Thanks to geebeebee for the post earlier. Have been trying for the past half-hour to add a comment to that post but keep getting an error so will write a new diary.
On those flyers that the Clinton campaign is handing out trying to “smear” Bernie, they really should reconsider. They are making a big deal out of a minor mistake with the fact that “endorsement” appears as a title. However, even though the papers do not officially endorse Bernie, here is what the Telegraph editorial said:
Bernie Sanders’ entry into the presidential race will give Democratic and independent voters a choice.
The senator from Vermont is everything Hillary Clinton is not.
He is not beholden to Wall Street money.
He is not tainted by scandal.
He hasn’t erased a cache of emails.
Nobody questions whether Sanders has sold his political soul in exchange for donations to his family foundation. He doesn’t have a foundation.
He doesn’t talk about a “vast right-wing conspiracy.” He is much more specific, laying the blame for dysfunctional government at the feet of the Koch brothers’ attempts to hijack the government.
Mrs. Clinton is the candidate of the monied interests. When it comes to name recognition, experience, organization and fundraising, she is a juggernaut, and all the coffee klatches in the world aren’t going to change that. She is the candidate not of Democrats who want change, but of Democrats who want the White House most of all.
Bernie Sanders? He speaks highly of Hillary Clinton but is, philosophically, much more closely aligned with Sen. Elizabeth Warren. Both have repeatedly railed against corporate excesses at the expense of the middle class.
Nobody gives Sanders much of a chance to win the Democratic presidential nomination. Heck, he’s not even a real Democrat, having served as an independent since his arrival in Washington in 1991.
If they were baseball players, Hillary Clinton’s corporate style would be a good fit for the 1927 New York Yankees, while Sanders – with his Brooklyn accent, wild hair and straight-spoken style – would be better suited for the lineup of the Bad News Bears.
And therein lies part of the value of Sanders’ entry into the race – to show that the gulf between Sanders and Clinton feels wider than the gap between Clinton and a lot of Republicans.
But that piece was published in May, before the traditional season for newspaper endorsements.
As for the Valley News, the paper’s Dec. 31, 2014, editorial simply encouraged Sanders to enter the presidential race. "A presidential candidate who vigorously espoused populism from a progressive point of view could help restore much-needed balance to American political life, which has tilted sharply to the right in recent decades," the paper noted.
And here’s how Politifact made their decision to label this “False”:
Our ruling
A Bernie Sanders political ad said he had been endorsed by the Valley News newspaper and implied he had been endorsed by The Telegraph of Nashua. While each paper published laudatory editorials about the Vermont senator, neither one has so far offered him an official endorsement.
In the context of an ad titled "Endorsed," full of unions and other organizations that have in fact endorsed Sanders, the spotlighting of quotes from New Hampshire newspapers would suggest that the papers had made the same decision. The campaign’s decision to alter the ad improves its technical accuracy, but the misleading impression remains. (my bolding)
We rate the ad’s claim False.
Wow, and this compares to her Goldman Sachs transcripts, oops, nothing to see here.
How about Sanders campaign passing out the editorial in response!!!