in 2004.  

Sanders didn't lose, and Clinton didn't win. Robby Mook won, and Jeff Weaver, Tad Devine, and Michael Briggs lost.