2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHas anyone flipped who they are supporting due to our "discussion" here on DU?
Last edited Tue Nov 3, 2015, 08:22 PM - Edit history (1)
Honest question.
On edit: Keep in mind the key part of the question is whether who you support has flipped DUE TO our discussion on DU.
I am trying to guage whether anyone has persuaded anyone here.
It feels like we are just preaching to our own choirs.
Trajan
(19,089 posts)I have not looked back once ...
LiberalArkie
(15,716 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)The King. He doesn't need state office.
antigop
(12,778 posts)Cassiopeia
(2,603 posts)Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)bravenak started out claiming Bernie as a candidate, then briefly seemed to favour O'Malley, and is currently full on behind Clinton.
jkbRN
(850 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Response to Erich Bloodaxe BSN (Reply #4)
Post removed
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)Do you really mean that?
Response to Bread and Circus (Reply #29)
Post removed
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)Please just be honest and say it.
Implying it is worse in my view.
Response to Bread and Circus (Reply #32)
Post removed
panader0
(25,816 posts)Christopher Columbus discovered America!
merrily
(45,251 posts)panader0
(25,816 posts)The since tombstoned poster said "Columbus discovered America" about 20 times.
I was referencing that because of the repetitiousness of the above poster.
I'm no Columbus fan.
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)No hiding behind veils.
Because what you are doing is implying racism but not showing the courage of your conviction.
It is a powerful charge but if that is how you feel come out with it.
jfern
(5,204 posts)Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)We should be very direct about it.
I would rather hear it, know, where we all stand, and deal with it.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)even randy seemed to know it - basically admitting s/he would get the hide
I'm not sure there would ever have been a forthright statement owning the accusation. S/he hemmed and hawed for several posts after you directly questioned it
merrily
(45,251 posts)LiberalArkie
(15,716 posts)Went to Selma in 1965 with her son. I was her "white bread boy" :>
Romulox
(25,960 posts)Romulox
(25,960 posts)Romulox
(25,960 posts)LiberalArkie
(15,716 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Yeah, I have a problem with her right now.
It fucking sucks and it's scary as hell.
randys1
(16,286 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)seaglass
(8,171 posts)where you live on DU.
demmiblue
(36,857 posts)seaglass
(8,171 posts)delete the post.
demmiblue
(36,857 posts)classy.
polly7
(20,582 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)that bravenak now wants to smear. She wants to dictate whose "black enough". You okay with that?
That story was in a protected group and has now been disseminated out to the general forums. You okay with that?
Bravenak didn't get that story from a DU search, she got it from an online search from my email account that she stalked me for. She's said that out loud, in Manny's thread. You okay with that?
You have time to delete unless you too are invested in further exposing a person's personal info on DU. That is a violation of the TOS.
Bravenak has become unhinged in her obsession with anyone who crosses her. This whole thing started when she alert stalked me for confronting her. That hide is clearly evident on my transparency page.
This is scary stalking. You're putting my personal ID out there for even greater exposure. You think that's okay? You want to be a part of that? Really? It's sick.
seaglass
(8,171 posts)should delete it if you don't want it available to anyone who views this site. I will delete my link but that does not make the information you posted disappear.
I like Bravenak and frankly your post doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)No one. Not even Bravenak. It's in the fucking genealogy forum where I assumed the members were colleagues, not crazy stalkers. Where a post every three months means things are hopping. So yeah, I actually did have a reasonable expectation of privacy (in Internet terms). I certainly never expected the exposure to come from within.
And frankly, she didn't find that story on DU, she got it from me direct from the
Chicago Tribune article. I gave her the link to make sure she knew I was bi-racial. I never linked DU to this story. Only the Trib. Anyone searching for it on DU2 had to be pretty dedicated to finding it.
Whoever has dug up the old DU2 link is simply backtracking.
I'm well aware that everything we put online is there forever. I'll delete the post but it doesn't mean it's ever erased.
Thanks to you.
Edited to
Edited to add that you'd have to have my real name to find that post. I did a Google search and a DU search. Either you or Bravenak are still stalking me to retrieve it. It's impossible otherwise.
Nice.
edgineered
(2,101 posts)Romulox
(25,960 posts)Autumn
(45,096 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Cosmic Kitten
(3,498 posts)Do a site search, see for yourself.
But here's the deal.
Bernie's supporters support him
because he support them...
the way Government is supposed to work!
Hillary's supporters tend to the *bandwagon*
mode of candidate support.
They don't like Bernie because of his supporters,
yet they love Hillary because they want to
be on her team. The *Fanwagon* effect.
See how this works?
Bernie folks want responsible government.
Hillary folks want to be on the *winning* team.
redwitch
(14,944 posts)I think that suggesting they do not isn't fair, isn't nice and does not move discussion forward in any meaningful way. Tired of the drama on here.
Cosmic Kitten
(3,498 posts)Hillary has a LONG track record
of supporting catastrophic polices
which have been unquestionably
irresponsible.
Iraq, NAFTA, Welfare Reform, Tough on crime.
She supported DOMA which denied civil rights.
The Clinton Doctrine destroyed Libya, and destabilized Syria...
and on and on
Hardly "responsible" government, IMO.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Instead they go on endlessly about 'Hillary is the only candidate that can win' so it is a fair point.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)Apparently many Hillary supporters have
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=763480
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Claiming ALL Hillary supporters don't want good government and are only fans is condescending, demeaning and insulting. This doesn't belong on DU.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Nov 3, 2015, 05:44 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Don't presume to fucking tell me why I support anyone.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Frivolous alert.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: LOL
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I disagree with the logic, but it is not hideworthy.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It says "many" right there in the subject line.
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Thank you jury!
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)The post must have touched that cognitive dissonance we are all observing in many of the HRC supporters. The fact of the alert succinctly legitimizes Cosmic Kitten's analysis.
Nicely done, CK.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)...and leave others to explain why they believe what they do.
I haven't flipped, and still support Bernie.
There is no fucking reason whatsoever for you to talk about others the way you do.
randys1
(16,286 posts)Cosmic Kitten
(3,498 posts)And none for you to get involve either.
Are you the internet police?
Take a chill
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)There is a difference between objecting to someone's behavior and playing armchair psychologist.
Your behavior is evidently obnoxious.
What makes you act that way I have no idea, but there is no reason for it.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)yardwork
(61,622 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)It's a beautiful evening my friend.
Prism
(5,815 posts)Which I kind of like. It identifies them as utterly unserious about politics in any substantial way. Everything they say can be immediately dismissed, because the motives are hilariously corrupt.
It's just selfish people who don't particularly care outside of their selfish preoccupations, but who invest a great deal in message board fights. Sure, people are dying in the streets, but I saw a jury on DU I didn't like! This outrage will not stand, not while I'm sitting on my ass!
The worst part is, these are ostensibly adults.
And the fact they boast of this behavior openly, as if it were a virtue . . .
Just magical.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Universe forgive someone listen to the argument of supporters of the "other side" and be swayed.
Prism
(5,815 posts)Anyone who claims they're changing their vote because they butted heads on a message board aren't being serious people.
"I'm changing my vote because people on the Internet are mean!"
Yes, let's leave the electoral process to five year olds.
But! I earned caps wow. Points!
merrily
(45,251 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I try to listen to the arguments of others and try and learn.
Some arguments I discount completely, others make me think.
Prism
(5,815 posts)"I'm changing my vote from Sanders to Clinton because I don't like how Sanders' supporters have behaved."
That's what I'm addressing. That is an unserious way to determine one's vote. That is who I dismiss out of hand.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I am trying to guage whether anyone has persuaded anyone here.
It feels like we are just preaching to our own choirs.
And ... the person that you dismiss out of hand, you probably could learn something from WHY that person is saying it. While they may be unserious to you ... they have a serious reason for holding that opinion ... and if you support that candidate, you might: pause to consider "Am I that guy/person they are talking about?"; and, if you support that candidate beyond typing stuff on the internet, you might pause to consider what you could do to shut "that guy/person" up/down.
Boy the truth seems to sting.
Just magical indeed Prism.
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)Every day I log in here, I find a disgusting thread, or hear about DUers acting like asses on another site that turns me off to both front runners. I've no longer come to expect a serious discussion of the issues.
luvspeas
(1,883 posts)Oh YES!
merrily
(45,251 posts)tammywammy
(26,582 posts)The primary has changed my view of some DUers.
procon
(15,805 posts)When it gets to the point where I just can't imagine myself associating with "those" kind of people, I guess I'll know which candidate I'll pick.
rbrnmw
(7,160 posts)Hillary's salem witch trial. When I saw her kicking as with class I knew she was my choice.
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)rbrnmw
(7,160 posts)But DU helped with that decision
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)Bernin4U
(812 posts)Oh wait, he didn't have one.
So you'll get behind team A, because team A beat team C (in a more or less exhibition game), and we all hate team C. No matter that team B hasn't even played against team C?
In this case it means that Bernie's lack of skeletons, and failure to get his nose dirty, is a problem.
So how about Bernie's interjection about emails during the debate? Of course we don't know Hillary's answer, since she didn't have to give one. But it seemed to me that Bernie, in only a few seconds, did a better job of shutting down the stupidity than Hillary had been able to do for months.
If there's a better example of "pwnage", I'd love to hear...
NRaleighLiberal
(60,014 posts)I support liberal/progressive/Democratic policies and principles, and as I near 60, it's always been that way - if anything, I've moved more leftward as I age. My heart grows sick to watch the division become more about excesses of money than principles. So to my mind, the left/right split is now clearly joined by the have too much/have not nearly enough split. There are overlaps.
So in the primaries, it is about the person who best reflects those principles. And in the general election, it will be whoever wins the nomination for the Democrats. Because Republicans and republican principles are toxic to all personkind.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)All day. I have further thoughts on O'Malley but think it would be offensive talking about that at this point in time. I believe whatever happens to him in this primary he is going to have a major role at the national level.
artislife
(9,497 posts)I especially have loved the way he has really supported the Muslim community these last few weeks.
I worked at an office and left it, but stayed in the area and would see the handyman from time to time. He was from Somalia. After 9/11, I was so worried how this country was treating him. Seattle cracked down on Somali businesses that would help send money back home and were accused of sending money to terror cells. He was pretty gracious when asked how things were, but we did agree it would have been better if he had walked to the Canadian embassy all those years ago...
I don't believe in organized religion, but I do believe that everyone should be able to practice their faith and not be accused of terrorism because of it.
GusBob
(7,286 posts)Matariki
(18,775 posts)but getting info about their positions on issues, yes.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)But this was before they even announced.
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)And her ability to build broad coalitions across a wide range of Democratic base demographics.
Then the union endorsements, party endorsements, civil rights hero's endorsements solidified my position.
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)Bernin4U
(812 posts)Particularly from the unions, some of which came unseasonably early and/or may be tainted by cronyism?
Romulox
(25,960 posts)Romulox
(25,960 posts)JimDandy
(7,318 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)Maybe the mockery of those who stuck their head up out of the fake Bernie supporter foxhole first has kept them quiet. Maybe they'll never come out of the foxhole. But I see them. Just in case they're wondering, I see them. And I laugh at their transparent dishonesty.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Although, oddly, I've never switched from Hillary to another candidate. But whatever.
I totally agree with Bernie about everything, but he and his supporters are such misogynists and racists that I can't agree with anything they believe.
randys1
(16,286 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)You had poor, perceptive randys1, who has posted many times that, not only is he a supporter of Bernie, but he has worked and/or volunteered for the Bernie campaign, thanking you for calling Bernie's supporters racists and misogynists, just as any true Bernie supporter would. Even after your many posts, he never grokked that you were being blatantly sarcastic.
I tried to warn him of your foul tendency to use sarcasm without labeling it as such, but it was too late. Now, he has three hides on this thread alone for strongly implying Bernie supporters (such as you and, of course, him) have a problem with strong women of color; i.e., that Bernie's supporters are racist and sexist. O, the humanity!
I blame all of this entirely on your failure to use a sarcasm emote in your Reply 45, or, at the very least, to sign it as Third Way Manny. This kind of reckless posting has taken a horrible toll. After all, how could poor randys1 be expected to know a MannyGoldstein post might be sarcastic if there were no express indication?
Emoticons are your friend. There's just no excuse for not using them, well, liberally, in your posts.
I am so done. From this moment, you are dtm.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Dark energy is to our universe; the irresistable deus ex machina that smothers all as time passes.
OK, that was bull@#%&. I just suck.
merrily
(45,251 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)They may not be used as tools of parody?
merrily
(45,251 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)You should have warned me with an emoticon!
merrily
(45,251 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)I just enjoy TWM.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)A little wine, some candlelight and... um...
merrily
(45,251 posts)If that was indeed you, you confused me on that occasion, too. Fortunately for me, I recover quickly.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)There are two groups of people: Reagan Democrats and Liberals/Progressives. Each has their candidate.
JimDandy
(7,318 posts)develop and test talking points and arguments to see if they stick and are capable of persuading those who can be persuaded outside DU. You can watch the Clinton swarm descend, in real time, each time they think they have something. It's fun taking aim at their pitches.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Last edited Wed Nov 4, 2015, 03:33 PM - Edit history (1)
And voting to immunize gun manufacturers.
I support no one, but lean slightly towards O'Malley.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)And against the interests of Americans.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)And why I really can't take what you say about it seriously.
Bernin4U
(812 posts)Not that I know much about it (closest I've come to firing a gun was a getting to try an older brother's bb rifle at age 12). But it seems they're pretty good at what they do.
As far as responsibility, a company is only charged to make something that works as they legally sold it. Period.
You don't get to have something both ways. If you don't like that a product exists, or how it's used, is one thing. Take it up with your congress person.
Or hell, be a rebel and create a plan to steal all the guns and drop them to the bottom of the ocean. It may not be effective, or even smart, but at least it's logical.
But to say that a product that was sold legally, can suddenly become an illegal sale due to the conduct of the end user, follows no logic. That's called grasping at straws.
Fight the good fight, not the bad one.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)And it amounted to corporate welfare.
And, it is counter to the health and welfare of the American people.
Bernin4U
(812 posts)Is there more to it than the idea that they should be responsible (or not) for the actions of their customers' customers?
Did not passing the bill make them exempt? (There was another bill in place it would over ride?)
Giving them exemption does not make sense, but holding them responsible definitely does not. They should be in the same boat as everyone else.
That said, I do have a big problem with our current system of anyone can sue anyone for anything. Especially considering how juries can be tailored to have the collective mental capacity of preschoolers.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)I have a big problem with Republican anti-tort reform movements designed to immunize corporations from their responsibilities and, thereby, increase their profits.
No industry should ever be shielded from responsibility for their actions.
Bernin4U
(812 posts)Labeling and characterizations aside, can you show a case where it's been an issue? Or even a hypothetical would be fine? Just to see where you're coming from.
Of course no industry should be shielded from their responsibility. Obviously it's a question of defining what that responsibility is. Afaik, companies are responsible to sell products that work.
If a company sells a car, and the car drives off a cliff because of a design or mfg flaw in the brakes, the car company is responsible. If the car drives off a cliff because the driver chose not to use the brakes, the car company is not responsible. Agreed?
But again, let me know what I'm missing in terms of specifics and/or examples. Speaking in broad terms ("We want liberty!" is too vague to be helpful.
demwing
(16,916 posts)But since the earliest stages of the 2008 campaign, I've learned a lot about her on DU, and what I learned killed any enthusiasm I once had.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)But I honestly don't believe any discussion on DU had anything to do with it. It was more of a matter of having an opportunity to compare and contrast the candidates statements, positions and past records that sealed the deal for me.
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)And then I heard Bernie's message and saw the crowds. I realized a Bernie nomination was possible.
I'm still uncertain about willy and manny. Lol
DanTex
(20,709 posts)I still think Hillary is the best candidate.
doc03
(35,340 posts)I am solidly in the Hillary camp now.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)doc03
(35,340 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)of his supporters. I still think he is personally a decent person, despite his rather stolid and singularly-focused personality and difficulty connecting with individuals on a personal level, but I can't say much for his leadership given the behavior of his fans. He's got to have an awareness of this aggressive conduct and the sour taste it leaves. Some--not all, but some-- of his enthusiasts are really rude and nasty. Bullying, even. And it's not just here on DU--I see the same angry and hectoring "tone" everywhere.
When I see swarms here doing things like hiding a newspaper article they don't like, or comments snarking about and MOCKING Clinton's private 2 hour meeting with mothers of victims murdered by gun violence, I have a hard time believing people who would say/do these things are Democrats, or even progressives. It's just too much. Too much hatred, too much anger, too many insults. I have to wonder how many of these supporters would actually stick with Sanders if he got the nomination, or if they'd run to the GOP. I wonder how much support is real, and how much is courtesy of Rovian-style operations.
If Clinton decided she didn't want to run, I think I'd go for O'Malley as a 2nd choice.
Guess I'm just not feeling that old bern.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Again.
MADem
(135,425 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)PatrickforO
(14,576 posts)The discussion here has done nothing to sway me either way. I supported Bernie from the start, I support him now, and I will support him moving forward. He's the only guy that is talking about the stuff that's truly important.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)than ever before and that includes a few Bernie supporters. I took a break from DU for awhile, came back, but I think it's time to make another exit. The intellect isn't here anymore. Just "rah rah" my side and if you go into one of the "protected" groups you better meld into the zeitgeist or else . . .
Stupid, juvenile shit most of the time. 99.9% keyboard warriors who don't actually get out and DO anything and don't want you posting on anything that you're doing because your "bragging." What the hell happened to this place?
pinstikfartherin
(500 posts)I've been coming here lurking since the Bush/Kerry election, and I've always learned so much from DUers even though I don't post much. But this? This is a damn shame.
I'd really like a forum for the DUers around here who want to talk policy and discuss the issues without the hate-filled, mocking rhetoric. You simply cannot get that here. I miss intelligent DU discussion, and all this place does anymore is make me sick.
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)to undecided, to leaning toward Sanders and now back to undecided.
Based upon what I see as condescension and arrogance toward people of color by some self-described Sanders supporters here at DU.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)Really? Good grief, is he supposed to be some all powerful creature that can control what everyone who claims to support him says and does? Really?
I am at a loss for words, going to the obvious...
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)Not me. I don't come here to be argumentative. A question was asked and I answered it. I hope you enjoy a good evening.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)refute Bernie's policies in any concrete way.
So until someone can thoroughly and clearly show me why Bernie is bad then I'm gonna just keep on feelin' the bern.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)None of the candidates have surprised me. It's been the most typical primary I've ever seen.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4218509
http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/video_hillary_clinton_in_1990_im_proud_of_walmart_20150525
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12778959
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251471617
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/06/us/elusive-papers-of-law-firm-are-found-at-white-house.html?pagewanted=all
In 1998, with First Lady Hillary Cinton, From began a dialogue with British Prime Minister Tony Blair and other world leaders, and the DLC brand known as The Third Way became a model for resurgent liberal governments around the globe.[17]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_From
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vast_right-wing_conspiracy
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Depaysement
(1,835 posts)But I am really beginning to wonder if I will bother to vote in the GE.
JustAnotherGen
(31,828 posts)Dem2
(8,168 posts)My heart says Bernie, my head says Hillary - I still have time to decide who I'll vote for.
I will admit that reading this site tends to turn me off to Bernie a bit. Insulting the intelligence of supporters or otherwise harshly ripping either of these two candidates is not pleasant - I see a lot more of that behavior on the Bernie side for some reason.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)and the level of vitriol against him by supporters of another candidate has made me dig my heels in so hard, they are HELPING him. What they aren't doing is helping the Democratic party, that's for damn sure.
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)I prefer Bernie like I always have, but I will vote for Hillary if she's the nominee, in spite of some of her more vocal supporters here who really aren't doing her any favors.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)And then seeing Hillary's main campaign use the same tactics a few days later.
I went from being very discouraged by Hillary's policy choices to being utterly enlightened in the wrong way about why she and her supporters favor those policies.
I thought our party was supposed to be better than the Bushes, not part of the family.
840high
(17,196 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)I'm amazed I keep reading this sorry excuse so often on here.
But then, I keep reading Carson is rising in the polls.
I'm convinced I've entered an alternate reality. This cannot be the real world.
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)I always supported Sanders, but I figured Clinton would be fine as Plan B in the general election. I still plan to vote for her next November, assuming the primaries go the way the corporate media says they should go. But I'm no longer enthusiastic about doing so. In fact, I'm not happy at all I will have to do so. I don't like the preaching from either choir. Bernie's choir is particularly nasty when it comes to digging for meaningless dirt, which is interesting, since there is some real dirt on Clinton, and they should just leave it at that, without trying to inflate little things into big things. On the other side, Hillary's choir comes up with these obtuse defenses of her mistakes that are just annoying, and their warnings that opposing Clinton will only help Republicans is strange. I guess we shouldn't judge the candidates by their friends, particularly since neither Clinton nor Sanders even knows what's posted here on DU.
I agree with you that neither side has persuaded anyone, with a small number of exceptions. I wouldn't be surprised, however, if they convinced a few people not to vote at all. Or maybe they sent a few people in search of a nice Republican.
pinstikfartherin
(500 posts)I'll never see the point of supporters turning you off of a candidate whose positions you otherwise support. If DU influences your opinion, just quit now. Seriously. It probably means that you spend too much time here, and if you look around lately? That's not good.
Hell, with all of these posts about switching because of Bernie or Hillary supporters being horrible, everyone here should be supporting O'Malley. His supporters at least seem sane and willing to discuss the issues. BUTTTT that's not happening, and we're taking sides of supporters who are routinely insulting and inciting one another....
Neither side is clean, and it's mostly the same people stirring the pot. Both supporters are horrible here at DU and act like children. Put your support behind O'Malley if you want to pick a "clean" side. Otherwise, it's just empty complaining and finger pointing because you spend too much damn time on DU.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)I was once an enthusiastic Bernie supporter, but the way some people turned on Bravenak made me NOT want to be in that choir. Some of the Bernie supporters, as much as I like Bernie himself, have acted in a manner that goes beyond the pale, which is unforgivable in life, and should have been unforgivable here on DU, which, sadly, it was anything but. Nathan Bedford Forrest is smiling from Hell at the way some bernie supporters treated black people because they dared think they had to right not to be polite after a solid year of lynching by cop.
My mind about Hillary is not changed; if the Democratic party were to nominate a ham sandwich in the general, than to paraphrase Churchill "I will need to say something nice about the devil" and vote for a ham sandwich, namely because the GOP has people dumber than a ham sandwich. But,just because I have taken my little loyalty oath aka "let's not do the Nader thing again" pledge, that will not deny me the chance to remind Hillary that she will need our votes, and to hear our voices, something she obviously did when she condemned Keystone and the TPP
Bernin4U
(812 posts)He wasn't up to speed on this issue, and needed to be taken to task. After that, he seemed to be on the right track.
I don't blame him for being a little clueless at the time. It happens to everyone. What matters is how he handled it. And he handled it correctly. His detractors call his lack of immediate reaction a weakness, but I see it as a strength. Understand first, then react.
But a lot of his supporters didn't get it. I wasn't on here, but saw a lot of the ugliness elsewhere. It pissed me off for sure, but I like to think a lot of them got a clue as well. Maybe they were just a little slower on the take.
Otoh, I don't give Hillary any points for corralling them preemptively, twice.
McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)Flying Squirrel
(3,041 posts)It's basic psychology, and attacking Bernie Sanders only makes the Bernie supporters more certain of their beliefs. So, apparently all the arguing is to try and convince the few undecideds who might be reading. I certainly have no hope of ever changing a Clinton supporter's mind, and neither do they have much hope of changing mine. Some external paradigm-shifting thing would have to happen on a par with the revelations about Subway's Jared or Bill Cosby.
Hepburn
(21,054 posts)I originally started as a Hillary supporter -- a weak one -- but a supporter. After seeing the conduct of and the statements made by some of her supporters on the DU, I started to look at Bernie and found what they said was totally false. The more I looked at Bernie, the more I liked him. In the beginning, I contributed $25.00 to Hillary and I still have 3 Hillary bumper stickers in my in basket on my desk. Now, I have a standing $25.00/month contribution to Bernie and a Bernie sticker on my car.
If not for the nastiness of some of the HRC supporters -- not all of the, but several of them -- who regularly post ugliness about Bernie Sanders, I might not have done my investigation. Hillary is now a very far behind 2nd choice for me. So thank you to a few very vocal and nasty HRC supporters for opening my eyes to the candidate, Bernie Sanders, who supports most closely where I stand on important issues.
Bernin4U
(812 posts)To assume otherwise seems a little naive.
My wife was telling me of a recent lunch outing with a group of workmates, to welcome some new hires to the group. All very standard stuff, certainly.
At one point one of them who apparently is relatively new to American culture, asked their boss, "So, who do you plan to vote for?"
A big faux pas, of course.
Why would they do that? Because in many other places in the world, it's totally normal.
In many places in the world, you'd go out with friends, co-workers, whatever, and discuss anything. And no matter how heated it gets, it's all just discussion. Water under the bridge.
Here in the US, we're huge whimps. Most anything interesting (sex, religion, politics) is taboo. Off the table. Perhaps a remnant of our initial Puritanism?
Instead, we have (certain places on) the Internet. Since we're all anonymous, we're finally comfortable to speak freely. But because we're anonymous, manners seem to go out the window.
Sucks, but what's the alternative? Discussions of politics and civil discourse seem to mutually exclusive, based on our current culture.
Personally, I choose growing a little thicker skin, over shutting it out, if those are the two options. Others are free to do as they like. But if there's a third option, being in chat forums but without a suitably thick skin, it just seems to be asking for trouble.
BooScout
(10,406 posts)But I will say I became an Obama supporter after the primaries of 2008 partly because of some discussions I had on DU with others. The fact that Clinton supported him so strongly played a larger role for me, but folks here helped to put me strongly in his corner, where I remain to this day. I think some folks need to realize no President or politician is perfect and on the whole, especially considering the complete clusterfeck Obama inherited and has had to deal with regarding the Republicans and very specifically the Teabaggers. Getting anything by those obstructionists should be considered pretty damned good.
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)I post to inform those who want a choice.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)I did back in '03. I started out supporting Dean, and ended with DK, based on discussions here at DU.
I still liked and respected those who were supporting Dean...then and now. I made that switch early, months before the primaries actually rolled around.
Renew Deal
(81,860 posts)Mayors, Attorney Generals, etc.
JackInGreen
(2,975 posts)I was pretty 'ready for hillary' with the long standing joke in the house 'unless Sanders or Warren run.....I can dream."
BANG.Bernies in and little has swayed me since.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)DU members has been stalked, had nasty mail sent and even to their home who was Sanders supporter. There has been others who are tired of the talking points over and over, the same talking points which have been debunked and I saw posted here yesterday and they continue. I did not dislike Sanders when this campaign first started but I can say his supporters have gotten nasty, calling Clinton names, and my thoughts have not been endeared of the supporters. There are some statements made by Sanders of which I agree and disagree. I have researched Sanders, just as I have Clinton and O'Malley, none of these candidates are perfect. I base my support for Clinton on years of research and following, know she has foreign affairs experience and with the recent Benghazi testimony has shown a presidential side.
Autumn
(45,096 posts)compared Hillary to Bernie, Bernie announced, no comparison. Support Bernie 100%. No looking back. I like Hillary she's a nice person, just don't want her in the White House.
Pathwalker
(6,598 posts)have no conscience, am tearing down the party, have no integrity IF I don't choose him and only him, vow to stay home on election day if he's not the nominee. Oh, and after a lifetime of being a dead-dog Democrat, I am now not entitled to call myself a Democrat because his supporters are the experts on who is and who is not allowed to call THEMSELVES a Democrat. I sometimes wonder whose side they're on. IMO.
Puglover
(16,380 posts)Thanks for providing a vehicle for more then a few laughs.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)definitely won me over.