Which spews more anti-Hillary hatred?

[Clintonista2]

[durrrty libby]

1. DU...No Contest

[Bjornsdotter]

2. DU

...we've got a few live ones right now.

Cheers

[Sparkly]

3. I don't know, cuz I avoid the other place. nt

[Donnachaidh]

4. the Senate has a problem with DISSENT, too

taking a page from their book?

[Clintonista2]

5. So you see no distinction between "dissent" and "hatred"?

That explains alot.

[Donnachaidh]

8. I've seen lots of vitriol thrown at other candidates by Hillary's bots

But those others aren't throwing a hissy fit and labeling disagreements as hatred. Old tactic (again) from the political playbook? :shrug:

[Clintonista2]

14. There is sincere hatred towards Hillary on DU

Even disregarding policy disagreements, I draw the line at people who call Hillary a "whore", people who make topics about how ugly Hillary looks (I'll try to find the ol' "Hillary looked hideous on Letterman" topic), etc. Yesterday I posted a topic about how the freepers want to sue Hillary to stop her from running, because they think that it should violate the consitution for spouses to run. Many, many people on DU replied and agreed with the freepers. It really is sick, and NO other candidate has to face those sort of attacks.

[Donnachaidh]

21. oh please spare us the scenery chewing

REALITY check -- it's a presidential race. If you're tearing your clothes and wailing to the heavens NOW about this perceived *hatred* - is your head going to explode before November 2008?

As I said previously, LABELING your perceived opponents as HATERS is something the Republicans do. And YOU are doing the very SAME thing with this creepy poll. How can you possibly expect respect from people who don't agree with you when you resort to such schoolyard tactics?

[Trajan]

40. I'm not a Hillary Bot

I am a 'NOT A GOP PRESIDENT EVER AGAIN' Bot ...

I support ALL the Democratic party candidates, because I will certainly be voting for whichever of them emerges come 2008 .....

Given that; I make a distinction between legitimate criticism and outright hatred ....

Edwards gets my vote ...

Biden gets my vote ....

Hillary gets my vote ...

Obama gets my vote ... come that cold day in November .....

I am tired of the cheap sniping as well .... and I could give a shit which 'Bot' is doing it ...... it all stinks ....

[beaconess]

67. Hear hear - it's absolutely sickening

[LanternWaste]

74. That it's limited to the DU supporters of just one candidate is absurd.

I've seen representation on DU from every candidated (except Kucinich) get overly-defensive and resorting to the tried and true-- name calling (bots, facists, etc...).

That it's limited to the DU supporters of just one candidate is absurd.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

6. Please note:

It is the season of the Democratic Party primaries. Democrats are running against Democrats. It is not "hatred" to speak in opposition of Sen. Clinton.

Quite frankly, some people around here really have to stop using Right Wing-style "I'm a victim!" statements, especially when their candidate is leading in the polls. It's simply tedious.

It's not hatred. It's Democracy in Action.

[Donnachaidh]

9. thank you thank you THANK YOU!

The whiny crybaby tactic is REALLY low.

[dionysus]

29. *ding ding* we have a winner!!!

n/t

[LanternWaste]

75. On one hand I can see analysis

On one hand I can see analysis, scrutiny and critique of candidates. That's not hatred-- that's discussion.

On the other hand, I can see name calling, deleted messages and petulance. That's not a discussion, and while it may not be outright hatred, it's petty and petulant.

Although, I'm the first to admit the pettiness and petulance have a place in politics-- I'd just thought it was reserved the the Republics...

[saracat]

7. Freepers because not supporting someone is not the same as "hating " them.

Hillary is a candidate in "our" primary and some diss her because they support an opponent.That is not hate.The Freepers just hate her because she is part of the opposition party. And because they hated Clinton.

[FrenchieCat]

20. Odd, when I dared post anything

with Edwards' name in it, YOU have accused me of HATING him, although I have clearly told you that I do not hate the man, I just don't want to see him become my President!

Yet here you have seemingly adopted a different policy at the moment. :dilemma:


saracat (1000+ posts) Sat Sep-08-07 01:48 AM
Response to Original message
25. Frenchie, you don't like ANYTHING about Edwards. Mostly you spew hate regarding him.
So I do not think the real reason for this post is that you feel "dictated to" by the verbiage a poster on DU uses. And the implication that you include JE in the candidates you can find something to "like" in is laughable. Your prior posts indicate otherwise.I actually prefer it when you truthfully express your contempt.At least you are being honest instead of attempting a pretense of impartiality through an assumed offense of what you interpret as "authoritarian orders", which was only the opinion of a poster.I assume you do not feel that poster has the right to state her opinion on DU as it conflicts with your own.How very sad.
-----------------

FrenchieCat (1000+ posts) Sat Sep-08-07 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. Thanks for your "judgement" of what I think and why I do what I do.......
Unfortunately, what you think is just that...and what is sad is that you would dictate to me my thoughts on my actions as though being honest equals what you have assumed.

In reference to me stating that I like something "even" about John Edwards, that is actually true....it is just not enough to make me want to vote for him. If you have a problem with that, it is yours, not mine.
---------------------

saracat (1000+ posts) Sat Sep-08-07 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #26
28. I am only "judging you on your previous posts" which always are laced with
your "hatred" or "dislike" of Edwards.You have even stated you have personal reasons to do so.I do not dictate your thoughts in any way. But it is disingenuous to imply that you in any way find something to "like in Edwards" after your many posts denigrating him.That is what I have a problem with.But do as you wish.I was just expressing my opinion.
---------------------
FrenchieCat (1000+ posts) Sat Sep-08-07 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. You've got me confused with another poster OR
else prior to making accusations as to what I have said, you would at least be consciencious enough to at least locate these "I have hatred" for Edwards posts of mine that you mention in your certainty as to what I am doing and why. I'll wait for those.

"Many Denigrating post" is a phrase that you have thrown into your reasoning to personally attack me....however, I'm not sure why providing information on Edwards actions with links is to be considered Denigrating to him. If he voted for some bankrupcy bills that I didn't like, is it really "denigrating" for me to post the information that backs up the fact that he did this? Information that I supposed Edwards supporters would prefer not show up in any posts?

I believe that it is Edwards supporters that time after time again attempt to denigrate me with their personal attack posts to be what is happening here....and this approach of theirs has been a constant perhaps because they lack the material necessary to actual refute the information I present with facts.

As they say, and I guess, as you do...."if you can't defend the message because it is factual, then attack the messenger".
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3504311#3505458

[saracat]

26. That is because I seem to recall a post in which you declared you

disliked Edwards for "personal" reasons and savaged him.If that was not posted by you and I am incorrect.I apologize.I looked for the thread in which that post appeared and I can no longer find it.It may not have been you but that was how I remembered it.

[FrenchieCat]

28. Nope....never have I stated that I disliked or hated John Edwards......

anywhere on these board.....although I certainly I'm no fan of John Edwards, the politician....and that is something that I have not hidden.

[saracat]

42. I apologize then Frenchie. I am wrong and have confused you with someone else.

[FrenchieCat]

70. No real problem........

Thanks for apologizing. :hi:

[AZBlue]

10. DU by far!

[illinoisprogressive]

11. One of the proud DUers posting truth

[wyldwolf]

46. ...better known as hypocrisy

[Forkboy]

47. You're one to talk.

Your own never seems to bother you. :shrug:

[wyldwolf]

48. nah. You have no idea what I'm referencing.

But you never miss a chance to make a snark reply, even if it's an ignorant one.

[Forkboy]

49. And we all know how you refrain from snark.

That would be more hypocrisy from you.

[wyldwolf]

50. and we all know how you comment on things you're clueless about...

..always wanting to get a word in... always completely irrelevant.

[Forkboy]

51. Would that be more snark?

Hey, maybe we can all go sing Kumbaya at FR with some Obama supporters like you wanted us to do.You may not remember that night well, of course. :toast:

[wyldwolf]

52. would that be more joining in a conversation where you're missing the relevant details?

[Forkboy]

55. No, that was my first post.

:silly:

Since then I've been part of this conversation with you, and enjoying another display of hypocrisy.First you said the 'they do it too' defense is "no defense at all" the day after you used the 'they do it too' defense.Now you complained about my snark when you engage in it more than I do (and that's a lot).No search required for that one...see above.

You can't even be consistent from post to post, yet alone thread to thread or day to day.

But do keep trying.The BC game doesn't start until 1:00.

[wyldwolf]

56. ..and since then your replies have grown even more irrelevant.

[Forkboy]

57. Well, what's that say about you always responding then?

:crazy:

[Clintonista2]

59. Because responding to you is like shooting fish in a barrel?

[Forkboy]

61. Hi Lirwin! How goes it?

:hi:

[Clintonista2]

62. I get the feeling that responding to your "hi" will somehow turn into an argument...

:rofl:

[Forkboy]

63. LMAO

Nah....I like a lot of your posts.Especially that one. :D

[wyldwolf]

71. it's like taunting a little chihuahua

[Forkboy]

72. Don't quit your day job for a career in stand up.

Unless you're playing the ventriloquist's dummy.You're already used to having your strings pulled.

[wyldwolf]

77. LOL! What forkboy? You say, "yip yip yip yip?" What does that mean?

[ronnykmarshall]

73. ...............

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJy1TdXwBKs

[ginchinchili]

12. It's too bad that you can't tell the difference between....

Hillary hatred and those of us, and we are many, who simply don't believe Hillary can win. You have to be able to listen to others who happen not to agree with you without getting so upset or, in some cases, making personal attacks.

[asthmaticeog]

13. Who posts more bullshit red herring polls? Hillary supporters or liberals?

[Forkboy]

34. *SNARF*

:spray:

[TSIAS]

15. FR

Most Hillary detractors here will likely vote for her if she is the candidate. Folks at FR would never consider voting for her.

Great job creating goodwill for your candidate. Keep it up!

[DURHAM D]

16. I have assumed that Freepers are

also the Hillary haters here.

[Maribelle]

24. Of course. I have seen them brag elsewhere about that.

But we are not supposed to talk about that here, now are we? :shrug:

[dionysus]

30. LOL

that's right man... I've been here undercover since 2001 keeping my powder dry for that chance to go after hillary!

sheesh, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...

[Prophet 451]

17. Not much difference

I post here and occasionally lurk in Freeper and from observation, I'd say it's about even.

I take it here, we're talking about irrational Hillary-hatred, rather than perfectly rational disagreement with her policies or feeling that Candidate X would do a better job.

[Clintonista2]

18. Exactly. I obviousley have NO problem with people who disagree with Hillary's policies

But I have encountered such slime on DU. Posts that attack her appearance, I see her called a "whore" daily ("corporate whore"), etc. You just don't see that kind of venom being spewed at any other candidate on DU.

[Prophet 451]

19. Well, that covers me

I'm sure Hillary would be a decent president. I just disagree with her policy of economic triangulation and feel Kucinich would do a better job.

[emilyg]

27. I find it disgusting.

[asthmaticeog]

37. I've seen Biden called a "corporate whore" plenty.

Because he is one. As is Clinton. Your selection bias proceeds you.

[jefferson_dem]

22. Oh jayzus...

Get a grip. All of the candidates are run through the ringer here.

No time for ==>

[HuffleClaw]

23. so criticism of hillary is 'hatred' now? hmmm, that sounds familiar

speaking of comparisons to free republic...

[Clintonista2]

25. Heh, well, 63% of DUers agree with me

And I'm fairly certain that 63% of DUers don't support Hillary.

P.S- LOL@ supporting the leafs.

[dionysus]

31. and this is where you people are so hypocritical...

as ytou have to throw a dig in at someone for whose fucking hockey team they support.

hypocrisy knows no bounds...

[Forkboy]

35. Funny stuff, isn't it?

:)

[HuffleClaw]

38. ok, so they haven't won a stanley cup since before i was born. big deal.

all that means is they are due! any day... any year... any decade now!

[JeffR]

32. This horseshit framing has been carefully crafted, HuffleClaw

Reason #712 why I don't support a Clinton nom. The irony is that until her supporters trotted out this shiny little hobby-horse, there were a mere 711 reasons why I didn't support her, so they might have had me.:)

[HuffleClaw]

39. hahaha

only 711?

[JeffR]

41. Give or take

I lost count a few weeks after her campaign began...

[LWolf]

33. Better question:

Who spews the most propaganda, for example calling non-support "hatred?"

Hillary supporters or Obama supporters?

[Forkboy]

36. Tough day?

[Perry Logan]

43. It's worse here. Freepers can't pronounce the word "unelectable."

[Donald Ian Rankin]

44. There is a difference between opposition and hatred; much of what is aimed at Hillary here is hatred

A lot of posters on this thread have been drawing a distinction between "opposition" or "non-support" on one hand, and "hatred" on the other.

I completely agree that this is a very real and very valid distinction.

A very large chunk of the posts about Hillary here on DU are out-and-out vitriolic hatred, not just non-support.

That doesn't mean they're wrong - there may be valid reasons to hate Hillary (I don't think they are). But they're certainly hatred, and that should be admitted.

[robcon]

45. Although I've never been on the Free republic site,,

I couldn't imagine that there are more anti-Hillary threads there than here.

[Sapphire Blue]

53. I don't go over there, but there certainly is a lot here. That goes for Edwards hatred, too.

[SOS]

54. FR hates all Democrats

DU has lively discussions among supporters of our candidates.
To compare the two sites is just plain silly.

How many DUers voted for Kerry in 2004, regardless of their primary favorite?
How many Freepers voted for Kerry?

[Forkboy]

58. Now you're just ruining their fun.

:)

[Arugula Latte]

60. Do you ever wonder why she generates so much? How's that gonna play:?

Not so well in the general, eh ...

[Clintonista2]

64. The more people see of Hillary, the more they like her

The right has branded her as a "cold bitch", yet the more people actually SEE and HEAR her speak, the more they realize that that is simply not true. Unfortunatley, many on DU have fallen for the "cold bitch" stereotype.

[Arugula Latte]

65. I can't say that has worked for me.

The more I see her, the more I'm turned off by her. And I'm a woman who would love nothing better to have a cool, progressive woman as prez. Hill ain't it.

[Clintonista2]

66. You're a typical political junkie, though

People who generally don't follow politics, who don't really have an opinion on any candidate, who could vote either way, probably view her a certain way right now. If she won the primary, and joe sixpack actually got to watch her speak, and hear her platform, I think they would be much less intimidated by her than they are now.

[beaconess]

68. There is plenty - and far too much - candidate hating going on here. But Hillaryhating outdistances

them all.

But all of it is ridiculous and counterproductive.

I haven't decided who I'm going to support in the primaries, but WHOEVER gets the nomination will have my full support.

It's really sad that Democratic Underground is being consumed by Democratic backbiting. In fact, it's downright pathetic and, in my mind stupid, for people to waste this much time and energy tearing down other Democrats.

[Clintonista2]

69. Well said!

The only people I truly can't stand on DU are the "I won't vote for Hillary, even if she's the nominee" people. I think that constructive critisicm is great for the party and DU as a community, but some of the attacks (attacks are different than critisicm) are just so ugly.

[backscatter712]

76. The DLC contingent doth protest too much.

Maybe there are a few tools going off the deep end on this; but every time someone suggests that Hillary's voting record doesn't put her against the Iraq war enough to make us believe she'll bring it to a quick end, or that her recent health care proposal, while requiring everyone to have health insurance, doesn't do enough to ensure everyone can afford to have health insurance; people start going "RAAAAH! YOU'RE A HILLARY HATER!!! YOU RAG ON HER BECAUSE SHE'S A WOMAN, YOU SEXIST PIG!"

I don't hate her, and her gender certainly doesn't enter my decision process when I decide which candidate I believe would best represent the Democratic party, but do I really need to be called a HILLARY HATER every time I suggest that someone like Kucinich would be a better president?