2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumNow that THAT'S over and done with...
1) It was the Sanders' campaign staffers that breached and, at the very least, observed info in the voter database that they weren't supposed to see. That's on Sanders and his campaign 100%...to blame Hillary for the breach is straight up bullshit.
2) The vendor should have posted something that they were "under maintenance" or something while these barriers were let down to upload info.
3) Schultz is a tool and the sooner that she is let go, the better. She handled this (and many other things) extremely poorly.
4) The ratings for tomorrow's debate will go through the roof. If I were a cynic, I would even say....you can complete that sentence.
Dem2
(8,168 posts)I refrained from participating in the DWS pile-on, but I really don't like her and would be happy to see her go, sooner than later.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)Being 'tired of hearing about your damn emails'
Instead her campaign doubled down with claims of millions of dollars of data stolen....
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)"damn e-mails" and access to sensitive and confidential voter data by her political opponent.
If Hillary wants to chalk it up to being a mere kerfuffle tomorrow night, that would be a good thing.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)...and she would best let it all go. She will have some sort of glib quip. But she has been warned by the massive uprising of Bernistas.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)Hillary Clinton had absolutely NOTHING to gain by any of this.
She's leading in the polls, she's leading in money, she's leading in Iowa, she more than holds her own in debates once the primaries are over with, she will get Sanders' endorsement, so I don't see anything that Hillary would have to gain by this heavy-handed action by the DNC...that's where I disagree with the "Bernistas."
DWS wasn't doing Hillary Clinton any favors, she's harming more than she's helping. DWS needs to be fired over this stunt.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Her only involvement in this was to suggest that Sanders be given access to his data.
Would it have helped if she'd added a "fuck the oligarchs"?
Renew Deal
(81,866 posts)What I read was that code was uploaded to the system and that exposed the data. They didn't turn off barriers.
On 4, I disagree.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)close the system down for maintenance while that is being done. It was only a 40 minute window.
daybranch
(1,309 posts)and the actions taken by the DNC were minor in comparison to what was done by DWS this time. If it comes up it will look like Hillary (the pot) calling Bernie ( the skillet) dirtier, and when it is over Hillary and DWS will be the losers due to the heavy handed and uneven punishment they tried to inflict on the Bernie campaign for actions similar to what Hillary campaign did in the past.
Chitown Kev
(2,197 posts)that shut DWS down over this...after all, she is winning in the polls and Sanders will endorse HRC if HRC wins the nomination, so Clinton really had nothing to gain by DWS' heavy-handedness.
JI7
(89,252 posts)who are likely to watch it anyways.
i don't think a weekday would have made much difference either. there would of course be higher ratings but i think a lot of people tune in for things like Donald Trump instead of actually caring about issues.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)She's going to be gone after this election is over with.
Logical
(22,457 posts)lovemydog
(11,833 posts)It's nice reading reasonable posts.
I think a court would have granted immediate relief to the Sanders campaign. I know it's mere speculation on my part. But withholding records that the Sanders campaign needs to keep it's campaign going just was so heavy-handed on the part of the DNC.
I would think most courts would lean in favor of issuing an immediate order to allow the Sanders campaign to have unfettered access to such information, in the interests of fair play and the strong public interest of open and free elections.
I'll be watching the debate tomorrow night. I'm a bit of a nerd who actually enjoys watching all the debates.