Is there any way to stop the hysteria here?

[cali]

I'm not a supporter of Clinton, though I have been accused of being, as if supporting Clinton was akin to voicing support for pedophilia

I have defended her against some of the more egregious attacks, and I intend to in the future. But sadly, the question in my OP title, has to be answered with a no.

Some of Hillary's supporters can be smug and gloating, but they're far outnumbered, and the attacks are often so ugly, that I was wondering if perhaps other non-affiliate people and supporters of other candidates could step in when they see something outrageous and refute it. Some of you already do this. It won't stop anything, but it might help.

It has gotten uglier and more hysterical in tone. I think criticism of Clinton is justified, even harsh criticsim, but not speculative and ugly accusations.

What's next? Accusations that Hillary's a murdererer? Recycling the old freeper Ft. Marcy scenario?

[Cameron27]

1. No

and it's reached the point where you'll be attacked if you defend her.

[BootinUp]

2. A plea from the mouths of angels.

:toast:

[KoKo]

3. no...too many "Peeps.'

[Adelante]

4. There appears to be no lengths to which it will not go

I've started hiding threads because I don't have time to shovel all the crap.

[Harper_is_Bush]

5. The attacks are so vile they should make people want to vote for Hillary even more.

[ElizabethDC]

6. No, and I'm just about pushed over the edge with some of this stuff

so many people here - on every side - have become so irrational that it's unbelievable. It's really sad to see what hatred fuels.

[BootinUp]

11. Hatred or just propaganda

I think what we are seeing is the result of left and right wing propaganda in all its glory.

[bluethruandthru]

7. I have to agree.

I'm not a Hilary fan either...but honestly, some people act like if she gets the nomination we should all move to Canada. While I don't think she's the best choice we have...she's a hell of a lot better than Rudy, Mittens, Grampa Fred or the other repugs.

[Gman]

8. November 5, 2008

2004 redux

[glowing]

9. The more you bring attention to this, the more it become problematic.

Stop posting these flame wars... People are from all dif. backgrounds. There are a ton of freeper types that sneak on. And a lot of people have been in the trenches since the beginning and want the most drastic in the other way direction that this country needs, not someone who wants to meet with freeper world. Freeper world is dead... How many people do they have left riding that coat-tail? Only the die-hards and the talk show Limp Balls.

[cali]

13. This isn't flamebait, and

other than that, I have no idea what you're attempting to communicate.

[glowing]

22. I don't think its hysteria. Most people have valid concerns. Some

people are die-hard working for their candidate, and will post things about the other candidates to smear.. and then, there are some people who are here to just troll and start a little rucus. I'm on here nearly every day for long amounts of time, and I read a lot of the posts. I don't think its hysterical to point out different views. I think Hillary is one of the most centric candidates (which really screams sitting on the repug fence), and I think that her "tough on terror" thing is going to be an eventual downfall. I believe that she will eventually be cornered into making the wrong decisions because of this.

In fact, everyone of these candidates needs to say everyday all the time, "tough on terror" has nothing to do with taking away civil liberties and starting wars all over the world.

As far as these posts popping up every, oh I'd say 3 to 4 hours, says someone wants a flame fest...And it always starts... I'm not for Hillary, but I really hate to see her bashed. Its not bashing to point out short falls in her policies. Its not bashing to feel that, even though this is non-binding blah, blah vote on Iran is all for show, I think it leads us down a road to create more enemies for us to fear... and will lead us to a reason to bomb something else. And yes, there are a few posts that are character attacks, but I don't think most of them are.

[bain_sidhe]

10. I don't think so.

I've seen what seems to me to be honest, heartfelt calls for civility and sanity, and not only do they not work, they seem to draw a special kind of vitrol of their own.

:shrug: I mostly stay away from candidate threads, good, bad or indifferent, because you can't get more than three or four posts in without encountering somebody bashing somebody's candidate over the head.

I've only spent much time here the last couple of days because I've been reading the "Michigan" threads... which also have a great deal of hysteria, but as a resident of that state, I have an interest in seeing what's being said about us.

**edited to fix grammar**

[Lerkfish]

12. no, but I think you consider me part of the hysteria

and I likewise consider you part of it.

[BootinUp]

15. just rude. And I am not hysterical in saying it.

There is no need to assume she is talking about you, rather it seems you are defending actions you know qualify.

[cali]

16. I don't know.

I don't actually see that you spend a lot of time on it. Maybe you do and I've missed it, but I didn't have you in mind when I wrote this.

[hfojvt]

14. But she is a murderer

or will be, when she wins the nomination and kills my dream of having a Democratic Party that is progressive. :argh:

[Perry Logan]

48. Progressive organizations think Hillary is progressive. Do you know something they don't?

These are quotations from another thread in this section:

Hillary Clinton Vs. Barack Obama (progressivepunch)

Overall Progressive Score: 92% 90%
Aid to Less Advantaged People at Home and Abroad: 98% 97%
Corporate Subsidies 100% N/A
Education, Humanities and the Arts 88% 100%
Environment 92% 100%
Fair Taxation 97% 100%
Family Planning 88% 80%
Government Checks on Corporate Power 95% 97%
Healthcare 98% 94%
Housing 100% 100%
Human Rights & Civil Liberties 82% 77%
Justice for All: Civil and Criminal 94% 91%
Labor Rights 91% 91%
Making Government Work for Everyone, Not Just the Rich or Powerful 94% 90%
War and Peace 80% 86%

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3602202

[Lerkfish]

51. apparently, yes.

[hfojvt]

52. I know

that I do not consider crap like this to be progressive

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/62

I know that "progressive" and "big money" don't really go together.

[sufrommich]

17. Good luck.

[...of J.Temperance]

18. I have no idea why there's such animosity towards Senator Clinton

Personally I think she's a CREDIT and a great asset to our party, and I'm pretty proud of the woman, and I don't care what anyone thinks of that....I like Senator Clinton and she deserves more respect than she gets.

[Dr Fate]

39. You have no idea? It's the war and her vote for it...

And it's the DLC's general inability to admit that their "centrism" on that issued failed.

Not really animosity-just fed up with the centrists losing to the right again and again.

When we see the DLCers stop acting like they have all the answers and the anti-war people are irrational and admit you were wrong on the war(hint- we were 100% right on the war- you guys were not), you might get somewhere with at least some of us...as it is, we expect the same "mistakes" again.

[...of J.Temperance]

41. Not ALL who stupidly voted for the IWR were DLCer's

Also I'm not aware that us DLCer's have ever suggested that we have ALL the answers.

Maybe if YOU stopped blaming and bashing the DLC for everything that happens, maybe if YOU treated us like your fellow Democrats and respected us as being members of the SAME political party as YOU, then maybe YOU would get somewhere with us as well.

Funny that Democratic Underground is for ALL sections of the Democratic Party, including us DLCer's, that's why there's a DLC avatar available in the DU avatar section, or haven't you noticed?

[Dr Fate]

42. True. But the DLCers still act like it was some act of clear-eyed pragmatism.

When in fact, it was a bust. 100% failure.

And I have to laugh- the organization that supported Joe Lieberman (I-3rd Party) wants to lecture me about party loyalty & party unity??? LOL!!

Here come the Lieberman Loyalty Cops!! LOL!!!

Unlike the typical DLCer (See their leader, Harold Ford)- I never supported a 3rd party.

Maybe if the DLC stops supporting GOP wars and conservative 3rd parties you wont get so many arguments. Dont act like we are the problem when it comes to being good DEMS.

[...of J.Temperance]

43. Of course I'd better not

Mention all of the so-called "good Democrats" who voted third party for Ralph Nader in 2000....INSTEAD of voting for Al Gore like the majority of DLCer's voted for Al Gore.

How many of these so-called "good Democrats" now spend a good portion of their time bashing Hillary Clinton and ANY Democrat who doesn't vote 100% of the time EXACTLY like they want them to vote?

So yeah, don't lecture ME about party loyalty and party unity either....people like ME are trying to find the things that UNITE us ALL as Democrats, instead of polarizing on the things that divide us as a party.

[Dr Fate]

44. You should mention greens. I oppose all 3rd parties that make DEMS lose-even the conservative ones.

DLCers complain about the greens as much as I do- but they seemed fine with 3rd parties when it was pro Bush on Iraq.

My my-so you are worried about DEMS who might follow the DLCs example by not supporting the nominee???

LOL! You shouldnt have taught them how to do it so well. I hope for all of our sakes that your chickens dont come home to roost.

LOL! Here come the Lieberman Loyalty Cops!!!! Support the DEM no matter what (pssst-Unless it's Lamont)

Sorry, but the DLC's support for Lieberman and the war did more to divide the party than people who dont want to reward Hillary & the DLC for supporting the war.

[...of J.Temperance]

45. Huh?

Whenever have the DLC NOT supported the Democratic Presidential nominee?

1992 - Bill Clinton - DLC supported him.

1996 - Bill Clinton - DLC supported him.

2000 - Al Gore - DLC supported him.

2004 - John Kerry - DLC supported him.

2008 - ? - DLC will support him OR indeed her.


With regard to the rest of your comments, with all due respect, they don't actually make a great deal of sense.

The fact is this, IF in the 2000 Presidential Election those so-called "Democrats" would have voted for Al Gore, like the rest of us did, IF those so-called "Democrats" HADN'T of voted for Ralph Nader and his Green Party - who didn't have a snowball's chance of getting elected to ANYTHING - then George W. Bush wouldn't have even BEEN in the White House would he, and thus there WOULDN'T have even been any talk of invading Iraq in the first place.

[Dr Fate]

46. You must have "forgot" how Harold Ford-top leader in the DLC- endorsed Lieberman(I-3rd Party)

Either that or you dont pay attention to the activities of your policy makers & spokespeople.

I'll say it again, the DLC, who supported a 3rd party, has no standing to lecture anyone on party loyalty or party unity.

The DLC didnt punish Harold Ford for supporting a 3rd party-they REWARDED him by giving him a leadership slot.

DLC staff members even went on to work for Joes staff after he defeated the Democrat.

Either you are playing dumb or you really dont follow what your own people are up to.

And to briefly adress your attempt at deflection-I never disagreed with you on Nader at all- so I dont know why you keep bringing him up. *I'm* not the one who is associated with 3rd parties.

[jmp]

50. "INSTEAD of voting for Al Gore like the majority of DLCer's"

Maybe they didn't want a continuation of Bush/Clinton policy. The Democrats wouldn't have to worry about losing votes to Nader if they nominated progressives.

[Perry Logan]

49. The animosity comes from fifteen years of incontinent slander in the media. And misogyny.

[bhumikag]

19. more to come

i was at national review's page..they have huge banners asking readers to support "stop hillary" campaign..anti-hillary chant is at fever pitch..even rational defense or call for civility gets u slammed..wait till the Swift Boat style attacks get rolling



bhumika
politics desk,Voxant Newsroom

[mmonk]

20. I tried the "say something nice about the other candidate" thread

between HRC and Obama supporters to try and unclog GD politics from the negative threads. Maybe someone can come up with another idea.

[cali]

21. That was a good idea, n/t

[mmonk]

23. Thanks.

There were some shakey spots but some fairly good participation.

[...of J.Temperance]

25. Another idea?

How about offering free booze or something....it's worth a try! ;)

[mmonk]

53. That could get expensive.

But it sure would be fun (as long as those that get nasty when drunk are monitored).

[hyphenate]

24. I've done what I could

but some people just have it in their head that Hillary needs to be put down with all the republicans. It sucks, but I guess we will really know the score when the majority of people NOT online or as well informed select her to be our nominee. Not my idea of a best case scenario, but it's the point where we'll be able to separate true Dems from the trolls.

[illinoisprogressive]

26. the article regarding the fake story re: edwards is true. and think of the Edwards family...

elizabeth is really sick and to have them plant a story like that was really over the line.
that is not just accusation. it is a real article and story.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

31. The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion Is A Real Article And Story

:sarcasm:

It's actually built on the same pattern of innuendo

[Cameron27]

38. Even THAT got posted here

under the guise of a different story. Rumor and innuendo are always the way horrible things begin.

[cali]

47. and you know that the Clinton campaign planted this

story just how? There's an article that says a supporter of hers owns the National Inquirer. And as I understand it, that's all it says. And why would her campaign do that? She's far ahead of Edwards by every measure.

[Grandrose]

27. It's really not that bad.....since

I found "Ignore", if I don't see it, I don't respond and it works! At least I do not add to the hysterics!:yoiks:

[tech3149]

28. Probably not, but don't let it bug you

I probably see 30 posts a day that have a strident tone, argumentative message, or are approaching slander. In the words of Cenk Uygur, Calm Down! People get too emotional about their political choices when they care enough to pay attention. I respect the emotional investment in the candidate of choice but I realize that once emotion plays a part, reason goes out the window. If someone is so invested in supporting or opposing a choice you aren't going to change their minds. Just read the post, make a mental note, and move on.

It's hard to find the balance between pragmatism and idealism. Cut the inflammatory posters some slack and don't become flame bait by trying to argue a fight you can't win. If you can post something that tones down the rhetoric and gets the discussion back to a logical discussion, please do! Otherwise, move along and note the OP. I only put one person on my ignore list, and that was only after a few years. If you see multiple posts or responses from someone that doesn't seem to be open to honest discussion, just dump them. Life's too short to waste time dealing with that sort of rigid mental structure.

[incapsulated]

29. Ban the word "Hillary"?

Make the forum replace the word Hillary with random odd names to confuse everyone. :P

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

30. First rule of hostage negotiations: Don't say "Calm down." It makes people violent.

Y'know... the prevalence of hate threads may be an illusion. They all turn into flame wars and stay kicked forever, so the top few threads are always a content-free donnybrook. If either side stopped responding it would stop dead, but that's not likely (or even necessarily desirable) on an internet forum

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. No...

And I don't give a rat's ass...There's people here I have lost all respect for and I hope they don't respect me because if they do I know there's something wrong with me...

[incapsulated]

33. Take a break

This place is a madhouse and I'm saying that after the worst of the 2004 primaries. It's just insane. I deal with it by not taking it seriously.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

34. I Draw The Line At Character Assassination

The Enquier Story was over the line...

[incapsulated]

35. It will continue, though

You put out one fire and another starts up. I've never seen anything like it, to be honest. It's like watching a train wreck, I can't turn away.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. I Swear To G-d

I was lukewarm about Hillary Clinton but now when somebody attacks her here it's as if they attacked my mom...

[BootinUp]

40. Me too.

I guess for some people the world really is black and white. I can't function that way.

[AtomicKitten]

37. Saltpeter or a swift kick to the nads.

Primaries are pretty ugly generally.