Since we are all Democrats, Why we are not going after the Republicans?

[asuhornets]

Instead of Hillary Clinton.
Trump, Cruz, Bush, etc. are names that are hardly mentioned here. They all have horrible policies-foreign and domestic.

[Renew Deal]

1. Because Sanders thinks Democrats are tweedledee and tweetledum

[Avalux]

3. Nope. Because Hillary wants to win at all costs, and is using GOP tactics. n/t

[Renew Deal]

5. Like stealing data, sending fraudulent flyers, running misleading adds, impersonating union workers?

Oh wait? That was Sanders campaign.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

72. No, like lying like a Clintoon.

[mcar]

91. Mic drop!

[valerief]

2. I think it's appropriate to criticize the Dem candidates but not the supporters of those

candidates. That's just stupid.

OTOH, both the candidates and supporters on the GOP are fair game!

[CorporatistNation]

89. If You Support A Candidate That...Lies, Uses Poor Judgement Repeatedly And Is In The Tank...

With Wall Street to the Nth degree... Then YES the supporters of such a candidate merit some substantial criticism , as does said flawed candidate.

[Cal Carpenter]

4. Because this is the primary

And you are in the Primaries forum. Go into GD and you'll see plenty about the repubs. Discussion of them doesn't belong in this particular forum.

[99Forever]

6. Compare and contrast is WHY we have primaries not coronations.

This forum is precisely where that is done on this site. If that troubles you, perhaps it's not for you.

[Andy823]

7. Obviously not everyone here is a democrat

Those who "only" trash and bash are not really democrats, they just com here and "claim" to be democrats so they can stir things up and cause problems. Real democrats disuse the issues, post about why their candidate is the better choice because of their record, their plans to fix the things that need to be fixe, but they don't try and destroy other democrats in the process. It's not hard to tell who is who.

[NanceGreggs]

16. Exactly.

"It's not hard to tell who is who."

Not hard at all.

[JackRiddler]

57. You don't get to define what a Democrat is...

by the way that has a capital D. (You also don't get to define what a democrat is.) That will be done by the voters. The meaning changes over time - or it would still be the Party of Slavery and the Trail of Tears.

And one gets to speak about the available choices. Based on record and stated platform, Clinton is a Democrat alright - the Third Way and DLC kind, who have failed utterly. And she is a terrible choice for president, and she will lose in November if nominated today. That's not "destroying" her, it's the truth as I see it and I get to express it without your implicit calls for censorship.

[hifiguy]

8. There's no discernable difference between HRH and the Repigs

on any meaningful issue of economic or foreign policy. They all share neoliberal economics and a belligerent, imperial neocon foreign policy. That's why. We don't want Repig-lite passing itself off as Democratic.

[orpupilofnature57]

10. + 1000000000000 !!!!!!!!!!!

[HERVEPA]

13. That's just trash. And I'm a Bernie supporter.

[Dem2]

18. Thank you

It's comments like the above that prevent me from embracing Bernie more, even though I prefer his politics to Hillary's.

[rhett o rick]

22. LOL. You let supporters influence who you will support? Good grief. nm

[Dem2]

24. Arrogant style commentary is a huge turn-off

Bernie supporters have driven away a couple of people who would have preferred to support him. I'm keeping an open mind *in spite* of the bitter vitriol of the typical Sanders supporter.

[rhett o rick]

30. I think an "open-mind" would recognize the vitriol from both sides. And I doubt very much

that message board entries can "drive people away from Sanders". We want honesty in government. If that drives anyone away, they weren't very committed.

[Dem2]

32. I allow for other viewpoints

Some feel it necessary to insult the intelligence or otherwise disparage those who see things differently, or are just naturally more cautious people. I find that offensive. Many, many people here agree, it's not just me.

[bkkyosemite]

33. Somebody's comments make you not support Bernie omg

[Dem2]

37. That's not what I said

I'm willing to have a discussion about this without the drama if you are.

[doc03]

61. I agree 100% I am sick of reading this bullshit from the Sanders people. Like the one above saying

there isn't any difference between her and Republicans. Many others saying they will not vote at all if she
gets nominated. Even though I previously thought highly of Sanders his supporters have totally turned me off.
I suspect a sizable number of these people have been planted here by the Republicans to trash Clinton. Sanders
has had free rid from the Republicans, if he gets nominated they will rip him apart. This is like in 2008 all over again
Obama got elected in large part by the younger voters. Look what happened they elected their man then when he didn't
get 100% of his promises passed they stayed home in the off years and now we have Republican house and the Senate
by a thread. What is even worse the Republicans control 2/3 of the states. We won the election in 2008 and 2012 but
we have been set decades in other ways.

[HERVEPA]

85. I disagree with you agreement with my post.

I was saying there is a big difference between Hillary and Republican. There is also a pretty big difference between Bernie and Hillary, and Bernie is my guy.

[hifiguy]

19. How so? HRH is welded at the hip to the Billionaire Class

and the banksters, who quite literally OWN her. She's an enthusiastic cheerleader for War Forever Everywhere.

[rhett o rick]

26. It's trash that she agrees with the Republicons on many issues? The list is long

and I've provided it many times. Maybe you could tell me on what issues she disagrees with them.

[hifiguy]

38. Arguing facts to the Fan Club is like

trying to teach calculus to the dog. It makes no impression on the dog and wastes your time.

[kath]

48. True dat.

Impervious to facts. it's pathetic.

[RiverLover]

64. +1

Very long

Its why we don't like her. She's just too republican. And worse, she'd do more republican-like deals as prez because its harder for Congress Dems to counter a Democrat-in-name president than a republican president. Example, NAFTA then & the TPP now. Though our Senate Dems are doing their best.

[rhett o rick]

74. It was a brilliant move to form the Conservative Democratic Wing (or Third Way) and let the

Republicon party slide into clown-dom. It has essentially disenfranchised the progressive wing of our party. And you are correct it's harder to make a case against another Democrat even though they are supporting Republicon issues.

[RiverLover]

75. Brilliant is right, they've been very successful at stomping out true Democratic FDR values

Which is what made the USA so great to begin with.

We're so lucky to have the internet. MSM plays along with their charade. We wouldn't stand a chance without the www. (& I couldn't be talking to you right now. ! )

But we have a shot at exposing these truths now & giving these phonies back to the RW where they belong. (from our lips...)

[rhett o rick]

83. And that scares me. The internet neutralizes their clamp on media. They will be working

to shut down our internet freedoms.

[Karma13612]

87. This is why we MUST MUST MUST defend

Net neutrality.

[RiverLover]

88. +100000

nt

[oberliner]

76. Ridiculous comment

Utterly ridiculous.

[hifiguy]

78. Her economics are neoliberal.

Her belligerent, imperialist foreign policy is neo-con. The facts are what they are.

[oberliner]

79. She is diametrically opposed to Rubio, Cruz, and Trump on every major issue

Here are some of the policy positions recently articulated by Rubio:

1. He wants to repeal the ACA and go back to the old system.

Hillary strongly supports ACA.

2. He is actively opposed to net neutrality.

Hillary supports net neutrality.

3. He does not believe human activity has any impact on climate change and opposes taking any action on this topic.

Hillary knows it does and supports acting accordingly.

5. He wants to cut the corporate tax rate to 25 percent.

Hillary opposes this.

5. He wants to scrap the Iran deal.

Hillary strongly supports the Iran deal.

[jack_krass]

94. Shes different from repubs on social issues

Last edited Sun Feb 7, 2016, 04:07 PM - Edit history (1)

On everything else, she's a centrist republican

[orpupilofnature57]

9. It's fruitless at this point who's more apt to knuckle under to republicans, who's dealing with them

BEHIND the scenes to help them win the nomination, Who resembles a republican in every aspect of their being ?

[rhett o rick]

23. Knuckle Under. That's what Clinton did when he signed off on Glass-Steigall. That's what

Clinton did when she joined the Republicons in 2002 to wage war.

[orpupilofnature57]

46. + 1000000000000 !!!!!!!!!!!

[procon]

58. It bears mentioning that even if Clinton had exercised the veto

instead of just signing the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999, the Republicans held a majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives to overturn it, and that would have made him look even more powerless as a beaten lame duck Democrat.

[rhett o rick]

62. That's the common: "The Republicons made me do it." Neither Clinton regrets the

passing of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. The banksters have been very grateful and have rewarded the Clinton handsomely. This is the culture we must stop before we all become paupers.

[procon]

71. Actually, Clinton did say he has regrets about not vetoing the bill.

more:
"If I had to do it again, I would have vetoed the bill, even though they would have passed it and overridden my veto in a heartbeat," Clinton said.




While I wouldn't venture a guess on what HRC may have thought at the time, since she wasn't an elected politician and held no vote in congress, its a meaningless criticism. I have more concerns about the effectiveness of one candidate and the humility of the other as they relate to today's current events rather that what a spouse did 17 years ago.

[rhett o rick]

73. I stand corrected. I do recognize that statement. However, H. Clinton has openly

defended the action recently and would not roll it back. I keep hearing that Clinton has had much more experience than Sanders but there is a great thread in here yesterday or today that shows what mistakes Clinton has made with that experience. Pres Jimmy Carter did well without much experience. And really Sen Sanders has been in politics a very long time.

I worry about Clinton's close ties with those that have looted the American economy.

[cyberswede]

11. ...or instead of Bernie Sanders.

This is GDP. The Rs are discussed, panned, mocked, and attacked in GD.

[thereismore]

12. It's too early. Once we have a candidate, it'll be game on! nt

[TheProgressive]

14. Ah, we are going after the 'republicans'....

[kath]

49. Indeed.

Time to take our Party back.

[HERVEPA]

15. You could just as easily have put Bernie Sanders in your subject as Hillary Clinton,

[Hoyt]

17. Because many Sanders' supporters are fine with another McGovern, Mondale, Carter (2nd) landslide.

[rhett o rick]

21. We just aren't willing to sell our souls to Goldman-Sachs. nm

[SheenaR]

41. I see this is going to be posted in every thread

Despite it being a fallacy.

With Bernie, turnout is high. Turnout is high, we don't lose no matter who we face. The people who support Bernie aren't jumping ship because the Repubs aren't going to play nice.

[Hoyt]

43. Turnout will be high for GOPers too, and many Independents are just GOPers too ashamed to admit it.

Last edited Sat Feb 6, 2016, 11:25 PM - Edit history (1)

Odds are Sanders can't win general election.

[frylock]

56. The 70's and 80's called.

[rhett o rick]

20. In the last 30 years the rich have been looting the lower classes with the help

of not only Republicons but also Conservative Democrats. Untold damage has been caused by the non-partisan attack on the lower classes by both. H. Clinton is a very strongly rooted Wealthy 1%'er. She has managed to accumulate a huge wealth from those that are looting the 99%. One of the worst things that happened to the 99% was the Iraq war that killed and wounded many (none in the 1%) and effectively transferred 5 to 10 trillions of dollars from us to the Wealthy 1%. Clinton sided with the Republicons on that war. More recently we had a burst of the housing bubble which effectively transferred 5 trillions of dollars from the 99% to the Wealthy 1% which includes Goldman-Sachs and others that have been helpful to H. Clinton in her campaigns and personal wealth accumulation.

The 99% can't survive much more of the looting. We must change the culture of big money dominating our government. I wish all Democrats supported that.

[malletgirl02]

25. Why just mention Hillary Clinton?

Are you fine with attacks against Bernie Sanders?

[asuhornets]

65. Absolutely not. n/t

[last1standing]

27. Because this is General Discussion: Primaries. You know, where we discuss the primaries.

Of all the desperate attempts to divert people from pointing out NoHope Hillary's many, many policy and character flaws, this one ranks right up near the top.

[asuhornets]

66. Coming from you..

I am honored...

[SoLeftIAmRight]

28. To everything - Turn, turn, turn - There is a season

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=turn+turn+turn&&view=detail&mid=01B00961493DFAD178F201B00961493DFAD178F2&FORM=VRDGAR

[SMC22307]

29. We know Republicans suck. We're fighting for the soul of the Democratic Party. (n/t)

[SoLeftIAmRight]

34. WOW - many thanks

seems many do not think self examination is healthy

[hifiguy]

39. Thread winner.

[whatchamacallit]

31. Why didn't you include going after Sanders in your concern?

FYI we're in the primary.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

35. This is the Democratic primaries forum.

We scrutinize and evaluate Democratic candidates running in the Democratic primaries.

[basselope]

36. Because she is part of the problem.

[bigwillq]

40. This.

[SheenaR]

42. Go up and down the list of threads

You lose a lot of credibility when you only include Clinton.

[MrMickeysMom]

44. Now, we're talking...

How long do you think you and I can keep an issues oriented thread going, asuhornets?

Climate change science and the Republicans... Why do you think the Republicans cannot discuss this issue?

[Turn CO Blue]

45. Rubio. Rubio is going to be Repuke Nom.

Rubio has the most endorsements (and they're being released masterfully), he has all the Koch Brothers Money and is the one that polls the highes.

The "Party" itself, the Republican establishment and the Fortune 400 are ABSOLUTELY going to find a way to teach Rubio how to talk more slowly, how to present more Presidentially, get him a decent haircut and some better suits, whatever they need to do such as frontload and backload support, paid attendees, pollsters, whatever they have to do to make Rubio into "THE PUPPET WHO CAN WIN". They need a new W, and they will somehow make Rubio into that if they have to hire a Hollywood special effects CGI team to do it.

DUers OUGHT to be lobbing grenades and nuclear warheads at Rubio every minute by the minute to take him down.

Cruz only has to keep talking (he is viscerally UNlikable, Trump will flame out. Rubio will be their guy. We need to make sure his unfavorables are very low.

[Oilwellian]

51. We will focus on the Republican they nominate

I'm not going to waste my time now attacking any of the idiots the Republican party has running for president right now. It's far too early and a complete waste of time.

Was it Freudian or dyslexic when you said:

Rubio will be their guy. We need to make sure his unfavorables are very low.

Personally, I'd like to see any of the Republican candidates unfavorables on the high side.

[Turn CO Blue]

84. Just typing too quickly

The reason I made the point to the OP is because the OP mentions s/he wishes we would have some focus on Trump, Cruz and Bush (only and in that order). It reminded me that I see Trump's name mentioned 200 times a day on DU but Rubio is now favored on fivethirtyeight and by the Koch machine.

[mak3cats]

47. Because it's primary season, and this is GDP...

...try General Discussion.

[TTUBatfan2008]

50. Plenty of attacks on Sanders too...

Why pretend otherwise? I am glad the candidate who has repeatedly supported the War Machine is not getting an automatic coronation. Said coronation should never be the case in a party with many people who describe themselves as pacifists. She is having to fight for the nomination and that's how it should be.

[doc03]

52. From my observation they are too busy trashing each other especially the

Sanders people. By some of the posts I had read on DU I suspect there are a sizable group of trolls planted here to
knock Clinton out of the running.

[frylock]

53. Who says we're all Democrats?

[asuhornets]

68. Interesting comment..n/t

[JackRiddler]

54. First of all, that is untrue.

Republicans are criticized here harshly, constantly, and daily.

Second, there is a primary, supposedly a time for democratic decision between candidates. So that means discussing it. If you believe in democracy, that is.

Clinton has earned the political critiques to which she has been subjected. She has a long record of word and deed as a neoliberal economically and a neoconservative politically - most notably her key vote for the Bush-led war of aggression on the people of Iraq and her recent moves to lead and promote wars around the middle east, including opposition to peace with Iran.

However, this discussion should have ended with her invocation of the war criminal and genocidaire, Henry Kissinger, as a guy whose good opinion she values. Of course, it should have ended back in the 1990s somewhere: with NAFTA, or the imposition of workfare, etc. This person does not care about working women or men, or people generally. She is a party establishment figure backed by the billions of the banking industry, nothing more.

[mcar]

55. A very good question

According to some on this board, Republicans are not the problem.

[99Forever]

59. Let me fix that for you:

A very loaded question.

According to most on this board, Republicans are not the only problem.

========================================

No need to thank me, it's how I roll.

[TTUBatfan2008]

86. Republicans are a big part of the problem...

So are the corporate-owned politicians in the Democratic Party. They are selling out the people of this country for their own personal gain. FDR would be ashamed of the economic policies we've seen from the likes of Robert Rubin and Larry Summers.

[randome]

60. It's too hard and we're lazy?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

[Vattel]

63. Because we are in the middle of a primary in which the two candidates

are very different in important ways.

[Fumesucker]

67. In this forum? Because it will get locked as off-topic like this OP should be..

[LWolf]

69. Tell you what.

Quit trying to make neo-liberal Hillary Rodham Clinton the Democratic nominee, and I'll gladly forget she exists.

As for Republicans? We'll be going after them with all guns loaded when we're running against them. Meanwhile, you can find people going after Republicans in GD, since this forum is for the Democratic Primaries, not for Republican candidates.

[jeff47]

70. Because there's still the little matter of a primary election.

Sorry that you are not getting to skip it.

[ljm2002]

77. Um, because we're in the PRIMARIES right now?

Just a thought.

BTW, who is "we"? I note you did not ask "Why we are not going after the Republicans? Instead of Bernie Sanders."

Please. There are two candidates vying for the Democratic nomination. Of necessity, they and we must differentiate by drawing contrasts between them and their policies.

Yes it gets heated, and yes it is sometimes unfair. Goes both ways. That's politics.

[ancianita]

93. Heated is Democratic. Unfair is Republican. GE behavior has no place in a party primary.

"That's politics" is a phrase best saved for the General Election between parties.

[pansypoo53219]

80. DUH!

[Odin2005]

81. I'm against Democrats who act like Republicans.

[thesquanderer]

82. Because it's not nice to pick on the mentally challenged. (n/t)

[asuhornets]

95. Good one..

[Lucinda]

90. DU, in the past, was very much about taking action - writing letters, making petitions

calling elected officials, and taking all sorts of action in supporting Dems and Dem policies.

People were much better informed then.
Now it's mostly what you see happening on these pages during elections.
GD is a much more thoughtful area of the website. IMO, GDP is just mostly noise these days.

Editing to say that we are not all Dems. A few posters have said they are not and will never be Dems, but only support Sanders.

[ancianita]

92. Good question. Why are we manufacturing all the Repubs' ammunition for the general election!