Skip to main content

Sanders Voters in MA to Sue Bill Clinton for Trampling on Voting Rights - Seek Delegates be Awarded to Bernie

Clinton entering a polling station in Newton, MA.

Clinton entering a polling station in Newton, MA.

PDF of Complaint

Invoking voting rights laws and precedents commonly cited in such cases, a group of Bernie Sanders supporters who voted for Sanders in the Massachusetts Primary on March 1st are confronting what they say was illegal campaigning by Bill Clinton on behalf of Hillary Clinton. On that Tuesday, known as "Super Tuesday," reports emerged, to the consternation of Sanders supporters, that Bill Clinton was illegally campaigning within 150 feet of polling stations during voting hours, in some cases walking inside the stations, all of which Massachusetts law expressly prohibits. Laws governing how close to a polling station one can campaign on voting days are similar in all 50 states.

A draft copy of a civil action posted in a Drop Box account states:

"On March 1st, “Super Tuesday” in the Massachusetts Democratic primary...Bill Clinton, did disenfranchise a large group of voters by diluting their votes through illegal campaign activity in and near polling stations. This disenfranchisement was deliberate, carefully crafted, and effective."

The voters contend that far more than being a nuisance and exhibiting thoughtless disregard for the law, Clinton's actions were:

"carefully and deliberately calibrated to impact the electoral battlefield in such a way that the entire course of future primaries was affected."

The lawsuit takes note that throughout the day of the Massachusetts primary, Clinton and Sanders were "neck and neck," according to NBC News, with Sanders at one point pulling ahead. Boston Patch reporter Alison Bauter wrote afterwards that Massachusetts was considered by some to be a "must-win" for Sanders, as any momentum he had might have had would be stopped by a loss there. In the end Clinton won seven out of 11 races in states which were voting on that day, with Sanders taking four.

The complaint states:

"Given the large number of “undecided” voters and the extremely narrow margin of victory for Hillary Clinton, there was sufficient fluidity in the race for Bill Clinton’s illegal electioneering to have made a significant impact, and to have reversed the verdict of the voters by handing victory to Clinton rather than to Sanders. With 100,00 undecided voters and a margin of victory of only 16,800 votes, it is eminently plausible that Bill Clinton impacted the final result.

Hillary Clinton won the race by 1.4%.,

A February 28th Suffolk University poll showed 8% of likely Democratic primary voters to be undecided just two days before the primary, which would mean roughly about 100,000 votes. 1.2 million people voted in the Massachusetts Democratic primary on Super Tuesday, equaling the record number of voters who turned out in that primary in 2008, for Obama and Hillary Clinton. After Super Tuesday of that year, super delegates and endorsements quickly began to shift to Obama.

Clinton inside West Roxbury polling place.

Clinton inside West Roxbury polling place.

The lawsuit also names Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin as a defendant, and claims Galvin in essence looked the other way while Bill Clinton broke the law. The complaint reads:

"Secretary Galvin issued a statement during the controversy...which declared that Clinton’s entering the polling places alone was not illegal, as long he did not utter words such as “vote for Hillary.” This notion is beyond absurd. The former president did not land at ground zero of a key battleground state and enter the polls because there was no place else to get a cup of coffee. Bill Clinton does not need a button or a sign (which it is illegal to wear or display inside a polling place.) In his very person, the presidential candidate’s fabulously famous husband amounts to a walking, talking sign for Hillary."

Once inside the West Roxbury and Newton polling places, Clinton can be seen in videos and photographs shaking hands with election workers, having pictures taken with people, and charming the star-struck with his full security and media entourage in tow. In another video, the complaint notes, Clinton can be seen speaking through a bullhorn within 150 feet of a polling station and saying "I want to especially thank those of you who are supporting Hillary.”

The complaint says:

"Throughout the day, Bill Clinton was in campaign mode for his wife, as his motorcade, security detail, and large entourage occasionally reportedly blocked people from voting at the times they had set aside to do so, due to his large security presence and security requirements."

Lawsuit participants contend that shaking hands, having pictures taken, chatting and otherwise generating goodwill for a candidate, by her unabashedly partisan spouse who had no other business in the polling station, constitutes campaigning. At one point during the day, video shows Clinton apologizing to an audience that he was so hoarse from speaking that he had lost his voice.

Scroll to Continue

In New Bedford, MA a fresh issue arose when the Sanders campaign received reports of people being hindered from voting at a polling place because of Clinton's appearance and security measures. The woman narrates:

“I haven’t seen one person be able to come in and be able to vote in here. Everything is blocked off. No person can park here. They are affecting the voting at this poll. It’s ridiculous. It’s fraud and illegal. From one side of the street to the other, there’s no way anybody can get down here to vote.”

Woman complaining people cannot vote because of Clinton security

The plaintiffs in the suit are as of yet unnamed, but say they will be filing this coming week, in Boston Federal Court. They are asking a judge to invalidate the Massachusetts results in punishment for Clinton's actions, exacerbated by his long reach, and to award the Massachusetts pledged delegates to Bernie Sanders. The plaintiffs argue:

"To merely reapportion a small number of delegates would do nothing to discourage similar future violations of electioneering laws, because in some cases, a small risk for getting caught might be worth it."

The plaintiffs say:

"Bill Clinton’s illegal activity throughout the day was neither trivial nor inconsequential. It significantly diluted the votes of people who in good faith voted for Bernie Sanders."

The plaintiffs contend that the remedy should be proportionate to the harm done. In the immediate outrage which scorched the Internet over Clinton's actions, a petition was started calling for his arrest which generated over 100,000 signatures at Lawsuit organizers on Bernie Sanders Facebook pages are looking for other plaintiffs to step forward in the class action suit. These would be Massachusetts Sanders voters who believe they were "harmed," in legal parlance, by Clinton's alleged violations.

Clinton within 150 feet of a polling station, addressing a crowd through a bullhorn and "especially" thanking those "who are supporting Hillary"



Hector Danson on April 03, 2016:

Ciao lovemychris. I can see why someone like you would support Hillary Clinton.

Jehoshua on April 03, 2016:

lovemychris Literally shit all over people's voting rights in defense of Clinton, and then claims "Sanderites" are the nasty ones.

Ok. Good luck on your whole "I can overlook Clinton's War mongering, Fracking, Wallstreet Corruption and ELECTION Fraud, all because Sanders did some stuff". Ya, See ya troll, good luck supporting your WARHAWK.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on April 03, 2016:

OK I get it. You're new to this, I understand.

You still have stars in your eyes.

I'll help you: he's a con man. Speaks a good game, not really committed to change.

If he was, he'd tell the truth.

There is no way on God's green EARTH to do what he wants.

But I think he would enjoy immensely the office of president.

Good luck. And I hope when you are badgered to prove why you support him after he's been vetted, dems aren't as nasty as the Sanderites have been.


Hector Danson on April 03, 2016:

So, nothing credible then?

If you're interested in facts about his trip to Russia, rather than being told what you want to hear by the Daily News Bin, try politifact:

You really have been led up the garden path about a lot of things haven't you? I would feel sorry for you, but I expect you don't care. Facts just aren't important to some people.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on April 03, 2016:

Kelsey Rupp, Independent Journal

Sanders nepotism

Tax payer funded honeymoon in Russia, since hes such an anti big money guy.

Now Sanderites are going to get quite a bit of their own medicine. And bet you willl still support him, go figure.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on April 03, 2016:

@Lee_in_Iowa....go to his feed to see the note that went out. Matches the dnb story, as she hacked into clintons info. NOT the first time theyve done that btw! Young internet savvy kids can hack gvt depts!

Hector Danson on April 03, 2016:

Oh, whats your source for this latest conspiracy. Please don't tell me it's the Daily News Bin.

Hector Danson on April 03, 2016:

This is getting more and more strange. What video are you talking about? What have I spun? There's no need to get defensive with me about my attitude (or perhaps, my "tone"). I'm only going on what you tell me, and you told me DailyNewsBin is a source of truth. Do you ever wonder why every article on there praises Clinton and derides Bernie? You must have wondered, or maybe you're just wondering now. Either way, that source has become a laughing stock for how biased it is. Even people in pro-Hillary communities have had to admit that. This isn't an insult to you, but it does explain a lot about your views. Like I said, at least find something that isn't constantly telling you things you want to hear. That's what Republicans do when they tune into Fox. We're supposed to be better than that.

I don't know of Michael Tomasky or whether he's impartial. I'm sure there are plenty of Hillary supporters who've made an educated decision to vote for her based on the facts available to them. It would be erroneous of you to suggest that my deductions about you apply to every Hillary supporter.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on April 03, 2016:

That must be WHY she hacked into hrc info!! So she would know who to send the note to.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on April 03, 2016:

Hmmm. Now im reading that a note was sent to Hillary delegates saying they didnt need to show up in nevada...sent by bernies camp.

Not just one source. Real dirty tricks, not imagined.

Anyone care?

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on April 03, 2016:

Did you watch the video? That cant be spun. And your patronizing attitude is very much in line with just about every sanders supporter who will engage. Why is that? Do you really think i just made up my mind on a whim, have never researched anything need YOUR spin to enlighten me?

Because if you think your views are umpartial, i beg to differ with you!

Michael Tomasky of Daily Beast has a nice article why hes voting fir Hillary. Is he too impartial? He likes bernie too, just thinks hillary will be more effective.

Is that allowed?

Really, some of you need to get a grip. You did not invent liberalism or the democratic party, and the insults to those whose party you are using is showing your colors.

Like a whiter shade of pale.

Hector Danson on April 03, 2016:

Did you really just cite DailyNewsBin as a source for the truth? I've seen their "articles" before. No wonder your views on Bernie and Hillary are so distorted. You'd only be marginally worse off if you plugged into Fox News 24/7. Being told what you want to hear is not doing research. I suggest you find something a bit more impartial.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on April 03, 2016:

I answered all your questions once. You disputed them, demanded more.

How long we going to ride that merry-go-round?

I was called a louse and an idiot by your responders. I think that's rude. Calling someonea a troll is rude. As if they can't be serious.

Always calling Clinton a some research. You may find just the opposite.

Clark County nevada. since you're after the truth and nothing but.

Hector Danson on April 03, 2016:

Lovemychris: You did ask “I’m supposed to listen to anti Hillary ops? Ehhhh. No.”

I replied with “You came to an anti-Hillary page. If you're not here to listen, what are you here to do? Troll?”

You respond with: “If you call a different opinion trolling, thats your problem. I was taught that everyone has a right to their own opinion, and like to hear diverse views. But you obviously dont, and the people commenting here are hostile and rude.”

Are you really going to pretend that I was calling you a troll rather than answering your question, that I can’t tolerate different views, and that everyone’s being rude to you?

It seems you can’t argue the points that are actually worth discussing, so you switch to plan B, which is straw-manning everyone here and playing the victim. As there's nothing else of substance in your comment, I'll leave it there.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on April 03, 2016:

THEN STOP RUNNING AS ONE. Simple. Know why Sanders wont?

He likes the perks too much.

And Donald J Trump should do the same.

You are outright carpetbaggers.

Patricia Panitz on April 03, 2016:

We will likelier have Kasich.

Has Obama been so much better than Bush? The operating word regarding Obama and the middle class has been one - betrayal. Hillary will be like Obama, (campaign from the left, govern from the right), but with more wars. On economic issues Repubs and Dems are the same, they serve corporations, the 1%, and the military industrial complex. The Dem party has sold its non-wealthy supporters out time and again - we owe it nothing.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on April 03, 2016:

So be it. We will have Trump or Cruz. Just like 2000 gave us Bush.

And btw, i voted Nader then. But i was Indie and so was he. At least we didnt use the party we were working so hard against.

Patricia Panitz on April 03, 2016:

Clinton and her surrogates have mischaracterized and outright lied about Bernie and his positions. The entire DNC establishment and media establishment is solidly behind Clinton and against Sanders - when they should be neutral. So what do you think Sanders' supporters reaction is when they are told they should "come together" and support Clinton for the "good of the party" if she wins the nomination? Clinton and Sanders are far apart on major issues - she's a corporate Dem and he's an FDR/New Deal Dem. If you don't like the direction the Dem party has been going the last few decades, you can't support Hillary.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on April 03, 2016:

No, i was only here to say how crazy it is to say Clinton broke the law. If you call a different opinion trolling, thats your problem. If you call Hillary diabolical, then i see why you feel that way.

I was taught that everyone has a right to their own opinion, and like to hear diverse views.

But you obviously dont, and the people commenting here are hostile and rude.

Kinda like your candidate.

I get the feeling that you all took the pledge....even if Clinton gets the nom, you will write in Sanders.

You will not convince me of anything, nor i you. But i had to speak up when you go around calling people criminals for supporting each other.

Hector Danson on April 02, 2016:

You came to an anti-Hillary page. If you're not here to listen, what are you here to do? Troll?

Yes, I don't have to consider Hillary's plan on finance and banking. It's not to do with liking; it's to do with trusting. and I've explained why I don't trust her in my previous comment. You take millions from Wall Street - I don't trust you to reform Wall Street. Not a giant leap, is it? Seems fair enough to me.

What are your reasons for not trusting Sanders on his spending sources? Regardless of what you say, it only takes a few clicks to verify he's not using outside money: .

So I think you're being deliberately obtuse. How can I verify Clinton will actually reform Wall Street? I can't. Your comparison fails.

Liz Warren can endorse the words in Clinton's plan, but I doubt she trusts Clinton will implement them:

I never claimed Sander's foreign policy record was perfect. It isn't. I said Hillary's is diabolical. I recognize Bernie's flaws, but you keep trying to justify Hillary's, even though they're far worse. And you brush it off with meaningless opinion like "the difference to me is the way they carry themselves". Nonsense.

And you end with an unfounded accusation that Bernie is sexist, based on the fallacious argument that he's "of that generation". But it's ok: you "can tell". What utter tripe. Bernie has fought for equality his entire life. Hillary was anti-gay until only a few years ago. She also worked on the campaign of Republican Barry Goldwater, who voted against the civil rights act of 1964. That's back when she was a Republican. But it's ok, she evolved! Or, maybe not:

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on April 02, 2016:

I see. So you don't have to consider any of hillarys plans, cause you just don't like her, but im supposed to listen to anti Hillary ops? Ehhhh. No.

And you can pooh pooh it all you want, Sanders has outspent Clinton in every place that he came up on top...

By a lot. You may believe that is from 27 dollar contributions, I don't. And by your logic, i dont have to check it, because I don't trust HIM.

And Elizabeth Warren endorsed hillarys wall street plan, so your approval not needed.

As for Iraq war, that was planned long time ago. Yinon plan, which merged into PNAC. Asked Clinton to regime change in 97, and Sanders voted to facilitate regime change Iraq 1998. Maybe if bill had done it, he would have agreed to invasion.

Sanders voted to support all the Gaza slaughters, too. You really don't have a lot of legs to stand on. In fact, Hillary and Bernie are alike 93% of the time.

The difference to me is the way they carry themselves, and the ugliness that is coming out now.

Bernie is of that generation of men that don't like to lose to a woman...I can tell. His prickly thorns are showing. Not good presidential material, imo.

Hector Danson on April 02, 2016:

1. Hillary on NAFTA:

2. Bernie doesn't accept money from Wall Street. I suspect you've listened to some of her exaggerations and misrepresentation, so here's a factcheck:

Regardless, it would pale in comparison to what Hillary has received, wouldn't it?

I haven;t "peeped" at her plan. Why would I look at her plan when I'd have to dismiss it immediately because I can't trust her? You may be very loyal to the Democrat establishment, or just to her, so you see no reason to distrust her. That's fine. Me, and (likely) tens of millions of independents (they do make up 40% of the population), look at this stream of money and think: how can we trust her to reform banking and finance when she's on the take? If you want to win an election, you need someone who independents find credible. You can't win with a core of ultra-loyal Democrats who dismiss anything bad about their candidate as lies while the rest of the population gives her an unfavorable rating of 55% (look it up, it's true). If you want the Democrats to win, at least nominate the candidate who people like!

3. Wow, you've even managed to justify her Iraq vote to yourself. Again, I doubt independents will see it your way. BUT, if that's really your argument, then you must believe Hillary is a naive and, frankly, stupid person for trusting Bush wouldn't use a green light to use force as... a green light to use force. She's either a liar or a moron. Either way, not Presidential material.

Sanders has a union of almost 200,000 nurses supporting him: people who help others for a living. If you think that's comparable to a few Wall Street firms whose sole purpose is to satiate their greed, then you're clutching at straws again (and impartial people won't see it your way on this either). Regardless, candidates often have no control over the SuperPACs that support them. I recommend you look up what superpacs are. But, if Bernie goes into Goldman Sachs and sells a speech for 200k tomorrow, I'll hold my hands up and admit they're no different. Until you provide a shred of credible evidence to the contrary, me and pretty much everyone else who's taken part in this discussion will maintain that they're very different.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on April 02, 2016:

1. How did she help pass nafta? She was flotus, not senator!

2. Everybody accepts money from wall steet, including ole Bernie. And why does she have to release transcripts of speeches she made? Is that now part of prez vetting??? I know releasing tax returns is....Hillary has released 15 yrs worth, Bernie, only one. HE'S the one hiding something!

Btw, did you look at her plan to control wall street? Not even a peep at it, huh?

3. Yes, she voted for Iraq resolution. But Bush was supposed to use it as a last resort. Blix was supposed to prove the existence of wmd's. Bush took it an ran...because it was planned. Not by hillary, by him.

And her wall Street "friends" are no more than anyone else in the political realm. Including business friends, union friends, teachers friends, and foreign lobby friends. All of them have friends. Sanders has some big money nurse friends...think he owes them?

And he's taken money from oil and has just about everybody.

Your slanted attempt to paint her as somehow different than Sanders is falling on deaf ears here.

His cohorts in a debate running for Senate in vermont, to a person, called him a corporate sell-out.

Ask Ron Paul.

Ask how his family got wealthy off his public service.

Ask where are the tax returns!

One year?.....what is he hiding?

Odd that you don't want to know, while clamoring for Hillary speech transcripts.

Negotiable Virtue. It's rampant.

Hector Danson on April 01, 2016:

1&2: Given that she helped pass NAFTA and served on the board of Walmart, a company who exploit workers on a massive scale with low wages and few rights, do you really think those will be good, high-paying jobs?

3. Given that she accepted huge sums of money in donations and speaking fees from Wall Street, and refuses to release transcripts of her speeches (instead lowering herself to the standards of Republicans on the matter), do you really think her plan for Wall Street will be comprehensive? Or with plenty of loop-holes for her friends to exploit?

4. With her help... we went to war with Iraq and got Bush's Patriot Act. She also contributed heavily to the current humanitarian crises in Libya and Honduras, worsened the situation in Syria by arming the rebels and endorsing air strikes against Assad, argued for more drone strikes, argued for keeping more troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and, as for Iran , she voted to designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a "terrorist" organisation, opening the door to war. She even threatened Iran with obliteration. According to Time magazine: "Clinton has demonstrated a well-documented willingness to use American military power overseas." Time draws on a number of sources, including Obama officials, who referred to the "strikingly hawkish voice Clinton offered during Obama Situation Room debates".

Given this, do you really trust Clinton to keep us out of another war? You must know why such wars are fought, yes? Those things that make the world go round: money. I bet her friends on Wall Street are licking their lips. It's not difficult to put the pieces together if you're willing to look.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on April 01, 2016:

1. Jobs in rebuilding infrastructure and renewable energy.

2. Gradually increase of the minimum wage nation-wide, like they are doing in Mass.

3. She has a great plan to control Wall Street. Google it.

4. I don't think she's going to reverse our foreign policy. But she, like Obama, believes in diplomacy first. She calls it smart power. Diplomacy backed up by might. With her help, we avoided war with Iran, which the cons still want. However, we are power hungry, and I don't see that changing no matter who's prez.

She doesn't want free education, just affordable.

Her bottom line for a SC justice is keeping roe v wade safe and protected, whereas Sanders is getting rid of Citizens United.

Anything else?

You could just Google it all, you know. I should, too actually!

Dan Aronson on April 01, 2016:

@lovemycrhis: Still nothing on the issues? Are you unwilling or unable? I am a Sanders supporter but people keep telling me I'll need to vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination. Again, all I am asking for is her plans to affect positive change for working class Americans. Why won't you tell me them?

1. How will she stimulate job growth for the middle class?

2. How will she raise those minimum wage workers out of poverty?

3. How will she prevent you and I from paying for the next Wall Street bailout?

4. How will she get us out of wars in the Middle East and reverse our foreign policy that features regime change, nation building, and drone assassinations in order to stop the endless stream of body bags, amputees, and mentally broken servicemen and women?

If you can help me out just a little, I'd be very appreciative. Thanks!

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on April 01, 2016:

Mothers of the Movement are 1%ers? Cause she's representing them on the national stage. Representing my rights, and my daughters. And representing a woman as competent and able to be the leader of the free world. I know that's nothing to a lot of people. To me, it's monumental. And i see in Sanders a guy who is all for women's rights and such, but has a habit of brushing them off. To me, he represents another man wanting power....something we've had since George Washington. Hillary is the real revolution.

Patricia Panitz on April 01, 2016:

Hillary's votes come from the south which will go red in Nov. and from clueless blacks who don't realize the harm the Clintons have done them.

By the way, Hillary isn't a Dem in the real sense of the word. She's a corporate Dem. One of the reasons I don't like her is because it is she and Bill, more than anybody, who are responsible for turning the Dem party from the party of FDR and Harry Truman to the party of plutocrats and 1%ers (that's who the party's representing).

Hector Danson on March 31, 2016:

Whoops sorry, I put in your name instead of mine there lol. That comment above was mine :)

Teresa Roberts on March 31, 2016:

Agreed Teresa. Although I think the Arizona mishaps will prove more costly to her though in the long run. Unless they do a revote right away and get it over with; this is going to drag on and damage her more and more. Either way, it helps Bernie's momentum!

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 31, 2016:

What if the masses vote Hillary in? She has 2.5 million more votes than him now.

Teresa Roberts on March 31, 2016:

I hope this lawsuit gains traction. I'm sure you'll have no trouble raising funding. The outrage stretches across the country and the whole world is watching. thank you for standing up instead of ignoring business as usual. You renew my faith in the masses.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 29, 2016:

Really? Mass sec of state said no laws were broken. I guess he's a dunce, too. But of course, he's a democrat, so he can't be honest.

I think this is about destroying Hillary. You guys are good at it, too. Using all the same tactics as the republicans.

It could be about destroying the status quo, like Susan Sarandon says. She's stumping for Bernie: Wait til Cali! Anyway, she may vote for Trump if bernie doesn't make it.

So, what i see is the Sanderites and Republicans working together to destroy a dem. Because as you know, sanders is indie. When it suits him.

So go on and sue, sue, sue. Take a page from trump.

And destroy the status quo. See what you replace it with. And I'll have a bumper sticker, don't blame me, I voted for Hillary.

NW Mary on March 28, 2016:

It is about the Rule of Law. Which you seem to have no understanding of.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 28, 2016:

She says it much better than me.....and I agree 100% with this:

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 28, 2016:

That's not what this hub is about. It's about the bs that Clinton broke the law, and Sanders should get her delegates.

And furthermore, why discuss with people who don't know,what they're talking about?

She was not against the Iran deal, she helped broker it....while she was Sec of State. You know, that nothing position that shows nothing of any accomplishment, unless it's Colin Powell or Condi Rice.

Yeah, she's a kiss up to Bibi, but so is everyone else. At least she has a good friend whose son is quite vocal against what Israel is doing. Maybe that will temper her stupid shmoozing all over Beebs, like all the rest of them do.

Sanders spoke out a little against Israel, but not at AIPAC, where it would have mattered. He could have been there. Scared?

Looking forward to seeing more of you speaking out against what Israel is doing....try it in forums, see what happens to you.

Patricia Panitz on March 27, 2016:

As usual you're failing to address issues and Hillary's positions on them.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 27, 2016:

Well, if you're a phissykeeatrist, you should say so before you make a personal analysis. Because from what I see, anyone who disagrees with your highness has no point in I right? Typical Superiority Complex behavior, since we're getting into amateur phychology.

It's really very simple. Sanders should have run as Independent, like Nader did, and whom I voted for in 2000. You see? True indie credentials. Unlike Sanders, who told Chris Hedges he was running (using) Dems so he wouldn't END UP like him!

So, for Berniebots to "school" me on being non establishment is really a joke.

And i see humor is not in YOUR character, nor is sarcasm.

I was under the historical impression that lynching was done to black men, not white women.

Rita Miller on March 27, 2016:

Hilarious! Character assassinating? Who's character? Making a keen observation. What you've been spewing out in your comments are ridiculous, not to mention ill-informed and without merit. My point is before comming on a thread maybe you could get facts and figures correct. Your argument on both accounts were without facts and sounded like babble. Even the sites you referenced were unrelated to the actual conversation and were bogus. Please get some education. Or you can wait until Bernie Sanders become POTUS and then you can have a free one. Oh, by the way....your reaction to the commenter that said, "they would have lynched Jane Sanders", shows that you are unable to have a reasonable conversation.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 27, 2016:

I know quite well what the lawsuit is about: stealing delegates.

Why don't you try looking at some real voter suppression going on in America instead of making one up.

You see, back in the day when parties were unified, a visit from an ex prez would have been an exciting event.

Now, it's classified as an attempt to suppress votes, smh.

This is already a settled matter. Officials knew it was going to happen, and made plans to handle it.

I actually see it as such a wimpy move by Sanders voters.

Because if he was preventing people from voting by his presence, than he was preventing Hillary voters, too.

So, how come the delegates should go to Bernie?

And, how was he campaigning by shaking hands?

He's an ex prez, he should be supporting people that get out and vote, regardless who they vote for.

Sour grapes is your drink.

And you have a lot of nerve mentioning god after your character assassination on behalf of Bernie.

You are making him look bad.

Rita Miller on March 26, 2016:

Lovemychris I've read through this entire thread and just couldn't hold it in any longer. I am unsure if you have a learning disability with cognitive or comprehension problems. Maybe even some mental illness, maybe a little slow or if you are just a troll. But, nothing you have said is even close to reality. You obviously have no idea what this article was about and you most certainly are clueless about the lawsuit in Ohio. I live here in Ohio and you are completely wrong. I suggest you walk away from the Clinton Cool-aid you've been drinking, dry out and pick up a book. Maybe visit a library to get properly educated and informed. Maybe take your meds if that's the problem. Whatever it is, by all mean please get it together before trying to converse with grown folk. God Bless

Hector Danson on March 26, 2016:

Exactly Patricia. How can any liberal, in good conscience, vote for someone who's likely to start another war in the Middle East? Why care if she's a Democrat or a Republican? Sensible people don't divide politicians in that way. They look at a politicians history of decisions and votes on the big issues.

Patricia Panitz on March 26, 2016:

How much does Hillary pay her campaign manager?

I notice that Hillary defenders talk about everything but issues - since her positions are indefensible.

She's supported virtually all job outsourcing trade deals, including the worst of all, the TPP, and is on record as telling an audience in India that outsourcing jobs is GOOD for this country. She's accepted millions from Wall St. and won't release the transcripts of her speeches - what has she got to hide? You think she's going to favor ordinary Americans over what Wall St. wants?

She supports GMOs and Monsanto, Big Ag and Big Pharma. Her tenure as Sec of State was disastrous - war and more war is what she wants. Coup in Honduras, Libya a failed state, only one who wants a no-fly zone in Syria. She was more hawkish than the Sec of Defense, Gates, who advised against an escalation in Afghanistan; she was all for it. I am really afraid she will start a war with Iran as she opposed Obama's Iran deal and is slavishly devoted to Israel. Did you hear her AIPAC speech?

I could never vote for this trade-deal- loving, job outsourcing, neocon warhawk.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 26, 2016:

Ask AL Gore. Ask any number of candidates. The system is what it is. And ole Bern enjoys it just as much of the rest of them. Problem is, he bites the hand that feeds him.

And you all run around hating on democrats, using all the mechanisms of the establishment to get votes.

Hillary has had more votes than the rest of them, and in Feb, Sanders raised more money than she did.

And, did you know, he's paying a staffer $830,000? I thought big money was out?

Wait until California, that's all I've got to say.

When big name celebs start hanging at voting stations for Bernie, you will be bragging, not saying it's a crime.

I see the future --great lmcini

Tanya Elliott on March 26, 2016:

lovemychris, You link articles from dailykos that have ABSOLUTELY ZERO evidence, even the Sanders and Clinton supports both are saying so in the comments. The DNC is the one tearing apart the democratic party with its neo liberal bullshit. Bernies trying to make politics work for us again, and a side effect of that is having to run on either a republican or democratic ticket in order to even have a real run at the whitehouse ( compliments or our greedy 2 party system.) The DNC proclaims its new numbers or fresh democrats joining the party, but sorely realize these people will change back to independent once they realize the shenanigans going on within the DNC. Bernie is simply urging super delegates to vote in the same way their states have, afterall those states are the ones who hire their "Super Delegates." I after learning about the super delegate proccess was appaled. How is this the voice of the people? When a candidate can win a state by popular vote but yet not really win?

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 26, 2016:

I have been at hubpages since 2010. You newbies are a lot like Sanders voters everywhere. Rude, judgemental, paranoid and thinking you just invented the wheel. My thing is politics, so expect me to be there whenever the ugly American surfaces to school us all about the world.

If you were standing on solid ground, you wouldnt need to push others off.

This is the honest to god truth: you Sanders voters are turning me off him! Your tea party like behavior is pushing democrats away....the party your guy us using to get elected.

Hector Danson on March 25, 2016:

Don't bother Patricia. Lovemychris is a troll. All of us have said the same thing, and yet he/she keeps returning to the same argument, pretending not to know the difference.

Patricia Panitz on March 25, 2016:

Supporting a family member is one thing, blocking voters' access to vote is another (and also illegal).

daniel shawn on March 25, 2016:

some needs to PIE this guy right on the face..... a BIG CREAM PIE IN THE FACE next time he does this

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 25, 2016:

Did you ever think that all those years when he was campaigning, she was there to support him, and maybe he just wants to do the same?

Dayna on March 25, 2016:

reguardless of what you say lovemychris it is illegal to support any candidate that close to the polling station. It is not wrong of Bill to support his wife however, was he voting that day? Is he allowed to vote in that state? No most likely not. Therefore what was the reason to be there other than to sway people?

Kristen Reilly on March 25, 2016:

You MUST add New Bedford, MA mayor Jon F. Mitchell to this suit because he is complicit and gave the bullhorn to Bill Clinton after stumping for his wife.

Joseph Chastain on March 25, 2016:

Then you haven't been paying attention. It was Hillary's camp that accused Sanders of being connected to communism which was a baseless, unconfirmed attack. Not one thing that Sanders has said about Hillary is unconfirmed.

Oh and as for Sanders "using" Hillary's info, no proof of that. In fact his camp TOLD Hillary's about the data breach.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 25, 2016:

Stop Hillary is Trey Gowdy...

Think of that. The guy running witch hunts in OUR gvt. I thought he worked for all of us?

Then there is something called Targeted Victory, which creates fake twitter and facebook accounts to spread anti Hillary rhetoric.

I just dont get it, now maybe i do....some of these Sanders supporters seem to hate her more than republicans do.

I know she has her own pacs and such...i just havent seen the same ammount of hate there.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 25, 2016:

Yeah, but where are his anti-Bernie ads? Its also Koch and another pac. Then ad Sanders attack ads on top of it, you begin to see what's going on.

Hector Danson on March 25, 2016:

"What proof is there that Karl Rove is financing ads for Bernie?" - None. Rove is running anti-Hillary ads, so, by the logic of Hillary supporters, Rove is runnings ads "for Bernie".

Miracle LaGrange on March 25, 2016:

lovemychris says: "Oh give me a break. No one I know is that weak minded. It's his wife. He has every right to be there showing support."

"lovemychris" apparently knows nothing about how law works, didn't bother to do any research to find out why what Bill Clinton did was potentially illegal in the state of Massachusetts, and doesn't think being terribly, laughably wrong about something precludes him or her from making smug, pedantic comments about it.

Patricia Panitz on March 24, 2016:

It's not surprising that MA officials say there's nothing to this as they are all for Hillary. MA Dem officials are very corrupt. I am a Dem and lived there 37 years.

What proof is there that Karl Rove is financing ads for Bernie? Bernie's ads are on topics anathema to Rove - income inequality, attacks on WalSt., restoring the sinking middle class. Sounds like another Clinton dirty trick.

Crowesam on March 24, 2016:

Helen Purcell was married to Clinton's Lt. Governor when he was governer of Arkansas. Not seeming so much like a screw up asit does more voter suppression.

Dana on March 24, 2016:

I really dislike that they are making it sound like it was only Sanders' voters that were hurt by this. I don't care who a voter planned on casting a ballot for. I'm from Massachusetts and the laws are clearly stated. The law was broken and it suppressed voters and most likely swayed others. It shouldn't be only Sanders' voters that are outraged. Unfortunately it makes us look like cry babies because our candidate didn't win, but it shouldn't be about the candidate. It should be about democracy and the people's voices being heard.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 24, 2016:

All these people outraged about hillary will see some outrages aimed at their guy too. Like I read this am that FEC is investigating him, because while he was taking in 27 dollar donations from people, making him look so common man, he is paying a staffer 830,000 dollars, or something, with those donations. His staff did get a hold of private Hillary voter info, too. And used it. So, if you throw out the boomerang of she's corrupt, just will come back to your guy eventually.

munkle on March 24, 2016:

lovemychris: what do you mean "what goes around comes around"?

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 24, 2016:

It was a tea party republican named Helen Purcell who "screwed up". Reverb Press has article on it. Once again, the knee jerk reaction and blaming Clinton. She is not Bush! Give it a rest!

Hector Danson on March 24, 2016:

Ah, the news. We can trust them!

It looks like the situation just got worse in Arizona. Closing 140 polling stations so that there's 60 polling stations for est. 800,000 people, while letting the substantial postal vote give Hillary the win because it's her demographic (elderly voters). Then there's the registration muck-ups. So corrupt, just like their candidate.

roob on March 23, 2016:

munkle: he was thanking the polling people for doing their job, far from campaigning. He is allowed to even enter the poll as he did on polling day. This is old news and not news at all. Seriously it is sad people still think this is true. Even if it was do you think he magically swayed those people and that is how Hillary will win? Lol. I don't like Hillary but if people want to paint a bad picture of her there are actually bad things she has done. Bring those up. They might just take you a little research to actually grasp the situation.

Unless you guys have proof that he was truly "campaigning" then be quiet because the news already debunked this.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 23, 2016:

Oh please. The drama. Your dude is slippery, too. Just get over the fact that Hillary has the advantage of an ex prez as hubby. Or, it can be a hindrance to her, if you think he's a corrupt elitist oligarch. You sued, now all you can do is wait and see. And remember, what goes around, comes around.

munkle on March 23, 2016:

lovemychris: Perhaps you didn't read my earlier comment. Any "strong minded" person as you like to say, knows what 150 feet within a poll means, whether it is your spouse or not. The law does not say "no one can campaign within 150 feet of a polling place, unless it's your husband." Hillary shills are just as dishonest and slippery as their candidate. This entire discussion should serve to scare voters away from Hillary even further.

munkle on March 23, 2016:

lovemychris: Perhaps you didn't read my earlier comment. Any "strong minded" person as you like to say, knows what 150 feet within a poll means, whether it is your spouse or not. The law does not say "no one can campaign within 150 feet of a polling place, unless it's your husband." Hillary shills are just as dishonest and slippery as their candidate. This entire discussion should serve to scare voters away from Hillary even further.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 23, 2016:

I haven't heard her smear him. In fact, she tried holding out the olive branch. He came back all smug telling her to release her speeches. Well, he could release his tax returns. She's not harping on that. And Jane had some kind of investigation on her, too. I dont see anyone mention that. Hillary attacks Trump. Sanders goes after her. That's what I have seen.

NW Mary on March 22, 2016:

"...check out Bernie's stance on that because it is where Clinton got her ideas from,..."

She is saying that it was Bernie who first supported that requirement. And he did.

Sorry for dissing you. But I hold my ground on our earlier debate.

As for smears, he doesn't do smears. He talks issues. She's done the smears and Fox, CNN and even MSNBC has noted it from time to time. And MSNBC is in the tank big time for Hillary.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 22, 2016:

Well, I'll use the same attitude on him that he takes with her. He's late to the party. He voted against plenty of gun regs. Voted against Brady bill and holding gun manufacturers responsible. But I think he's a good guy.

I like him, and think his hearts in the right place.

It's probably as much or more his team. Stop trying to take her delegates, stop the nasty smears. That's all. To make her husband a demon for supporting her just turns everyone off.

Susan Jacobson on March 22, 2016:

lovemychris- you say your concerned about guns, and children getting hold of them etc.... you may want to check out Bernie's stance on that because it is where Clinton got her ideas from, he wants a bad on all semi automatic's just as hillary does, they both want stiffer background checks and to close the loopholes that allow folks to buy guns from private sales and the like. Just saying, same policies!

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 22, 2016:

Yes, if he was campaigning, which he wasnt. A man is allowed to stand in support of his wife. Any strong minded human knows that.

munkle on March 22, 2016:

G Herman: If you are so weak-minded that you don't know what 150 feet is, you shouldn't vote.

NW Mary on March 22, 2016:

The sad part of this is that in America The Rule of law no longer exists even though our Constitution is based on it. Today it really depends on who you are and not what you do.

To me, that is the saddest part. My observations and subsequent beliefs on this started when I heard an attorney for the plaintiffs in the Exxon Valdez case years after the spill talking about the court's reduction of fines and dismissals. The Rule of Law no longer exists in America. I've paid attention ever since.

Tyler on March 22, 2016:

The law is clear. If Bill was campaigning within 150 ft of a polling place, he broke the law. I don't see how there is any room for debate on this.

April on March 22, 2016:

Lisa Jackson on March 21, 2016:

If you think he broke the law, then issue him citations for the offenses, let him pay his tickets, and move along. A lawsuit is a waste of time and resources. And you have to prove damages if you want to win one. Last I checked "plausibility", as identified in the complaint, does not equal "preponderance of the evidence."

G Herman on March 21, 2016:

Lol. What a bunch of cry babies. Its just become #berniewho lost. He's in a hopeless situation and they need anything they can to try and fight with. I hope the court throws this out. A person's presence shouldn't be enough to sway you, unless you are THAT weak minded.

The Pyat on March 21, 2016:

NRA Lobbyist Will Co-Host Hillary Clinton Fundraiser

Hillary Clinton did not say that she would shut down the NRA and ban handguns if she were elected President.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 21, 2016:

So, Sanders people take pride in disposing of people who Trump-like.

How long you been on hp Mary? You a newbie, talking smack? Or a sock puppet?

Either way, you can take a seat. Youngblood.

NW Mary on March 21, 2016:

Goodness Gracious. I thought we'd disposed of LMC by now. Best advice, ignore trolls. You just made his day.

Hector Danson on March 21, 2016:

Thank you Dan. Yes, we should all follow that advise and ignore the troll bot now. I'm surprised such people pushed you towards Trump though. He won't be as establishment as Clinton, but he'll still be about screwing the world over for American interests and won't be as socially liberal as Clinton. Anyway, I've had similar experiences. Before, I might have held my breath and voted for her; but now I've been pushed firmly into the Bernie or bust camp. Before, I was also more respectful and positive; but now I've started posting negative stuff about Hillary on facebook (and it's gaining quite a bit of traction). Hillary and her supporters don't deserve my support, my restraint, or my allegiance at the polling booth. These aren't just Republican trolls trying to "split the party". Many/most are genuine supporters just demonstrating how rotten and disingenuous they can be.

roob on March 21, 2016:

I am not a Sanders supporter either! Have a good day though, peace.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 21, 2016:

Sanders, master criminal

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 21, 2016:

Not really you. Roob. It's dumb to try n comment during work. You have not been degrading or insulting, it's the rest of the Sanders crew that has about as much class as a cockroach.

My apologies to cockroaches...

For real!

roob on March 21, 2016:

Look up the facts on gun control. Do you really think crime really goes down? No the criminals still have their guns, and the citizens have no protection. If you can prove me wrong with numbers then I might change my "stupid" opinion. However if it is just what you think, well that is not a fact and I would go with the facts.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 21, 2016:

Well howdy doo. And you feel you have every right to have that opinion dont you? Just not me. I cant gave an opinion unlike yours, unless im a stupid shill.

roob on March 21, 2016:

Yeah so how about people protect themselves with guns? Protection with our 2nd amendment rights. You go ahead and be unprotected. I'd rather shoot a bad guy then get shot. I don't know about you. I think if you really wanted safety you would want guns for protection. Wherever there is gun control there is high violence.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 21, 2016:

Right, if so, the FBI will handle it. Benghazi, e mails, let's see, she's a fool for staying with bill, but a femi nazi for not baking cookies. Derp to the nth degree. And this may surprise you, but I'm voting for her because of issues. Oh i know, you didn't think a dunce like me could have legit issues, huh? Not like you political experts.

Here's one: I hate guns. Hate that people get killed by them, kids get hold of them, just hate the whole purpuse of them. So, who do you think I should support?

"Oh but you cant, benghazi, e mails, monica...."

"Listen to us, we know"

What goes around, comes around. Or, if you prefer, people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Things will be known, and you won't care. You'll still support your candidate no matter what, while looking down your noses at me for being a low information shill. Can't disagree with you, have a different opinion, must be stupid.

Voila, the problem with America.

roob on March 21, 2016:

MommaKat I can't stand Clinton but you are wrong. That video is old news and it was already established he was just saying hi. Go do some research, that video is from weeks ago. No one is even talking about that anymore. On the megaphone he thanks people who are supporting hillary. He is not soliciting a vote. She lied to the FBI, bring that one up. There is real evidence there, not here.

Dan on March 21, 2016:

lovemychris, you sound like one of those people that argue the only reason we should vote Hillary is to block Trump. How is that by any means a standard to support a candidate, we choose Bernie because we discovered via social media since MSM/pundits is doing their best to sling mud on Bernie's image.

Using Trump as reason to vote for a candidate has got to be the lowest bar that has EVER been set for picking someone. I might as well choose a dog, well, after all Hillary barks like one, I still would rather have a real dog. At least a dog doesn't support TPP.

Woman's rights aren't going to vanish under republican leadership, you're once again deflecting your support into fear baiting the opponent. We support Sanders because simply put, his policies agree with us. We didn't choose Sanders because the republicans suck.

MommaKat on March 21, 2016:

No one is saying Bill cannot campaign for our support his wife, lovemychris, only that he must do so legally. And roob, it is not settled by any means as video dies indeed show Bill campaigning within the free Zone and specifically thanking people for voting for Hillary. Galvin admitted Clinton's wrong doing by stating his office issued a warning to Clinton's campaign. That warning occurred before his visits to 2 more polling locations, and he did it again in Chicago. Clinton's actions clearly demonstrate their belief that they're above the law. This is not a coronation, and they need to be held accountable.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on March 21, 2016:

Oooops. I think you may be wrong about Bernie. On war, environment, safety of our citzens. But then it won't matter, as you're just as much zealots as anybody.

I have never seen anyone fair and impartial around here. Some just suffer from the delusion that they are.

Go Bernie or Bust. But what about womens rights?

Under the bus they go. See ya in the collaseum! Or is it fencing dual? En guard.

Dan Aronson on March 21, 2016:

Guys, we need to quit engaging Hillary's vast army of mindless zealots (see, lovemychris). It's a waste of time. If you don't believe me, try engaging any of them in a substantive discussion on the issues and how Hillary plans to . . .

* Revitalize the Middle-Class that "her" Wall Street destroyed in 2008. Remember in the debate she said, "I represented Wall Street when they were attacked on 9-11". Has she ever talked about representing Middle Class New York as a Senator? Nope.

* Ensuring that the bill for the next Wall Street bailout doesn't get handed, yet again, to taxpayers.

* Getting us out of our endless involvement in war-for-profit, regime change, and nation building in the the Middle East. She helped start those conflicts as a Senator (Bernie opposed them vehemently) and escalate them as Secretary of State. She has apologized for the vote, but never to the parents, siblings, and children of the 5,000+ brave men and women of our armed forces who came home in body bags, the thousands more who came home missing limbs, or the tens of thousands more who came home mentally broken. When do they get their apology lovemychirs?

And that is just the short list. But just try getting answers from a HRC supporter on just those three. Or, skip engaging these mindless zealots and get the vote out. As we saw in Michigan, the only winning formula is to outnumber the mindless -- and that will go triple for November when we face the GOP.

feetontheground on March 21, 2016:

MA Primary: Unadjusted Exit poll Indicates Bernie won

roob on March 21, 2016:

He can walk inside the poll, he just can't try to get peoples votes. This was already on the news and it was shown he was just saying hi to the people running the voting poll. I am not a fan of Clinton at all so if this was legit I would want it to have publicity. However this is an old settled matter.

Joseph McCombe on March 21, 2016:

Lovemychris=low info voter. Keep typing Sad little Clinton troll.

Dan on March 21, 2016:

Hector, it isn't an argument of two sides. It's a swarm of people that know what Clinton has done, and one idiot Hillary-bot "lovemychris" using deflection arguments attacking Bernie Sanders by irrelevant comparisons that make absolutely no sense. I went into this election neutral about Clinton, my state still didn't have a primary, and probably would have went third party in a general election if Clinton somehow cheated her way through. But after seeing the amount of manipulation and corruption so far, something like 10 states now that have issues with voter tampering. My vote is likely to change from third party to Trump. This country simply cannot afford to have another Clinton in office, the amount of desperation and political favors being abused by her frightens the hell out of me.

Trump may have the nuance of a chimpanzee bashing rocks together, but at least he doesn't have the connections to mobilize the next global war or desire to lock us in the worst trade agreement in history that will be the inevitable downfall of our nation.

Related Articles