A plea for civility and respect for other DU members.

[BlueCheese]

I'm undecided between the top three Democratic candidates. I find a lot to like about all three of them, and a little to dislike about all three of them. My state votes very late, so in practice it almost doesn't matter who I end up choosing.

So here I am, checking in to see what everyone else is thinking, expecting some thoughtful discussion... and HOLY CRAP. What on earth is going on? I'm reading things on a Democratic-supporting website that are nastier than a lot of things I see from conservatives.

Two big threads by commenters I've long admired are near the top. One says, more or less, that no thoughtful person could possibly support Hillary Clinton. The other says, more or less, that black people and LGBT who support Hillary Clinton are possibly suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. I'm sure if I kept looking, I could find comment or threads by supporters of Hillary Clinton with fairly dim views about Sanders supporters as well.

But let me ask the people who post and support sentiments like this a question: Do you really believe that the only possible reason someone could support a different Democratic candidate is because they're thoughtless, corrupt, or misled? Are there no other possible explanations? Is it at all possible that they simply have an honest difference of opinion?

Can't someone look at Hillary Clinton and see someone with a lifelong dedication to helping children, women, and the middle class? Someone who is obviously very smart and tough? Is John Lewis suffering from Stockholm Syndrome? Is Howard Dean corrupt? Is Wendy Davis not thoughtful?

Can't someone look at Bernie Sanders and see a highly principled public servant who is focused on reversing the great inequalities in our society? Someone who is untouched by the dirty money that sloshes around our political system? Someone who is drawing huge crowds and who has made true-blue liberalism mainstream again?

So can we turn down the temperature here? Treat each other as reasonable people who have simply come to a different result?
And even if you still can't escape the conclusion that anyone supporting the opponent is an idiot, consider that insulting someone's morals, judgment, or values is not a good way to get them to like you or the cause you're supporting.

Thank you for reading. I apologize if this came off as preachy. I really like what DU represents, and I hate seeing this kind of internecine fighting.

[still_one]

1. It would be nice if that occurred wouldn't it

[Chitown Kev]

2. I'm an undecided voter as well

who likes both of the candidates.

I am also a black gay man.

By every poll of this race that I have ever seen, Bernie Sanders will need to win a large number of those who support Hillary Clinton right now.

And the type of insults that I've seen aren't the way to win a sufficient number of Clinton supporters, much less an undecided voter like myself.

[orpupilofnature57]

56. Listen to Bernie not us, it's not a popularity contest, and We're not the issues .

[Chitown Kev]

72. Then many of his supporters should do

what Bernie does.

I'm listening to him. Some things I like, some things I don't.

[orpupilofnature57]

76. That's reasonable .

[CaliforniaPeggy]

3. Even though I have settled on who I will vote for, I agree with you.

All the sniping, innuendo, anger and what not does not do anyone any good.

It hurts to read.

[sabrina 1]

4. You missed some of the best OPs, the ones that call Bernie and his supporters White Supremicists,

Racists, Commies etc.

But I ignore them. I'm happy with my decision. Hillary harmed children greatly when she helped push the dreadful Welfare Reform Bill and was still proud of it when she ran in her last election.

I see the results of that terrible, Right Wing legislation every day.

One in six children go to bed hungry now in the US.

War devastates women and children.

Hillary IS a war hawk.

So because I care so deeply about children and women who are struggling to maked, now without some of the safety nets they once had, thanks to the Welfare Reform Billl, not to mention all the dead children whose photos I cannot get out of my memory in Iraq, in Pakistan etc, I could not in conscience support anyone who played even a minor role in causing these travesties.

I discuss all these things evey day with people with no problem, just not on DU.

[jfern]

5. Don't forget angry white men

The new meme is that all Bernie supporters are angry white men.

[BlueCheese]

24. I didn't see those, because I've only been back for a day or two.

Those posts sound as reprehensible as the ones I mentioned myself.

Sabrina, I remember your name from when I used to visit more regularly. I always enjoy your posts.

I fully understand that you have chosen a candidate. I like Sanders a lot myself. However, do you agree with the sentiments of the posts I've mentioned that state that voters who support another candidate must not be thinking, corrupt, or suffering from Stockholm Syndrome? Or do you agree that they might be thoughtful, reasonable, people as well?

[orpupilofnature57]

57. One is an altruist the other a Misanthrope. PERIOD.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

6. I am definitely sympathetic to your plea.

I have strived (sometimes unsuccessfully) to be civil on this board. I am still generally trying to maintain a civil tone towards others on this forum.

Frankly, though, I am more concerned by the conduct of two candidates in the first debate. I wish all candidates would try to maintain honesty and ethics in their campaigns, but that is not happening, imo. Sorry if this point is off topic, but I believe I have objective reasons for my concerns about some candidates. So, I have changed my tone about some candidates, because of my perception of their ethics.

[aikoaiko]

7. We need to speak frankly. Will we nominate someone to the right of Obama or to the left.

I know what I want.

[mindwalker_i]

8. Screw civility, this is who we are

All of us get caught up in what we believe is good for the country. For anyone who is aware of what's going on politically, this is what happens and I'm good with it. It may not be kittens and rainbows but it is what it means to be human.

And hillary sux!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

9. "Screw civility, this is who we are..."

"Screw civility, this is who we are..."

If you truly want free and unfettered argument and debate petition the Administrator to abandon the jury system so posters can't use it to silence their adversaries.

[cui bono]

11. Yeah, it's a shame how cali was alert stalked.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

41. The irony is an entire group of posters were targeted for...

The irony is an entire group of posters were targeted on this board, many of whom aren't even supporters of Hillary Clinton.

Well, DemocratSinceBirth is one guy who isn't going to be silenced, at least not willingly.

The youngsters says "don't hate the player, hate the game", well DemocratSinceBirth is learning how to play this game.

[cui bono]

91. What group are you talking about?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

92. The group that was targeted.

eom

[cui bono]

93. What group are you talking about?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

95. See Post #92

eom

[cui bono]

98. What group are you talking about?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

99. See Post #95

eom

[cui bono]

101. And here you always try to sound so reasonable yet you refuse to answer a simple question,

choosing instead to play some childish game.

What do they call that in psychology?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

102. By identifying the group that has been targeted I will be compounding the

By identifying the group that has been targeted I will only be compounding the pain that has been inflicted on them. That is a place I will not and can not go. They have suffered enough.

[cui bono]

103. Thank you for caring so much about Bernie supporters.

I really appreciate it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

104. I care about everybody. That's why I am a liberal.

eom

[stevenleser]

43. That person was getting hides and timeouts before the primary race started. Nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

44. I went ELEVEN AND ONE HALF YEARS before getting a hide.

Some folks, suddenly, don't like what I have to say.

[Skidmore]

87. Happening too often and

long time members are being driven away and blamed for being forced out.

[cui bono]

90. Doesn't change the fact that cali was alert stalked by a MIRT member.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=622710

[stevenleser]

105. It does change the facts actually. Since 85% of DUers support Bernie the vast majority

Of the votes to hide were by Bernie supporters.

You say alert stalked, I say a group of folks noted her behavior exceeded DU standards and juries kept agreeing.

[cui bono]

106. So you didn't go to the link I provided then. It's a clear cut case once you see the evidence.

I do agree that if one does not post hide-worthy or questionably close posts the chances lessen, however, that link shows proof that cali was being alert stalked.

There's another screenshot that shows Chae saying "our juries" on a list of posts over at the Clinton Cave. That should be alarming to EVERYONE on DU that a group of disgruntled DUers sets up a site for the purpose of directing hate to DUers they disagree with and targets them for alert stalking and then manipulates the system to get their own jury.

Would you not agree that that is just wrong?

[mythology]

107. Which doesn't change the fact that her posting style earned the

First four hides.

If you know you have for hides and continue to insult and belittle people, you only have yourself to blame. It's not like a single instance caused her to get a time out.

[Mojorabbit]

89. +1000 nt

[mindwalker_i]

80. That's definitely not what I said

We fight, it happens. One can fight without being an asshole.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

82. What is the opposite of civility to you?

"Screw civility, this is who we are..."

I would argue that being uncivil to someone is tantamount to being an "asshole" to that person.

[Utopian Leftist]

109. Civility is always good

until it is used by someone as a cover for the truth.

When being civil prevents anyone from telling the truth, being civil is no longer necessarily called for.

Are there diplomatic ways to express hard truths? Sure. Sometimes. At other times, one is forced to yell, "STALKER!" or other such accusation.

"The truth will set you free, though not without pissing you off, first." ~ Gloria Steinem

[MoonRiver]

79. Speak for yourself. IMHO, humanity should embrace compassion and civility.

But we're all "different" lol.

[cui bono]

10. These sorts of OPs would be better if they were even handed.

I agree with your sentiment, however, when you present your plea in such a one sided manner I don't think you are going to get the result you would like.

As sabrina mentioned you must have missed a lot of OPs. In addition to what she mentioned there was the infamous "Not Enough, Bernie" where an attempt was made to paint him as a flat out racist by posting a vile, racist pic. The same poster of that one has posted many OPs against Bernie that are flat out lies about both his beliefs on racism and on guns.

The new thing is to call Bernie supporters "truthers" or "conspiracy nuts" because I guess all of a sudden every word the MSM pundits utter is to be believed.

And there's the website for Hillary supporters that was created as a place to spew hatred and more toward Bernie and his DU supporters.

So yes, it would be a better place if everyone was more civil and didn't try to smear monger so much but based on what I've seen that just ain't gonna happen.

[BlueCheese]

23. I admit I didn't do a deep scour.

I looked at two posts, by people whose names I recognize, and looked into them. I've been absent for a while, because the last time I was here I recoiled at some of the rancor. It looks like it's only gotten worse.

As I said, I'm sure there have been bad things written by every side. I'm not saying one side or another is on the side of the angels here.

[Fumesucker]

37. Here's a little experiment you can do..

Post something that isn't about DU, doesn't attack any candidate, is interesting and revealing while still being relevant to the primaries and see how many replies you get.

Or you could just go and look at this..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251669554

[ms liberty]

47. I gave that thread a rec, it was a good piece. n/t

[Major Hogwash]

75. That's true, too.

Back in 2004 when Kerry was busy trying to get more voters to vote for him, some people who were so-called journalists claimed Kerry was pandering to the right.
Whereas Kerry just viewed them as Americans who may possibly vote for him that year.

Odd that it was an idea that Kerry would have, to simply view those people as potential voters because they were American citizens, after all.
Instead of thinking of them as brain-eating zombies from "red states" who survived by feeding on the corpses of liberals, via the way some journalists portrayed that campaign season.

Kerry bent over backwards to try and convince people he wasn't the debbil, but the media cried out for more of his blood, and the rest was history.

So, now we've got some half-assed famous cowboy singer and Ben Affleck doing commercials on tv begging for money for the wounded veterans of the Iraq War!!
"For a donation of only $18 dollars a month . . . "

Yet, more people died as a result of poor healthcare insurance in this country than were killed in the Iraq War and in the War in Afghanistan combined!!
Nevertheless, the mainstream media won't talk about that little factoid!!!!

It's not a patriotic, flag-waving issue deemed fit for the masses, dontcha ya know.
Can't bring that issue up while the Republicans in Boehnor's House of Horrors were busy voting 56 times to overturn Obamacare!!!!

[tblue]

55. I second that & it does turn me elsewhere

away from this site and from those who generalize and spread untruths, to put it PC.

[treestar]

62. Unlike in the real world, there are more BS supporters here than HRC ones

There is a lot more vitriol from BS supporters for that reason. That's why HRCs fled to the other site. Also I have a hard time believing the BS supporters don't have their own sites. That complaint is silly.

[TM99]

65. No. There is no Sanders support site

where we call her and her supporters names.

[cui bono]

100. So much wrong in your post. Especially the reason HRC supporters created that hate filled site.

That site was only about spewing hate towards DU, Bernie and DU Bernie supporters. It was not there to talk about issues. We all saw that the Issues forum wasn't opened for posting until the site was ridiculed on DU for what it was, a cesspool of hatred and filth.

And regardless of how many supporters each candidate has on DU, that doesn't change what I said about being even handed in the OP.

Then you throw out some baseless comment speculating about BS supporters having their own site. Yeah there are sites made by Bernie supporters, here's a couple:
feelthebern.org
http://forberniesanders.com/

Oh, you were expecting some hate spewing sites that rivaled the Clinton Cave? I do not think those exist. That kind of vitriol is reserved to a particular type of person and I have yet to see any of it from a Bernie supporter. I'm sure it exists somewhere, in someone, but I haven't seen it. Bernie supporters have a lot of positive things to say about their candidate and most of what I see posted on DU reflects that. Hillary supporters on DU don't seem to trumpet their candidate's virtues so much as try to tear Bernie and his supporters down with smear mongering. Unfortunately, you have to temper your words and feelings on DU due to the community standards. That's why HRC supporters "fled to the other site" to avoid standards based on civility.

[olddots]

12. complaining about complaining

about complaining about complaining is enough to make me complain about complaining about complaining .

[NotHardly]

13. here here

Yeah, I've gotten kicked twice for not agreeing with a couple of groups and am tired of all the lambasting that goes on and if you disagree with someone or group they run for the monitors who seem to be of like mind ... so much for democratic, if you will.

There is still a year ahead. I think we can all pretty much agree that it would be terrible for the Republicans to gain the Presidency, so, for my money, everyone in the race who is a Democrat is a boat load better than any Republican, however, if we keep bashing and trashing, we'll end up cutting our own throats.

[JDPriestly]

14. I'm all for civility, but the stakes are too high in this primary season to cause me to value

being polite over getting the right Democratic candidate.

You pointed your finger to the crucial issue in this primary season when you wrote:

Can't someone look at Hillary Clinton and see someone with a lifelong dedication to helping children, women, and the middle class? Someone who is obviously very smart and tough? Is John Lewis suffering from Stockholm Syndrome? Is Howard Dean corrupt? Is Wendy Davis not thoughtful?

Can't someone look at Bernie Sanders and see a highly principled public servant who is focused on reversing the great inequalities in our society? Someone who is untouched by the dirty money that sloshes around our political system? Someone who is drawing huge crowds and who has made true-blue liberalism mainstream again?

This election is about the corruption in our government.

Bernie Sanders is the first candidate in my lifetime to strongly and positively oppose corruption. Not only is he opposing the corruption that our campaign finance customs and laws encourage, but he is living his opposition by refusing contributions over $2700 per person and campaigning without the backup of one or more superpacs.

Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, although strong on certain issues like women and children (Bernie is just as strong on those issues and stronger on the race and prison and many other issues) is mired in the corruption right up to her neck. She is taking the money from the wealthy, the Wall Street billionaires, anyone who will cough it up.

Bernie is, in my opinion, our last chance to maybe get clean government at least for a few years.

I want a Bernie appointee heading the Department of Justice. I want a Bernie appointee heading the Commerce Department, the Agriculture Department, the Labor Department, the Treasury and every other department in the government.

The TPP would not exist; it would not be a question to argue about in this election, were it not for the extreme corruption throughout our government.

We would not have gone to war in Iraq and would not be concerned about war in Syria were it not for the corruption in our government.

We would be dealing with climate change in a rational way and would have reduced our carbon emissions to far less than they are now had it not been for the extreme amount of corruption in our government -- and especially the influence of the oil and gas and coal industries.

I know it is troubling for nice people to come to a website like DU and find so many nasty posts, so much argument, so much turmoil.

But, I am a 72-year-old woman, and I tell you, the stakes have never in my life or the lives of my parents and grandparents been this high.

The industrial revolution, the advent of the automobile and all the wonderful inventions we enjoy -- hey, the internet and cell phones and medical advances, and on and on, have given us great lives, great opportunities but the energy we burn when we use those amenities are killing our planet.

And it is the corruption in our government that prevents us from dealing with the slow destruction of our planet that is happening as we type.

Corruption. That is the issue in this election.

You pointed to it yourself.

Hillary represents business as usual. Her huge financial backing, her big donors, they represent the polluters of the world, those who view the future of our planet as not their problem. There is no way that a candidate can amass the sums that Hillary has pulled together without taking from the polluters and the destroyers of our earth.

Corruption -- that is what I am voting against this primary season, and that is why I am voting for Bernie Sanders.

We each have to make up our own minds.

I have made my decision.

[aidbo]

21. With you.

[BlueCheese]

22. Fine, I totally understand that. Congratulations on your choice of candidate.

But why are there posts insulting the voters of the other candidate?

[Ed Suspicious]

26. That's a great question. Sincerely, Berniebro.

[JDPriestly]

31. Beats me.

People are angry and don't know how to talk intelligently about the issues I think.

Our political campaigns have for so many years, just as Bernie says, been about the gossip that is associated with the candidates and their staffs that people don't know how to discuss the issues.

I think that Bernie is a breath of fresh air.

I was very proud of him when, in the debate, he supported Hillary with regard to the e-mail scandal. I think that Hillary is wrong on a lot of issues and very poorly informed on many of them -- Snowden for example -- but the e-mails happened. They shouldn't have happened. With the exception that they reflect the bad judgment that Hillary has shown repeatedly, the e-mails are pretty irrelevant.

I want a campaign on the issues -- and corruption is one of them.

I can't help but notice however, that Hillary is often uninformed or misinformed on issues like the inefficacy of what passes for whistleblower protection for intelligence services employees and many other details of the laws of our country.

I don't know why those of us who support our candidates are discussed so much. Just human nature maybe.

[BlueCheese]

32. I agree with almost all of this.

I thought Sanders defending Clinton on the email story was a great moment of statesmanship.

I was very disappointed in almost all of their answers on Snowden. Sanders at least acknowledged that Snowden educated the public about a lot of what was going on, but all of them except Chafee still wanted him to be punished.

[JDPriestly]

40. I heard Snowden answer a question about coming back to the US.

I gather from his answer that he expects to receive a reasonably reduced sentence in exchange for being able to return.

I don't think he expected to avoid some punishment for being a whistleblower.

But the anger that Hillary and O'Malley expressed and Webb too I believe toward Snowden is unwarranted in my view. Snowden did a service to many people in the world, especially us Americans who had been told shortly before Snowden revealed the truth, that there was no intentional spying on us. A terrible lie. And that liar is of course above the Constitution and above any law so --- Snowden will probably pay and is paying for telling us the truth, while the liars and the spies on Americans are viewed as heroes. Strange world we live in.

[in_cog_ni_to]

70. HUGE, GINORMOUS HIGH FIVE!

Thank you! That pretty much says it all.

Corruption is at the root of what's wrong with this country.

[cui bono]

94. +1,000,000

[Le Taz Hot]

15. It's the primaries. This is GD-P

There is rancor. If you're uncomfortable, instead of demanding that everyone fall in line and sing Kum Ba Ya, which NO ONE is ready to do yet (if ever), then there are lots of other forums and groups that I'm sure would be more to your liking. These "lets all get along" threads are posted 30 times a week and have been totally ineffective so I've no idea why anyone would think they'd be effective now.

[BlueCheese]

25. I'm not saying people should agree.

I'm wondering why we can't disagree politely, without maligning each other's morals or thought processes.

[Le Taz Hot]

33. See my subject line.

Already answered.

[merrily]

46. Le Taz Hot's post said nothing about agreeing.

[TM99]

36. And bluntly every single one of these Kum Ba Ya

let's get along threads always castigate Sanders supporters, use posts from Sanders supporters as examples, and never do the same to Clinton supporters.

There were some vile posts on display yesterday from Clinton supporters, several of which got juried. Are those ever mentioned? Fuck no.

[treestar]

52. There are some hides

of posts that merely state what Sanders has done. If the jury has enough Sanders supporters, they will hide anything they don't like. Pretend to be the victim when you are more numerous - not buying.

[TM99]

64. Try again Treestar.

This is not factually correct.

Here is one such example --

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251694857

Does that have anything to do with what Sanders has done? No. It was a blatant meta trolling of Sanders supporters.

[Bluenorthwest]

66. So here's the thing. If the results of a poster's work harms the candidate they are claiming to tout

you have to at least question the voracity of their support and the true objectives of their personal attacks on their peers. Any old fucker can put on a Bernie shirt and run around DU saying 'What's wrong with the blacks and gays'. Does that really assist Bernie? No. It harms him, hurts the reputation of his cohort and generally degrades the discussion and debate away from the issues and to personalities. That is the absolute opposite of what Bernie does, he insists upon issue based discussion, rejects petty personality politics, rejects negative campaigning and he speaks of policy, ideas, issues and progress.

So every single campaign that has ever been has seen persons who pose as candidate supporters in order to make the candidate look bad.

So I am not a chump. I look to the results of a poster's actions, not to the press release the poster puts out about themselves. If a person claims to support Bernie and does nothing but make other Democrats pissed off about Bernie and his supporters, that person is not a Bernie supporter but consciously or not, that person is a rat fucker.
On the internet, people say 'I am a Bernie supporter' or 'Hillary supporter' or 'a Nigerian Prince who needs your help' . Are any of those statements inherently true simply for being said?

[TheFarS1de]

110. You too have noticed a pattern ?

It does seem odd that it does always insinuate via a Sanders supporters post that there is really only an issue on one side , this is disingenuous at best . I take these posts for what they are , little more than a distraction . Sorry OP but if the shoe fits ....

[merrily]

48. +1

[Bubzer]

16. It's going to get worse, not better, before election season is over.

There are a whole host of reasons why it'll get worse, and very few reasons for it to get better. Most of it has to do with personal insults that have gotten worse and worse, and a heavy dose of confirmation bias. Its a pretty caustic combo. It drives reason away enough to make one wonder if someone got Trump exposure.

There's been too many insults cast and too many hurt feelings for this to go away anytime soon.

Emotions tend to rule people here.

[Zorra]

17. Hillary is going to prevent us from getting single payer healthcare and affordable college

for our children and grandchildren. I want my grandkids to be able to afford to go to college. I want to have a healthcare system where I don' have to spend my half my free time fighting with health insurance companies who will do everything in their power to cheat me if I am not vigilant.

Hillary is going to prevent us from getting the substantial hike in the minimum wage that we need desperately need.

She is more likely to go to war at the behest of corporations. She may cut social security. She will continue the deadly neoliberal assault on our environment and labor unions. She will increase privatization, and give more of our rights and democratic power away to oligarchs.

Hillary is simply not even going to try to take our country anywhere near where we desperately need to go.

Many people are not happy about these things. Bernie supporters have every right to question why Hillary supporters want to elect someone who will very likely irreparably damage our chances of giving our children and grandchildren the kind future they deserve.

So, like, WTF, you know?

[BlueCheese]

29. Do you think this kind of questioning of Clinton supporters will help convince them?

If you tell somebody no reasonable person could possibly believe what they believe, does that make them agree with you, or hold more firmly to their beliefs?

The same thing goes the other way. Telling a Sanders supporter that no sane person thinks he could win a general election isn't going to help anything either.

[treestar]

63. That's just way out there

on par with right wing levels of way out there where she will have us become a Marxist nation - Obama's already started that!

[in_cog_ni_to]

74. INDEED, WTF?

It makes no sense when people vote against their own best interests. Which leads me to believe they're not, which makes them just like her and the people/entities she represents.

They are wealthy, don't care about their fellow citizens, they work for /own/represent Corporations or work for/represent Wall St. They're thinking of themselves, not others. No empathy. OR, they're female and want a female President. It's all about ME, ME, ME. And that, my friend, is NOT Progressive values.

[McCamy Taylor]

18. Great OP. Sadly, only "Clinton is a Poo Head" will get rated up at the current DU.

[Ed Suspicious]

28. Don't forget "Bernie supporters are such Poo Heads." That's a classic.

[LostOne4Ever]

19. Why can't I rec this post more than once?

[font style="font-family:'papyrus','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=8 color=crimson][center]WHY~[font size=12]!?[/center][/font][/font]

[Spitfire of ATJ]

20. "I hate seeing this kind of internecine fighting."

Did you see the epic match in '08 between Obama and Hillary?

[NBachers]

27. Well, you opened the Gates of Hate with this post, didn't you?

I find myself skimming subject lines and avoiding the vast majority of posts. I'm still here multiple times a day, but I've got no time for the entrenched, fundamentalist hatred.

[cwydro]

30. Good post.

I'm on the fence too, and I'm sickened by the intolerance/hatred that I'm seeing on both sides.

[Aerows]

34. While we need to be more civil in general

me being civil doesn't include not supporting the candidate that I favor. That seems to be a major gripe.

I am not going to stop saying why I support my candidate. I'm not going to stop attempting to get others to vote for my candidate. In real life, I'm not going to stop telling people about my candidate, volunteering to help register voters and trying new things to get voters to pull the metaphoric lever for my candidate.

On that note, I'm also not going to quit pushing for fair polls. The software involved in electronic voting is of extreme concern to me.

It might not matter who you actually vote for if we have vote flipping - somebody else will decide who you, me and every other voter "voted" for.

If anybody here wants to call that a conspiracy theory and isn't concerned about it, I welcome their explanation on why they think it is invulnerable black box code.

[Fumesucker]

35. Don't blame the players when the game is the real culprit

The game isn't broken, the game is fixed.

Some of us see that and some don't or won't.

Here is what one well known DUer posted in 2008 in his own blog..

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_steven_l_080320_hillary_clinton_s_re.htm

In fact, the documents released today show a meeting that Hillary chaired at the White House on November 10, 1993 where she promoted the passage of NAFTA to 120 people. Reports are coming out in every news agency pointing out the contradictions between her stated positions since announcing her bid for the Presidency and everything before that.

One of the things you would expect of someone who really has good experience and judgment is that they can articulate a basic set of principles and positions on issues that they can run on and defend and that stay relatively static. I'm not saying you have to stick to them in the face of overwhelming evidence that one of your positions has been proven to be wrong, like George W. Bush does, even someone who has good experience and judgment occasionally changes their mind. That is not what we have with Hillary. Hillary gives a different opinion on the same subjects every couple of weeks depending on her audience and what she thinks it will net her. As evidence of this is now coming out and is going to be presented to the American people in the starkest terms, how can one be expected to trust her to do anything that she says she is going to do? How can one really know what she believes or intends to do about anything? The only things Hillary's experience seems to be good for is perfecting how to talk out of both sides of her mouth, engaging in the politics of personal destruction and other aspects of her ruthless pursuit of power that remind one of what a Karl Rove might do. That kind of person ought not to be the Democratic nominee.

This DUer has now changed his mind and after comparing her with Karl Rove in 2008 now thinks Hillary is the most qualified candidate for the Presidency in history.

Go and read the thread where that information was revealed, it's quite enlightening as to what's happening here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251658816

[Major Hogwash]

42. Don't hate the players . . . hate the game!!

Most players don't even know that the game is designed to feed fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

And ultimately, hatred for the others, those who don't have fears, uncertainties, or doubts.

[bobGandolf]

38. Hope this thread is relatively new, ...

because if it is not there should be a hell of a of REC's.

[RiverLover]

39. April '14: "Hillary Clinton and the Future Failure of Progressive Hope and Change"

Why a run by the undeclared frontrunner demands upending the corporate wing of the Democratic Party
by John Atcheson
Common Dreams

..........And yes, gender equality is a critical issue, but don’t hold your breath looking for progress from Hillary. She’s likely to do as much for women, as Barack Obama has done for African Americans – which is to say damn little, other than a better brand of rhetoric.

So before we proceed with her coronation, maybe it’s time to think back to the 2004 campaign, and the early days of Barack Obama’s candidacy and Presidency.

Remember “hope and change?” At the time, few thought to ask what exactly we were hoping for and what exactly we were changing to.

And of course, what we got was a great slogan, better speeches, very little change and even less hope.

Here’s what Obama promised:

Shutting down Gitmo;
Ending warrantless wiretapping;
Ending foreign wars;
An end to trickle down economics;
Greater regulation of Wall Street and the financial sector;
A public option for health care;
Protecting social security, Medicaid and Medicare;
Serious action on climate change;
Greater equality in opportunity and more broadly shared prosperity …

Here’s what we got: An administration that set up Goldman Sachs south in the Treasury, doubled down on domestic spying; expanded a drone policy that creates between 40 to 60 new terrorists for every one it kills; health care reform that is better than the status quo, but which rewards corporate insurers as much or more than it does citizens; international trade agreements that favor corporate interests, while eviscerating domestic wages, scuttling environmental performance, and crippling US industrial infrastructure. It’s so bad, they’re trying to negotiate it in secret …

The list goes on and on, and so do the betrayals.

Apologists for the DLC branch of the Democratic Party will say Obama had no choice – he was constrained by Congress. But he practiced a brand of preemptive capitulation that meant we always ended up carrying corporate water, and satisfying military imperialists while ignoring or discounting citizens’ civil rights and welfare.

So now enter Hillary Clinton and the deluded Democrats who jones for her Presidency. Maybe it’s time to ask what, specifically, we will get; what we can hope for, and whether it will usher in changes Americans overwhelmingly want (more about this, in a bit).

And here’s the answer – If we nominate Hillary Clinton we will get another DLC Democrat who mouths progressive values during the campaign, then shifts to the right when (and if) elected. In short, citizens get no real choice.

The problem with this isn’t simply that it’s morally bankrupt; economically bad for 95% of Americans; bad for the economy in general; bad for the environment; bad for US competitiveness; and devastating for our children’s future climate – it’s ultimately bad politics, too.

Here’s the deal – the dirty little secret that plutocrats and corporatists in both Parties don’t want us to know: The vast majority of Americans favor progressive policies. Consider:

— 90% of the citizens support legislation requiring background checks for gun purchase, but Congress can’t pass one.

— 74% of Americans want to end subsidies to big oil – but there’s no chance of it happening;

— The majority of citizens favored allowing tax cuts for those earning over $250,000 to expire, but the best we could do is compromise on $400,000

— 70% of Americans consider climate change to be a high priority issue, yet Congress has taken no action;

— Some 80% of Americans favor shoring up Social Security even if it means higher taxes and a similar number support retaining Medicare as is, but we’ve twice offered cuts to both programs as part of a “grand bargain”;

— Or take this gem … more than 80% of Americans want to clamp down on Wall Street but the best we could get was weak-sister legislation that is being completely eviscerated as it is translated into regulations.

This list could be extended across a broad range of issues. The fact is, the people’s interests aren’t being represented in Washington and they won’t be if Hillary Clinton is elected. Her record is clear. She’s an ardent proponent of trade agreements; she’s consistently supported the interests of Wall Street over Main Street; she’s been hawkish on foreign policy; weak on civil protections; hawkish on the deficit (until very recently) and mum on many other issues that demand a progressive advocate.

Yes, she’s beginning to veer to the left in preparation for the primaries, but haven’t we had enough of this?

Wouldn’t it be interesting to see a candidate who actually represented the peoples’ interests tackle the usual corporatists who win the Democratic nominations? Not to mention the sycophantic Republicans who so obviously dance to the tunes of the likes of Addelson, the Koch Brothers and Wall Street?

The fact is we can wage and win a war for a progressive candidate, and we have potential candidates who speak for the people. Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, the Progressive Congressional Caucus – each offers common sense and popular alternatives to the corrosive forces of corporatism that is eroding our Democracy.

Corporate money can trump everything but the vote. In the age of the Internet, we can take over this Party. We can raise our own money and turn out our own candidates. We can bypass the bought and paid for media and reach people directly with a message they are dying to hear.

Doubt that? Think back to 2011, when income inequality was a non-issue, ignored by the media and candidates alike. Between September 2011 and October 2011, the Occupy movement erupted, making income inequality one of the main issues in the 2012 election.

We must occupy the Democratic Party. Yes, as constructed, it’s little more than Republican lite – answerable to corporate overlords. But we can change that. We can insist on candidates who represent the people.

Take a look at those polling numbers again – if we used the tools of the Internet to raise money and advocate popular progressives, we just might be able to beat back the plutocrats. It’s at least worth a try.

So let’s go for it. Let’s occupy the Democratic Party.

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. )

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/04/17/hillary-clinton-and-future-failure-progressive-hope-and-change

(Bold for emphasis is my own)

^^^^^^ This is pretty much what it is all about for me personally, and I suspect many others here. And it helps explain why we are so against this likely "Democratic" front runner.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

60. Whoomp, there it is. nt

[TM99]

68. Damn!

If this is not already an OP unto itself, it sure ought to be.

Please post this. It is spot on!

[akbacchus_BC]

45. Seems to me that the owners of DU is quite comfortable

with the discussion on here among members. Correct me if am wrong, if civility is being compromised, the owners will be the first to want civility restore.

[ColesCountyDem]

58. You're exactly right.

The Admins consciously decided to allow DU evolve into a site that 'looks like what the members want it to look like', essentially. Although the TOS and SOP are in place to establish fundamental principles and rules of conduct, the members themselves determine what acceptable or unacceptable conduct is, via the jury system.

We've both been here long enough to know that what DU looks like today is almost certainly not what DU will look like after the party decides who our nominee will be.

[treestar]

49. It's become performance art, a parody

People on the right convince themselves of things like Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya. People here seem to have convinced themselves Hillary is a Wall Street supporting oligarch and a warmonger. It is funny how the parody of Hillary from the right would make the left happy and how the parody of Hillary from the left would astonish a right winger.

[betsuni]

54. This comment is perfect. nt

[RiverLover]

61. Perfectly ignorant.

We actually look at facts & WHAT IS to come to the conclusion that "Hillary is a Wall Street supporting oligarch and a warmonger."

Conflating that with rethug lies is despicable.

[betsuni]

67. Hey, nonny no!

Men are fools that wish to die!
is't not fine to dance and sing
When the bells of death do ring?
Is't not fine to swim in wine,
And turn upon the toe,
And sing Hey, nonny no!
When the winds blow and the seas flow?
Hey, nonny no!

[merrily]

50. Le Taz Hot nailed it. Ignore, hide thread and hide forum are your friends and effective. Use them.

Believing that your OP is going to change DU is not effective.

[bigwillq]

51. Politics is dirty and nasty.

I love the fighting! I love primary season on DU. IT's the most wonderful time of the year!

[tblue]

53. I'm hating it

Yep, the DU Civil War is a drag.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

59. Civility is fine.

But it takes ignorance, willful or otherwise to support Clinton. That, or simply being one of the people who benefits from the current status quo and is fine with it continuing.

John Lewis? Wendy Davis? Both doing pretty well with the status quo.

[99Forever]

69. This is perhaps our LAST chance to take back government.

As such, opinions are justifiably strong. Vetting the next President COMPLETELY, is CRITICAL. If you are going to hang out on this board, I highly suggest you grow a thicker skin and understand that it isn't going to turn into a coffee klatsch because someone pleads for "civility." There's too damn much at stake and the filthy rich bastards are pulling out ALL of the stops to keep the rest of us under their thumb.

Time to pick a side and take a stand or get the fuck out of the way. This is for keeps.

[in_cog_ni_to]

77. CNN - TIME WARNER

"the filthy rich bastards are pulling out ALL of the stops to keep the rest of us under their thumb"

[TBF]

71. Calls for civility are always the first defense of the status quo -

People who are generally well off and doing ok under this inequitable system want to discuss things "reasonably".

Ask Sandra Bland if she feels like "being reasonable" got her anywhere. Oh, wait, you can't because she's dead.

[BlueCheese]

78. Do you think personally insulting me (which your reply does) makes me like your candidate more?

Without knowing anything about my circumstances, you insinuate I'm happy with the status quo, only want "reasonableness" because I'm well off, and accuse me of the same kind of thinking that killed Sandra Bland.

[AOR]

84. Nothing insulting there...

TBF made an observation that had nothing whatsoever to do with a candidate or you personally. So thoroughly do some identity with the gentrified sensibilities of the ruling class, the voice of the boss, business as usual, and the status quo that they take any criticism of those things as a personal wound. If that's not the case - in your situation - it's not a personal insult and you wouldn't feel the need to take it as one.

[TBF]

85. You personally insult every person in poverty when you tell them to shut up

which is effectively what you did. "Either speak on my terms or don't speak at all" -- > that is what you say whether you "meant" to or not.

Fuck that.

[AOR]

83. +1

[FlaGatorJD]

73. Amen (n/t)

[BlueCheese]

81. Thanks everyone for their responses.

There are several categories of responses:

1) Explanations of why you're supporting your candidate (usually Bernie Sanders). This includes praise of Sanders and criticism of Hillary Clinton. Both are perfectly reasonable. I like him too, as I said in my OP. However, this wasn't the main focus of my OP.

2) Criticism of people who support a different candidate, using broad generalizations. This is what I was driving at in my OP. The idea that anyone who could support your opponent must be selfish, ignorant, or personally comfortable is not doing anyone any favors. It immediately shuts off any hope of discussion. And let me ask you this:

Suppose you really do believe this, that anyone rational person must inexorably support your favorite candidate. How does it help your cause to say this to someone you're trying to convince otherwise? How many opposing voters do you think will listen?

[TBF]

86. And it's meta - which is supposed to be against TOS.

Interestingly the hosts are letting it stand. And so it goes ... (with a hat tip to Mr. Vonnegut, who as my comrades will know, was also a socialist)

[olddots]

88. JDPreistly made a great point

The stakes are high for some of us here when asked if we will vote for the "chosen one " when she enevititably wins the primary is threatening to me ,my life has been lead like Bernies so much so that I become blind with anger .The stakes are huge ,this may be my last hurrah and I want want some change from this downward spiral of greed based on others misfortune .

[Chitown Kev]

96. But as someone who is a black gay man

and an undecided voter, I should not have to put up with posts that assume that I am a Clinton supporter and a victim of Stockholm Syndrome.

Remember...mine is a vote that is wanted by all of the nominees and Bernie Sanders supporters who post and/or rec and/or even hint at such a thing aren't winning my vote for their candidate

[aikoaiko]

97. Are threads calling out other threads that passed the jury system civil?

[LWolf]

108. I'm ice cold.

I can only speak for myself. I believe that I've been civil. Yes, I've seen incivility, but I'm usually able to refrain from jumping into that fray. It's a pretty simple concept. Don't feed it.

And yes, there are plenty of threads and posts with vicious attacks on Sanders supporters...there have been from the beginning.

It's a 3-way roundabout.

Are you really asking me what I see when I look at Hillary Clinton? I generally don't post about her at all. And no, I don't see what you do. I see other things.

This is really an example of what I mean by feeding the flames. Asking me what I see is simply asking me to pour fuel on the fire. So I'm not going to tell you what I see. I have, enough times, expressed my disagreements with her. I don't hate her. I never have. I've been, for at least 2 decades, cautious in offering up respect for her policies and record, but not for her person. I don't hate her. I just don't want her as POTUS.

As for her supporters? Some of them I like and respect. Some I don't. That's not going to change. You won't find me posting personal attacks.

I see all of what you post when I look at Sanders. Clearly, since he's got my support and vote.

[yodermon]

111. I agree with your sentiment, but.. This is a message board. On the Internet.

Thick skin is mandatory.

[applegrove]

112. Many a paid GOP troll here to gin up Hillary hate and

make Bernie supporters so seething angry that they refuse to vote for her if she wins the nomination. Clinton supporters readily say they would support and vote for Bernie if he wins the nomination. Try an OP asking people if they will vote for the Democratic nominee whomever that may be if you don't believe me.