"... the Obama-Sanders dynamic" Washpost

"...  the White House has confirmed that two will meet Wednesday, a tacit acknowledgment that the senator’s popularity among Democratic primary voters has unleashed a potent political movement that could influence not only the race to succeed Obama but also the president’s legacy.

The meeting will take place at a time when the contest between Sanders (Vt.) and Obama’s former secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, is surprisingly tight — particularly in Iowa, where ­caucus-goers will cast the first ballots of the year on Monday. Democratic voters are choosing between an iconoclast who has emerged as an emotional favorite for liberal activists and an establishment politician who argues that her lengthy résumé and dealmaking ability make her better qualified for the nation’s highest office."  Washpost

-------------

So, pilgrims, what is this really about?  The WH says that at a Christmas party the prez casually asked Bernie to "stop by some time."  I don't think that is the cause of this meeting.  So what is it?

• "I want you to accept that HC will be the nominee and I will campaign hard against you if you do not."  That does not seem a fruitful approach for Obama and he must know that.
•  She may be indicted and I would then have to step away from her.  The FBI can't be trusted to keep their mouths shut.
• Even if she isn't indicted this legal "sword of Damocles" will hang over her forever.
• If she withdraws from the race can I rely on you to continue my program of "Hope and Change?"
• Tell me why I should not "unleash" Biden if she withdraws.

 

So, tell me what this is about.  pl  

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/what-is-the-obama-sanders-relationship-there-isnt-one/2016/01/26/03c5244a-c45e-11e5-9693-933a4d31bcc8_story.html

Comments

[BabelFish]

My bullet point would be that the President sees the possibility that, like 2008, her candidacy will collapse and wants to build leverage with Bernie.

[ex-PFC Chuck]

Perhaps one thing Obama wants to get a reading on is whether or not he supports and will continue too maintain the moderate distance between the US and Israel that he has created. To what degree will Sanders' Jewish origins affect his policies in the Middle East, and therefore his "legacy." He may also want to get a reading Bernie's perceived threats to BHO's patrons in the FIRE sector are serious as opposed to kayfabe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kayfabe

[eakens]

They are going to screen old Milton Friedman tapes about what happens if you raise taxes even more.

[Charles Michael]

I would think so too,

with a little addition: Obama might be acting as the ambassador of the Belt Way with large funding promisses against attenuations.

[JohnH]

Perhaps the President wants to try to work things out with Bernie--allow Bernie to stay on message but assure Obama's Wall Street backers that he won't really burn the place down...

[rjj]

"Democratic voters are choosing between an iconoclast who has emerged as an emotional favorite for liberal activists and an ....etc."

"favorite for liberal activists" has very narrow appeal. it is usually a knee-jerk negative.

Sanders is the preferred iconoclast. He seems more mensch than superannuated brat.

[LeaNder]

that's interesting:
"But in Sanders’s more than 40 visits to the White House since Obama was sworn in as president, visitor logs show that they have had a private meeting in the Oval Office only once: on Dec. 15, 2014."

Wikipedia lists, September 14, 2015.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/09/senator-bernie-sanders-may-run-in-2016.html

******
BabelFish, concerning her campaign against him, I always somewhat wondered what made him offer her the job.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton's_tenure_as_Secretary_of_State

[D]

One nice thing about Bernie is that it's hard to threaten him. The usual Washington threat among politicians like Obama and Clinton is that they will withhold money from you. But Bernie doesn't take money from most of the various PACs and grandees that the Democratic Party and its bigwigs control anyway, so the threat to withhold it is meaningless to him. I suspect some of the various unions that endorsed HRC early and gave money from their PACs are starting to feel a little regretful.

If Bernie loses, he'll withdraw and endorse Clinton. But he's not half-way in the race, and he won't withdraw before then, barring exigent circumstances. I suspect that some of the Super Delegates that endorsed HRC early are starting to feel itchy.

The FBI investigation to me is a wildcard. I don't know how serious it is and I am fairly certain that crimes much worse than wrongful declassification have been buried in Washington. In any event, that sword of Damocles gives leverage with HRC, not Bernie, and truthfully it would be wrong of anyone in the know to discuss that with someone outside the investigation at this point. Notice that our free but constrained mainstream press is saying almost nothing about it right now, despite its potentially devastating impact.

Bernie is going to be Bernie. Urging him to do this or that will cause him to listen politely and then do what he thinks is best.

If Clinton withdraws, it appears that Bloomberg is her replacement. It is getting to be too late on the schedule for Biden or anyone new to jump in, as filing dates to appear on Democratic primary ballots in most states are quickly passing or already past. Bloomberg would have to run as an independent and get a lot of petitions signed to appear on general election ballots.
https://ballotpedia.org/Important_dates_in_the_2016_presidential_race

[crf]

To deliver a lesson in moderation?

[Cee]

What lengthy resume? On the board of WalMart?

Bernie has 32 years. Hillary?

[Aka]

all,
I think Obama is at a point where he only cares about his legacy.

According some at SST, Obama is a narcissist. If we consider that to be true, I think Obama would like to see something like the 4th bullet point.

To be remembered as the one who "made" the change (Sander's presidency) happened.

[William R. Cumming]

Many seem to think that the President's real strength is his long view--i.e. vision. But many of his supporters claim his vision is too long term and fails to deal with current problems. He is quoted by HRC as having said something like "Presidents don't get to pick their issues as they come daily like a fire hose"! What is left unsaid is the axiom "delegate or die" and this President has not really delegated power so almost all must be handled by him! A micro-manager but one that does not want to reveal his hand? This IMO reveals his lack of governance skills! I don't believe this meeting is of use other than the President trying to convince Senator Sanders that he remains relevant.

The problem may be Bernie too trusting and the President not really able to trust almost anyone.

Who would be brought to power by a Sanders presidency? We know who the President brought to power almost no one.

[mbrenner]

I find it unproductive to seek deep meaning in anything that this President does. I'd put this rendez-vous in the already over-stocked category of empty gestures. Sanders is quite popular, therefore I have to show symbolically that I recognize that even as my staff work hand-in-glove with Hillary's team to promote her. It reads better this way in the last chapter of Vol 2 of my memoirs.

Obama never has given a damn about the welfare of the Democratic Party as such. It always has been about him and him alone. Look at his campaign messages; look at the results.

[my.comment]

i caught his comments upon leaving... and the first thing he said was to remind everyone about the monthly loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs; the world economy on the precipice and then into a general 'it was a good conversation' blah blah blah... he also seemed to be hedging much more than usual on the possible outcomes in iowa/nh/sc.. although, obviously statements coming out of a meeting with the president is much different than a campaign appearance.
so, i suspect he got an earful from obama. his demeanor seemed very low energy.

[The Beaver]

@ LeaNder

Riding on the coat-tails of her husband President Clinton as far as the foreign leaders are concerned ( may be not Tony Blair) after the fiasco of Bush-Cheney years. Some trust and respectability were needed but ... ( we know what happened as far as the R2Pers and the Borg are concerned)

[The Beaver]

@ D

IMHO Biden has more chances than the former mayor of NY. He has a party and most probably some backers who would jump ship to provide $$$$ and support, especially from the think tanks controlled by the Israel firsters.

[Jack]

All

For the Democrats it would be best the indictment happen quickly. Shrillary sure ain't gonna go down that easily. I don't think her sense of entitlement will allow her to withdraw. And I doubt the "serious" Democrat, unions, blacks, seniors and all the Wall St elites will vote Sanders. Maybe Obama is just giving Sanders a heads-up that he's gonna delay any indictment until after the election and leave it to the next President. His Chicago & Wall St money mavens probably want that in return for funding his foundation.

OTOH, I continue to be amazed with Trump's media skills. By picking a fight with Fox he's already moving to capture many Democrat voters. At this point IMO, he's the only Republican who can defeat Shrillary in November.

[Lefty]

The Dem establishment is in the bag for Hillary, but Obama overstepped for Hillary in the Politico interview and is simply throwing a sop to Bernie.

The problem with the Dems is that in 2009 (starting late 2008 actually) Obama took a mandate and a veto proof majority in Congress and used it for more Same rather than the Change he'd ridden into office. It's been all downhill for them from there. Repubs haven't faired any better as they like Same.

Most of America has failed to thrive for a long time while the rich get richer. The questions for 2016 are "Are you better off than you were 8, 24 or 36 years ago. For more than 90% of the country the answer is "No". Thus the Sanders and Trump campaigns.

[Medicine Man]

Could be something as simple as seeing what kind of assistance Sanders will want in the General election from Obama, should Sanders win the Dem nomination. Obama and Hillary probably already have an understanding.

[Jack]

All

Borgistas having cognitive dissonance with Trump.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/01/27/donald-trumps-broken-campaign-promise/

"Unlike the other candidates, Trump does not appear to have reached out to any of the traditional advisers on foreign policy and national security. Analysts at the major conservative think tanks and others who have briefed 2016 candidates say they’ve heard nothing from Trump’s campaign — and know no one advising him."

[rg]

Hillary is being degraded as a candidate and will probably be wiped out soon, by indictment and more revelations about her and Bill. This is the wish of the group that currently operates the non-military portion of the U.S. executive branch of government. That group is primarily based in the financial world. They got almost everything they wanted out of the Bill Clinton Presidency, and he's enraged about it. He wants revenge, and he wants Hillary and himself to be sovereign, which they were not when he was President. The financiers all know this and are totally unwilling to have the Clintons return to the White House. Obama has not been sovereign, and Biden is willing not to be.

It looks like Trump will be the Republican nominee. Although Trump is probably controllable to a large extent, there is real risk that he will prefer not to be and will resist. So although he is probably working for the financiers with whom he does business, they feel that a President Trump would be risky for them.

When Hillary is eliminated, the two-party choice will be between Trump and Sanders. A draft-Biden campaign will be orchestrated and he will become the Democratic nominee. The puppet-masters are accustomed to making their own rules, so the fact that Biden has missed deadlines to get on various ballots will be dealt with as a clerical detail.

The most interesting question that has come up recently is what Bloomberg's motives are. His contemplation of a campaign might fit into the bankers' plans to make Biden the next President, but I would not rule out that he also would like to be President, and to be sovereign in the role. Although he probably more or less shares the bankers' agenda, I think they would much prefer Biden to Bloomberg, because Biden has made it very clear over the years that he will faithfully implement the plan, while Bloomberg is probably a lot less willing to be told what to do.

[Walrus]

I agree with Aka, Obamas meeting with Sanders is about whats in it for Obama if Sanders is the Democratic Party nominee.

[Seamus]

He wants to show Bernie the Kennedy assassination tapes from an angle the public has never seen. Just to let him know who's in charge.

Bill Hicks explains the scene here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ytv15ono5J0

[D]

In this case, Biden having a party isn't really much of an advantage: he can't get on the primary ballots in most states because it's too late, (see the link above for details on each state) which makes it difficult for him to gather delegates. Even assuming Hillary dropped out and Bernie showed up at the Democratic Convention without enough delegates to win the nomination outright, an alternative would need to have a good-sized number in hand to get in the game. Then there could be a brokered convention.

If Hillary dropped out, a good number of Super Delegates who were coerced into endorsing her early would be free to go to Bernie (and some may anyway if she weakens further). Biden probably can't win a lot of delegates in primaries now because it's so late in the process. True, California and New York are still out there, but for New York, he would need to file next week to get on the ballot and California is probably Bernie country, as New York may be. Moreover, I think Uncle Joe chose not to run because his heart wasn't in it. The last few years have been hard on him and his family, and running for president is a grueling task.

Bloomberg's advantage is that he doesn't have to raise money, as Biden would, so long as he is willing to spend lots of his own. His disadvantage is that, to run as an independent, he needs to get thousands - usually tens of thousands - of signatures in most every state were he wants to appear on the general election ballot by a date certain. That takes time, organization and money. He only has lots of the latter.

[rg]

Obama and Sanders might not have talked about anything substantive at all, but the fact that they met undermines Hillary, which was certainly one of their purposes.