How Bernie Sanders is turning criticism into campaign donations.
______________
Hilary Clinton may have built a wall in the American South, but Bernie Sanders has been busy with a construction project of his own. From the beginning of his campaign, he's indicated he won't be playing dirty. Now it seems his commitment to policy-focused discussion, along with unprecedented grassroots support and rising popularity, have effectively shielded him from attacks by fellow Democrats. Furthermore, criticism of Sanders in the media is sparking backlash from readers and rival publications.
A far cry from the mudslinging of 2008, the 2016 Democratic Primaries have seen contenders dance around directly criticizing each other. Far more heat has been directed at DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, particularly from the likes of Martin O'Malley and the #AllowDebate movement.
The mostly respectful race has put front-runner Hilary Clinton in a somewhat precarious position. As she remains silent about her chief rival, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, he continues an upward trend in the polls, overtaking her in the crucial primary states of Iowa and New Hampshire. For the Clinton campaign, the Sanders Problem has grown from a mild inconvenience into a viable threat. She's been taking notes; or at least her staff have been—promising Hilary will show more humor, heart, and spontaneity in a race characterized by frank, no-nonsense underdogs.
On September 14th, The Huffington Post reported on an email being circulated by pro-Clinton super PAC Correct the Record. Sent primarily to journalists, it negatively compares Sanders to Jeremy Corbyn, the recently elected leader of the UK's Labour Party. Using selective quotes from Corbyn and citing Sanders' support for a 2006 deal with Venezuela to provide heating oil to low-income families, Correct the Record suggests ties between the Vermont Senator and the late Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez.
On September 15th, we reported the Clinton campaign is coordinating directly with Correct the Record. It seems Clinton staffers may be testing the waters with going negative. But the reaction from Sanders' fans, the media, and her own supporters should convince them it's a remarkably bad strategy.
Hailstorm of HeadlinesFew outlets ran Sanders-critical headlines in the wake of Correct the Record's email. To the contrary, the real story wasn't the Venezuelan oil deal in Vermont, the sixth state on the East Coast to adopt it, but rather the existence of the email itself. A Pro-Clinton Super PAC Is Going Negative On Bernie Sanders, screams the headline from The Huffington Post. Even conservative website Free Beacon eschewed a partisan attack with the headline Pro-Clinton Super PAC Goes Negative, Compares Sanders to Corbyn. Similar headlines made their rounds on social media, drawing widespread condemnation both in and outside of Sanders' grassroots circles.
"Odd move," opined DNC adviser Hilary Rosen. "Looks to me like a play to Bernie's strength."
The flurry of negative press wasn't enough to make Correct the Record founder David Brock apologize, stating the email was "standard opposition research" in a grating interview on Bloomberg's With All Due Respect.
Turning Opposition into OPPORTUNITYSanders was quick to respond to the attack, sounding more like a disappointed grandfather than an embattled politician. "It was the kind of onslaught I expected to see from the Koch Brothers or Sheldon Adelson," he wrote in a campaign email, "and it’s the second time a billionaire Super PAC has tried to stop the momentum of the political revolution we’re building together."
The other PAC Sanders mentioned is linked to Martin O'Malley. In June, the PAC spent $10 thousand on internet ads criticizing his gun control record. The day after the ads ran, his campaign sent an email exposing the attack and asking for donations. Within 48 hours, he collected $800,000 in contributions.