Did Bernie Sanders Just Go Negative on Hillary Clinton?

Andrew Harnik/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


With the Democratic presidential race neck and neck in the early states of Iowa and New Hampshire, the volleys between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are heating up. Clinton has been slamming Sanders for his positions on gun control and health care. And now Sanders is firing back—in a way—and coming close to breaking his career-long vow to eschew negative ads. 

In his latest ad, called “Two Visions,” Sanders contrasts his approach to Wall Street reform with another “Democratic view”—though he does not mention Clinton by name. In the ad, the Vermont senator gazes into the camera and says, “There are two Democratic visions for regulating Wall Street. One says it’s okay to take millions from big banks and then tell them what to do.” That certainly could be interpreted as a dig at Clinton for collecting donations from Wall Street over the years. Sanders continues: “My plan: Break up the big banks, close the tax loopholes, and make them pay their fair share.”

This wouldn’t be the first time that Sanders has highlighted Clinton’s ties to Wall Street. (Remember the second debate?) But this ad is the closest the Sanders campaign has come to going back on its promise not to hit Clinton with negative ads. In June, Tad Devine, a top Sanders strategist, told Mother Jones that the campaign wouldn’t even engage in comparison ads.

So, Devine notes, [Sanders] will not directly criticize or poke at Clinton. For sure, no personal attacks or cheap shots. “That won’t help him,” Devine says. “He rejects the status quo of politics.” Sanders won’t even do a straight-up contrast ad—as in, Bernie Sanders believes X about subject Y, but Hillary Clinton believes Z. “If we do that, we’re done,” Devine says. “If we do a classic comparative ad, it’s over. We’ll have to be smarter.”

This new ad is not a true comparative ad—given that it doesn’t name Clinton—but it’s getting close. And there are still two weeks to the Iowa caucuses.

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate