I'm Canadian, moderately "left", and I say this bluntly.

[delrem]

I know that it's "interference from abroad" and that those stung by it will be unforgiving.

What I see everywhere and esp. on the internet is that Hillary Clinton and her supporters don't like that Stephen Harper lost and Justin Trudeau won the recent Canadian election.
This matters.

Stephen Harper was Mr. Oil_Patch from the get go.
He was Mr. I'll_be_there_for_you for any US military adventurism, and he was Netanyahu's best friend simply out of truth toward Christian Fundamentalist religious ideals.
He was right out of The Simpsons and he's very much like Hillary Clinton.
He was a perfect Mr. Gray for the third way, and he did lasting damage.
Very lasting damage.

I'm just saying this, as bluntly as I can, that I see no difference between Hillary Clinton and Stephen Harper, except in lasting negative impact because the USA
has a greater and more influential economy.

[MADem]

1. Where the hell are you getting that load of nonsense?

I am an ardent Clinton supporter, and I'm thrilled that that helmet-headed keyboard playing ass who ran the Great White North got shown the door. I don't know a soul who isn't equally pleased. Most people viewed him as Bush-North.

Not sure where you're getting this "Some people say" shit, but maybe you need better sources.

And if you can't see any difference between Harper and Clinton, I suggest you get your eyes checked--soon. It could be glaucoma or worse.

[delrem]

10. That's how I see it, MADem.

Your outrage notwithstanding.

[MADem]

13. It's not "outrage" -- I am dismissing your characterizations as utter, foolish nonsense.

I don't know a single Clinton supporter who has ever had a kind word to say about Harper. You can check the DU archives here, if you'd like--no one liked that asshole.

That's as absurd as saying "Bernie Sanders supporters were fans of Margaret Thatcher. Why? She didn't like federal solutions to local problems either."



I think you're pot-stirring, frankly. It's an unkind thing to do, that.

Either that, or you're easily duped by people who pretend to be Clinton supporters but who, in fact, have another agenda.

Whatever could that agenda be?

[delrem]

42. Sorry, MADem, but Stephen Harper was a US America quisling supreme.

And he quisled to big oil, big war. Just like ---- who?

Now, you were saying?

[MADem]

59. Yeah? And what's your point? He was Petit George.

You put up with that asshole Harper for WAY longer than we had to tolerate Porgie--and we had the good sense to shoot down his Li'l Buddy McCain and his wingwoman, Caribou Barbie, and elect Barack Hussein Obama, instead.

I'm not going to blame you for not knowing US history or current events--you're not from USA, so that is not your charge. But you really might make an effort, while posting on a Democratic Politics board in USA, to at least understand the TIMELINE of events. Clearly, you're having a bit of a struggle with that.

See, your little pal Harper was elected--by YOU guys--at the height of the worst excesses of the Bush administration, in Feb 2006. You finally unloaded his sorry ass just last month.

It took you nearly 12 years to get rid of the little shit.

I think you're hardly one to lecture us about our issues, when you tolerated that slimy jerk for so very long. Maybe you should work a little harder on the home front--all politics is local, you know.

Put your OWN house in order....EH? Get cracking!

[totodeinhere]

179. It was harder for the Canadians to get rid of Harper because they don't have a

two-party system like we do and the anti-Harper vote in previous elections was split. Finally they got it right this time and did some strategic voting, but I would not be too hard on the Canadians who never expressed majority support for Harper in any election. Also the Liberals had been weakened by scandals and were in no position to put up a good fight.

[Thespian2]

217. Excellent response

Also very correct...I am a US citizen who lives in Canada, and I can't agree with you more...

[Duval]

246. I congratulate you on your reasonable response to a post

that was littered with ugliness.

[MADem]

296. Gee--that speaks well to OUR 'lousy' two party system, then, doesn't it?

AND our 'lousy' POTUS term limits!

Can you imagine twelve years in the Bushes?

I think a system that makes it harder to get rid of an asshole might need a little tweaking--but that's just me!

[totodeinhere]

303. You are complaining to the wrong person. I happen to support our two party system although

right now we don't have two legitimate parties, only one. But Canada's parliamentary system is the predominate system around the word and it works well in a lot of places. Parliamentary governments in Western Europe brought universal health care to those countries decades ago.

[MADem]

306. I am not complaining--simply making an observation. Nearly 12 years of Harper was TOO much.

There should have been more political will to unload that ass.

I know that 12 years of George Bush would have destroyed America.

As it is, it's taken Obama most of his Presidency to undo the sick stuff that ass did--starting with stem cell research ban repeal, and ending two wars, cleaning up his shit at Gitmo, etc. And he's done it fighting the GOP tooth and nail.

[AlbertCat]

289. all politics is local, you know.

Which is why one can ignore national polls re local primaries. Right?

"Put your OWN house in order....EH? Get cracking!"

The smug, condescending response we now expect ..... nice work.

[MADem]

295. You can do what you want. If you think the views of anonymous people on the internet somehow

"control" you, then you go ahead and knock yourself out doing their bidding.

What's smug and condescending is the entire premise of this nasty, unsubstantiated thread. And if you can't see that, I can't help you with that, either.

[Splinter Cell]

310. ....

How is February 2006 nearly 12 years? Sounds like Reaganomics....

[MADem]

311. You're right.

He was conservative party leader for 12 years--but PM for only nine and a half years.

[fleur-de-lisa]

116. Ha ha! Good answer!

The HRC supporters want us to forget her history so that we blindly elect the anointed and inevitable one.

Thanks for calling them out on their bullshit, delrem!

[artislife]

117. The push back is enough for me to agree with you.

Thank you for your OP.

[Fawke Em]

171. Makes it obvious, doesn't it? eom

[treestar]

121. Canada did not send troops to Iraq

So how could he have?

A Canadian conservative is going to be moderate compared to US ones.

[LiberalLovinLug]

175. Harper was a special breed

He definitely would have sent troops to Iraq. He criticized the Liberal government at the time, after 9/11, when he was leader of the opposition for NOT joining the US in their Shock n Awe adventure. When he finally had power, he only started out as what we call a "minority government" and could not garner enough support for it. And then when he finally won a majority government, when he could have, the Iraq war was already turning into a quagmire and getting bad press, and so he didn't push it anymore.

But make no mistake, if Harper had had his majority one term sooner, we would have joined other Commonwealth nations like the UK and Australia, no questions asked (literally).

[totodeinhere]

182. You give a good explanation. Unfortunately too many on this board don't know squat about Canadian

politics yet they are more than ready to offer their uninformed opinions anyway.

[MADem]

299. It was, if you pull the string, a CANADIAN (ostensibly) who STARTED this thread and, in

a rather nasty, churlish and uninformed way, proceeded to hold forth on AMERICAN politics.

That's a rather important point--pull the string.

[arikara]

187. All that you said is true.

He would have loved nothing more than to be involved in Bush's mess.

And the mood of the country has lightened so much now that he's finally gone.

[treestar]

208. Thanks!

Like most Americans, not too well informed on Canadian politics, so that helps.

[Hal Bent]

198. He wasn't in power in 2003

I'm almost sure of that.

[MADem]

301. 2006, Feb or so--that's when he became Bush's Little Buddy. nt

[guillaumeb]

206. Canadian forces did go to Afghanistan.

Harper is a born again Christian oil man from the Texas of Canada.

[KittyWampus]

135. But that is not what your opening post says. Your OP says Clinton supporters

were grievously disappointed Harper lost.

[gordyfl]

162. Bush North, Bush South

Yeah, we have our own Bush-South running for office.

[dbackjon]

213. BULLFUCKING SHIT

[Buzz Clik]

197. Damn, dude. Canadian? Moderately left?

She-it.

I'm a centrist Orc from Mordor who thinks Canada's support of Gandalf was beneath contempt.

Bottom line: we can be whoever want to be on the internet.

[snooper2]

144. but you are wrong on 77.6% of the issues

[pnwmom]

203. Every Clinton supporter I know likes Trudeau. Do you have a link backing up your opinion?

[mgmaggiemg]

326. agree also with you...

cheers, Maggie

[Number23]

17. Isn't that weird?? First time I've ever see anyone accuse Democrats of being upset that Trudeau

won. And not a single link to back it up either.

[MADem]

28. I really think this kind of tack suggests a bit of a desperate Hail Mary pass.

I know Doug Flutie played in Canada for many years, but he could never replicate that moment of Boston College glory, and it's bad form to try it here on DU, IMO!

WAAAH--Hillary people LIKED Steven Harper!! The one they called Petit George Bush! Be Very Afraid!!!



Never mind that the archives prove otherwise.

Lightning doesn't strike twice....this rather flopsweatty pass hit the dirt and the clock is running out.

[LuvLoogie]

76. You made short work of that Bro, ay...

He was kinda sure he had you. Heh.

[Cha]

80. But, look around.. they don't need anything to back it up, do they? Make an accusation and

act really really offended if anyone objects.. and 85% of the board won't even bother.

[DFW]

91. First time I saw it, too

I have NEVER heard of ANY Democrat being anything other than thrilled that Trudeau won. The only thing the OP got right was that Harper was bad news.

[Number23]

205. Exactly. But when there's all important recs to be counted, little things like facts and

evidence are the first things out of the window.

[JTFrog]

132. Yet we've seen what many of the people who have rec'd this thread think about Canadians around here.

They consistently call out Canadian DUers because they feel they should have nothing to say whatsoever about our political process. Because they disagree with them. Period. It's plain as day now. No more hiding it.

There were even a couple of gems in this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251902354

[George II]

164. It's amazing how denigrating "liberal" people on DU can be toward Canadians, or actually....

.....anyone connected to Canadians.

Sad.

[Number23]

207. Not just Canadians. Some of these folks become down right FREEPERISH toward "ferners"

-- even if they're not even actually foreigners but bona fide, tax paying, voting Americans who live in other countries (which is what this same crowd screams about doing the first chance they get constantly) -- if they don't espouse the DU Mob Mantra.

This quarter's mantra is apparently Hillary is a conservative and evil (which, considering this has been their mantra against Obama for the last EIGHT YEARS, you have to give them serious props for originality ).

You can have just crawled out of a mud hut in Slovenia and barely know the language but if you can somehow work a "Hillary bad" into your tortured English, this crowd will love you forever. It's kind of pitiful.

And as for the Canadian digs, including the one in the link you provided, just consider the source. Says all that needs to be said.

[BlueMTexpat]

153. Exactly! eom

[Fuddnik]

170. Link?

[akbacchus_BC]

93. MADem, our heath care is going to the toilet. Ours is not what the US wants!

Poor Del, he is commenting through some kind of glasses that we folks cannot see through! We already have a two tiered health care system, one for the rich and the poor will likely die before they get a consultation As to an MRI in BC, might as well give up and to see a specialist, you have to wait for six months. I think Gordon Campbell initiated this shit when he got elected as the Premier of BC. Now he is enjoying his stint in London as Canada's High Commissioner to the UK. I hope Mr. Trudeau bring that asshole home to where he belongs minus his frigging privileges!

[MADem]

94. That is a crying shame. I actually know someone from Canada

who did like Maggie Smith in the Best Exotic Magnolia Hotel movie, and went to INDIA for a hip replacement. I was shocked when I first heard this, but it was going to be a six month wait (I guess how long you wait depends on where you live and how many slots are available--you obviously know how this works better than I do), and he did not want to wait that long (he was using a wheelchair he was in such pain)--so he combined a vacation with an operation. It worked out well for him. He really did up India once he got through the bulk of the post-op PT. I think they said he could fly across the country and go get the operation somewhere else in Canada...but I'm vague on the details--it was a while ago.

Is it customary for the PM to recall everyone and either reissue their appointments or send them home, or would the guy in London be like our Fed Chair, who runs out a term as Chair and then either gets reappointed or goes back to a seat on the Board of Governors?

[LiberalLovinLug]

174. This person is wrong

Read my response to their post.

And on the OP, I also do not agree. Harper was a psychopath. My opinion is that Sanders is preferable for moving all of North America forward progressively in general. That said there may be some cross-over with their hawkish stances, but no way does THIS Canadian think Hillary Clinton is anywhere close to the small-minded pig-headed turd that was/is Stephen Harper. In fact it is the Liberal Party, who is now in charge, who has historically been a "third way" type of governing party much like a Clinton Democrat. Like Obama, and I suspect Hillary, they promise all kinds of progressive change, here it is done in order to take votes from our most left wing party the NDP, and then once in office cater more to big business. (Trudeau was "disappointed" that Hillary withdrew her support for Keystone) But they at least temper it with not denying uncomfortable truths like global warming and do not rely on fear mongering, xenophobia, and other Con tools to push through their policies.

[Codeine]

107. I see you're unflagged.

Some people are untouchable, I suppose.

[LiberalLovinLug]

173. WTF? Our health care system in Canada would be a huge improvement for our friends in the USA

Of course after a decade of cuts by our Conservative overlords, it has been strained to the limit. But it is STILL much cheaper overall, and STILL covers every citizen from birth to death. How is this not an improvement? How is finally adopting the principle that healthcare, like primary education, is a right and not a privilege, not a step forward?

Do you have to wait sometimes for a year for a non-emergency surgery? Yes. I had to wait almost a year for a knee surgery. But a life-threatening injury or illness, you are treated right away. Its a small price to pay for living in a country where you never have to worry about healthcare bills. Even when unemployed, between jobs, and poor. Where you never have to worry about changing doctors, or private companies telling you, sorry, they can't cover you because of some precondition.

Yes, under the Cons, they have privatized as much as they can get away with, like blood testing and xrays etc.. but The Canada Heath Act remains intact. Yes if you have enough money you can travel and/or pay more somewhere else for quicker service. But that would go on regardless.

Sounds like you have swallowed Harper's bait. Like all Cons, they con you into thinking social programs are "unsustainable", and spreads talking points like "its going down the toilet" and then defund them to the point that their prediction starts to come true. Its the same everywhere, as our friends down south will attain to. I expect with Trudeau and more sane leadership, things will improve again.

[Doctor_J]

238. don't tell the new democrats/hillarians. They think heritage care is healthcare

And want to elect Mrs Clinton to make it even more expensive. Stockholm Syndrome.

[MADem]

304. Can't you travel for the surgery too? Go from one area where there are too many

people to another region where there are fewer, if you do not want to wait?

I think Canadian Health Care ain't bad at all--I think many Americans would like it. They might gripe about the tax burden, though. You've come up with it, so it's part of the landscape, but people in USA are freaks about taxes and have been since Saint Ronnie of Raygun made them as unwelcome as child molesters.

It's why so many people live in FL and NH--they don't perceive that not paying a "state income tax" means that they'll be gouged in other ways (e.g property taxes, meals taxes, gas taxes, etc.)--but they feel as though they have "control" over their expenditures.

I hope Trudeau does well. He seems like a really nice guy.

[LiberalLovinLug]

322. Yeah you may be able to do that.

Of course most of the surgery locations are located in major cities, so it may not be much less of a wait.

But as far as Americans accepting paying more tax: I think Democrats have done an abysmal job at explaining that Single Payer is actually lighter on the wallet in the long run. Its why the armed forces are funded "socialist" Americans have no problem pooling their money to pay for national security in order to buy in bulk for uniforms, weapons, planes etc.. as opposed to the more expensive and discombobulated option of each State being responsible for paying for and running their own sub-armed forces, or worse each one was privately funded and run FOR profit (Join the Trump Troops today!). If they could just be convinced that their own healthcare should be a right and not a privilege. That it is just as important as national security. I mean they pay half their taxes on the MIC, and that is even after we hear stories about nuts being invoiced at $2,043 each

http://articles.latimes.com/1986-07-30/news/vw-18804_1_nut

Other items offered in the catalogue include a $285 screwdriver, a $7,622 coffee maker, a $387 flat washer, a $469 wrench, a $214 flashlight, a $437 tape measure, a $2,228 monkey wrench, a $748 pair of duckbill pliers, a $74,165 aluminum ladder, a $659 ashtray and a $240- million airplane.

Also, admittedly, once a tax is hidden in general income taxes, it becomes less of an issue.

[MADem]

323. I don't blame (only) the Democrats. People just are cheap bastards.

They believe that they will never get sick, they don't want to pay for "those people" (especially the dusky and/or non-Xtian) when they get sick; they are "hardworking" while those "others" are "freeloaders."

They just don't CARE about "the long run." They think "insurance" is something that a fat guy with greasy, thinning hair rips them off for--they think their car will never crash, their house will never burn, no relative will ever need an organ transplant. And if any of these things DO happen, why, GAWD will provide. They'll put a big jar down at the diner, they'll raise money at the church, and if it's a medical issue, why, they'll just walk away from the bills.

Having been inside the Defense Department "structure" and seeing how things work, it will require an army of accountants (and I'm not kidding--we probably need to actually offer commissions to accountants, give them strict oversight instructions, and have them report to a four star "accountant" in the Pentagon--and this is OUTSIDE the "logistics" chain of command completely) to even get a handle on "overspending." The three hundred dollar screwdriver sounds great on the news, something to point at and wail about, but all around the services there's a shitload of waste going on at the unit and command levels. It's not just the BIG MIC--it's the little MIC, too, the local MIC. I am NOT an accountant, but every command I was ever at where I had enough rank to put my paws on the cash, I was able to cut/slash/burn and re-allocate. I never gave the money BACK, of course (that would be INSANE given the way the current structure is), but I saved money and re-applied to other, better things. I wasn't quite a legend, but I was damn good at it. I'm not the only one who knew how to play this game--but the trick is to make the game unnecessary. You can't do this with 'civilian' accountants--there's something about the UCMJ that encourages purity of performance. It's not a guarantee, but it's helpful.

In any event, the MIC won't go gently into that good night, either. Eisenhower was right--the military-industrial-CONGRESSIONAL-complex is a problem. And the biggest problem is CONGRESSIONAL. Even the purest of the pure can--and are--co-opted. Pork for your state? Just look the other way; make an excuse that "everyone is doing it anyway." The system is rigged so that everyone gets a taste, everyone is "in on it," and everyone--particularly those involved in appropriations (and all money is allocated from the House)-- is invested in keeping the con working for as long as possible. So, you've got 435 clowns in the House, all "in cahoots" and you've got 100 other assholes in the Senate, cheering on the system, investing in the corporations through "blind" (cough) trusts, watching their children and spouses get fat paychecks from these bums, and touting the "benefits to the state" for engaging in this long con game. The system most certainly IS rigged, and it's the "lawmakers" -- not those evil MIC guys (who only do what they can get away with)-- who have done all the rigging. Even the so-called "purists" (and I look at my own party with this very jaundiced eye) are every bit as guilty as "the other guys." All Congress has to do is Just Say No. But they won't --why? Because part of that pork--aside from the outright graft and the campaign donations-- is JOBS. And JOBS bring VOTES. It's a vicious cycle.

We've got a cadre of people who are going to fight "social programs" tooth and nail, too--they don't want "the gubmint" telling them they have to pay to help others, and that's how they see it. Frankly, I think gun control is an easier fight--and that's going to take forever. I doubt I'll see that in my lifetime to any meaningful extent.

The way to approach these problems, though, isn't to demand "revolution." People are uncomfortable with that--they reject that "To The Barricades" shit. They don't go for the fist-shaking, demanding, hot-breathed rhetoric. It gets their back up. It invites push-back. Better to go round back, slide in the back door quietly, sneak on in and have a quiet seat at the table, and chip away, bit by bit, at the infrastructure. When you do things INCREMENTALLY, people tend not to notice--look at the Patriot Act, after all!

The way to approach this is the same way you would eat an elephant--one forkful at a time. It takes longer, certainly, but the job gets done, eventually. And the results stick.

[LiberalLovinLug]

331. thanks for the explaination

It looks like I hit a sore spot with that MIC overspending comment! Sounds like you did the best you could have within that corrupted system.

Anyways, you raise some good points. Its true, at the risk of being generalizing and stereotyping, Americans are different than Canadians in their spirit of "I did it my way". Its actually one thing we admire in you'all. But it also means you are frustratingly stubborn to the detriment of your own benefits.

Another way to look at the FREEDOM argument is that when you can rely on the people you elect to manage your taxes for the necessities, you are more FREE to work on other things in your life, and with less stress. You don't have to organize your neighbourhood to raise money to fix a bad road, you don't have to raise money to pay for your own private police, or firefighters. Or to pay for public school. It is worth it in the time and effort for citizens to hire representatives to take care of all that if you just pay a part of your salary to them. There must be a way for more progressive politicians to explain that the same is true for ones medical services. That one is actually FREER in life when basic needs are provided by everyone pooling their money to take care of those things.

And I have also heard that businesses also benefit greatly when bidding for jobs internationally, and the world is rapidly becoming a global economy. Despite Republicans and some Democrats saying its not good for capitalist business. Why? Because businesses in Canada, and Europe, and other countries, who have single payer ingrained into their structure, and paid for in the general revenue of the country, means that the more expensive private medical insurance that American companies pay to their employees must be included into their bids. So they have a disadvantage. This also should be explained properly.

[NCTraveler]

103. +1 nt

[ChiciB1]

172. I'm Can't Let Your Comment Slide...

I belong to another group on FB that's "closed" not because we tell secrets, just because it's for a tennis player we all love and show our support for. He's the Number One player in the world and we started our own little family because he was continually being attacked viscerally because he had the audacity to rise to the top over Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal.

Anyway, that being said I've become friends with so many people from so may other countries and they know who I support and my concerns for this country. Given what you said I need to tell you that many, many countries have begun to view America very negatively. Countries who were never involved in OUR WARS and aren't fleeing oppression to come to this country.

Be careful when saying "My Country, Right Or Wrong!" America is being viewed more and more as War mongers and they find it disturbing. I'm not saying this because I support Bernie, I'm saying this because I'm a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN of this country and I'm unable to disagree with them. I'm big on the environment and I can't begin to tell you how many times they've asked me what I think about ALL the pollution WE spread around with our bombs. AND, wonder why WE sell weapons to countries that WE go to war with!

I can only say I don't agree with WAR as a solution and as a Boomer I'm VERY aware of what Viet Nam was all about. I recall it being said that this country will NEVER do it again! OH WELL, that went well didn't it?

Not trying to pick a fight with you, just making a point. AND, I won't argue back and forth with you... just needed to make this point.

[Duval]

249. And they were good points! eom

[MADem]

293. I think you would do well to go back and read what I actually SAID.

What's this "My Country, Right or Wrong" bullshit accusation? Where did I ever say that? Why are you making up things I never said, stuffing them in my mouth, and then LECTURING me?

If you would take the time to read my words, I was talking about people, here, on DU, to include Clinton supporters, who DISLIKE Harper, have for years, have said as much, and think he's George Bush's evil little twin.

I think, if you're not trying to pick a fight with me, accusing me of saying things I didn't say, and holding attitudes I don't hold, is pretty frigging uncivil.

And I am being as straightforward with you as I can muster when I say this--I think you were out of line, and/or didn't read what I had to say very carefully at all.

[randys1]

177. Endless, non stop BASHING of Hillary Clinton on DU...endless, non stop

[MADem]

313. It's getting to the point where it's disturbingly obvious. nt

[Buzz Clik]

195. +1

[Hal Bent]

202. I'm with you, MADem

Haven't heard anything about Hillary being a Harper fan.

[mgmaggiemg]

325. agree

cheers, maggie

[still_one]

2. Well she sure pissed Harper off by being against Keystone, not sure what Trudeau's position is on

the pipeline, but would be interested

[Chakab]

6. She's against Keystone like Obama was against NAFTA when he was running.

If the price of oil goes back up during a Clinton presidency and the project becomes feasible again, that thing is getting approved.

[delrem]

11. Oh, give me a fucking break.

She'll say ANYTHING for a vote.
But look at her record, for the love of truth.

[daleanime]

14. +1

[still_one]

53. Then throw some fuck*ng links to support the OP

and as far as my question regarding where Trudeau's position on Keystone,

Trudeau does support the Keystone XL pipeline

[artislife]

119. They are not really reading what you wrote

It used to be interesting to see the gyrations, but I have seen the dance too often.

[merrily]

178. Like watching Elaine dance.

[99Forever]

120. No kidding.

These freakin pretenders think we don't see through their bullshit.

There is a reason most of America doesn't trust Clinton. She has been proven a liar far too many times. She will say ANYTHING to gain power. ANYTHING.

[MissDeeds]

221. +1000

For her, it's all about winning, whatever it takes, whatever the cost.

[tex-wyo-dem]

63. She must have pissed off Harper very recently...

Because it wasn't until very recently that she (at least says) opposes it.

Hard to tell what the weathervane really means, though.

[still_one]

64. Her emails showed a lot of disdain for Harper in the foreign ministry when she was Sec of State

[JaneyVee]

110. Trudeau SUPPORTS THE KXL PIPELINE

[MADem]

130. Does he really? Well, not surprising, since it's a Canadian thing, I suppose.

He's not going to find any love from HRC on that score, I'm afraid.

You'd think he'd work those "liberal bonafides" and start trying to shift to something a bit more sustainable. They do a lot of hydroelectric generation up that way; maybe they should do more, still...?

[still_one]

133. I actually was aware of that, and that is why I brought it up

[merrily]

134. Didn't the State Department approve Keystone while she was Secretary?

[still_one]

136. I am just speaking off the top of my head, so I may be wrong, but I thought the state department was

waiting for environmental impact studies at the time

I'll need to look it up

[merrily]

166. As SOS, she intended to approve Keystone.

Speaking on Oct. 15, 2010, with the Commonwealth Club, a public forum in California, Clinton took a question asking if the administration would be willing to "reconsider" the pipeline. Here’s Clinton’s response:

"Well, there hasn't been a final decision made. (Crosstalk) Probably not. And we -- but we haven't finished all of the analysis. So as I say, we've not yet signed off on it. But we are inclined to do so, and we are for several reasons -- going back to one of your original questions -- we're either going to be dependent on dirty oil from the Gulf or dirty oil from Canada. And until we can get our act together as a country and figure out that clean, renewable energy is in both our economic interests and the interests of our planet -- (applause) -- I mean, I don't think it will come as a surprise to anyone how deeply disappointed the president and I are about our inability to get the kind of legislation through the Senate that the United States was seeking

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/oct/14/hillary-clinton/clinton-says-her-keystone-xl-position-isnt-flip-fl/

[still_one]

168. ok, thanks

[MADem]

312. Because 'Well, there hasn't been a final decision made' means that she 'intended,'eh?

And it's amazing how the Secretary of State has the power to "sign off" on stuff that is the prerogative of the POTUS.




Only on DU does "there hasn't been a final decision made" mean "She intended."


When she's not the one who OKs the deal, either.

smh.

[Doctor_J]

159. She is not against the pipeline

where do you get this stuff?

[CaliforniaPeggy]

3. K&R. n/t

[newfie11]

4. Thank you

I totally agree.
Just looking at his cabinet shows the difference, now if we can do the same!

[delrem]

18. He's doing alright, that's for sure. nt

[PowerToThePeople]

5. I am proud of what Canada did.

Hopefully the USA will boot out conservative war mongering trickle downers as well.

I will be voting that way.

I will be voting for Bernie.

[bvf]

24. +1.

[newfie11]

43. +1 Nt

[senz]

78. +1

Definitely.

[merrily]

180. +1

[moobu2]

7. You dont know what you're talking about.

No Hillary Clinton supporter would hate that Stephen Harper lost and Justin Trudeau won..That's rediculous.

[still_one]

9. but, but, if it is on the internet it has to be true doesn't it?

[ibegurpard]

15. has anyone asked Sid?

[delrem]

21. Poor Sid. I feel so sorry.

So s.. s... s.... sorry for Sid.

But who the fuck is "Sid"?

[Art_from_Ark]

37. Sid is a poster who says he's from Canada

He's always trying to ridicule progressive American Democrats, and his idea of winning an argument is to end it with this guy
no matter what gibberish comes before it.

[KittyWampus]

137. he doesn't ridicule all progressive American Democrats. Just the foolish barking ideologues.

[truebluegreen]

214. Annnnd...that would be people who disagree with you?

[SidDithers]

283. ...

Seeya in March!

Sid

[Segami]

8. Hope you didn't forget to bring a hockey stick with you.

Don't forget the goalie mask....... ......Just saying.....

[delrem]

12. Truth is truth, so far as I've known it. I abide by it.

[Segami]

20. Hey delrem....

I agree with your assessment.......once you get by all the grooming staging effects, you're left with nothing but the unvarnished truth.


But.....I also do believe that she has a smidgen of Brian Mulroney in her also..........

[Segami]

25. A shutout!

[NanceGreggs]

70. Well, then ...

... prove the "truth" you've asserted that Hillary Clinton and her supporters don't like that Stephen Harper lost and Justin Trudeau won the recent Canadian election.

Link or slink.

[LuvLoogie]

79. Yeah, sure

You've sure come to the right place for affirmation.

Excuse me, but I have to chuckle a little.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

77. Around here, you need to be the 'goalie mask & machete' type.

[artislife]

122. Chuckling because of the reference...nt

[George II]

113. There's more to Canada than just hockey. I wish more Americans understood that.

[Segami]

160. I don't need any guidance from you

about Canada. Nobody is stereo-typing anybody's culture or leisure activities.

[BeanMusical]

190. He's not even Canadian.

Don't know what silly game he's trying to play with that avatar.

[Segami]

215. Hah!..

[redstateblues]

16. You are way off base. Get your facts straight.

You don't know what you are talking about

[applegrove]

19. That's bull****! Right wing propaganda.

[delrem]

31. You seem upset by this Canadian's assessment.

boo hoo.

[litlbilly]

58. Thanks for the OP delrem. the truth really does seem to upset them doesnt it?

[tritsofme]

250. Truth, something this OP is completely devoid of. OP is a liar.

[totodeinhere]

300. More an opinion that an outright lie. You are free to disagree but calling the OP a liar is going

too far IMO.

[tritsofme]

308. Then OP should produce evidence of these throngs of Hillary supporters upset Harper was defeated.

This did not happen. OP made a charge that is clearly untrue, a lie, it follows that such a person is a liar. If they were mistaken, the OP has had ample time to correct.

These are Trump-ian tactics.

[totodeinhere]

314. Many Hillary supporters are very good at covering their tracks so presenting proof may be

difficult. But that doesn't mean that the OP cannot say that he or she believes that it is happening. After all, this is a message board, not a court of law. The rules of proof do not apply. And apparently the belief is widespread. Look at how many recs this thread has.

[tritsofme]

315. If OP "sees it everywhere" it shouldn't be difficult to show us a single example.

To paraphrase the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the OP is entitled to her own opinion, but not her own facts.

I don't know what kind of nonsense you are going on about or implying with Hillary supporters "covering their tracks" but it sounds very silly.

The bottom line is the OP lied, made an extraordinary charge, and has offered no defense or supporting evidence.

I'm not sure exactly what it says about the widespread beliefs of Bernie supporters to have all these recs on a Trump style lie filled attack aimed at Hillary and her supporters, but I don't think it is good.

[KittyWampus]

138. Your "assessment" is based on absolutely nothing. What is unfortunate

is that some DU'ers I formerly respected have given your OP any serious consideration and support.

[Thespian2]

219. Thanks

As I noted above...I live in Canada-Nova Scotia...I completely agree with your assessment...

[tritsofme]

252. What is there to agree with? The OP is a box of bullshit.

Filled with baseless lies.

Can you point to a single Clinton supporter that was pulling for Harper? I'll wait...

[Thespian2]

319. Thanks for your opinion...

[tritsofme]

321. The OP is entitled to her own opinion, not her own facts.

To paraphrase Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

It is not my opinion that the OP lied, it is an objective statement. The OP made an extraordinary false charge, offered no evidence, and in the process exposed herself as a liar.

I will offer my opinion though, these sort of lie filled attacks leaves the OP more in line with Trump-ian values than Democratic ones.

[Renew Deal]

260. Your "assessment" is a lie.

Still waiting for you to prove your point. So far nothing but lies.

[Doctor_J]

239. right wingers say Clinton is too conservative?

Do you have a link to that?

[Doctor_J]

244. you should probably post in the conspiracy theory forum

Hillary has most of big media and lots of billionaires on her side. There is no reason to be paranoid. I would think that a conservative troll would do things like praising for profit health insurance, supporting TPP, complaining about taxes paying for healthcare and education, and so on.

[applegrove]

245. Obviously they would get kicked off the DU if they were not pretending to be Bernie

supporters. You honestly don't think the GOP has not graduated from push polls to push polls on the internet? Really? Is the technology too hard for them to understand? They don't have the money? Really? I mean we know they are on the internet comments sections because it has gotten so bad many websites have closed down certain topics or their whole discussion forums. But you don't think they wouldn't take the extra step and lie. Republicans would not lie to win a Presidential race? They wouldn't do a pushpoll on the internet? Really?

[grasswire]

255. did you notice that NO ONE mentioned Bernie in the GOP debate?

Hillary was the presumed candidate, for three hours.

They are itching to face Hillary. They have mountains of opposition research on her and the voters will crawl over broken glass to be able to vote against her.

[applegrove]

256. No. They want to up the number of Bernie supporters and then turn a small percentage of them enough

against her that they don't vote for anyone in the General Election. They are all about getting that last 2% points that make or break a Presidential candidate.

[grasswire]

258. ok sure, that's the ticket.

Sure.

Whatever floats your boat.

[applegrove]

263. You don't think the GOP would try and stop those on the far left from voting? That they would do

push polls in real life but not on the internet? That they wouldn't lie? That they don't have the money to hire bullies on the internet? That DU bans anyone overtly non democrat and so they show up anyways as democrats sock puppets? Do you not think the GOP is not interested in getting that 2% of democratic presidential voters from the left (by getting them not to vote) rather than from the moderates where the fight for votes usually is? And that they have not started? And that it is war?

[grasswire]

316. I wonder why you don't capitalize "Democrat" and "Democratic"?

Show some respect.

As for the other stuff; I don't think that Bernie will be affected by any of those alleged conspiratorial dirty tricks.

[passiveporcupine]

273. How the hell do you goat somebody?

all manner of true Bernie supporters are being goated

I think you maybe meant goaded?

[applegrove]

288. Ha Ha Ha! That's typical me. Goaded. I'll try to remember that.

[totodeinhere]

294. Justin Trudeau, while not as right wing as Harper could at best be called a moderate.

I certainly would not label his a liberal savior by any means.

[applegrove]

298. I mean he is an example of a liberal doing well politically and giving people hope and a liberal

agenda to enjoy. Jerry Brown has filled that role for a while. Obama did when he had a veto proof majority and was not stymied by the right wing kooks at every turn. It is a role Hillary and Sanders want to have next year. But you have to have power to earn it.

[840high]

22. k/r

[Ed Suspicious]

23. Alert.

On Wed Dec 16, 2015, 12:30 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

I'm Canadian, moderately "left", and I say this bluntly.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251901560

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This post is intentionally disruptive. If this person sees "all over the Internet" that Clinton supporters are upset that Trudeau won, than surely they could have posted ONE single link that proves that. this is just shit stirring and the idea that Clinton is the same as Harper is just a asinine

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Dec 16, 2015, 12:36 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Oh ffs, stop it, alerter.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: One of the worst alerts I've witnessed. Take a bow, alerter.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The post might be a little off-topic but it's certainly not disruptive, hurtful, rude, etc.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't agree with the poster but I see nothing there to suggest this is intentional pot stirring. Just a dude with an opinion.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: does not rise to hide status for me
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[ibegurpard]

27. 7-0

No alerts for you!
Good job jury!

[bvf]

30. A new low in alerts, if that were possible... n/t

[delrem]

34. I've been doing pretty damn good vis-a-vis posts hidden, lately.

In comparison to before, mind you.

At risk of getting alerted on and this post hidden, I've got to say that I like the DU jury system. If nothing else, it keeps us busy.

[bvf]

45. Not to worry.

Eventually someone is bound to come up with a reason that defense of the DU jury system is somehow worthy of an alert (provided the defender is of a particular opinion wrt the primaries, that is).

More seriously, good on you, delrem!

[demwing]

108. You support the jury system? That's meta. Alerting.

[artislife]

124. +1

ooh...ahhh..

Why don't we have a Hall of Fame of stupid alerts?

[bvf]

129. Alerting for failure to provide a link is a first, AFAIK.

And would definitely pass for induction.

[passiveporcupine]

277. Just a dude with an opinion

Used to be opinions were fun things to have around here. Now it's not so much fun, is it?

Who the hell alerts because someone's opinion is different than theirs? And proof? You don't need proof for an opinion. An opinion is not a lie because you don't agree with it. It's not a fact. It's a fucking opinion!

I've been avoiding a lot of this stuff lately...I think it's time to back off again. Quickly! Geeze Louise!

[NanceGreggs]

26. Absolute BS.

I've not seen a single HRC supporter praise or defend Harper - nor have I have seen any HRC supporters expressing any "dislike" for the fact that Trudeau won the election.

Apparently anyone can post anything on the internet and expect it to be believed - no facts to support it notwithstanding.

[NanceGreggs]

35. I have no idea why you thought ...

... I would be gone for 90 days.

Perhaps you were yet again misinformed by your network of buddies - ya know, the ones who don't discuss the goings-on here amongst themselves on some other site.

[stevenleser]

193. That poster has 4 hides in the last 90 days themselves, don't know why they feel superior. nt

[OilemFirchen]

251. Make that five.

Due back in March of next year.

Hilarious in context.

[stevenleser]

264. I've noticed the more rabid supporters of that candidate

Are oblivious to their rank hypocrisies. This is just the latest example.

[Number23]

254. Thanks to their unnecessary attacks on EVERY freaking thing that EVERY freaking body posts here, it

looks like that one should now be worrying about his own schedule for the next 90 days.

[stevenleser]

266. Yes, that person is exceptionally nasty. Part of a cadre of 15-20 supporters of that

Candidate (at least 15-20) who are exceptionally nasty and make DU suck

[Number23]

274. I just don't get the rage and hostility. I sincerely don't get it.

Who acts that way? And especially in "support" of a candidate that you keep hollering to the hills that you are happy and confident in??

[Andy823]

317. Same group

Had the same amount of hate and hostility towards president Obama. Then then turned that same "quality" on to Hillary. They hate the party, want to purge it of anyone who doesn't think like they do, and the only thing they do is "divide" the board here on DU. Most of the Bernie supports are really good people and they don't bash and trash on a daily basis. As for the "haters" I really don't think their agenda is putting more democrats in office.

[delrem]

38. I'm talking identity of politics, of policy.

Of where the actual politicians are at.
And a certain growing trend.

Oh I know, Hillary Rodham Clinton is "unapologetically progressive" again, having recently been "unapologetically centrist", and before than having been "unapologetically progressive", or am I mistaken?

I'll say one thing for Harper, he wasn't that kind of liar.

[NanceGreggs]

41. We're still all waiting ...

... for the links of HRC supporters expressing their "dislike" of the fact that Harper was ousted.

Where are they?

[delrem]

44. Nance, if you like Hillary Clinton then you like Stephen Harper.

They are IDENTICAL in outlook, and who they look out for.

You cannot deny history, no matter how hard you try.

You cannot win on a lie.

[redstateblues]

50. Motorboat in a cesspool

stirring up shit. Hopefully you aren't a dual citizen- you have no grasp of American politics.

[NanceGreggs]

51. Can't hep but change the subject, can you?

YOUR WORDS: "What I see everywhere and esp. on the internet is that Hillary Clinton and her supporters don't like that Stephen Harper lost and Justin Trudeau won the recent Canadian election."

If it's all over the internet, you must be able to find any number of links that support that assertion.

BTW, I'm an American living in Canada. I have more than a passing familiarity with the man's policies - and to say that he and HRC are "identical in outlook" is beyond laughable.

But about those links that prove what your OP says ...?

[still_one]

54. That is the one glaring thing I noticed from the OP, no links

[NanceGreggs]

65. Oh, fear not ...

I'm just SO SURE those links are coming any minute now.

No one would make an assertion like the OP made without having the evidence to back it up.

I'm just amazed that he didn't include the links in the OP - but maybe he just forgot.

[Cha]

85. Just accusations.

[George II]

115. Totally untrue, in all regards.

[KittyWampus]

141. If you wanted to say that Harper was just like Clinton, why didn't you just post that as an OP?

Instead of making up some bullsh*t about so many Hillary supporters all over the internet having a sad about Harper's loss?

Why is that delrem?

Could it be your only intent was sh*t stirring?

[George II]

163. I like Hillary Clinton as a candidate, and I was ecstatic when Harper lost....

....here's one that disproves your blanket proclamation.

[A Simple Game]

188. If what you say is true and to be true to history,

then Nance must have disliked Harper before she liked him.

[tex-wyo-dem]

66. You didn't address delrem's question. Nt

[NanceGreggs]

69. It's delrem's OP.

He made a statement - I asked him to back it up.

I don't owe him any answers. He posted the OP, not me.

If he can't provide evidence of his assertions, he should just say so.

[artislife]

125. Hee!

[Live and Learn]

32. K&R nt

[neverforget]

33. K&R for pissing off the right people

[delrem]

39. It's been fun, so far!

[newfie11]

106. Love it

[tritsofme]

253. Trump seems to have a lot of fun spouting lies and untruths about his opponents.

Glad you two have a hobby in common.

The OP is objectively a lie.

[SammyWinstonJack]

90. Love it!

[akbacchus_BC]

36. I love my country, glad that Mr. Trudeau won. I never liked Harper, he is

a weasel!

[Art_from_Ark]

40. Who was worse-- Harper or Brian Mulroney?

[delrem]

46. Harper.

Compared to Harper, Mulroney was a rube.

It'll be extremely hard to undo what Harper has done.

[akbacchus_BC]

48. Mulroney was a liar and a cheat and his protege Harper fell right into his footsteps.

Look and learn, Mr. Justin Trudeau will change that, he is for working class Canadians, human enough to bring 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada. We love him.

[MADem]

67. So why did YOU wait nearly 12 years to get rid of Your Very Own Petit George?

He's George Bush's "Lil Buddy" after all. Why didn't you give him the boot sooner?

Seems like Canada tolerated him for much too long.

[akbacchus_BC]

87. MADem, we tried to get of Harper. Then we had a revote and he got elected with a majority vote.

When that happened, Harper was on cloud nine, he shut out the media and Canadians had to accept his authority. Next thing you know, four years later, Canadians voted Harper in again. The Dems did not have a trustworthy leader and the Liberals also did not. Mr. Dion, who is now our Foreign Affairs Minister was the leader of the Liberal Party and he had to step down because of that asshole hole who lived in the US for 25 years was trying to get the leadership of the Liberal party, cannot remember his name now.

Regardless of all the turmoil, we are now back on track and we have a leader who will represent us.

[MADem]

92. It is clear to me that delrem's goal was to roil and boil.

He's made some ugly and untrue charges and not backed them up with anything save his shoddy opinion. I don't think much of this 'tactic' frankly.

And he has no answer to Canada's failure to clean their OWN house. Facts are facts--Canada tolerated Le Petit Bush way longer than we tolerated the real and BIG one. And I didn't see delrem out on the front lines, railing about how awful Harper was--but he's suddenly got time to come here and make a spurious (and completely unsupported) association between a departed Canadian PM and a POTUS candidate who have absolutely nothing in common. There's a name for people who do that on message boards, and it's not very nice.

You have just elected a leader who has six months of a honeymoon to try to start to clear up the mess Harper made--and you all should be VERY happy, indeed....but I can guarantee you that this is going to happen as soon as that honeymoon ends--if not sooner:

1. He's going to fuck a few things up. All new leaders do this, even ones who are "legacies" like the Son of Pierre. Some people may even try to trip him up, just to be assholes. It always happens. People will try to make any missteps seem worse than they actually are, just for cruel sport and political advantage.

2. He's going to disappoint some of his more liberal supporters, because he WILL make compromises. Yes--he will. This doesn't make him EVIL, it makes him accountable to the entire nation and not just one sector.

3. He's going to infuriate people who think he's not doing what he promised, and he's going to enrage others who think he's overreaching. Where these angry people stand depend on where they sit.

4. If he's even a third as smart as his Deddy, he will do OK. He had one smart Deddy....and his Mama was no fool, either. Wild, mainly as a consequence of her mental health challenges, but no fool!

I wish the guy the best of Canadian luck--I hope he's able to make a bit of headway and that the movers and shakers give him a little room to do some moving and shaking.

[akbacchus_BC]

95. Thank you MADem, your insights are very useful.

Gosh, apart from Daddy Trudeau and Jean Chretien, this is the first time I feel that Canada is on the right track. We have always been humane and am glad we got a PM who is equally for world peace. I never thought our PM will be at the airport to welcome the Syrian people, that was amazing.

It's early days and time will tell if he could lead us but rest assured, most of us are backing him. I do like his policies and perhaps he may not be able to meet his promises to the Canadian people, however, as an older person, I really respect Mr. Trudeau. The Canadian Senate will not be as nasty to him as the US Congress did to President Obama. President Obama tried to work with those assholes and all they wanted from day one was to stifle anything he wanted to pass to make America better. Well, if that trump shit gets elected, then the lowlives will know how their lives will get worst.

Never thought that the country which was respected worldwide now has a group of assholes vying for the Presidency. Am not religious, but God help America if anyone of those low lives is going to be the gop nominee!

You know what I really wish for -- for President Obama to close Gitmo and hand over the land to the Cuban people! That will make most of the gopers go batshit crazy!

[MADem]

96. I had an unreasonable fondness for Jean Chrétien.

I thought he was a swell fellow. I liked his temper--he could get pissed off when called for. He was sincere.

Smart as hell, too! I know he had trouble towards the end of his era, but one thing I remember most fondly was his denial about Bush, words to the effect of "Bush is not a moron!" Apparently one of his deputies was overheard saying that, and Jean was placed in an uncomfortable position of clarifying.

It made for some hilarious headlines -- on the lines of Canadian PM Insists that Bush is Not a Moron.

[SidDithers]

140. Chretien was awesome...

His mangling of the English language was lovable.

Sid

[MADem]

324. Yes--that was another thing that made him especially cool!

And, he had the most unusual face I've ever seen in a politician--so expressive! At times, he looked like he was almost snarling--at other times, he came off like a happy drunk! I thought he was fantastic!

[treestar]

128. +1

Can't wait to hear of how "disappointing" it all is in about 6 months or so.

[Number23]

212. Your posts have been spectacular in this thread. And pretty much destroyed the OPs premise

from Post #1.

Not that it will make the slightest bit of difference to the Happy Wreckers (Rec'ers) Crew.

[MADem]

290. Aw, thanks! nt

[akbacchus_BC]

47. Both, they sucked the life out of ordinary Canadians.

Thank goodness for Pierre Trudeau and Mr. Martin. They both brought back Canada to what we wanted. Worked hard for working class people and it was about time that Harper went his way, piece a shit. Made us look really bad on the world stage!

I am so happy that we have Mr. Justin Trudeau as our PM, he is young but knows what he is doing. And let me point this out, we never had any anxiety that another Trudeau is our PM, it is different from you all politics. I can understand the American people do not want another Clinton as PM, she lies all the time and is not trustworthy. Hope Mr. Sanders gets the nomination.

[JDPriestly]

49. K&R.

[Cassiopeia]

52. Do you support your neighbor or their employers.

It's a simple question that so many fail to understand.

[DemocraticWing]

55. I'm sorry, but I'm a Bernie supporter and this post seems wrong.

I have never seen any evidence that your assertion (that Hillary supporters favor Stephen Harper over Trudeau) is true. NONE.

IF that's true it would be a huge deal, and I would want that truth out there. So if you have evidence for such an assertion being true, please produce it.

Frankly Trudeau seems great for Hillary Clinton. He had challenger from the left (the NDP) and tried to steer a middle course. Sounds a lot like the Third Way and it's those kinds of things that keep me from supporting Hillary.

[BlueMTexpat]

157. Thank you for your sensible response. eom

[Vattel]

189. I second this

[MisterP]

56. they've already been saying "we can't be like CANADA" and implying that VT is barely American

politics-wise

by January they'll be yelling that he's gonna have us all drinking Unibroue

[BainsBane]

57. I seriously doubt most Americans even know who they are

let alone have opinions about Canadian politics. I feel pretty certain polls would confirm as much. You see what you want, and for some reason what you want to believe is that Clinton supporters--who are in fact the great majority of Democrats--are somehow less. So now you'll get lots of recs from others who share your contempt for that same majority of Democratic voters. Once again we see the enemy is not corporations, capitalism, or any power structure but ordinary American voters, who happen to be less advantaged than the more affluent and whiter demographic that supports another candidate.

We get it. That message has been communicated very clearly in a myriad of ways. Once again we see a political ideology build around a hierarchy of human worth, which betrays the hollowness of rhetoric about greater equality.

As for the random Americans whom you've seen comment online, their views on Canadian politics are no more relevant than your views on our elections.

[still_one]

60. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[Scootaloo]

61. Why not just say what you want to say, BainsBane?

[KittyWampus]

147. Too bad the OP'er doesn't say what he really wanted to say, rather than make up a cool story

so Bernie supporters can flock here to support his nonsensical and unsupportable assertion about Clinton supporters.

[Scootaloo]

184. I'm waiting on him to show some proof myself

But I'm also waiting on BainsBane to speak straight, too. 'Cause I want to make sure i'm not misreadign her and jumping ot conclusions about what she's trying to say

[delrem]

328. I guess I don't have "proof", Scootaloo. I guess I was wrong.

So, in light of the universal adoration for Justin Trudeau's politics from the Clinton/Progressive left, I posted this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251904825

[Scootaloo]

329. Well, this was your claim...

What I see everywhere and esp. on the internet is that Hillary Clinton and her supporters don't like that Stephen Harper lost and Justin Trudeau won the recent Canadian election.
This matters.

Bolding mine. If you saw it on the internet, you can probably find it again and show us all to bolster your claim.

[delrem]

330. Nope. It's just an inference.

My bad!

eta: but I take them at their word, and they are universal in their acclaim for Justin Trudeau's political leadership and program as evidenced so far.

I'm amazed. It in fact is contrary to Hillary Clinton's "plans" in just about all ways. Justin Trudeau's Liberals are a little to the left of Bernie Sanders, and Stephen Harper was/is a little to the left of Hillary Clinton - IMO of course. If Canadians used mungy third-way words to describe politics, Trudeau would be "a centrist", as it's seen up here. Not exactly a "socialist", as per the NDP, or even decidedly "left" as the left is defined here. We're waiting to see and as someone said to me "He's a wild card. Look at his mother, first, then at his father."

But jeez, it's nice to be rid of Harper and that kind of myopic corporate extremism.

What this election did was put a STOP (sorry for the caps) to the "swing to the right" of Harper's Reform/Conservative rule, which ruled Canada essentially as a company town taking orders from absent owners.
A bit like Hillary will rule the USA, except only as an echo in comparison, I'm afraid to say. That STOP is something, but otherwise not all that substantive.

Substantive was that on his first day he contacted Obama to explain that Canada would no longer being doing bombing runs in the ME. On his FIRST DAY. I didn't believe it when I read it first on DU and said so, and was chastised when a few hours later I got "a better link". So I know about "proofs" and "links" - and that I got caught out badly in my wording of this OP.

[akbacchus_BC]

89. We do pay attention to what is happening in the US!

Do not dismiss us as if we are irrelevant! We had Harper who was a Bush lapdog. Thank goodness he was not our PM when the decision to invade Iraq and our then PM Jean Chretien, refused to engage in that atrocity.

Worst fucking thing the invaders did and now they do not want to take responsibility for people fighting back!

[akbacchus_BC]

62. Why are you harping on Harper? That weasel is no longer our PM?

You are right, Mrs. Clinton would have loved him as a side kick! Fucker Harper is mini bush, they both would have loved to high five each other to invade Iraq! I have no idea if any intelligent American can forgive Mrs. Clinton for her vote to invade Iraq! Wall street princess and haliburton conglomerate!

The invasion of Iraq was a war crime, the writing was on the wall and millions protested, but those fuckers chose to invade a country that was never a threat to the US. Now they cannot admit their failure and take responsibility for fucking up the Middle East. Then when the people start fighting back, they are terrorists.

Americans arm themselves to the hilt, would any armed American allow America to be invaded? They will fight back, and that is the backlash of ISIS!

[seabeyond]

68. And everyone I know is thrilled and excited Trudeau won. I won't put stock in you "blunt" statement

[akbacchus_BC]

83. Sea, we are thrilled that Mr. Justin Trudeau is our PM. He is down to earth, young too

but he understands what Canada expects of him. He was front and foremost to take in refugees from Syria and was at the airport to greet them. Which PM would do that? Got to tell you, as compared to President Obama, I just love our PM! I saw him at Pride this year and he looks much younger than on TV. He makes promises and he keeps them and we are backing him. It is so good to have a leader who understands that the middle class is being disenfranchised but knows that the working class need to be uplifted as well!

[seabeyond]

105. Fine. As I said, I have only seen Clinton supporters that also endorse and support Trudeau.

The Ops only intent was to unjustly insult a bunch of people on DU.

That is not ok.

[Betty Karlson]

71. That comparison is chilling.

But it may subject you to mocking and ad-hominem attacks by the coronation commiittee, who want to deflect from the arguments.

By the way, ever since Clinton attended the "Family" prayer rounds, she was Mrs. Gray for the third way - including her abiding opposition to gay marriage until at last it became a danger to her electability.

Trudeau is a treasure, his heart is in the right place, and I wish him the very best for his country.

[seabeyond]

73. Show me one Clinton supporter that validates OPs point. Just one. Forget all, just one.

[Betty Karlson]

75. Al Frum. eom

[SidDithers]

101. Who the fuck is Al Frum?...

If you're going to pretend to know something about Canadians, at least make the minimal effort to try to get their names right.

Al From, of DLC fame, is American.

David Frum, is a Canadian Conservative.




Sid

[Betty Karlson]

154. That joke went right over your head, then...

[SidDithers]

155. Ah, the Pee Wee Herman defense...

"I meant to do that".

Sid

[Todays_Illusion]

72. I see it that way, Hillary's recent rhetoric is very conservative and yet the on-line support is all

her past positions but those references to her past exclude her yes to the Iraq war and her yes to the Patriot Act.

[artislife]

126. She cannot wait to "go in".

I find it abhorrent that one mass shooting by a muslim couple has done way more to mobilize the citizens of this country than all those spotty face young men with guns have done. Their death count is so much higher.

[mgmaggiemg]

74. Trudeau is in and I like him and I'm voting for HRC 2016

I don't think I have to repeat it..... Cheers, Maggei

[akbacchus_BC]

82. You do not need to repeat yourself. However, our PM

is not in snyc with your war monger President to be! If she gains the nomination over Mr. Sanders!

[senz]

81. Everything you said rings true, delrem.

Thanks for an interesting OP. But you sure did stir up the hornet's nest! They've been quite agitated lately.

Canada seems so sane and normal, you're fortunate to live there.

[Cali_Democrat]

84. Really?

What I see everywhere and esp. on the internet is that Hillary Clinton and her supporters don't like that Stephen Harper lost and Justin Trudeau won the recent Canadian election.

You see this everywhere? Surely you can provide a link to back up your claim.....

[Cha]

86. You'd think so.. also the ones who agree him.. where's their proof? Just accusations with absolutely

nothing to back it up. I am so shocked.

[betsuni]

88. No links, only Canadian baiting.

[MrWendel]

97. Funny...

I'm Canadian to and no "Moderately Left" about it. I live in Calgary, Alberta. Harper's Home. Alberta is the Texas of Canada. And I just simply gotta know....Where the HELL did you come up with that?!?

[tech3149]

98. Hey! Nobody does "interference from abroad" like the US

So for me, no harm no foul! At least you don't bomb us on a regular basis and have Reaper drones flying overhead 24/7 for humanitarian reasons. We probably wouldn't mind if you threw a few billion at NGO's for democracy promotion and education. Perhaps you could start a Radio For Democracy US (sorta like Radio Marti) to help us p from the coma of being entertained and distracted to death.

[ejbr]

99. Hillary supporters

Take a deep breath and think about her poll numbers; this should distract you from any similarities to Harper. It's okay.

[SidDithers]

100. You're wrong...

Just plain wrong.

Sid

[NCTraveler]

102. This is just strange.

You start with a point that doesn't exist in reality, throw in some real issues, then point to them as proof of your first false narrative. The model of we report, you decide. We're any muscles pulled writing your op?

[brooklynite]

104. I have no idea what you're talking about...

...who specifically commented on Harper losing?

[in_cog_ni_to]

109. LOL! The HRH supporters - "thou doth protest too much

Methinks"

delrem. Seems you hit a nerve.

You're right. Hillary and Harper are cut from the same cloth. If they didn't like Harper, how can they possibly like HRH? It makes no sense whatsoever.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[betsuni]

111. A link, a link! My kingdom for a link.

[George II]

112. Sorry, I can't agree at all. There is a HUGE difference between Clinton and Harper, and...

...there is no logic in even thinking of comparing the two.

I'm reminded all the time that Canada is not the 51st state. There are huge differences between Canada and the US, and to try to compare the leaders or potential leaders of the two is a stretch.

[MoonRiver]

114. Well, that's not true of this Hillary Clinton supporter.

I loathe Harper, was rooting for Trudeau, and do not believe Harper resembles Hillary in the least. But thank you for you concern.

[treestar]

118. Untrue.

As far as I know about Canada, Harper was conservative, and Trudeau winning is good. I go by Canadian DUers opinions.

[NCTraveler]

123. 102 recommendations for an op built off a false premise.

One that was rightfully debunked in the first reply. Things are becoming more clear here every day.

[Codeine]

143. Forget it, Jake -- it's Bernietown. nt

[KittyWampus]

150. As the primary goes on, I'm losing more and more respect for many DU'ers.

[stevenleser]

269. From attacking BLM to hawking online polls to just making stuff up, it's hard not to lose respect

for them.

[Number23]

210. Things have been clear as crystal for almost a decade.

These people and their intentions could not possibly be more clear.

[peacebird]

127. I agree that Hillary would be an unmitigated disaster as President, for the environment, for any

Hope of world peace. On the upside, bankers and billionaires love her!

[Spazito]

131. What a heapload of codswallop. n/t

[TryLogic]

139. Thank you.

It seems you hit a nerve with a bunch of Hillary folks which makes me think they realize the significance of what you said. Myself, I see Hillary as another Margaret Thatcher.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

142. If the seminal poster gives me permission...

If the seminal poster gives me permission I will start a poll asking Clinton supporters if they supported Clinton or Harper.

[sufrommich]

145. This should win some kind of award for

weirdest accusation against DU Hillary supporters so far.

[frazzled]

146. Another false rumor/faulty presupposition thread

I haven't seen a single Clinton supporter unhappy that Harper was defeated. Utter nonsense. Nice try, though, to attempt to get weak minds to drink your sauce.

[KittyWampus]

148. Cool Story, Bro!

Last edited Wed Dec 16, 2015, 12:56 PM - Edit history (1)

[Cali_Democrat]

185. LOL

[Enthusiast]

149. Kicked and recommended!

We must divest ourselves of these entrenched interests that have done so much damage.

I hate to subject Bernie Sanders to such a miserable task but I can't see any way out.

Every selfish profiteer will be out to stop Bernie both before he wins the election and after he wins the election.

Go, Bernie! Win this election!

[Renew Deal]

151. Please provide evidence. I've never seen such a thing

I've never even seen someone on DU lament the loss of Harper.

[BlueMTexpat]

152. There is a hell of a lot of difference between

Hillary Clinton and Steven Harper. If you don't understand that, then you really don't know the US political scene at all.

You would do better to compare Harper to any one of the GOPer candidates than to ANY Dem candidate.

That said, I am a staunch Hillary Clinton supporter who is delighted that Justin Trudeau won in Canada. Every other Hillary supporter whom I know personally - and there are a heckuva LOT more of us lifelong Dems who are Hillary supporters than you might think if your only reference is DU where the Bernie supporters seem to be in the fore - is also delighted.

I have no idea where you get your hearsay about Hillary supporters not being happy about Harper's loss. But it is simply false. My many Canadian friends/colleagues could tell you that too.

[retrowire]

156. knr for similarity of Harper and Clinton

not because of the false accusation that Hillary supporters liked Harper.

[Doctor_J]

158. Clinton would be toward the right of the Tories in the UK or Canada

Same with Obama. I believe she is more conservative than Harper. Probably couldn't get elected in the civilized part of Canada.

[Codeine]

161. I'm a Hillary supporter and I quite admired

and even envied how you guys tossed Harper.

[jalan48]

165. Hillary's Wall Street's choice.

Why pretend otherwise?

[gembaby1]

169. Justin and Hilary

[BeanMusical]

191. Harper and Hillary:

[comradebillyboy]

320. Shouldn't the US Secretary of State be cordial to

the prime Minister our most important friend and ally?

[Buzz Clik]

201. Holy shit! Is that my ex on the right? Couldn't be...

... that's what she looked like back in the day. Probably looks as bad as I do these days.

[harun]

176. Hillary is a third way, pro war, Conservative

And I doubt she will get the nom.

[Buzz Clik]

200. TRUTH TO POWER! F*CK THE MAN! HELL NO, WE WON'T GO! WE WON'T FIGHT FOR TEXACO!!!!!11

God, I miss the 60s.

[libdem4life]

234. The 90s were supposed to overturn the 60s...what happened to the VW buses and Flower Power?

Lordy mercy, it's almost 30 years late.

[LonePirate]

181. The vast (90%+) majority of Americans (including Hillary supporters) couldn't name a Canadian PM

They sure couldn't identify the political leanings of Harper because they have no idea who Harper is.

I have no idea whether Hillary personally supported Harper or Trudeau in the recent election. I simply think it's laughable to believe that large numbers of her supporters (or most Americans) invested enough time and interest in the recent Canadian election to form an opinion one way or another.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

196. I remember his mom and dad. Nixon hated the latter and the former dated Mick Jagger.

[MisterP]

183. Harper is a clever, scheming doughface, a Mississaugan engineer

who reinvented himself with cowboy drag, who mouthed a different platitude with each audience

he took the PCs' ashes and rebuilt them into the GOP North (like Netanyahu or Howard)

[tritsofme]

186. The premise of the OP is a lie. Why spread such lies?

There is no critical mass of Clinton supporters that were rooting for Harper. The OP can spread lies, but can't be bothered to provide any shred of evidence.

The OP is a ridiculous lie, and not worth further time.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

192. You sir, are a liar.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

194. Clinton supporters, please vote in my fair and unbiased poll. Please Rec and Kick too...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251903369


Thank you in advance.

[beam me up scottie]

199. Is this the thread that is giving some HC supporters the vapours?

I just had to kick it because all the drama makes this place so much more interesting.

[moobu2]

209. Yeah nevermind it's all untrue.

but that doesn't matter does it?

[beam me up scottie]

211. Maybe you should alert. :)

[Cali_Democrat]

223. Is the statement in the OP true?

"What I see everywhere and esp. on the internet is that Hillary Clinton and her supporters don't like that Stephen Harper lost and Justin Trudeau won the recent Canadian election."

Of course you're not going to answer my question because you seem to always have a very difficult time answering straightforward questions.

[beam me up scottie]

229. How does this compare to a HC supporter claiming we don't care about raped women?

That was allowed to stand and I don't remember you objecting to that smear.

You'll have to forgive me for not mustering any poutrage over this one, what goes around comes around.
















*note to jury: asking a question is not a personal attack

[Cali_Democrat]

230. So you're admitting the OP is a lie, but...

it's OK because some Hillary supporter said something bad about a Bernie supporter some time in the past.

[beam me up scottie]

231. Strawman, typical. Point out where I admitted anything or said it was "ok".

One of your associates accused others of not caring about rape and murder victims* and you rec'd it.

I'm not okay with any of it, actually. I just find the HUGE public outcry over this thread to contrived and extremely hypocritical.








*note to jury the poster seemed confused about the thread in question so I provided a link

[Renew Deal]

261. You post is evidence of what is wrong with DU

[beam me up scottie]

265. Too much meta not getting locked? I agree.

But until the rules are enforced fairly I refuse to participate in today's daily poutrage.

I didn't rec the op, I don't agree with it and I think the Hillary supporters who rec'd that disgusting exploitative thread but are complaining about this relatively mild one are hypocrites who are being quite selective in their outrage*.








*to the jury: this is an opinion, not a personal attack on anyone

[Renew Deal]

267. You're happily participating and you're piling on.

I don't know what other thread you're talking about and what that has to do with this one. And that was my point.

[beam me up scottie]

268. Then you should have read my other posts for the link before passing judgment on me.

Like I said, I am participating in this one because I find the double standard and drama fascinating, especially considering most of the people having a fit over it rec'd the rape thread.

[Renew Deal]

270. The other thread is irrelevant.

And you're clearly a hypocrite in this case.

[beam me up scottie]

272. No, it's not. I didn't rec this thread and I said I disagree with the op.

Last edited Thu Dec 17, 2015, 12:45 AM - Edit history (1)

Now you're being selective with your outrage, you seem to only ever condemn Bernie supporters for some strange reason.

You are all over me for my non-support of this thread but ignore the dozens of other smears by HC supporters.

Why is that?




















*note to jury: this is an opinion only, no posters were harmed by this post

[Renew Deal]

275. Wrong again

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026740357

[beam me up scottie]

276. You had to go back to May to find something you posted in defense of Bernie's supporters?

Last edited Thu Dec 17, 2015, 12:47 AM - Edit history (1)

If you're so outraged about this meta thread I expect you to weigh in on the rape thread, I kicked it.


















*note to jury: this post contains no personal attacks

[Renew Deal]

278. Isn't this the part where you admit you were wrong?

"you seem to only ever condemn Bernie supporters for some strange reason"

And I have a more recent one where I voted to hide some ridiculous attack by a Hillary supporter, but that's harder to find.

I hate to pile on about this off topic BS. I really don't know what rape thread you are talking about.

[beam me up scottie]

280. Here's the link again:

Last edited Thu Dec 17, 2015, 12:42 AM - Edit history (1)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=892463

I applauded the hosts when they locked all threads about supporters but that only lasted one night.











* note to jury: this link was posted because the other poster was wondering about it

[Renew Deal]

281. Thanks

Believe it or not, I didn't read that thread. I thought something with that subject line didn't make sense in GDP and avoided it.

I don't think the OP is targeted at Bernie supporters specifically. It's targeted at people threatening to not vote. That can be anyone including Trump and Bush supporters.

Has it become accepted wisdom that Sanders supporters won't vote? I didn't think so.

[beam me up scottie]

285. The op even admitted it wasn't about the primaries, it should have been locked.

So why wasn't it?

[Renew Deal]

279. Here's another one

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=817753

You're welcome

[beam me up scottie]

282. Good for you, that post should have been hidden.

Yet you still accused me of "happily" supporting this thread when I obviously haven't, which proves you're being selective.

[Renew Deal]

284. I don't think we should fight over this.

There's plenty of good stuff to argue about.

[beam me up scottie]

286. Agreed, I don't want to diss the hosts too much.

It's not an easy job and I appreciate what they do.

We both agree that meta threads should be locked no matter who starts them.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

224. Maybe posters shouldn't libel other posters on the internet.

[pnwmom]

204. It is true that Trudeau supports the Keystone Pipeline and Hillary doesn't,

but I don't think either Hillary or her supporters are holding that against him.

[delrem]

216. Pop quiz:

What action did Justin Trudeau take immediately on attaining office, that is inconceivable from either Stephen Harper or Hillary Clinton?

Special short-essay question for Hillary Clinton supporters, who claim that Hillary Clinton is similar to Trudeau and not at all like Harper: Considering that Hillary Clinton's foreign policy cred's, as ex-SoS, is advertised as one of her greatest strengths, explain how your gung-ho applause for Justin Trudeau, above, which has been remarkably short on specifics, is consistent with Hillary Clinton's foreign policy?

[brooklynite]

220. He cancelled Keystone, which Clinton opposes?

Is there a bonus round?

[delrem]

225. No bonus round until you pass the test! nt

[MissDeeds]

222. Yep

K&R

[iandhr]

226. I am an HRC supporter and I was happy

Don't paint us all with the same brush

[MariaThinks]

227. they are nothing alive. if anything Harper is more like Cruz.

[Metric System]

228. I was born in Canada, most of my family live in Canada, THIS is BS.

[in_cog_ni_to]

233. kick it!

Kick it good!

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[tishaLA]

235. wow I didn't know Sec Clinto and her supporters favored Harper over Trudeau

that's awful.

[Number23]

241. No links to support any of that and 2/3 of this thread is Hillary supporters saying the complete

opposite of what this OP is saying. So, 230+ post in, it's not hard to figure out what's going on here.

[tishaLA]

247. I know, I know....

just having a bit of fun ad pretending something I'd read on DU that is both unsourced and devoid of any kind of reason could have swayed me in one direction or another. In fact, if it hadn't been you who responded to me, I would have asked for a link to prove it untrue, but you foiled my evil scheme!

[Number23]

248. Well I'd like to think that half of those recs are ironic but this place passed that point a long

time ago. It's gone around the bend so damn far it's halfway back again.

[Gloria]

236. Frankly, you have jumped the shark and

I'm sure there are many Sanders people who will latch onto this....to them, grow up, use your brains, FOR ONCE!

And, yeah, I sure did support Harper, NOT....

The idiocy on DU has reached new heights....

[MohRokTah]

237. Gotta link to any of your allegations about Hillary?

Didn't think so.

[MrWendel]

240. Right wing radio...

is more factual than this crap, all be it inspired.

[Duval]

243. Thank you, delrem. I have friends in Montreal

who have told me the very same about Harper. They are very happy and excited for their country. I hope this country can also
vote for the person who will make us proud.

[Zynx]

257. Seriously? I've never heard anything from a single Clinton supporter to suggest this.

Show me a single true Clinton supporter that wanted Harper to win. I am a Clinton supporter and I was thrilled by Trudeau's victory.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

259. So far not one Clinton supporter has shown support for Harper,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251903369

[jalan48]

262. Hillary is definitely part of the ruling class.

She supports the left though she's leaning to the right. And all that money she's collected from speaking fees to Wall Street corporations will have absolutely no effect whatsoever on her policies. Honest. Now, was it Abe Lincoln or George Washington that never told a lie?

[stevenleser]

271. Stephen Glass, is that you? Nt

[glinda]

287. Thank you for speaking up.

[KMOD]

291. Hey Rick,

You should lock this one too, and suggest it be posted in the CT forum.

[NanceGreggs]

292. Well, here we all are.

Almost 24 hours after this was posted, and you still haven't come up with a single link to support what you've asserted.

But this is, of course, the new DU - where 235 posters have "rec'd" an OP that has asserted a "fact" that has no basis in reality, and absolutely no evidence to support it. That pretty much says it all about who's posting here, and how interested they are in actual facts.

There was a time when DemocraticUnderground was a site for Democrats. Alas, those days are gone forever - along with the days when posters demanded facts, instead of K&Ring every OP based on unsubstantiated bullshit.

And that probably explains this:

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/democraticunderground.com#

[MeNMyVolt]

302. Please, don't think this is creepy....

.. but's it like you're in my head.

There's nothing to be done with this. I just say, let it play out. We've (especially you) have done our part, and we'll keep working, way beyond the primaries.

[NanceGreggs]

307. No worries here.

DU stopped being representative of Democrats and the Party years ago - and everyone pretty much knows that.

I now come here to see what "the other side is saying" - which saves me a trip to FR or other RW sites.

[stevenleser]

318. Yep. Bernie's supporters here have driven DU into the ground. DU is unquestionably theirs and this

is what they have done with/to it.

They are unable to build anything. They only know how to destroy.

[Andy823]

327. To be honest

Most of the Bernie supporters are great people, but there is group that "claim" to be supporting Bernie, but they are also the same group that trashed and bashed Obama on a daily basis, then they went after the party and wanted to "purge" anyone that did not meet their purity test. Of course when Hillary came along it was only natural for them to take up the trashing and bashing with her. I highly doubt that they are trying to get "any" democrat elected. They have their own agenda and it is pretty easy to see.

I like Bernie, but I can't hold him responsible for the actions of these clowns who are trying to destroy DU with their outlandish behavior.

[totodeinhere]

297. 239 recs. Not bad.

[blitzen]

305. You are freakin' delusional...

You don't need to lecture us about who Harper is...Many of us know. We're not clueless, and I don't know a single Clinton supporter who "doesn't like that Stephen Harper lost."

As for equating Harper and Clinton, that is truly idiotic.

[Splinter Cell]

309. Truth hurts.

Billary's supporters can't stand it.

[SidDithers]

332. Kick for fantasy...nt

Sid