"Right now, the Clinton campaign and other Democrats are getting worried that some of Sanders' attacks are going to leave a mark that will hurt her in the general election, should she be the nominee. "

Nah. Clinton's attacks didn't hurt Obama in the general election, and Sanders's won't hurt Clinton.

What might hurt Clinton is the childish petulance and stubbornness of some of the Sanders groupies. But at this point, nothing he says or does will make any difference in that regard. If he dropped out of the race right now and endorsed her, they'd still be just as unreasonable anyway. So he has very little to do with it.

I'm still wondering how they're going to reconcile his eventual endorsement of her with this over-the-top evil characterization they've made of her. They've built her up into the world's biggest monster, while they seem willing to throw themselves in front of a train for him. If they love him so much but hate her guts, and yet he's willing to support her and vote for her, either they're wrong about him or they're wrong about her. It has to be one or the other!

I think that Bernie found out that personal attacks on Hillary would counter productive for his campaign and for progressives in general. Time for Bernie to work with Hillary in attacking the ridiculous Republicans.

Here is just one example the questionable math that shows the hidden " weakness " of the Bernie Sanders campaign : A scientific poll of 1000 school children here in Rhode Island reports that " 64.8 percent of students [ on the Democratic side ] preferred Sanders to Hillary Clinton " ( story on page 3 of the April 23, Providence Journal ).
Bernie Sanders is scheduled to appear at Roger Williams Park on Sunday at noon. The last Brown University poll showed that Hillary Clinton would beat Bernie Sanders in Rhode Island by nearly double digits. For some strange reason the results of a new Brown University poll will be released Sunday at noon- while the crowd is " feeling the Bern " at our Temple to Music picnic area.
All the enthusiasm, the VISIBLE support is with Sanders' " political revolution . But Hillary is the choice of the Democratic Party establishment. Ah, Democracy in America.

And the race is for the Democratic nomination, not the national race (in November) or the Independent party.

True, but considering the momentum of " political revolution " -independent of " prudent " Bernie Sanders-hows does open revolt settle for the Queen of the Status Quo, Hillary Clinton ? Is Hillary going to reform Wall St and greedy American capitalism ? Is Hillary going to improve this economy in a way President Obama could not for working class black Americans ? Is hawkish Hillary going to end the New Colonialism in the Middle East ? Is Hillary going to improve the living standard of ALL working class women in America ?
And why leave out all those " angry white working class males " ?
Could " more love and compassion " Hillary Clinton at least boldly oppose the racist -and class oppressive- death penalty ?
Yes, if you are are a truly " liberal " Democrat, what more do you want than Hillary Clinton ?

I have a great deal of respect for Bernie. But, before it gets nasty, he should support Hillary.

What you are saying is that " socialist " Democrat Bernie Sanders' first responsibility is to the American ruling class - which as good old Ralph Nader insists - in the final analysis, controls both parties. Presently the parameters of the campaign script for both Republican and Democratic presidential candidates have been stymied by the Anti-Establishment Voter.
It should have been Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton months ago - but the Zeitgeist struck . It could have been so very " exciting " .-this Election 2016.

What I'm saying is that politics are controlled by business, and they won't work with Bernie because he won't fall in line. Nothing against Bernie.
I have never understood why people have billions of dollars, send our jobs else where or how they can walk down any city Street in this fine country and not be repulsed at the poverty that is becoming more and more common.
So, Bernie is right. He is running for the wrong job, because business won't let him do it.

The United States of Corporate America wants no taxes and wants slave labor to maximize their wealth and profits.
What they fail to consider is that one day when nobody has the money to buy their goods they will be in big time trouble.

Sanders can't change anything until Congress and Senate are filibuster proof to his plans...and that will take several years to change...not one election.

There you go!!!

He's not saying that at all.

Hi Mike,

I have little doubt that Bernie Sanders will throw his support behind Hillary Clinton.

For those of us who supported him, that is a different matter.

Those of us aware of the fact that capitalism inherently trends towards wealth concentration, depletion of natural resources, and disruption of ecological systems understand that alternative economic systems are more likely to provide sustainability and equity than the status-quo private sector model embraced by Hillary Clinton.

Those of us interested in peace and justice understand that peace and justice are undermined by an over-exaggerated military, support for regime change, support for drone murder, support for crowd killing/signature strikes, support for regimes engaged in human rights violations (Saudi's, the Sisi government, and the Netanyahu government). Hillary Clinton has embraces such a hawkish approach to militarism and has lashed out against whistle blowers such as Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden.

Thus, many of us will be encouraging people to vote for Jill Stein in the understanding that 水滴石穿

As to American domestic and economic policy, I'm curious what you think you'd get from a President Sanders that you wouldn't get from a President Clinton and which you think would still be possible after a President Trump/Cruz/Kasich. I mean, let's look at healthcare, for an example. I don't know about you, but I wish we had Single Payer. Unfortunately there just isn't enough political support for it right now. But we can get closer to it by making incremental reforms to the Affordable Care Act, like adding "the public option." That would give people an opportunity to see that they really have nothing to fear from "government-run health insurance" without being forced into it against their will. Politically, it's possible to achieve under a President Clinton.

But if a Republican gets into the White House, and Congress passes a bill repealing the ACA, healthcare reform is dead for the rest of our lifetimes. If that law gets repealed, after all the fighting and political sacrifices Democrats went through to make it possible, WE WILL NEVER HAVE SINGLE PAYER. Ever. Every lawmaker will decide that healthcare reform is just so toxic an issue that nobody will want anything to do with it. In our fight for something better, we would end up with something worse.

You know a President Clinton would veto a bill repealing the ACA. You also know a Republican President would sign such a bill. Are you prepared to live with the consequences of that? You can't make the perfect the enemy of the good. If you're so stubbornly in favor of something that you're willing to give up everything in a doomed effort to achieve it, something is very seriously wrong.

I only chose healthcare reform as an example. I could give plenty of other examples where it's clear you'd be much better off with a President Clinton than a President Truz.

Hi downtown21,

Thanks for the questions.

My efforts to encourage people to vote for Jill Stein follow from the fact that Hillary Clinton is very likely to be elected President.
The Republican Party is fragmented and regardless of who is nominated, Trump/Cruz, will face a great deal of opposition from Republican supporters of the other candidate, establishment Republicans, and Democrats.

Hillary Clinton has made clear that she supports status-quo private sector driven capitalist economics. Through her comments and actions she has supported corporate friendly international trade pacts, the fossil fuel industry (off shore drilling, hydraulic fracture, and tar sands development), the insurance industry (through health care reform), and the status quo financial sector.

When she becomes President, it is clear that she will face opposition from Republicans. It is also clear that she will endeavor to work with Republicans on the conservative economics she supports. Thus, it is most likely that the legislation she will pass will be plutocratic friendly and environmentally unsustainable.

If large numbers of Sanders supports vote for Jill Stein than, in eight years, after Hillary Clinton finishes her second term, there will be more momentum for a candidate who has progressive socialist economic platform in addition to a pro-peace, anti-war approach to foreign policy.

On the other hand, if large numbers of Sanders supports vote for Hillary Clinton, supporters of progressives will be taken for granted to a greater extent than they are at present.

Your accusation that Clinton supports the Netanyahu government undermines your entire comment and makes it very clear that you really don't know nearly as much as you think you know about these issues. Ignorance combined with self-assuredness in what you THINK you know is a dangerous combination. It's what we've come to expect from Tea Partiers.

The truth is that from day one the Obama Administration - Clinton included - have been extremely frustrated and at times livid over Netanyahu's domestic and anti-terrorism policies. His actions have completely derailed the peace process and further destabilized the region, and neither Obama nor Clinton hesitated to tell Netanyahu that. For crying out loud, Clinton/Obama and Netanyahu are so at odds with each other that Netanyahu took the extraordinary (and outrageous) step of coming to Washington at the invitation of Republicans to try and sabotage the historic nuclear arms control agreement that Clinton worked so hard to make possible (Kerry was just the closer, it's Clinton that laid all the groundwork). And by the way, if she's so in favor of war, why did she work so hard at a historic diplomatic solution that's designed to PREVENT war?

Did Clinton and Obama completely abandon Netanyahu and give up on the alliance between Israel and the United States over Netanyahu's policies? Of course not. Israel is our ally and will continue to be our ally for a very long time. If you think a President Sanders would do anything differently than they did when it comes to Israel, you couldn't be more wrong.

Your heart is in the right place but you don't know as much as you think you know about these issues and it's leading you to make very foolish choices. Helping a Republican win the Presidency when all the Republican candidates are bragging that they WANT to go to war in that region is foolish. Sure, you can go around saying you're not really responsible because you didn't actually vote for the Republican, but it doesn't really work that way and you know it.

". . . it very clear that you really don't know nearly as much as you think you know about these issues. Ignorance combined with self-assuredness in what you THINK you know is a dangerous combination. It's what we've come to expect from Tea Partiers."

Hi downtown21,

I welcome you to express disagreement with my perspective. I encourage you to do so by engaging in fact-rooted dialog untainted by digression to offensive ad-hominem attacks aimed denigration of my knowledge and/or intellectual capabilities.

Do you have any problems with the following facts?

1. Hillary Clinton has supported regime change (i.e. Lybia https://www.youtube.com/wat... ) and Honduras (http://www.democracynow.org... ).

2. Hillary Clinton supports drone strikes and crowd killing(signature strikes):

“Clearly, the efforts that were made by the United States, in cooperation with our allies in Afghanistan and certainly the Afghan government, to prevent the threat that was in Pakistan from crossing the border, killing Afghans, killing Americans, Brits and others, was aimed at targets that had been identified and were considered to be threats. The numbers about potential civilian casualties I take with a somewhat big grain of salt because there has been other studies which have proven there not to have been the number of civilian casualties."
- https://www.youtube.com/wat...
Also, note Hillary Clinton's role on the Drone Kill team in the figure below.

3. Hillary Clinton has helped the Saudi regime get US weapons used against Yemeni civilians ( https://theintercept.com/20... and http://fpif.org/weapons-sal...,

4, Hillary Clinton expressed support for the Mubarak dictatorship and the Sisi regime in Egypt. ( https://theintercept.com/20... )

I heard you the first time.

Hi downtown21,

"Your accusation that Clinton supports the Netanyahu government undermines your entire comment and makes it very clear that you really don't know nearly as much as you think you know about these issues. Ignorance combined with self-assuredness in what you THINK you know is a dangerous combination." -downtown21

I should have phrased my comment in a manner in which I criticized Hillary Clinton for the support for Israeli right wing rather than Netanyahu in particular. However, rather than making unsubstantiated ad-hominem attacks impugning my knowledge and or understanding I suggest you look into the facts.

Hillary Clinton has said that she intends to invite the Israeli Prime Minister, Netanyahu, to the White House during her first month in office:

"I will do everything I can to enhance our strategic partnership and strengthen America’s security commitment to Israel, ensuring that it always has the qualitative military edge to defend itself. That includes immediately dispatching a delegation of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to meet with senior Israeli commanders. I would also invite the Israeli prime minister to the White House in my first month in office." - Hillary Clinton

(Source: http://forward.com/opinion/... )

In her recent debate with Bernie Sanders, she completely disregarded Sander's comment that Palestinians need to be treated with respect and dignity. She deamonized Iran and laid blame for the last Israeli bombing of Gaza completely on the Palestians -
https://youtu.be/Hfp4bWWwxIE

Hillary Clinton has also condemned the BDS movement and linked it to anti-semitism:
https://youtu.be/-0iNXoXkcT8

Hi RetroPam,

Thank you for your comments. I greatly admire you analysis in many of your comments. In this case, I disagree with your perspective.

I am very concerned about the hawkish militarism supported by Hillary Clinton and the Republican candidates.

If Trump/Cruz are elected, I am sure that they would engage in military action resulting in the deaths of many tens of thousands. I am also convinced that Hillary Clinton will undertake action leading to the deaths of many thousands given her support for regime change in Lybia, Honduras, Egypt, and the Ukraine; her support for further military intervention in Syria; her backing of the right wing Israel governments slaughter of Palestians; the efforts she made to get Saudi Arabia the weapons it is using against the civilian population in Yemen; the hostility she has expressed towards the Iranian and Russian governments; and her support for drone killing and crowd killing (signature strikes); her admiration of Henry Kissinger.

What right do I have to say to the people that Hillary Clinton in other parts of the world:
"The destruction of your homes, the killing of your children, your relatives, yourself, is a price I am willing to pay."

Many who are critical of my actions will only vote. If my only action to prevent the slaughter that I see coming would be a vote for Jill Stein, then yes, I deserve your criticism. I, however, am working to support the growth of a grassroots community based movement among my Latino community. Sure, Hillary Clinton is very likely to be elected this upcoming election, however, progressive change is unlikely unless we begin to work for progressive political engagement and progressive alternative to status quo Democrat/Republican party politics.

While I lack the eloquence you have, I agree that capitalist pricks are making it harder for every one else, and that the use of a war machine is totally wrong.
I also believe our relationship with isreal is pretty twisted.
Regrettably, Bernie is not strong enough to run our country. I found the Democrats will work for him and in certain the Republicans won't work with him at all.
This isn't me blaming Bernie. It is me blaming the two parties for becoming so immoderate.
I wish you well and hope things work out properly during the next election.