It's getting downright toxic around here.

[boxman15]

I've only recently begun posting here on DU, but I've been a lurker for years, heading back to the Bush administration. I'm missing the days of honest political discourse. But, lately, I've just been seeing attack after attack after attack on the Obama administration, a majority of which have no basis in reality. That's already bad enough, but what makes it worse is that these attacks are dividing us.

Not only are posters criticizing the president usually based on flimsy at best information, they are then throwing around attacks toward those who disagree with them. If you support the president, you are not a true Democrat. You don't truly understand what liberalism is. Bullshit. Some of us just have different opinions of how a president should govern. I, for one, am disappointed in certain respects with the president, but I have tremendous respect for him. He's done more to enact progressive policy than any president in decades. And he's able to do that because he lives in a place called "reality."

Truth is, if you take an all-or-nothing approach, you will get nothing. And tell me, how is that progressive? How is talking a good game but doing nothing to move forward progressive? You have to compromise with the other side. It makes change slower than desired, but the change still occurs. Progress is made. That's how our system works. And that job is made harder when some in your own party are Blue Dogs (the previous Congress) or when your base stays home and allows a ridiculously partisan and sociopathic GOP to take over the House of Representatives. Now, good luck getting anything remotely liberal out of Congress. You're a fool if you can think that can happen.

There's nothing wrong with criticizing the president. But attacks on him and on his supporters do no good. We need to have healthy political discourse and focus on how to recapture Congress in 2012 instead of hurling insults back and forth at each other.

[jefferson_dem]

1. Hey there!

Well said. I hope you post more often. We can always use more reality-based perspectives... :hi:

[roguevalley]

21. Hi, OP.

Jun 28th 2011

That is the date stamp on when you became a member. Lurker for years without joining or what?

[boxman15]

60. Yeah, I just read posts.

I've probably been reading on this site since 2006ish. Just recently got an account, though.

[Mimosa]

76. Odd.

Just plain odd.

People discuss issues and directions. Nobody, especially oldtimers, is posting to tear down the President. We have every right to disagree with decisions and initiatives which could hurt us.

[mkultra]

80. you are totally out of touch with reality

Things have degraded into name calling toward Obama. There is no issue discussion in that.

[FreakinDJ]

37. We certainly need more like him around here

[global1]

2. I Have My Tinfoil Hat Affixed Firmly To My Head Tonight And I Believe....

that DU was targeted by Repugs & Teabaggers posing as disgruntled Dems & and their purpose is to demoralize and divide us. And guess what - their plan is working.

[flamingdem]

3. +1

Let's hope it's not so insidious but that element is certainly around .. and dang they get paid!

[jefferson_dem]

4. Yeah...

A post calling for unity, healthy democratic discourse, and reasonableness...

Real divisive! Sure sounds like a troublemaker! Git him... :eyes:

[global1]

7. I Was Not Referring To The Original Poster Here You....

misunderstood my message. I was simply making an observation of what I've been seeing here on DU since Obama was elected. I agree fully with the original poster.

[jefferson_dem]

8. D'oh.

My bad. Sorry.

We agree wholeheartedly!

[Enrique]

33. oops

everyone's psyching themselves out. :rofl:

[jefferson_dem]

58. Quick keyboard trigger fingers all around.

:)

[Fire1]

69. Including you. n/t

[CakeGrrl]

14. I completely buy that possibility.

I recall someone asking a few weeks ago about seeing some posters with 1000+ post counts that they didn't recognize during their time on DU.

Shortly after that, an article was posted about user account infiltration.

I buy it.

[GoCubsGo]

57. Yup.

Another one popped up just now. 1000+ post count, no star (not that lack of star necessarily means anything), and multiple posts that bash the President, one after another. I've been here a few years, tend to spend more time than I should here when I'm between jobs. I don't recognize many of them, including the latest one I'm seeing today. They come here, post negative things, and don't even participate in their own threads. Hit and run.

[WingDinger]

25. Troll bait seems to be, whatz fer dinner

[Puglover]

41. And I would say the opposite could be true as well.

I would posit there are Repugs and Teabaggers posing as rabid Obama supporters that work to alienate solid Democrats that (as Democrats do)criticize current Democratic policies they disagree with. And I agree. Their "plan" is working.

[Jakes Progress]

48. +100

The conspiracy whose name must not be spoken.

The rabid fan base is doing the most harm to Obama's re-election.

[Name removed]

72. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BeFree]

5. Progress?

You call one step forward and two steps back: Progress?

Obama is doing nothing more than toeing the line. He is not making progress.
The US is not progressing and any hope of progressing is just about dead.

That is why the toxicity is progressing.

[EffieBlack]

6. Hear, hear!

Great post!

[Armstead]

9. You aren't helping

If you actually tried to engage with people without vitriol, it would be a way to reduce toxicity within your control.

And if you didn't start from the assumption that people with a different view are wrong and stupid, you might be more successful at advocating your beliefs.


I know I can be ascerbic at times, but I do have a rule of thumb. If someone disagrees with me and challenges something I say, I respond in the way they do. If they are civil, reasonable and actually focus on the content, I respond likewise.....But if someone replies like a hothead, is insulting and just repeats canned put downs, I'll respond with a similar tone or ignore them.

[ElboRuum]

11. Where was the vitriol?

Or the accusations of being wrong or stupid?

[CakeGrrl]

13. Do you advise those you truly AGREE with the same way?

From reading around, I don't think you go out of your way to say that to them.

I think you use this excuse to unload on PERCEIVED attacks on you.

[Armstead]

17. You haven't looked around long enough

Been posting on DU since 2001, and when the subject has come up over the years, I have said similar things to people I agree with.

And I don't really give a hoot about "perceived attacks on me." What gets my goat is when peopke trot out canned personal crap to anyone and inane stereotypes as a substitute for sincere and honest debate about the actual subjects at hand.

[CakeGrrl]

26. "Sincere and honest debate"?

You might want to take a closer look at your OP from the other day which 'modestly' proposed that anyone who supported the debt deal get the weight off their chest and admit that the President was wrong.

I called it out as presumptuous that you created that OP under the premise that those who disagreed with you HAD to have been feeling guilty.

You dismissed my assessment as "7th grade" (attacking those who disagreed with your biased premise).

That was a poor example of seeking an "honest debate". You got fed up with people who didn't see it the way you did and you decided to condescend to them with that OP.

It's obvious that a lot of people who see the President as a failure in this scenario and others have a pretty short fuse when others don't get on board with their lines of thought, and yours was an example of airing out your frustrations. Don't try to say you expected 'honest debate' when that OP was all about lashing out, as have a few others been recently. Your thread was a perfect example of what this OP was talking about.

[Armstead]

65. Tone 'm'dear Tone...It's a chicken-and-egg process

That post you referred to may have not been among my most reasonable. However I posted it after hearing Democratic politician after Democratic politician who voted for it (including the President) acknowledging that it was a bad bill that only got passed because of desperation to head off the deadline disaster.

That was in contrast here to all of the posters on DU who were still trying to put lipstick on that pig, and lashing out at anyone who dared to suggest that it was a bad bill.

[boxman15]

16. When was I being a hothead?

If I came off that way, I apologize, but I'm tired of the insults coming from so many on this site. it doesn't matter to me if it's someone who insists those who support Obama aren't true liberals or that those who aren't supportive are racist. I'm sick of it.

And I never said that people who think differently than me are stupid. In fact, many times, I agree with what some of Obama's DU detractors say, especially with regards to messaging and foreign policy. But, these insults and angry threads that take one or two facts and twist them to fit some preconceived narrative do nothing productive.

[Armstead]

23. Well you have been -- in my opinion, of course

If you would like me to pull out examples of what I was referring to I will. Right now though I'm a bit too tired for looking and cut-and-paste. But I will if you would like me to later.

DU has always had its toxic aspects, sometimes worse than others. You may feel it more now that yo9u are posting, but it has always been this way. You could go back to 2003 and find "Why has this place gotten so bitter recently?" threads.



I actually totally agree with many of your sentiments in your reply. I feel the same way, both when it involves people I agree with and those I disagree with.

Except for horseplay or other "positive" personal interactions, I don't believe it's useful to get personal about disagreements here. What you describe as preconceived narratives may well just be a different way of looking at things, and may also be based on a large accumulation of facts and knowledge. Sometimes not. Same goes for people with different perspectives.

Personally I think Obama is doing a bad job overall for a variety of larger political and other reasons that are both simple and complex. I wish he would do a lot better, and I get really angry about him at times. I also get really angry and frustrated at the Democratic Party institutionally for the same reasons.

But I try never to imply or assume that people who believe otherwise are naive, misinformed, not a true liberal or deliberately out to destroy liberalism. etc.

There is a difficult line in distinguishing between heated but reasonable debate and browbeating and toxicity. There is also a difference between expressing a strong opinion and being judgmental and self-righteous towards those who hold a different one.

As I said in my previous reply, I try and treat people here in the same way they treat me or the same way they express themselves in general. So, on a micro level, if you want civil and respectful discourse with me, I'm happy to do likewise. I prefer that. But when people are toxic, I'll mix it up in that way too......Same thing generally applies on a macro level.

[CakeGrrl]

28. Toxicity? YOU are accusing the OP of toxicity?

Is this your way of reaching out to engage honest discussion?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=736170&mesg_id=737320

[Armstead]

52. That post was toxicity in response to toxicity and knee-jerk attacks

Those knee-jerks attacks on Conyers were about as toxic as it gets here. If those who jumped in with shallow and misinformed attacks on Conyers had at least made reasonable points about the actual subjectr, I would not have been provoked like that.

I couldn't believe that Rep. Conyers, one of the longest-serving Dems who has been a staunch progressive and fiercest fighters of Republicans over the years, was being being swarmed by attack bees for calling for public action for jobs -- and being accused of being cowardly about fighting Republicans, simply because he -- and other members of the Out of Poverty Caucus -- were daring to criticize President Obama's performance on the jobs issue.

It is also evident by many of the comments, that many of the attack bees had not even bothered to take the time to actually WATCH the video -- INCLUDING THE FACT THAT HE WAS BEING INTRODUCED BY REP BARBARA LEE -- or even address what he -- and a coalition of other Black and White progressive Congresspeople -- were saying...and they didn't bother to address the historical context or any of the other points he mentioned.

They also said, with boring repetitiveness, a variation of the familiar attack "Why doesn't he file his own bill instead of just whining?" He explicitly said in that press conference that a bill HAD been filed, but had been ignored by President Obama.

Also, they assumed that since the video was posted on Firedog Lake that Conyer said this on that site and was just being a dreaded "Hampshirite." In fact, it was a video of a f'in PUBLIC press conference of progressives in Congress, including that awful Rep. Barbara Lee, among others.

Toxicity in response to toxicity.

[CakeGrrl]

62. Of course. "They made me do it!"

None of the 'high road' for you.

Stop pretending to 'honest debate' when you just want an excuse to be a bomb-thrower.

[Armstead]

63. I DID IT and I'm glad I did. My only regret is that I made it too personal

Watch the 'fing video, and listen and disgest it and alslo note who is introducing Conyer and the WHOLE CONTEXT of the press conference. Then say he is just a "Hampshireite" and that Conyers is just stirring the shit on Firedog Lake.


If President Obama showed even 1/4 the spine of Conyers, and actually was working to advance that agenda, he'd have the full support of me and many others.

But what really pissed me off is the (deliberate?) determination to deflect from the actual subject(s) and the refusal by certain people (ahem) to even pay attention to things like what Conyers and the Up from Poverty Caucus are actually saying and trying to do.

Disagree with them fine. But to accuse someone like Conyers of cowardice towards Republicans? That's when I call bullshit.

[boxman15]

47. There is nothing wrong with heatedness.

It's a good thing, actually. But, when people start to throw insults back and forth at each other, it does no good. I think you do a good job, from what I've seen, of backing your posts or arguments up with facts. If I were you, I wouldn't try to stoop down to anyone's level. Set an example.

Again, if any of my posts have ever come off as self-righteous or insulting, I apologize. I try to avoid doing that. I try to stay as reasonable and level-headed as possible, and sometimes it's difficult to get one's tone down properly on the internet. Anyone who just stops bringing facts to the table and starts throwing insults at each other are the ones being toxic. Not people with different opinions. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear in my post.

[Armstead]

55. Okay let's call a truce on this.

I basically agree with your point about that. And I admit i don't always practice what I preach in that regard myself, though I try.

So let's both try to put that into practice, at least in any interactions we might have on the board with each other.

:toast:

[boxman15]

59. Sounds good. nt

[dionysus]

93. pot, meet kettle.

[Jakes Progress]

49. You don't seem to be tired of the insults

coming from the supporters who pile on posts that have criticisms of the president.

[mkultra]

81. says the main provocateur

still busy doing the republicans dirty work?

[Supersedeas]

100. Exactly, there is plenty of vitriol originating from both sides

Defenders of the President accusing those who disagree Administration policy with being racist white progressives to those who attack the Defenders of the President with the accusation of sycophancy.

The toxicity is not as one sided as some might suggest.

[CakeGrrl]

10. Rec for you! Something I've noticed is

Posters creating "trap" OPs whereby they dare someone to disagree and slam anyone who does.

The best thing with those is to let 'em sink.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

12. Here's how I see it. I took out 1 week's vacation to canvass for Obama...

I gave a good amount of money to his campaign.
To the last second when the polls closed down, I was driving people to the polls.
I gave my all.

I would've liked him to be angry. I would've liked him to seek our help and united us against the Republicans.

THEY didn't vote for him.

THEY will not vote for him.

THEIR ideas always hurt the least powerful, the weakest, the most helpless.

Instead, he behaved as if their ideas were good.

Maybe he does believe they are.

[RBInMaine]

15. Thanks. I've made many of the same points many times. I too am so tired of purist mentality on BOTH

sides of the spectrum. I too wish Obama would put on his Captain Kirk hat and take off the Mr. Spock hat more often, but he has overwhelmingly done well against tough odds. Just look at what this guy inherited. Too many "progressives" simply perpetually see the glass half empty. It is too bad especially when the TeaNuts have handed us so much to unite around.

[housewolf]

18. Yeah, we seem to go through phases like this

For instance, were you around during the 2008 primary season? It was a lot like this is now.

[boxman15]

20. It was pretty bad then, too,

but this seems to be like that but 10x worse. Hopefully it's just a phase and we can get back to reasonable discussion where both praise and criticism are based in reality.

[Tarheel_Dem]

19. Rec. (nt)

[babylonsister]

22. Thanks so much, and recommend. nt

[JoeyT]

24. Oh look, it's another post concerned about "tone" that's using concern for tone

for a very thinly veiled attack on everyone that's critical of Obama. Imagine that.

Toxic = Not worshiping Him as He should be worshiped, apparently.

Your concern for the heathens that don't love Him enough is noted.

[CakeGrrl]

30. A little thin-skinned, aren't you?

Those of you who "criticize" (also read INSULT) the President on a regular basis don't have enough of a forum around here?

[mitchtv]

66. a kind of nice STFU

is what I caught

[Number23]

27. What a nice post

K&R

[iamthebandfanman]

29. trust me, the du of this magical time you speak of

would be just as upset.

Its sad that we are having to speak of DEMOCRATS like this, I agree.

I dont think its us that need to change though!


since then, alot of outside influences have come to DU. now that DU is actually on the political spectrum in some shape of form, something tells me there are rats here from both partys trying to sway and lead arguements.


i mean, we know foreign governments do it.

after all ive seen the last 10 years, i highly doubt we are above it.


Oh the glory days of the bush administration... er... wait what? lol

[lamp_shade]

31. About 20 OPs (original posters... NOT repliers) on my ignore list. This has eliminated nearly all

the toxicity.

[Enrique]

32. this post is toxic

and it's against the rules. i've alerted it.

[mkultra]

82. Indicating you have alerted is also against the rules

[creon]

34. Nature of the beast.

People are angry, frustrated and fearful.
I am not surprised, and I expected this after Obama was elected.

People nedd to decide what they will do with those emotions.

[Vattel]

35. If you attack or defend President Obama on this site

you will be insulted. There is plenty of toxicity on the part of Obama's defenders and plenty of it on the part of his critics. Blaming one side for the toxicity is itself toxic.

[boxman15]

44. I can't defend them.

Lately, it seems as if it's coming from one side more often, but I can't defend anyone who throws in personal attacks at those who think differently than them. It does nothing productive and serves only to make others angry.

[Vattel]

46. I guess it seems to me that more of the toxicity

comes from Obama apologists than from those suffering with Obama Derangement Syndrome. But that could easily be due to my biases since I am not a big fan of Obama.

[boxman15]

53. That's probably it.

Again, it's not that people disagree that's the problem. It's that people begin to just stop arguing with facts and begin to attack each other. That does no good.

[polmaven]

36. Thank you!

n/t

[FreakinDJ]

38. K&R

[paulk]

39. "honest political discourse"

if you miss it so much, why did you post this generalized attack on other DUers?

me thinks you are full of it...

[boxman15]

45. There are plenty of DUers, regardless of their political views, who are being honest

and back up their opinions with facts and stray away from insults and attacks. I'm referring to the people who tend to back up their opinions with faulty logic and then insult those who disagree with them. I happen to support President Obama, so I used those who disagree with him as examples in the original post. But, I can't stand it when supporters of Obama hurl insults at his detractors, either. It doesn't do any good.

[Bluenorthwest]

40. Let's focus on how vicuosly ignorant and deeply corrupt the

Republican Party is. The fact that not one Republican candidate for any office is worthy of that office. The entire problem with this country is the Republican Party, which hates the American people.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

97. THERE. IT. IS. Right there, people!! There it is!! +1,000,000!!!!! n/t

[CreekDog]

42. this is a callout thread

but it's okay because you can call out certain people, just not others.

[Jakes Progress]

51. +100 Yep

[chalky]

61. Who's he calling out? I must have missed the poster's name in the OP.

n/t

[Mimosa]

77. Amen.

Some of us discuss ideas, events and policies. Some small minds discuss other people. ;)

[mkultra]

83. callout is by name

I see the trolls are trying to silence dissent on the board through rules abuse.

[CreekDog]

90. no, not according to DU practice

if you talk about a group or category of posters, the thread will get locked --except often not if you talk about posters who offer any criticism of Obama from the left. the distinction isn't spelled out in the rules, however, it is spelled out in practice.

[last_texas_dem]

43. It's no different than it's been for at least the last four years, IMHO.

Also, this OP presents a rather one-sided POV as to from which faction of DU the "toxicity" is emanating.

[boxman15]

50. I just want to make something clear about my original post,

I am directing my criticism to anyone, whether he be the most ardent supporter of the president or one who can't stand him, who doesn't bring anything valuable or intelligent to the conversation and starts to hurl insults back and forth. It does no good. It only serves to deepen the divide between us. I should've been clearer about this in retrospect, but I am a supporter of the president, and I've had insults like that thrown my way for defending him. But, I also can't stand it when some of my fellow supporters decide they can't bring any facts to the table to refute what someone is saying and resort to calling that person a racist, or something like that.

It needs to stop. My criticism has very little to do with those who disagree with me, but more with those who, regardless of their views, personally attack others.

[Jakes Progress]

54. Very good correction and clarification.

This was not at all the gist of your OP. Notice all the atta boys and agreement with how wise you are based on the first post.

Let's see if the "ardent supporters" who praised your OP will respond the same when you suggest that some of them are over the top sometimes.

[whistler162]

56. January 2013 a return to the comfortable status

quo is hoped for by many!

[donna123]

64. Bickering amongst dems/liberals

is yet another goal of the repubs/tea partiers. People should criticize the president and congress, but at the end of the day, I hope everyone pulls together. If people are fractured and not united, the rabid nutwings are going to get even more of their way. The thought of that, of another Bush, or more rabid repubs in congress scares me more than anything.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

67. Been toxic here for a very long time, dating back to the 2008 primaries!

I call it "Obama Derangement Syndrome," and there are some sufferers here on DU.

[Armstead]

71. It existed long before Obama showed up on the scene

It's called spirited discussion among passionate people who don't always agree.

Attributing legitimate differences on policy, message and performance to ODS is just very shallow thinking and an agenda that goes no farther than the idea of politics as a sport.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

75. I love you, Armstead, but I've been here quite a long time, and I've never seen anything

like what I've seen here since 2008.

[PVnRT]

91. You joined in 2003 - you missed out on the Nader threads

[primavera]

92. Well do I remember those

Kind of sad to see that kind of vitriol being resurrected again, but I guess it's only to be expected.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

94. Actually, I lurked for many years before joining. I remember those Nader threads.

They weren't pretty. :(

[JVS]

98. Nader threads never stopped being posted.

[Armstead]

101. You may be right....two differences, I think

With Boosh in the WH and the GOP in Congress, we may have squabbled among ourselves, but it was against the backdrop of a common enemy in charge of everything. So even as we bashed other on day, Bloosh and the Congress would do something outrageous the next day that kept us together more.

Plus it was smaller, so even as people fought, there was more of a sense of community.

[Phx_Dem]

68. Getting? It's a sewer and has been since Obama was elected.

[mkultra]

84. racism is an ugly spectre

[shellgame26]

70. K&R

Unfortunately there are always going to be people who fall into herd mentality. they can't even acknowledge the accomplishments of this president because they are afraid of losing the veneer of toughness and liberal street cred. So they pretend to not understand reality. We all need to be mad as hell at the republicans and work to defeat THEM instead of all this bullshit self-serving talk of primarying!

[Name removed]

73. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Enrique]

74. ah the good old days before Obama

when every day there would a new poll posted at DU, asking "Who should replace Harry Reid?"

[Skittles]

78. if you want goosestepping, go the the freak republic site

we deal in REALITY

[Name removed]

85. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[politicasista]

79. Kick

:kick:

[MouseFitzgerald]

87. Bullshit

Guess what? A lot of people dont like the fact that we have a republican president masquerading as a democrat. A lot of people dont like Obama because his policies are wrong and they are hurting this country.

A lot of people dont agree with your premise that Obama is doing his best and wants to do great things but cant because of republicans. His positions on many issues are very clear and they are right-wing positions. Education, trade, foreign policy, on and on and on.

I'm so sick of these "kumbaya" "cant we all just agree with my opinion" threads. Many people who post on this website dont agree with you, that's why we all cant just set aside our differences and support Obama.

[Scurrilous]

88. ...

:thumbsup:

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[struggle4progress]

95. From time to time, DU profits by a heavy application of Troll-B-Gone®

I think it's been a while

[otohara]

96. Boy Howdy

I thought about posting a similar thread, but chose to maintain calm vs making my headache worse.

[BeyondGeography]

99. This is nothing