Weeks ago I argued that Bernie Sanders had already done damage to his own brand but hadn’t yet realized it.

His fateful (and likely fatal) decision to go hard negative on Hillary in 2016 was one of the reasons for Hillary’s clean sweep on March 15th and her prohibitive delegate advantage.

Going along with campaign operatives who see their only path to victory running through Hillary’s integrity has cost Bernie dearly. And if he keeps it up in spite of Hillary’s clear path to the nomination, it will cost him even more.

With the prospect of a President Trump looming larger every day, why is Bernie’s campaign still tweeting things like this?

Do working Americans really care about a super PAC? No.

If they did, Hillary wouldn’t have millions more votes than her rivals, Democratic or Republican. She wouldn’t have so many endorsements, won so many states or had the support of so many prominent public figures.

I’ll repeat: Bernie’s Wall Street dog whistle is a barely concealed attempt to accuse Hillary Clinton of corruption, despite the fact that he lacks a scintilla of evidence to support that claim.

No matter how lofty and inspiring his message (and progressive values are inspiring), it is deeply unjust – and frankly, reckless – to run a campaign premised on the destruction of Hillary’s character through false innuendo.

If Bernie and his campaign want to keep running in the face of improbable odds, then how about running against what Republicans stand for? How about making proposals on issues and letting the people decide if they like them? How about dropping the artful smears against Hillary?

With all his talk about super PACs, Bernie has been outspending Hillary by big margins — and she’s still winning big. Perhaps impugning her honesty and integrity isn’t such a smart strategy?

(AP Photo/Steve Helber)