I'd like to give a round of applause to all the Jill Stein voters and JPR-atf*ckers out there

[Maven]

who made this day possible.

Take a bow, guys! This is your day.

When the first bombs fall on Iran, we'll all remember how "pure" you truly are.

[KG]

1. don't forget susan sarandon!

[Maven]

2. Sarandon!

I hope she stocks up on cashmere before nuclear winter.

[LenaBaby61]

10. There won't be enough Cashmere on this earth ....

To protect her ignorant behind IF there's a nuclear Winter.

NONE of us will be here IF ...

[Blue_true]

128. Honestly, if there is an all out nuclear war.

I hope that me and all of my family die fast, instead of the slow painful death that will follow. I have no idea why people that do live would want to reproduce.

[LenaBaby61]

146. I agree with this Blue_true ...

I'd want for me & my family/friends to go FAST too, and yes who'd want to reproduce and live in a Chernobyl-type world? Even through some type of we do have survivors left on this big blue marble (Which won't be blue any longer), the radiation and nuclear devastation will kill them slowly and painfully in possibly a few days.

Look at the fall out map from From Fukushima from 2011, and we STILL have particles/radiation floating around in our atmospheric jet stream 7 years later.

[Blue_true]

148. Lena. The earth will turn blue again, humans just won't be around to see it.

I hope that what comes after us are better toward the earth and everything on it.

[Plucketeer]

300. The best thing that could happen (for Earth's sake)

would be that nothing with much of a self-perceptive brain arises from the muck again.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

351. I'm with you on that... whoever comes after certainly couldn't be any worse than what we have now.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

175. That fallout map is totally bogus.

Were it accurate, everyone within the zones shone would have died.

Snopes is always your friend. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/nuclear-fallout-map/

[LenaBaby61]

329. "Snopes is always your friend."

Well, Snopes is not really my friend where it relates to their stance on Monsanto's use of a weed killer that is NOT safe for human consumption (Glyphosate).

I'm a 30 plus year Vegan, and of course my diet mainly consists of fruits, veggies, legumes and nuts but I also eat cereal. Well, I used to eat Special K. cereal and, and Glyphosate (A herbicide agent found in Monsanto’s Roundup weed killer, which is used by MANY farmers) was found in Special K., and I don't want to be eating something as toxic as Glyphosate which shouldn't be in our vegetables, fruits, cereal, and especially not in our water, air and soil which it is which is how it's passed onto so many food products.

As for the fallout map, I should have explained myself better to the person I was posting the map to, in saying that we still have radiation fallout in our atmosphere 7/8 years post Fukushima.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

330. Except the map is still totally bogus and the fallout amounts

indicated simply did not occur.

[LenaBaby61]

386. Per Snopes, right?

Because if your saying that it's "bogus" per Snopes

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

387. Yep. Per snopes. Although they are not the only ones who pointed out

that the map is totally erroneous. They're just the easiest source to go to.

There are actual maps out there that show the true amount of radiation released and spread out from the accident. And only a tiny fraction of the radiation shown in that fake map actually got across the ocean. I recall that map was put out there a few days after the accident and people who actually understood something about these things pointed out how wrong it was.

Unless I somehow missed the news that everyone in those Western states died of radiation poisoning, it didn't happen.

This might help.

[SidDithers]

394. Phil Plait also commented...

Far worse, in my opinion, is the person who created a map claiming to show the spread of a radiation cloud from fallout. This map is a fraud: totally fabricated and complete garbage. Snopes has the details. A nuclear reactor like this cannot release such a cloud of radioactivity; it’s physically impossible. People remember Chernobyl, of course, but the Japanese reactor is a very different design, and cannot explode the way the Ukranian reactor did in 1986.

Creating this kind of map is a horrible, horrible thing to do. I cannot abide fear-mongering in any form, but with the heightened fears of radiation coupled with the scale of the tragedy in Japan, this map is particularly disgusting.

Having said that, there are reports of some radioactive materials from the reactor having escaped. The amount of radioactivity is not negligible, but reports indicate that sailors on the deck (that is, open to the air) of a US ship a few miles at sea from the plant received an elevated radiation dose — about a month’s worth in an hour. That sounds alarming, but keep in mind the Apollo astronauts traveling through the Earth’s radiation belts received a dose ten times higher than that with no ill effects. The chances of any of this radiation making it to the US coast are essentially zero.

Again, I am not trying to downplay this. It’s serious. However, it’s not the doomsday a lot of people are playing it up to be.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/03/14/the-japanese-nuclear-reactor-overreaction/#.WvXNAogvzIU


It's a bogus map.

Sid

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

395. Thank you.

I keep on thinking that people here on DU are bright enough to want to get their facts straight, but alas that isn't always the case.

[Fortinbras Armstrong]

221. There was a writer on military strategy in the 1950s

Named Herman Kahn, who wrote, "After a nuclear war, the living will envy the dead."

[quartz007]

305. Do not wish that! There is hope after nuclear bombs!!

Make note of the fact that Hiroshima & Nagasaki are now rebuilt with modern buildings, world class infra-structure, and thriving. Google pictures of those 2 cities. It will boggle your mind.

[Blue_true]

333. You clearly missed the worldwide part.

There will be no rebuilding in nuclear winter. Daily survival will be savage and uncompromising. I am somewhat of a natural optimist, just not to your level.

[quartz007]

350. The next nuking will look like this..

No, it won't be an all out nuclear war.
Having nukes is best guaranty against all out war.

India & Pakistan fought 4 wars before both got nukes.
Now it is a stalemate with limited border skirmishes.

US & Russia went through extended cold war with MAD.
(mutually assured destruction)

If Japan had Nukes during WWII, there would not be
Hiroshima & Nagasaki bombing.

Kim Jong UN got scared after Twitter threats from tRump.
Kim likes his whiskey and donuts too much to fight a war
he can't win and will surely get killed.
No nation who has the wherewithal to develop nukes
is going to commit suicide.

So...here is what will happen...
Religious extremists who routinely execute suicide bombings, will get hold of a portable nuclear device and detonate in some US or European city.

[Blue_true]

352. I hope you're right. nt

[quartz007]

354. 2 reasons I could be right

1. history of nukes
2. I am in late 70's..seen a lot.

[NJCher]

80. I think this is what you're looking for

&t=68s

Watch it two or three times. You'll feel so much better!

[DoctorJoJo]

45. And Nina Turner!!

[Gothmog]

55. Nina Turner clearly played a role and is still playing a role

[Demsrule86]

195. In Ohio last night, Kucinich lost badly ...he was our revolution's candidate...and he was

destroyed...so happy about that. I hate Turner and her anti-Democratic Party organization. Sen. Sanders should distance himself from it.

[Gothmog]

398. I was glad that the Our Revolution candidates have done poorly

[Demsrule86]

401. Me too.!

[world wide wally]

46. Sarandon is an ignorant B_ _ _ _ _

(pardon the expression.... it just seems to fit here)

[Ninsianna]

65. She is ignorant.

But she doesn't not provide us adorable puppies. So not the usual word, please.

[Blue_true]

129. Plenty of other words that you could have chosen.

There were socalled liberal men who made Trump possible. I just call all of them assholes.

[world wide wally]

153. I call them assholes too.

If it makes you feel better, Sarandon is an ignorant asshole.

[Atman]

218. Wait, we all have assholes!

What do you have against assholes? And what about the people using ostomy bags? I think you’re being rather insensitive!

[nclib]

304. Ahh...but hers is ignorant.

[world wide wally]

167. Well said

[Gothmog]

53. Susan Sarandon and Jill Stein both helped to elect trump

[Eliot Rosewater]

102. Not the only ones.

[Honeycombe8]

76. She was very high profile on Stein. Sarandon! nt

[Blue_true]

127. Or Cornell West. Assholes both. nt

[Lunabell]

166. Who?

[Oneironaut]

237. I can feel the revolution beginning!

Good thing i have a lot of money, though, so i won’t need to suffer, unlike those poor underlings in society who watched my movies!

[Hoyt]

3. On target. There are many to blame, but those groups are high on the list.

Sad thing is, they are fine with this. "Bernie or Bust" and "Burn it Down" weren't just rhetoric to some of these folks. Of course, they failed to see who would end up in control, not them.

[Orsino]

392. Numerically, they are tens of millions behind plain ol' Republicans.

It's fun to scapegoat, but the few who were never going to vote for Hillary anyway don't deserve an outsize share of the blame. Republicans created and championed candidate Trump.

[fleabiscuit]

4. I love good irony. This one gives me a sad. nt

[LonePirate]

5. Let me Rec this for you. Not much difference between Stein voters, JPRs and deplorables.

[Honeycombe8]

78. Who is JPR? nt

[rurallib]

82. jack pine radicals - a group of Sanders supporters on here

that formed a different site mostly to support Sanders and oppose Hillary.
That is about all I remember.
I looked in once and it was pretty radical.

[Honeycombe8]

86. Ohhhhh...I didn't follow Sanders & his supporters closely. I think I've asked this before recenty,

and got in trouble here. LOL. So I guess I can expect it again.

I asked what that was recently, and I got slammed here and accused of being a troll, because apparently I asked this last year and didn't remember.

And even now, STILL, I can't remember what the initials JPR stands for. I must have a mental block about that. Maybe because I rarely see it mentioned, and I didn't follow Sanders closely...and that group isn't important to me.

It escapes me why someone would think I'm a troll because I can't remember what JPR is. But whatever. I don't care about Sanders and wasn't familiar with this little group, so I guess I just won't be able to remember it...ever. Anyway, thanks.

[rurallib]

89. it took me a bit earlier this week when 'JPR' started popping back up here

worrying about them is not something I want to devote much time to.
I am sure my answer is inadequate by some standards and will be corrected but frankly I don't care.
Be well.

[GusBob]

98. Yes that was in Feb. 3 months ago

It was pointed out that you keep asking this question: what is JPR?
Someone posted the links to 3 times you asked it. 3 months in a row last year

So I reckon this is the 5th time you have asked and have been answered

[Scurrilous]

117. Here:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=10181856

[GusBob]

119. That entire subthread from Febuary gets real bizarre

With the repeated replies

[Scurrilous]

120. I didn't read that until now.

As for the replies, troll...alert!...troll...alert!.

Then break out the Uncle Leo excuse (1:05).

Time to update my jury blacklist.

[Eliot Rosewater]

103. If you asked before, were told, why are you asking again?

[fleabiscuit]

160. It's easy to forget crap that doesn't mean anything to you. nt

[calimary]

227. There is something to be said for frequent reminders.

We absolutely should remember this stuff. And be reminded of it if some of us forget. NEVER forget. It’s a vital warning from Holocaust survivors, and sure can apply her too. Never forget what happened, the betrayals that were spawned, and who helped.

The sooner we forget, the sooner we drop our guard. And the sooner the Dark Side will rise again. As what has happened now.

Reminders are NOT a bad thing.

[Scully]

319. The more you know!

Whether it was the 5th time or 100th time asking, I am actually glad you asked the question because I didn't know what JPR stood for either, and would have asked if you hadn't.

[ooky]

262. Yeah, I visited that website once out of curiosity and

when I saw all the vitriole for Hillary I thought I had accidentally taken a right turn. They sounded just like Hannity's nonsense about Hillary. It looked like the wrong place for me to hang out.

[stonecutter357]

162. rwnj's and russian trolls ....

[alp227]

291. A better JPR: Jefferson Public Radio

http://ijpr.org/

[pampango]

286. There are many "Russia can do no wrong" types at JPR but

there are many who want a more FDR-like Democratic Party.

That said, it is funny to see that some of them are abandoning Bernie because he acknowledged Russian interference in the election. It is easy to tell who are real liberals and who are pro-Russian types.

[Gothmog]

399. You are so very very correct on this

There is almost no difference between JPR posters, Stein voters and deplorables

[Hekate]

6. Today, the US is planning to separate children and parents at the border. Because...

...illegal.

I am out of words. All I want to do is cry for the blackened soul of my nation.

[Maven]

20. That is a crime against humanity.

One of several our nation will commit before this travesty is over, I'm afraid.

[nolabels]

269. The idea that there is some kind of moral long game is not sobering to me either

The establishment's glossing over of things like the genocide American Indian and hundreds of years of a viable business known as slavery that is even written into the US Constitution gives me pause.

I also believe in little that is not proven. What person would think morality and US History where a match that has researched the many sides in the story of such. The idea of learning from past mistakes is the only thing that seems to be something to look forward to.

[mcar]

31. "Blackened soul of my nation"

So sad and so true. In less than 2 years.

[Scurrilous]

7. @#$% them.

[Wwcd]

8. Stein, Sarandon JPRatfuckers & those who chose Trump over the future of our once great free society.

Aren't you all so damn pitifully proud of your self righteous assault on our nation?
How does it feel to have succeeded in playing a big role in moving the message of the Russian crime syndicte against the solvency of the USA.

Wave that little made-in-China American flag. Pat yourself on the back.
The destruction of American society & its government is hanging by a thread & those who still speak for fascism over our Republic, those who jumped in because the lure of self enrichment thru "MONEY & MEDIA" was too promising to resist, must also own what becomes of the United States of America.

You had ONE DAMNED CHANCE. You worked against the only other choice we had.

Your obstinence & ignorance, when all the warning signs were in front of you chose to look towards fascist America for our future.

STFU from here on.
You have all done your part & now sit back & enjoy the fall of democracy and the thrilling ride to fascism.

Go ahead, now proudly claim your spot in the rise of fascism. You worked hard moving the lies & silencing the truth.
Enjoy the fruits of all you campaigned for,
The overthrow of the American govt, for Fascism.

[ChubbyStar]

16. Hyperbole....it is not just for breakfast anymore!

[Wwcd]

24. Nothing hyperbole about my statement. You think this is a freakin mocking joke that we ended up

..where we are?
You may downplay the situation the US faces & how we got here, but many Americans & many more around the world must have more to lose, in a fascist America, than you do I guess.

We had 2 choices.

[ChubbyStar]

27. Did I say anything about a joke?

I did not.

[Wwcd]

32. "Hyperbole.." now please stop talking to me.

If you don't see the path it took to bring the USA to its knees, then we have nothing more to discuss.

We had only 2 choices.

Ignore

[ChubbyStar]

38. Hyperbole does not mean joke

Have a fabulous day!!!

[Eliot Rosewater]

105. Yes, ignore those who give aid and comfort to rump which means aid and comfort to Putin.

[Gothmog]

324. JPR idiots are putin supporters

[average_mo_dem]

49. We're not even close to being a 'fascist America'

Nor is "the destruction of American society & its government is hanging by a thread."

[ChubbyStar]

52. This thread is quite interesting

I need a nap!

[average_mo_dem]

54. No kidding

[NastyRiffraff]

93. Yes you do

So go take one, already.

[ChubbyStar]

125. Thanks!

[dbackjon]

112. A lot closer than you are aware.

But stick your head in the sand.

[Cha]

185. Thanks.. I agree.. how long were the Germans

saying "..hitler's not fascist..".. or some shite like that?

They've been the first ones to warn of about trump. Not hyperbole.

[average_mo_dem]

226. Our Constitution and form of government will not allow it

I am open to any facts that you think may prove your point, though.

[DanTex]

132. That's it? That's the best defense of Jill Stein you can muster? Come on, try harder.

[ChubbyStar]

135. Sorry, Jill Stein had nothing to do with my post

Don't care for her policies, never voted for her, and I don't give a shit about her. Thanks for asking though!

[DanTex]

137. LOL. Apparently you replied to the wrong thread then. Stick around, you'll get the hang of it!

[ChubbyStar]

138. I just learned how to use ignore! I think I have the hang of things. Thank you so much for your time

[DanTex]

139. Jill Stein supporters are so smart!

[Gothmog]

325. LOL

[redstateblues]

380. Good to see you DanTex!

[Tipperary]

208. Lol!

Boom.

[fleabiscuit]

164. elobrepyh, submitted as "very lovely or enjoyable." nt

[Demsrule86]

340. It is truth...Jill Stein hopefully will end up in jail for her part with collusion.

[KPN]

233. Wow, some real butthurt there.

[R B Garr]

245. How are you okay with Trump? That's what your comment implies.

Are you not "hurt" by Trump? Please explain.

[Wwcd]

259. No, its America's "butthurt" now. You ok with that?

[KPN]

270. I don't equate your's with America's the way you obviously do.

[Wwcd]

274. Sure. There's a great part of America that sees it exactly as I stated.

How anyone condones the Steins, JPR's & those who assisted this backassward turn of our society, belongs in your colimn then.
Because there are those who agree with them & those who do not.

I'll stick with those who watched & warned of the backward turn of our country with Trump.

Bye.

[KPN]

295. In my column? I voted for Hillary. So how do they belong in my column?

As a party, we are mistaken if we think that all those who voted for Stein or participate at JPR are lost causes and treat them that way or worse. Stein didn't lose the election for us nor can anyone say if they hadn't voted for Stein that Hillary would have won. Who knows? They may have voted for Trump if not Stein. There are a lot of reasons why we lost in 2016 (and in 2010, 2012, 2014 at the State and Congressional levels). Blaming those who voted for Stein ignores the basic issue.

[Wwcd]

296. Not putting the blame on one group at all. But when those who contributed to this horror show, when

there was clearly warning cries all around, then yes, they need to be called out.

Thanks for voting for America rather than against it.

[R B Garr]

297. You also keep ignoring the point. Explain what you have gotten

out of the chaos that was promoted to disrupt and harm our nominee. What has that gotten you. Explain. Anyone who voted for Stein voted for a fraud. Explain how perpetuating fraud against our nominee is beneficial. How have you benefitted?

[disillusioned73]

9. Jill Stein is one powerful..

MOFO!!

[Wwcd]

11. Money & Media is a powerful drug

[R B Garr]

15. All they needed was to pull a few gullible suckers...

which is exactly what happened. She seems to be just fine with the oligarchs' after all...

[Eliot Rosewater]

107. ADd to this the ENDLESS attacks of HRC before and after the primary

about how she cant be trusted, etc.

Or the ones who said they might vote for her but have to hold their noses.

Fuck those people.

[R B Garr]

114. Exactly. If only we could have said more of what we all saw playing out.

None of the Russian interference strategies were surprising, let's just say that.

[GWC58]

124. Yeah, we had a candidate, the most qualified in fact,

to step right in for Obama, to carry on what he’d accomplished. Instead this nation of numbnuts, fuckheads, nitwits & just plain stupid fucks took us in a 180* turn. A bunch of not too funny 🤡’s! And to those of you fuckheads reading this take a close look. 🖕🏻you DICKS!!

[Maven]

23. She is powerful with a certain group of self-important simpletons. nt

[Gothmog]

400. I agree with your analysis

[Cha]

41. Jill Stein is an Asshole BIG LIAR.. LIES her DAMN

head off with ease.

[stevenleser]

56. In an election decided by one vote, someone changing one vote can have an outsized effect

This isn’t that hard. Your retort is silly.

[Blue_true]

131. Case in point. Florida 2000.

Bush won by 958 votes. It came down to that state, him or Gore would win it and be President. 97,000 people in Florida voted for Nader, 3,700 voted for Pat Buchanon. Republicans voters were a lot more disciplined in staying home with plenty at stake, we were not, around 10,000 Americans and visitors died and hundreds of thousands of Iragis and Afghans died, all because 97,000 dumbasses wanted to prove a point.

[stevenleser]

169. What's worse is that folks like the person I responded to didn't learn from that mistake

They had to make the same mistake again.

And what is sad is, I STILL don’t think they learned from this.

[Blue_true]

170. Everything that you pointed out is on target.

Bush had no concept of the ravages of war, it was all a video game to him. Trump brags about new smart missiles like war is some xbox game. A war with Iran is going to be a bloody affair if Trump go that route. We MAY overrun them in the shorterm, but like Iraq, when our troops are on the ground and war is over will be when our troops start dying.

During the Iraq-Iran war, Iraq was far superior to Iran militarily, but the Iranian fought Iraq to a standstill, and the world had never heard of the biggest killer of our troops, IEDs yet.

[disillusioned73]

199. You presume to know how I voted in 2000 & 2016..

goes to show your ignorance on the matter.. and there are lessons to be learned, like making sure that the count is completed instead of conceding prematurely because..oh my.. people will get mad.. or how about choosing a better running mate than Joe moth#rf&cking Lieberman?? How about the electoral college is an archaic joke??

There are always lessons to be learned.. but it looks like some folks just want to find the most convenient scapegoat and distract the masses instead of self reflection..

I have shifted my philosophy for these up coming elections.. I guess to an extent I used to be a sucker "blue no matter who" voter.. no more - I will judge/ support and vote for candidates by their record and their policies/ platform... not by what the Democratic party or some folks on the internet dictate.. those days are over

good day

[KPN]

231. Good for you. There's a reason we didn't get their votes in 2016. Not to mention there's a

reason we didn't get some I's votes in 2016 that has nothing to do with racism, misogyny, etc.

You are right -- some just can't rise above scapegoating. Oddly, it seems they would drive you, me, us out even though we (well I at least) voted for HRC in the GE.

[disillusioned73]

299. Right there with you..

[stevenleser]

278. Nope, I didn't presume that at all. How one voted doesnt have any bearing on whether they learned a

lesson or not.

[disillusioned73]

309. That makes no sense..

why would I have learned a lesson by someone elses presumed (by you) mistake?? Why is it always someone else's fault?? Maybe a combination of American electorates lack of engagement and candidate campaign shortcomings among a flurry of other factors gave us 2 popular vote loss rightwing presidents.. I wish Dems would address the electoral college.. but they don't want to touch it, and I don't know why.. that's 2 disastrous presidencies within 16 years because of it.. and with their continuous efforts to disenfranchise more voters, targeting ppl like myself it is only going to become even tighter come election night..

Nader/Stein gives people the ability to vent without any substantive way of addressing the real problem.. red meat always satiates but never resolves..

[R B Garr]

284. So you didn't vote for Gore because of Joe Lieberman??

Really?? That contradicts your claim that you used to be a "blue no matter who" voter.

Some look like they just want to promote chaos, so no wonder you are taking such umbrage with this thread. This thread is pointing out that people who vote against Democrats have hypocritical stances and are not credible as a result. How do you like what George Bush dished up? Gore wasn't good enough, so the Iraq war was a good tradeoff ? These kinds of hypocrisies will not stand anymore. That's what this thread is about. Thanks for participating.

[disillusioned73]

310. Enjoy the red meat..

[R B Garr]

312. I'm just reading your responses to this thread. You call them

"red meat." hmm.

[Gothmog]

382. Nader gave Bush the election

Nader gave the election to bush in 2000 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/ralph-nader-was-indispens_b_4235065.html

Nader-voters who spurned Democrat Al Gore to vote for Nader ended up swinging both Florida and New Hampshire to Bush in 2000. Charlie Cook, the editor of the Cook Political Report and political analyst for National Journal, called "Florida and New Hampshire" simply "the two states that Mr. Nader handed to the Bush-Cheney ticket," when Cook was writing about "The Next Nader Effect," in The New York Times on 9 March 2004. Cook said, "Mr. Nader, running as the Green Party nominee, cost Al Gore two states, Florida and New Hampshire, either of which would have given the vice president [Gore] a victory in 2000. In Florida, which George W. Bush carried by 537 votes, Mr. Nader received nearly 100,000 votes [nearly 200 times the size of Bush's Florida 'win']. In New Hampshire, which Mr. Bush won by 7,211 votes, Mr. Nader pulled in more than 22,000 [three times the size of Bush's 'win' in that state]." If either of those two states had gone instead to Gore, then Bush would have lost the 2000 election; we would never have had a U.S. President George W. Bush, and so Nader managed to turn not just one but two key toss-up states for candidate Bush, and to become the indispensable person making G.W. Bush the President of the United States -- even more indispensable, and more important to Bush's "electoral success," than were such huge Bush financial contributors as Enron Corporation's chief Ken Lay.

All polling studies that were done, for both the 2000 and the 2004 U.S. Presidential elections, indicated that Nader drained at least 2 to 5 times as many voters from the Democratic candidate as he did from the Republican Bush. (This isn't even considering throw-away Nader voters who would have stayed home and not voted if Nader had not been in the race; they didn't count in these calculations at all.) Nader's 97,488 Florida votes contained vastly more than enough to have overcome the official Jeb Bush / Katherine Harris / count, of a 537-vote Florida "victory" for G.W. Bush. In their 24 April 2006 detailed statistical analysis of the 2000 Florida vote, "Did Ralph Nader Spoil a Gore Presidency?" (available on the internet), Michael C. Herron of Dartmouth and Jeffrey B. Lewis of UCLA stated flatly, "We find that ... Nader was a spoiler for Gore." David Paul Kuhn, CBSNews.com Chief Political Writer, headlined on 27 July 2004, "Nader to Crash Dems Party?" and he wrote: "In 2000, Voter News Service exit polling showed that 47 percent of Nader's Florida supporters would have voted for Gore, and 21 percent for Mr. Bush, easily covering the margin of Gore's loss." Nationwide, Harvard's Barry C. Burden, in his 2001 paper at the American Political Science Association, "Did Ralph Nader Elect George W. Bush?" (also on the internet) presented "Table 3: Self-Reported Effects of Removing Minor Party Candidates," showing that in the VNS exit polls, 47.7% of Nader's voters said they would have voted instead for Gore, 21.9% said they would have voted instead for Bush, and 30.5% said they wouldn't have voted in the Presidential race, if Nader were had not been on the ballot. (This same table also showed that the far tinier nationwide vote for Patrick Buchanan would have split almost evenly between Bush and Gore if Buchanan hadn't been in the race: Buchanan was not a decisive factor in the outcome.) The Florida sub-sample of Nader voters was actually too small to draw such precise figures, but Herron and Lewis concluded that approximately 60% of Florida's Nader voters would have been Gore voters if the 2000 race hadn't included Nader. Clearly, Ralph Nader drew far more votes from Gore than he did from Bush, and on this account alone was an enormous Republican asset in 2000.

[still_one]

209. In every swing state that Hillary lost by less than 1%, Jill Stein had 1% of the vote in those

states.

[KPN]

234. If true, too bad we/HRC couldn't win their vote.

[still_one]

255. It is true. Go to The NY Times and the election results and breakdown are all there. We could not

“Win” their votes from these so-called self identified progressives, because they believed the lies and distortions that there was no difference between Republican and Democrats,. I remember discussing if for no other reason the SC, and they told me it didn’t matter

In addition every Democrati running for Senate in those crital swing states lost to the incumbent, establishment, Republican, and these were progressive Democrats

[R B Garr]

258. Explain how the lies and smears about Hillary helped to "win" votes. nt

[DanTex]

133. Do any of you Jill Stein fans ever try mounting an actual rational argument in her defense?

Why not? Why just the one-liners?

[stevenleser]

168. Nope, they don't. All of their answers are logical fallacies or passive aggressive

Or trite cliches or some combination of the three

[disillusioned73]

196. Fan, no.. voted for, no again..

Agree on a majority of policy positions.. yes

I just find it interesting watching things that we used to laugh at the right for permeate through a faction of the so called left.. There are plenty of VALID reasons for Hillary's loss.. Jill Stein/ Susan Sarandon are just not that high on that list.. if at all

[DanTex]

205. If it looks like a fan, and quacks like a fan...

Because every time there's a Jill Stein thread you and a couple of others are quick to jump in with your defenses of her.

And like I said, there's never any reasoning behind it. Just a one-liner. You just want to register your support for Stein and Sarandon, without actually trying to defend them, probably because even you know that's impossible.

Strange.

[disillusioned73]

214. Defense..

no, just mocking the absurdity of it all.. and getting into an argument here is an act of futility.. we all know where the majority of this board stands, it's all anger/frustration 24/7 - I venture to guess similar to Bush Jr's term in office without the anti-war contingent.. I miss that part of the left & many others

Simply, I come here to get my fill of "reagan democrats" perspective..

[betsuni]

215. You are calling DUers "Reagan Democrats."

At least capitalize words!

[DanTex]

219. I guess if I couldn't defend by beliefs with logic, I'd just post empty "mocking" as well.

I do appreciate your position, though it's a little puzzling why you are such a Stein/Sarandon fan to begin with if you understand the futility of trying to actually mount a defense of their support for the GOP.

You're right that there's a lot of frustration here. That's because, unlike Stein and Sarandon and their supporters, the people here are progressives and didn't want Trump to be president. I guess, as you describe, their supporters come here to gloat about the fact that their man Trump is in the White House and doing things they like like canceling the Iran deal and cutting taxes for billionaires.

[Cha]

341. Calling DUers "reagan democrats".. You Lose.. all you

have are ignorant insults.

[disillusioned73]

360. You can get offended all you want..

just stating the reality of the political shift here.. progressives are shit on while Bush Jr & McCain are welcomed back into the fold with open arms... after their war crimes and continual support of the disastrous republican agenda..

Obama explained this back in 2012 - where do you think all these "reagan repubs" went?? And the repubs have shifted even further to the right since this... where did they go?? Or are they part of the millions that sit at home and don't vote and get no criticism??

[Cha]

367. I'm not offended.. you're the one making

assumptions about me out of thin air.

[KPN]

235. Are there any Jill Stein fans here at DU?

I haven't seen/heard any.

[DanTex]

248. People who post things like this...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=10594888

[R B Garr]

12. Amen! Anyone taking Trump or Stein seriously on anything...

...ever... you have to shudder at the complete ignorant gullibility which you see from the JPR crowd. They were very useful to the GOP.

[SidDithers]

13. And MoDo. Don't forget her...

Sid

[mcar]

33. Posted mine right after yours!

[SunSeeker]

34. We were so fucked by these idiots.

[greatauntoftriplets]

40. Donald the Dodo would have been more appropriate since she was trying to be alliterative.

[LenaBaby61]

44. I swear ....

I was thinking about this worthless hack of a reporter Dowd when I came into this thread ...

[jrthin]

57. Dowd, Haberman and Judith Miller, my reason

for cancelling my 25yr subscription to the NYT's. Probably a couple others, but they helped me to cross the line.

[LenaBaby61]

69. Dowd, Haberman and Judith Miller, my reason ...

Media cheerleader of our invasion into Iraq by Dubya et al Judith Miller was the reason for me canceling my then 11 year subscription to the NY Times back in the early 2000's. I'm not a big fan of Haberman's either.

[mcar]

14. Remember "Hillary the Hawk, Trump the Dove?"

[SidDithers]

25. Great minds think alike...

Sid

[mcar]

35. It hurts to laugh

[workinclasszero]

43. I want to see this repeated over and over

in the run up to war with Iran!!

Fucking GOP warmongers can’t wait to sacrifice the poor kids in the military for $$$!!!

What about your Nobel Peace Prize Herr Shitler???

[NurseJackie]

17. It's EXACTLY what Susan Sarandon wanted. Just LOOK at how giddy and animated she is...

... she can barely contain her excitement at the horrors that await us. Oh, how pure she is!

[deurbano]

18. "Some people..." (Right from the orange MAGAt's playbook.)

[Scurrilous]

26. The Revolution.

[comradebillyboy]

60. Not just any revolution ... Our Revolution.

[Scurrilous]

71. Ah, yes...

Even funnier.

[world wide wally]

47. As soon as someone says "revolution" I know they are full of shit.

The other dead give away is if they use the word "sovereign"

[sheshe2]

68. Uuugh!

I can't stand to even look at her face.

[NurseJackie]

74. My hatred for her burns with the white-hot heat of a thousand suns.

I'll never forget (nor forgive) Sarandon's shouting and finger-wagging at Dolores Huerta.

[sheshe2]

77. I am with you, NJ!

[R B Garr]

88. I hear you, NJ! A spoiled privileged phony actress like Sarandon has no place

wagging her finger at a woman like Dolores Huerta, a real true and living icon of America's labor movement. That was so vile it was surreal.

[NurseJackie]

136. I know, right! She's the worst.

See ya!

[disillusioned73]

19. Can we give this guy a round as well????

He may very well see the day..

[C Moon]

244. Iran is apparently something the GOP has wanted their grimy hands on for a long time.

These moves against Iran, are probably getting Trump more power within the GOP.

[disillusioned73]

321. Exactly..

and yet we'll have the usual condolences threads & "let's be respectful" of a man like this because he dies of cancer, all the while he enjoys the healthcare in his last days that most Americans wish they could afford... but let's shit on leftists because scapegoats are easy to vilify..

[honest.abe]

21. They were so condescending to those of us who supported Hillary.

Utter fools.

[bettyellen]

22. Does someone not get the difference between the primary and general election?

Because this is about the general election.
Just want to set it straight for those confused and bothered that this is about the primaries. This is about after HRC won the primaries.

[Hekate]

28. It sure is, because juuuust enough Left voters were lured away from voting for the Democrat...

...in the GE to really swing the election -- or to make it plausible that's what happend.

[NurseJackie]

30. Thank you. Yes it is.

You are correct. Others are mistaken.

[DownriverDem]

42. Yes

No far left or far right wins GEs. Primaries often give us far left candidates that can't win in November. These purity folks lack the political skills needed to be taken seriously.

[Cha]

63. Hell yes it's about the General Election. How could

anyone who was paying attention to the 2016 GE between Hillary and the asshole.. and the other Lying assholes not get that?

[KPN]

238. Right. So why even post it here?

[SunSeeker]

29. K & R

[DownriverDem]

36. Wow!!

So true. Some of these same folks are causing trouble with the local Dem Parties. They need to pay their dues if they want to be taken seriously. Purity my ass!!!

[murielm99]

91. Ya got that right.

The local parties are having this problem in a lot of places.

[AtomicKitten]

242. They are entitled to participate in the process.

[R B Garr]

276. Part of the process is rejection. They are also entitled to experience

rejection, which is what is building here. Some are only after chaos and are being rejected. It's about time.

[AtomicKitten]

298. Rejection? Is that what you call Perez kicking ALL progressives, those voting for ...

...Sanders and/or Ellison, out of the DNC? Or how Obama made a phone call to Perez to run in the first to prevent the party from falling into progressive hands with Ellison's candidacy, and then calling and leaning hard on delegates to vote for Perez? That's your definition of rejection? in my book that's manipulation and bullying.

The vote is sacrosanct and the aggressive intrusion into peoples' voting record here is appalling. And the blaming! My god it's surreal. It's everything and everybody else's fault for the loss. You are all so enmeshed in a singular mindset that I won't bother to elaborate herein.

Just know there's a substantial amount of people that have a different mindset, for instance people are absolutely flabbergasted that last election's Democratic VP nominee (along with other Democrats) recently voted with the Republicans to hollow out Dodd-Frank to further deregulate the banks. Good lord that's insanity! Progressives' point of view on this is common sense/moral integrity and you call it rejection. That division which you insist on is the reason this place is no longer the vibrant community it used to be.

Have a great day.

[R B Garr]

301. Nice distractions, but that is not what happened. This is part of the chaos --

just stir up and blame the so-called "establishment" for simply being elected and being popular as if they are doing something evil.

I have to laugh at the ridiculous claims about the DNC and now -- Obama?? You are right, it's best not to delve too much into the actual FACTS so that you can just spin the victim yarns.

This is the exact chaos that is being rejected. Thanks for the further illustration.

[AtomicKitten]

316. There are only facts, not yours and then others', and that discrepancy is sad, not funny.

Still I'm glad to know the truth about what has happened to Democratic Underground. Progressives will exist in that space, and frankly most are fine with it. We will continue to seek truth and be active in that endeavor, and you can continue doing whatever the hell you are doing. And the Democratic Party will continue to lose, and that will be just as much your fault as those you hold in such smug contempt.

I have nothing further to say to you about this, I'm in hospital right now with MSSA pneumonia and tired of this, so in the words of Sansa Stark of GOT, "No need to seize the last word, Lord Baelich. I'll assume it was something clever."

[R B Garr]

320. I'm sorry to hear of your pneumonia. You should quit smearing Democrats,

though. My whole state of California is progressive, and yet it is sneered at by those like you who just stir up chaos and call it "progressive". Sorry you keep being rejected at the polls as I've never heard of Independents winning in more diverse areas. Diversity is not going away. It is a fact. A one-size-fits-all purity test will never win. Sorry. edit: and "whatever the hell it is that I am doing" -- I am voting for Democrats, that is what the hell I am doing.

Glad you are taking care of your pneumonia -- that is the priority.

[Gothmog]

335. I got to see their participation at the National Convention

Delegates are vetted carefully by campaigns. Each candidate and each campaign has absolute approval rights over their delegates to the national convention. I was a Clinton delegate and I know I was vetted. The only vetting that I saw was that the Sanders campaign removed one duly elected sanders delegate because that delegate would not say that he hated Hillary Clinton. This occurred at the Texas Democratic Convention but this young man was allowed to attend to the National Convention as a guest of the Texas Democratic Party due to the poor treatment of this young man by the Sanders campaign.

I do not think that this was isolated incident. There was a coordinated plan to attack Congressman John Lewis at the National Convention and the delegates who led this plan were evidently leaders in the Sanders delegation and they were proud of these attacks. The Sanders delegated booed Congressman John Lewis when he was introduced and did their best to disrupt his speech. I was warned of the attack on Congressman John Lewis about 20 minutes before the attack occurred by my whip. Again, this was a stunt planned by the Sanders delegates. I heard that sanders knew about this plan stunt and refused to do anything about it.

The idiots on JPR are very proud of this stunt https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/hey-john-lewis-karmas-a-mf-aint-it/

[still_one]

37. Dropping bombs won't do sh*t, so there would be no strategy to doing it

it will not remove the Iranian leadership, but instead unite Syria, Lebanon, Iraq which is mostly against us, and cause a destabilization of the Middle East that will make the invasion of Iraq seem like child’s play, and god help us who knows the blow back it will create

[grantcart]

48. It will give them the bounce they need for the midterms

It will raise the price of gas which is good for Putin ,even do Putin will publicly denounce it.

Everything Trump does is for domestic consumption.

[world wide wally]

39. P.O.E.

Remember P.O.E. from Dr Strangelove?
Purity Of Essence

[Blue_Tires]

50. kicked

[Gothmog]

51. Congratulations

Thanks for the moving the world closed to war. Voting for Stein or supporting JPR was such a good thing to do.

[Aristus]

58. Yeah, your precious political orthodoxy 'saved' us from Hillary Clinton.

Look what we have now, assholes!

This is your fault!

And I say that as a former Bernie Sanders supporter.

When he didn't get the nomination, I didn't scream and whine and cry. I stepped up, as a true progressive does, and voted for Hillary Clinton with pride, and without a qualm. Because that's what you do: you vote for the most qualified candidate! If your dream candidate ain't on the ballot, you don't stay home and pout, or write in the name of someone who might clear 1.5% of the vote on a write-in campaign. Because a loss is still a loss. If you think after a loss like that: 'Well, if we had gotten another 1.5%, we could have a place at the next debate! Third Party, Fuck Yeah!' then you are part of the problem.

So go ahead and put a 'Trump 2020' sticker on your car, and give up the pretense...

[Omaha Steve]

64. I have a room at JPR and voted Hillary

No Trump 2020 for me.

OS

[Jim Lane]

96. Steve, don't confuse people who can't handle nuance.

It's comfortingly simple to think "JPR is unremittingly Evil, Bernie Sanders is unremittingly Evil, JPR and Sanders are responsible for the Trump presidency, no one could possibly disagree with me except a troll being paid by Putin," etc.

As you and I know, JPR is subject to the same tendency. "DU is unremitting Evil, Hillary Clinton is unremittingly Evil, the nomination was stolen from Bernie and he would have beaten Trump so everyone who supported Clinton is responsible for the Trump presidency, no one could possibly disagree with me except a Hillbot," etc.

These people who so vehemently denounce each other have more in common than they realize.

[R B Garr]

99. When will you acknowledge that people can actually read the posts at JPR.

Your tangential summaries and interpretations of what other people write don't matter when we can go and read what they write. We know how they undermined Hillary.

[dgauss]

110. Agree, especially that last line.

And kind of ironic when side by side with vehement denouncements of divisiveness.

[Jim Lane]

171. The irony is thick indeed.

On DU, we see vehement denunciations of divisiveness... alongside (and sometimes from the same posters as) the vehement denunciations of the millions of progressives who don't adhere precisely to the poster's views.

If you don't believe me, just trying posting something favorable about Bernie Sanders and watch the flames erupt.

My own view is that, if you believe in democracy, you can't see divisiveness as the greatest evil. There are disagreements on the left on subjects like single-payer health care. How do we resolve those disagreements? With competing speeches, arguments in publications and online forums, contested primaries, contested fights for party offices, platform fights, etc.

For example, I support single payer. If the minority of House Democrats who haven't signed on as cosponsors to HR 676 would do so, then the Democratic caucus would be united in support. But I don't expect the Democrats who disagree with me to just STFU in the name of party unity. My criticism of them is that they're wrong on the policy, not that they're being divisive.

[WIProgressive88]

182. Excellent post. These two minutes hate type threads that seem to always come from the usual suspects

accomplish nothing, but I suspect they already know that.

[R B Garr]

228. No. What you see are vehement denunciations of slander and outright lies

about Democrats. You see vehement denunciations of those who undermined our candidate in the name of divisive tactics meant to DIVIDE Democrats so that the GOP could gain an electoral advantage. You don't get to rewrite history or usurp what the Mueller indictments clearly state -- Bernie Sanders was supported by the Russians to DIVIDE Democrats. That is the history, and those are the FACTS.

Your attempts to gain some kind of leverage over the word "divisive" are rather amusing. It is a clear attempt to foist an equivalency argument that is just not there. These attempts at subverting reality is what is divisive. Alternate realities are not part of the Democratic party. We are the party of reality, not Fox fake news.

[Maven]

118. You flatter yourself.

Last edited Tue May 8, 2018, 07:10 PM - Edit history (1)

It's comfortingly simple for you to think that a site dedicated to supporting the only party standing between us and a fascist state, and a site dedicated to undermining that party by embracing conspiracy theories and right-wing propaganda, are roughly equivalent. And to think that you can stand astride that fence and proclaim your independence because your supreme wisdom places you above it all.

Ah, the rarefied headspace that privilege affords. Amirite?

We're not blind to subtlety, my dude. What we are is allergic to bullshit.

[Blue_true]

141. Bingo. nt

[Cha]

188. Scorch!

Thank You!!

[ehrnst]

204. ....

[DanTex]

144. LOL. The irony of you complaining about people that "can't handle nuance" is delicious.

[betsuni]

213. +1

[betsuni]

212. No, nobody on DU thinks Sanders is an evil monster. JPR thinks HRC is an evil monster.

They're obsessed with it. DUers aren't moronic conspiracy theorists. Your argument is dead, Jim.

[KPN]

239. Bingo! Wouldn't it make so much more sense if they'd just take this stuff directly to

JPR?

[R B Garr]

263. I recognize some cross over names. Don't you??

[Jim Lane]

285. Correct. That goes the other way, too.

There's a lot of stuff on JPR that should be taken directly here.

Each board has posts of the form: "What those people on the other board say is totally wrong, but that other board is a cesspool and I would never sully my keyboard by going there."

The left would benefit if progressives were more willing to engage with other progressives who disagree with them on some points. Instead, what we have is the frequent assertion that the people who disagree about anything aren't progressives at all.

The most obvious example is the role of the Democratic Party. I personally am a registered Democrat who voted for Bernie Sanders in the primary and for Hillary Clinton in the general election. I believe that the correct course for progressives in electoral politics is to work within the Democratic Party, and that the minor-party route is a big mistake. Nevertheless, I understand that people can disagree with me on that without being right-wingers or bots or Russian trolls or off their meds or whatever the insult du jour is.

[R B Garr]

289. Your false equivalencies are still false. The TOS explains why and how

you are wrong, and that is only one aspect. Your topical musings do not begin to make sense but look instead to be self-serving.

You keep displaying a fundamental misunderstanding. Here is a link to the Mueller indictments so you can see which "progressives" were targeted with lies about Democrats and lies about Hillary. You keep ignoring that people can read the JPR website and read the lies about Hillary. We know enough from current news that backs that up, and we also saw it for ourselves.

You would do yourself a favor to actually read the Mueller indictments before you proceed with further false equivalencies. It is very divisive to continue denying reality.

Please read the Mueller indictments.

"According to Friday’s indictment of 13 Russians and three Russian companies, the “strategic goal” was to sow discord in America and dated back to 2014. Online propaganda efforts by a troll farm called the Internet Research Agency were “primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton, to denigrate other candidates such as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and to support Bernie Sanders and then-candidate Donald Trump”."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/16/trump-mueller-russia-indictment-what-does-it-mean

[KPN]

290. Same here ... Bernie primary, Hillary GE.

I agree with you re: working within the party. That's why I'm okay with Our Revolution's effort to engage within the party.

[Blue_true]

140. Steve.

People like you and California Peggy are sane. You push for very left candidates, but if they don't win primaries, you appear to vote for the best choice in the General, the Democratic Party candidate. Some very far left people are not that wise, and the country has paid twice because of that.

[MustLoveBeagles]

176. +1

[Wwcd]

67. K & R

[MustLoveBeagles]

172. Thank you

As another Bernie supporter I never understood the Bernie or Bust, Never Hillary crowd. I'm reading your post as a criticism of the extremists only, not the majority of Bernie supporters that voted for Hillary in the General. I never hated Hillary and enthusiastically supported her after she won the primary. There was too much at stake to throw a pity party. As I said in another thread: vote as though your life depends on it because it does.

As for Jill Stein, she's a snake in the grass. I hate that she conned so many desperate Dem's out of their money after that disastrous election. She can go to hell.

[Aristus]

180. Thank you.

I thought the JPR curb-stomping crew had come over to kick some ass.

Well, I'm not going anywhere. I think my record speaks to that.

It's always good to get some support...

[MustLoveBeagles]

353. Your welcome

[still_one]

59. What they did well be remembered, and payback will bite them in the ass

[Chakaconcarne]

61. Well we went a week without bringing up the election again.

Good on ya.

Can we maybe try for 2?

[MrsCoffee]

66. What exactly bothers you about talking about elections on a political discussion site?

[Cha]

190. Good Question.

[RhodeIslandOne]

73. Go find a site that talks needlepoint then

You’re out of your element.

[Cha]

189. Well well well.. glad you're not running

the board.

[progressoid]

194. +1

[betsuni]

200. That's like complaining that people are talking about recipes on a cooking forum.

[BigMin28]

62. Please let us not forget

all those people who for whatever reason couldn't be bothered to vote.

[Eliot Rosewater]

109. Some who dont vote do so because of the ENDLESS shit they hear about

how both parties are the same.

[RhodeIslandOne]

70. They said if I voted for Hillary, we'd be at war in two years

I did vote for her, and they were right.

Fuck Jill Stein.

[samnsara]

72. whats jpr?

[Gothmog]

83. Jackpine Radicals

It is a site for Russian trolls and people who left DU

[dhol82]

95. Jack Pine Radicals

[Blue_true]

147. Jackpine Radicals.

The people that started the site stole the DU username of a highly respected progressive here on DU. There are some decent people that went over there or who straddle both worlds, but there is also some vile people on that site, people who I doubt have ever had one minute of self-reflection.

[samnsara]

207. Ohhhhhhh ok.

[stonecutter357]

165. rwnj's and russian trolls ....

[Blue_Tires]

75. And a special "fuck you" to the "Hillary would have been just as bad!" crowd

Greenwald, Taibbi and Scahill, I'm looking in your directions

[Eliot Rosewater]

111. Yep, lots of folks said that. Some on the internet and elsewhere.

Some didnt come right out and say it but their actions and words over a very long period of time said exactly that.

[wryter2000]

292. And may I add a big F you

To the guy who made up the "no difference" lie? Ralph Nader.

[betsuni]

79. Something about their conscience and evils and other nonsense.

Idiots.

[OneBro]

81. What is a JPR?

[Gore1FL]

87. It's a website where many former DUers went during the height of the 2016 primary phase

Some people have accounts at both. Some at one or the other.

At this point is mostly allows for a convenient 2016 scapegoat for DU to come back to, as evidenced in this thread.

[kevink077]

84. Absolutely!!!!!

There are liberals out there that would rather lose every time because the dem is not 100% pure. Sitting at home and pouting or voting 3rd party instead voting for the dem who will likely get you 75% of what you want is an idiotic strategy.

[Stinky The Clown]

90. You just compared HRC to David Duke, George Wallace, Orval Faubus, and Lester Maddox.

I let you imagine what I think about that.

[RhodeIslandOne]

94. Again, how are you enjoying things right now?

I'm going to completely ignore that you just equated the "established DNC candidate" with a bunch of racists and chalk it up to you having some sort of episode.

[Maven]

113. Are you saying that you didn't vote for HRC in the general election?

Then yes, you were very wrong. Period, end of fucking sentence.

I'm not even going to touch your warped comparison of Hillary Clinton to the miscreants you listed.

[Blue_true]

149. What a distortion of what was written.

The OP suggested no such thing. But if you think allowing a republican to win office is sane, knock your self out. The fact is a segregationist nor a Nazi will win a Democratic Party nomination, that has been the case for more than 45 years. But real life segregationists and Nazis ARE running as republicans today.

[BannonsLiver]

177. Well it's good to see some examples of the op's Point showing up here

Devoid of self awareness and shame, as usual.

[DanTex]

272. Did you really think Trump was better than the Democratic candidate? Hmm...

[stevenleser]

279. Thank you for illustrating the OPs point better than the OP. nt

[CanSocDem]

92. This thread is why 'social progress'...

...never gains a foothold in the USA. It's not on the agenda.

Never has been in the 50 or so years I've been paying attention. More like "Hey...We got it pretty good here! No need to change anything." So nothing changed and the rest of the world caught up and passed you- because "social progress" was on their agendas.

.

[honest.abe]

97. We were making "social progress" during the Obama admin..

and would have make even more progress with President Hillary Clinton.

But I suppose incremental progress is not good enough for some... which is one of the reasons we now have a lunatic in the WH who wants to tear down all the "social progress" that we have achieved over the past several decades.

[CanSocDem]

108. No you weren't.

You had a black family in the Whitehouse so I suppose that is 'progress'. Thinking that then electing a woman as POTUS would surely prove you had arrived on the worlds stage. This was your "agenda".


.

[honest.abe]

121. I wasnt even considering those aspects of progress.

Funny you would focus on that.

[Blue_true]

155. That statement was a bit strange, like that was all that happened and someone was put out. nt

[honest.abe]

156. Indeed.

Very strange.

[sheshe2]

152. Shouldn't your 'you' be 'we'?

[Blue_true]

154. Wow, what bullshit.

The ACA was passed with no help from republicans, LGBTQ people got to serve in the Arm Forces without fear, the Justice Department actually protected POC and LGBTQ people instead of hunt them down. There is much more, that I can't readily recall, but someone put up a list once, over 100 seriously significant accomplishments toward a more progressive country.

[CanSocDem]

203. The ACA...

...may seem like 'social progress' to you, but to the rest of the world, it is still a for profit enterprise administered by the insurance and pharmaceutical industries.

Human Rights in a non-sexist society is a no-brainer. The USA however, is deeply sexist AND racist so "social progress" in these areas is a little hard to see. That you are no longer 'hunted down' may feel like progress to you but not to the rest of the world.

Most of us, outside the USA, have seen a trump presidency coming for decades. The various Democrat administrations slowed the process, but you still have wars and very little in the way of public assistance.

.

[Blue_true]

275. There is no doubt that Europe is way ahead of the USA on everything that really matters.

But Europe got there through devastating wars that tore up all of Europe. The USA has never faced anything like those wars, even the Revolutionary War, War of 1812 and Civil War were largely localized to some parts of the country. Maybe we need to have every town and city in the country leveled and everyone having to get into lines for bread and personal items, then Americans will understand what Europe learned about the benefits of social democracy, although I add that as the shadow of WWII has began to vanish, some European countries are cutting back on their social safety nets.

[CanSocDem]

282. You had your chance...

...as we did in Canada to elect a leader willing to put public interest ahead of private interest. We failed. Not because the people approved of the 'private' ownership of their lives, but because they never got to hear the benefits of public ownership.

But we did have a politician in the 50's who took on the "private interests" and changed life in Canada forever. One man, albeit a social democrat, with a gift for oratory and the ability to explain 'how a rising tide raises ALL boats', can make the difference.

.

[DanTex]

293. Yes, we could have elected Hillary. Instead we elected Trump.

And people like Jill Stein and Susan Sarandon helped elect Trump. That's why you get threads like this.

I'm not sure if the same phenomenon exists in Canada or European countries. But here in the US, we have a group of people that talk like leftists, but when it comes to elections, they do everything in their power to help elect reactionary right-wingers.

[Sherman A1]

192. Agreed

Certainly so, progress was made in some areas, in others not so much. What I find completely beyond understanding is 1). Refighting the 2016 election in 2018 and 2). Placing the blame on a candidate that garnered such a tiny amount of the vote. You can dislike Jill Stein perhaps for many reasons, but she hardly put Trump in the White House through her campaign as she simply didn’t get enough votes.

Those who don’t like the Jack Pine Radicals discussion board, don’t go there. What is posted here, there or other similar sites is predominantly opinion and everyone is entitled to believe as they choose. What is posted there “neither picks your pocket or breaks your leg.”

[Uncle Joe]

220. I agree Sherman. I also believe this is an ingrained part of our programmed national psyche.

American identity politics via the corporate media conglomerates for decades has trumped the promotion of sound progressive policies.

This has only served to exacerbate all manner of fault lines across the entire spectrum of our nation and in turn these divisions make domination by the less than 1% aka: (American's oligarchs) and mega corporate conglomerations over the public's best interests not just easier but possible.

The continuous bombardment of identity and image propaganda over substance; that could actually enlighten and lift up the American People of ALL stripes made the arrival of Trump inevitable and if this pattern isn't altered something worse will come along in the future.

[Sherman A1]

223. A very

Eloquent summation of the world in which we find ourselves.

[KPN]

241. Yep, the wedge issue strategy has served remarkably well hasn't it?

[Uncle Joe]

256. Keep the people fighting among themselves from an emotional, identity perspective

which of course crowds out logic or reason thereby making the divide and conquer strategy a snap finished off with hearty laughing all the way to the bank.

[Blue_true]

336. When elections come down to 1.5% in several key states.

A tiny amount of votes loom very large. Nader got around 1.2% of the votes cast in Florida in 2000. That 1.2% gave us Bush.

[Sherman A1]

344. Please detail which states

That were flipped by Stein? Or was it perhaps voter suppression, voter apathy or a myriad of other potential reasons? Would everyone who voted for Stein really have voted for the candidate of Your choice or would they have stayed home if Stein wasn’t in the race or have just voted down ticket? I was and am not a fan of HRC. I voted for her or rather voted against Trump as I am much less a fan of his, but in my heavily red state, it really made no difference and I could have stayed home.

[Blue_true]

346. Penn, Michigan, Wisconsin.

Voter suppression is going to happen until the My Revolution types smarten the fuck up and help the rest of us get republicans out of office. You don't, frankly I stand by my point.

[Sherman A1]

348. And I stand by mine points

Good Day!

[Blue_true]

349. Yep, good day. nt

[dbackjon]

385. I gained marriage equality

But that probably doesn't matter to you, right?

[Blue_true]

151. It is the purity thing.

A purist would rather starve than eat any meal that is not spot perfect. The mental gymnastics coming from purists make my fucking head spin.

[KPN]

243. So don't watch them?

[Maven]

115. How is social progress doing now?

FYI, it was on the agenda of one of the parties in 2016. Try to figure out which one it was.

[Cha]

187. Really.. If jill stein hadn't LIED

her head off during the campaign.. she wouldn't have had so many suckers voting for her.. and still defending her shite.

[Blue_true]

150. LOL.

How absurd. Open your eyes and look around, there has been plenty of social progress that progressive democrats made happen and republicans are doing their best to pull back.

[Cha]

186. You're Wrong. This thread is highLighting the

gd LIES that 3rd party jill stein spewed out to get her SUCKERS to vote for her.

If jill stein told the fucking truth she wouldn't have gotten the votes. little pawn for putin.

[Plucketeer]

225. Dear identifier of Suckers

I'm writing a bit and require some clarification of the word: Lies. Let's say someone's trying to gain followers (and as an ultimate result, votes) and proclaims they'll (paraphrasing here) END those illegal wars on day one! Something WHICH, BTW was as easily do-able as picking up a pen.
Further - let's say this someone had boldly proclaimed that single payer health care was a RIGHT of every U.S. citizen, and then placated the followers with a cock-eyed health care compromise that didn't incur serious injury to the money-dripping health insurance maggo..... er, folks.
And for that "third time's the charm thing" - a prospective voter entranced by said aspirant - should they have adopted an "Oh well!" attitude when it became evident that the person who professed to be ready to walk picket lines hadn't ever intended to do so?

So again - the above proclamations - easily doable, but conveniently evaded - would they be best labeled: gd LIES, just LIES, moments of dementia or something akin to an "Oopsie!" As I said, I'm drafting something that requires a degree of specificity. In this emerging era of fake news, sometimes things aren't what they appeared to be or might've sounded like.

Thanks in advance for your help!

PS: I've voted straight Democratic since 1992. In part, I've voted that way because I didn't have a choice - like folks living in democracies do.

[Cha]

337. jill stein is gd LIAR.

[Plucketeer]

365. Yeah - you said that.

But I was asking about liars in general. And like a politician of deft aplomb, you played as if you hadn't read my post. C'mon now - you know SO MUCH. Certainly, answers to my queries can't be beyond your insights.

[Cha]

368. Yeah, and every who actually cares about our Country knows it.

[Plucketeer]

388. I had politely asked for clarification of a descriptor

"Lies" is the word I wanted your take on. Again, let's say someone's trying to gain followers (and as an ultimate goal, recruit votes) and proclaims they'll (paraphrasing here) END those illegal wars on day one! Something WHICH, BTW was as easily do-able as picking up a pen.
Further - let's say this someone had boldly proclaimed that single payer health care was a RIGHT of every U.S. citizen, and then placated the followers with a cock-eyed health care compromise that didn't incur serious injury to the money-dripping health insurance maggo..... er, folks.
And for that "third time's the charm thing" - a prospective voter entranced by said aspirant - should they have adopted an "Oh well!" attitude when it became evident that the person who professed to be ready to walk picket lines hadn't ever intended to do so?

So again - the above proclamations - easily doable, but conveniently evaded - would they be best labeled: gd LIES, just LIES, moments of dementia or something akin to an "Oopsie!" The hypothetical aspirant manages to outshine their opponent in the end. Probably knowing all along that the carrots on the end of their stick weren't a real possibility. Ms. Stein wasn't even in the mix for the race I'm relating to. All I want to know is if the victor used something you'd label a "lie" or a "strategy"

That you won't answer my questions is why we CAN'T dutifully forget the past and put on a big smile for thwe unknown challenger for 2020.

[safeinOhio]

100. I like to follow the money.

So the applause goes to Putin, the NRA and the Alt-Right and those that bought what they sold.

[Eliot Rosewater]

101. Dont forget the nose holders....but yes, this is their day.

[JCanete]

193. how exactly would the nose holders be at fault? You just want to lump everybody in? The point

would have been that they voted for a candidate they didn't love for the very reason of avoiding a Trump Presidency, so I'm not exactly sure what you're driving at. People have to love the candidate you love? They can't have legitimate beefs? There are no legitimate beefs?

[disillusioned73]

210. No.. & ppl think that right wingers are the

only irritational folks.. I've learned a lot since 2015 - some not so pleasant about factions of the left...

[KPN]

246. Factions of the left? Perhaps you're being too kind.

[R B Garr]

261. Heck, I'm wondering about factions of the left who are okay

with Trump. That's what this thread is about.

[disillusioned73]

315. There is no one on the left OK w/ Trump..

just because ppl criticise the Democratic "establishment" doesn't make them Trump apologists.. that is just silly

[R B Garr]

323. That's why this thread is important -- look at JPR and you will see plenty of

"silly" people who are just fine with Trump. That's the point. That's how far down the rabbit hole they are. Propaganda or otherwise, they are indeed that "silly." That's why this divisive rhetoric and propaganda about our candidates is being called out.

[disillusioned73]

314. Perhaps..

but I have hope that the majority of it is just internet distractions.. most ppl are just going about their lives while we are here in the muck

[KPN]

250. Hear, hear. My thoughts exactly.

Thank you.

[KPN]

247. Huh? What are you saying?

[dbackjon]

104. And a big FUCK YOU to all the equivocators

Who said there was little or no difference between Clinton and Trump, providing cover for millions of Americans to sit on their asses.

[Eliot Rosewater]

251. Or said " I will vote for her but I will HOLD MY NOSE and make sure EVERYBODY

around me hears how I dont trust her but have to vote for her"

Which, as we ALL know, has the effect of turning off EVERYBODY around you to voting.

The DESIRED effect, that is.

Or the ones who said we have to PROVE to them she deserved their vote (this is all post primary so I GET TO talk about this, god DAMMIT) while on the other side was a NAZI.

The NONSTOP whining about Hillary had the effect of turning off likely MILLIONS from voting at all. POST primary POST priimary

[dbackjon]

383. Yup

I know a Berniephile in Oregon that was anti-Hillary. Said that there no difference between the two. Voted Stein. Now claims that since he lives in Oregon, what he did in 2016 doesn't matter, since Hillary won Oregon. He refuses to admit that the poisoning of the air about Hillary with lies did affect people outside his liberal bubble.

[Eliot Rosewater]

393. Every nose holder or Stein voter convinced at least one person NOT to vote at all.

[Gothmog]

403. Agreed

[KPN]

253. I trust you are posting this here only to vent.

[dbackjon]

384. Nope - there are many that felt that way that still post here on DU

[stevenleser]

402. Yup, plus a billion.

[CincyDem]

106. b,b,b,but, but, but the eeeeeeeamails. n/t

[AtomicKitten]

273. *eeeeeeservers

FTFY

[The_Casual_Observer]

116. Don't hear much from them these days.

[Blue_true]

157. They are as silent as churchmice. nt

[BannonsLiver]

178. A few joined this thread

Devoid of self awareness and shame, as usual. But hey purity y’all.

[KPN]

254. Exactly. So why post this stuff here? Why not take it where one does hear from them?

[Hortensis]

123. I remember their contribution whenever the news is

particularly dark. And of course whenever one of them tries to fill the public ear with lies about how bad their imagined big obstacle to power, the Democrats, are.

[Eliot Rosewater]

257. What I am PARTICULARLY sick to DEATH of hearing is how HOLDING YOUR NOSE

and constantly WHINING about not trusting someone who might barely be the better of two evils, does NOT have an effect on voting overall.

These people DENY that this has a tremendous effect on voting.

[Hortensis]

268. Me, it's those vulnerable to discouragement who substitute

surrender to the despair of ignorance for sitting down and educating themselves about their choices. That can be a very sad downward spiral, greased by propaganda, so that some never discover there are actually some good people out there.

[MaryMagdaline]

126. I second that

[JohnnyRingo]

130. Kick

What an insufferable lot. Those people caused me to take a hiatus from DU leading up to the election.

[JI7]

145. They got what they wanted

[RhodeIslandOne]

174. The revolution will start any second

But first, let Dr Jill Quack and Susan Saranwrap set their security systems....

[stonecutter357]

159. K&R !

[chwaliszewski]

163. Not again...

I don't think anybody who didn't vote for Hillary in the GE frequents this board that often so who is this thread directed to? I'm focused on the midterms this fall and not on elections past.

[RhodeIslandOne]

173. You'd be wrong

They’re all calling us Bush and Reagan Democrats as we speak and crying about this thread and still saying Hillary would do the same as Trump.

[chwaliszewski]

183. I would agree with you but then we'd both be wrong.

We should be focused on attracting Millennial voters because that's what 'they' are doing.

[Exotica]

216. Yes, we millenials will be the biggest potential voting bloc

in 2018, 2020 and onwards.

Furthermore, articles like this worry me.

Exclusive: Democrats lose ground with millennials - Reuters/Ipsos poll

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-millennials/exclusive-democrats-lose-ground-with-millennials-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN1I10YH

MANCHESTER, N.H. (Reuters) - Enthusiasm for the Democratic Party is waning among millennials as its candidates head into the crucial midterm congressional elections, according to the Reuters/Ipsos national opinion poll.

The online survey of more than 16,000 registered voters ages 18 to 34 shows their support for Democrats over Republicans for Congress slipped by about 9 percentage points over the past two years, to 46 percent overall. And they increasingly say the Republican Party is a better steward of the economy.

Although nearly two of three young voters polled said they do not like Republican President Donald Trump, their distaste for him does not necessarily extend to all Republicans or translate directly into votes for Democratic congressional candidates.

That presents a potential problem for Democrats who have come to count on millennials as a core constituency - and will need all the loyalty they can get to achieve a net gain of 23 seats to capture control of the U.S. House of Representatives in November.

Snip

[KPN]

260. Me too re: that article/poll a few days back. OPs like this one serve no useful purpose here ...

and probably only serve to solidify any concerns millenials may have with the current Democratic Party; and drive them elsewhere. Now that's a winning strategy.

[Mountain Mule]

179. I'm with you!

The midterms are what matter now. To hell with fighting over the past. I voted for Bernie in the primary and Hillary in the election since I'm a true blue yellow dog of a Democrat and proud of it. Let's win in November, everybody!

[Aristus]

181. Maven, I'd like to set politics aside for a moment, and tell you how much I love

the NDT & HRC mpeg in your sig line.

[herding cats]

184. The ones who started those anti-Dem narratives truly wanted this end.

It was their end game plan. The fools who believed their propaganda and repeated it ad nauseam were just useful tools.

Our whole country is suffering because of these duplicitous people and their followers who believed them blindly. Be they from the far right or the far left, if they fed/bought the anti-Democratic narrative they have a hand in this disaster.

[JCanete]

191. They don't own this, or they certainly own it less than our own corporate media, which is a poor

excuse for a fourth estate, by-and-large. But instead of pointing out the corporate incentive for shitty media as the reason why we can't have nice things but instead get the Bachmans and Palins and W's and Trumps and Perrys of the world, if people prefer to point to a small fringe percentage of hold-out or 3rd party voters, by all means don't follow the actual plot. Just post one more rage pile-on here so that people can feel self-righteous.

[honest.abe]

201. They had a huge impact.

They were media darlings.

[JCanete]

294. They had an incredibly small impact compared to the total impact of the media. Incredibly small.

The media gave us Trump by failing and has continued to fail as its ownership receives huge tax cuts. The media that tried to legitimize Trump over and over before that became a bridge too far but still likes to be happily wagged by every single tweet the idiot posts rather than to report on anything the public should be aware of. The media that gets all offended by celebrity correspondence dinners. the media that has made us uninformed or disinformed as a public over the last 30 years.

citing a faction...a sliver of the picture simply because the media does suddenly love to trot out leftie independents right before a GE (but never at the beginning of a primary...huh) and putting it all on them for presumably(though certainly not always) voting their principles, rather than to focus on the real problem that is that media and who owns it, is a tragedy of red herrings.

[honest.abe]

303. It was a huge impact because it was just enough to give the election to Trump.

If we had full-throated support from all those who claimed to be Democrats Hillary would be in the WH now.

[JCanete]

308. again, focusing on the 1 percentage point versus the 15 or 20 percentage points the

media is easily responsible for.

[R B Garr]

311. You should read the Mueller indictments instead of parroting the scripted

"corporations" mantras. More people are online --- millions more -- than watch the cable news shows. That is why Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein were promoted so that they would undermine Hillary. That is how the Russians went about it, and it was comprehensive. The U.S. media alone did not construct this -- it was a foreign hit job. Let's stick with reality.

Pushing stale campaign talking points does nothing. Read the current news and the Mueller indictments.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/16/trump-mueller-russia-indictment-what-does-it-mean
"According to Friday’s indictment of 13 Russians and three Russian companies, the “strategic goal” was to sow discord in America and dated back to 2014. Online propaganda efforts by a troll farm called the Internet Research Agency were “primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton, to denigrate other candidates such as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and to support Bernie Sanders and then-candidate Donald Trump”."

[JCanete]

326. what, and corporate

media has no presence on social media? Is that really what you're trying to say here? Does that really make a lick of sense to you?

[R B Garr]

327. Seriously? LOL. So now you are saying corporations were boosting Bernie??

What?? Because that's what the Mueller indictments are saying if that is your corporations-are-everything angle.

"According to Friday’s indictment of 13 Russians and three Russian companies, the “strategic goal” was to sow discord in America and dated back to 2014. Online propaganda efforts by a troll farm called the Internet Research Agency were “primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton, to denigrate other candidates such as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and to support Bernie Sanders and then-candidate Donald Trump”."

[JCanete]

328. no, you are focusing on the minor influence of Russia compared to the herculearn influence of

American corporations. Is Russian meddling in our elections unacceptable? Hell yes, but it was only effective at all by virtue of our own media sucking ass...by virtue of a public already being primed not to like Clinton enough that some were willing to believe whatever they saw that painted her in a negative light. That has been decades of doing, not just to Clinton(though particularly to her and pushing everybody left of her off of the grid and pretending that she represented the far left), but to all democrats and progressives and progressive idealism.

Russia's whole angle in piggy-backing on anything pro-Sanders was going to have to do with damaging clinton going into the GE. Putin certainly wanted to undermine our election process. I don't know that he could have imagined that his buffoon would win in the end(unless any hacking occurred), but again, his small footprint(barring hacking) is just slight depression of a gnat in the huge crater that is our own making.

[R B Garr]

334. No. I'm focusing on the reality of the actual news and not some

machinations to make everything fit on to the pinhead of a talking point from one man's campaign.

Again, here's the gist of the Mueller investigations. If Bernie was so anti-corporation(s), then they certainly wouldn't be trying to help him, would they... All of your generalities fall apart.

"According to Friday’s indictment of 13 Russians and three Russian companies, the “strategic goal” was to sow discord in America and dated back to 2014. Online propaganda efforts by a troll farm called the Internet Research Agency were “primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton, to denigrate other candidates such as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and to support Bernie Sanders and then-candidate Donald Trump”."


You are so far into it that you cannot even see or acknowledge that and instead cling to some rather byzantine ideations of "corporations," none of which match what has been reported from the Mueller investigations. It is no longer speculation time. We have the facts.

[JCanete]

355. So I agree with you, that was the goal of Russia, to sew discord. So what. How does that contradict

anything I said?

Did I say anywhere that there is no russia and no russian tamperiing, or did I say that corporate media deserves our far greater ire?

I don't know what to do with the rest of what you posted here.

[R B Garr]

361. Reality is that your ideations about corporate media are really

just manufactured talking points to prolong one candidate's losing platform. You can have ire for whatever you want, of course, but to force that ire and an alternate universe on others is ultimately a divisive tactic, not to mention it still remains false. The news is of a foreign attack on our elections. That is the reality. Just now there were "Breaking News" headlines -- Russian Facebook ads causing divisiveness were seen by 33 Million.

Not to mention your generalizations fall apart, but you won't acknowledge that. Bernie benefitted from the Russian attacks on our elections. That was meant to harm Hillary. This was a foreign attack. You should read the Mueller indictments.

[JCanete]

362. No, it is an obvious trend in this nation with obvious results. That you choose not to see

the impact of money on politics directly and indirectly, particularly over the last .40 years is astonishing. That you think that silly conspiracy stories in-and-of-themselves can change people's minds is also ridiculous. 33 million people did not change their minds because they saw facebook ads. I am not saying it had no impact because I'm sure it did, but not as much as what got us to a point where they could be effective, from the destruction of public education in this nation, to a lack of emphasis on actual journalism.

That Trump was even a phenomenon was not Russias doing. It was our medias piss-poor excuse for a fourth estate.

[R B Garr]

363. Now you are laughably trying to backpedal and generalize even more...

...now you are talking about money in politics in a broad sense that is really just common knowledge. Bernie isn't the first politician to talk about money in politics. And it's interesting you call the Mueller indictments "silly conspiracy theories" because that is also the hallmark of those who were targeted by the Russian meddlers. Folks were targeted by Facebook ads with the same type of propaganda that you are engaging in. Pushing false realities is what they did. You should read the Mueller indictments.

Speaking of money in politics, foreign money is what we are talking about now. Money from Russia. That is what influenced this election. It's all over the news. You still won't acknowledge how you can't possibly be correct about Bernie/corporations because the Russians helped him to harm Hillary. Those are the facts.

[JCanete]

364. I haven't backpedaled on anything. Nor did I call Russias involvement a silly conspiracy theory.

I called some of the stories that Russian operatives advanced silly, and only effective because of factors created right here at home.

Russia simply piggy-backed on any movement that could undermine the democratic frontrunner....again, not so diffferent from standard corporate operating procedure in America, except that its okay when American money shapes politics and except for timing, since corporate media tends to forget that there are left-wing challengers until they are too out of reach to do anything but harm the frontrunner going forward. Then all of a sudden they remember that they exist, and come GE time, you can suddenly expect the Steins and Naders to get air time that wasn't previously offered to them.

I don't know how much effort was put into propelling Sanders to national recognition, versus simply using that popularity and recognition to continue to sew discord by posing as Sanders supporters or placing propaganda in those spaces. I suspect that this was mostly the latter, but if you have proof that Sanders literally achieved that popularity because of Russian influence, well by all means make that case.

[R B Garr]

366. You obviously cannot accept the facts that Bernie was helped by Russia*

and your theories/generalities are in conflict. If Russia just exacerbated what the American media did, then that still says that Bernie was helped. They helped Bernie to harm Hillary. Those are the facts.

You should read the Mueller indictments. Sorry, but only Fox News gets to perpetuate false story lines, and it is just common knowledge that they are not credible so you don't have to state the obvious about Fox News. We know they lie about Democrats and we know they lie about Hillary. We already know all that.

You also refuse to accept that there are literally millions more people on Facebook -- MILLIONS more -- than on the cable shows, especially. That is why online Russian troll armies were used, even trolling their victims down to what websites they viewed to determine how vulnerable they were to propaganda. It is obvious from your continued digressions that you are just trying to reboot your wrong opinions about the Russian influence. Your speculations look only to perpetuate some campaign talking points and are seriously lacking in facts.

Here is another article about the Mueller indictments and the Russia investigation. People are going to jail over this. It's real. A United States Presidency is potentially in danger here for his collaboration with Russia. We don't get to throw all that aside because we don't want to hear it.

* https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/02/17/indictment-russians-also-tried-help-bernie-sanders-jill-stein-presidential-campaigns/348051002/
A 37-page indictment resulting from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation shows that Russian nationals and businesses also worked to boost the campaigns of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Green party nominee Jill Stein in an effort to damage Democrat Hillary Clinton.

[JCanete]

369. I threw none of it aside, but keep beating that dead horse. Its easier to win an argument against a

position you invented. Millions more on facebook who are entirely insulated there from corporate media? Really? I haven't singled out the cable news channels, you have.

What do you keep trying to show me that I haven't already acknowledged? Are you proving that Sanders was propelled to popularity by Russian involvement or that his popularity was used as a tool to infiltrate and perpetuate anti-Clinton sentiment?

[R B Garr]

370. Mueller didn't invent the facts he's presenting. Mueller didn't invent the Russian investigation.

Mueller didn't invent the facts that Bernie and Jill Stein were helped by Russia to harm Hillary. Those are the facts of the world we all inhabit. You obviously refuse to acknowledge them in favor of protecting your own misinformed opinions, none of which match the current news. They only echo past campaigns.

You should read the Mueller indictments. They will answer your questions.

Title: INDICTMENTS: RUSSIANS ALSO TRIED TO HELP BERNIE SANDERS, JILL STEIN PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGNS
"...37-page indictment resulting from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation shows that Russian nationals and businesses also worked to boost the campaigns of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Green party nominee Jill Stein in an effort to damage Democrat Hillary Clinton."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/02/17/indictment-russians-also-tried-help-bernie-sanders-jill-stein-presidential-campaigns/348051002/

[JCanete]

371. okay...i don't know what it is you are saying I'm not accepting. I also don't know what you've shown

me that has contradicted anything I've said.

[R B Garr]

372. There you go again. There is a world of information about a GLOBAL

assault on our Democracy and elections and all you are focused on is parroting some packaged campaign talking points.

[JCanete]

373. there has been a corporate assault on our democracy for a long time. That's kind of why the

Republicans are doing nothing about this Russia situation with Trump. I get the feeling you're the one missing the plot.

[R B Garr]

374. This is typical. It illustrates a fundamental misunderstanding of how

the true oligarchs are having a laugh at using the simpleton Americans.

[JCanete]

375. the true oligarchs who actually own the media, or the shadow oligarchs who are still trying to

infiltrate Hogwarts?

[R B Garr]

377. Yet more diversions, I see. Your alternate realities are actually a huge tactic

of the Fox News World denizens and those false realities are fed to their simpletons. You should read about the tactics of the Russian bot trolls. ...

[JCanete]

378. why, I'm surprised you haven't already accused me of being one...now that's not a tactic at all...

[R B Garr]

379. Alternate realities are for the simpletons. Simpletons like the Fox News

types. We should stick with reality, the reality we see from the indictments like in the Mueller investigation. You should read the Mueller indictments.

[Kurt V.]

197. FFS. we are all to blame!

i personally have flipped more ex-repubs than i can count. Volunteered in one campaign and it still feel like i should have done more.

[dembotoz]

202. This bs again? Let's focus on November

[vi5]

206. I keep needing this math explained to me...

...but nobody has really fully done it yet.

The supposed "justification" for these posts is that Stein voters voted against what they claim are their own interests. Right?

Explain to me again how the 1% of Jill Stein supposedly voting against their own interests are more responsible for Trumps win than the 25-40% of female, jewish, latino and other demographic groups who voted against their own interests by actively voting FOR Trump?

I mean last I checked
25%> 1%
30%> 1%
40%>1%

So.....what did I miss? Did math change? And if it didn't why don't I see thread after thread after thread yelling at THOSE groups that voted against their own interests?

I mean don't get me wrong, that would be stupid and moronic to keep ranting and raving about that over a year later. But given the numbers and proportions and all of that, that makes posts like these even MORE so.

[ehrnst]

211. It's not "moronic," it's math

Last time I checked:

10,704 < 51,463
22,177 < 31,006
49,485 <67,416


Trump's victory margin smaller than total Stein votes in key swing states

In Michigan, Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton by 10,704 votes, while Stein got 51,463 votes, according to current totals on the state’s official website.

And in Wisconsin, Trump’s margin over Clinton was 22,177, while Stein garnered 31,006 votes.

In Pennsylvania, meanwhile, Stein’s total of 49,485 votes was just slightly smaller than Trump’s victory margin of 67,416 votes, according to the state’s latest numbers.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/308353-trump-won-by-smaller-margin-than-stein-votes-in-all-three

Is that clearer?

Also, a higher % of white women voted for Hillary than those who voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012. Were *you* ranting about white women's votes then? Or were you among those who simply wrote it off to racism among the right then, and not indicative that he was a "bad candidate," running a "bad campaign."

Hillary got more white votes total in 2016 than Obama got in 2012.

And yes, there was plenty of ranting about white women voting for Trump here on DU, and it was used to "prove" that HRC was "a bad candidate," despite the fact that she got a bigger % than Obama did.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/whats-up-with-white-women-they-voted-for-romney-too

Women voters are chastised more than any of those other groups (who are also inexplicably lumped together culturally in your post), for some reason....

Where were you?

A bigger % of jews voted for Hillary than they did Obama in 2012.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jewish-voting-record-in-u-s-presidential-elections

[vi5]

229. I didn't ask about how she fared compared to Obama...

And I didn't ask about them compared to Trumps margin of victory.

But fine....in those swing states what percentage of the groups I listed voted for Trump?

Unless those number are also less than the number of Stein votes, then singling them out still makes zero sense.

But then again, sense and logic isn't the hallmark of any of these Stein/Bernie/Leftist/whatever posts.

[ehrnst]

230. So you don't like math if it doesn't support your opinions.

Got it.

I answered your questions, and you got upset.

Go ahead and move the goalpost again, while you're at it.

[vi5]

331. I repeat...

"how the 1% of Jill Stein supposedly voting against their own interests are more responsible for Trumps win than the 25-40% of female, jewish, latino and other demographic groups who voted against their own interests by actively voting FOR Trump? "

That was my original question. Not how did Hillary compare to Obama, or how Trump compared to Stein.

My question was why do Stein voters bear more blame by not voting for either candidate, than so many other groups whose large numbers saw them actively voting FOR Trump?

If those numbers are not bigger than the percentage of the vote that Stein got (national or in swing states...I'll take either) then by all means I'd love to see that information and admit that I am 100% wrong and this is absolutely all the fault of Jill Stein and her scary 1% of the vote which absolutely eclipses the number of any other demographic that logic seems to dictate "should have" voted for Hillary but instead voted FOR Trump.

[ehrnst]

359. I repeat...

10,704 < 51,463
22,177 < 31,006
49,485 <67,416

Trump's victory margin smaller than total Stein votes in key swing states

In Michigan, Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton by 10,704 votes, while Stein got 51,463 votes, according to current totals on the state’s official website.

And in Wisconsin, Trump’s margin over Clinton was 22,177, while Stein garnered 31,006 votes.

In Pennsylvania, meanwhile, Stein’s total of 49,485 votes was just slightly smaller than Trump’s victory margin of 67,416 votes, according to the state’s latest numbers.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/308353-trump-won-by-smaller-margin-than-stein-votes-in-all-three

(Moving of goalpost by refusing to acknowlege that you got "the math explained to you" by suddenly demanding other numbers and calling the OP "moronic" again like this is an elementary school playground in 3..2...1)

[honest.abe]

240. I think what is so irritating to many of us..

is that the Stein/JPR/BoB types insisted they were absolutely right about all things liberal/progressive/Democratic and we who supported Hillary were a bunch of corporatist DINOs.

For someone who claims to be on the same side they certainly did a lot of damage to our side.

[ehrnst]

288. +1000 (nt)

[vi5]

332. I'm not sure how the solution to that is...

...essentially repeating "Nu-uh!!!!!!" over and over and over again almost 2 years after the fact.

Which is what these incessant and ridiculous Stein/Bernie/JPR/whatever posts are essentially doing.

I just find it ridiculous and short-sighted that we can navel gaze about what we did or didn't do to reach out to every other fucking group under the sun, but we're not at all supposed to even give a modicum of thought to what we might have done more to reach out to "lefties" (or I should say what are called "lefties" now but are essentially what were mainstream Democrats 25+ years ago)

I voted for her. I voted for her in the primary. I voted for her in the primary against Obama. I voted for her in the GE against Trump.

But the refusal by many to even give one modicum of thought as to how we maybe can get those people on board, or more importantly the 10s of millions who didn't vote at all and who support liberal policies is not going to get us anywhere. And these ridiculous posts get us not just nowhere forward, but they actively move us backward.

There's a meme going around liberal social media that is something to effect of how it's easier for Republicans to believe that Republicans Mueller, Comey, Rosenstein, the FBI and the CIA have been conspiring for years to bring down President Trump than it is to believe that Trump is a liar.

The liberal version of that is that it's much easier to believe a mostly washed up, super-liberal middle aged actress convinced people in the rust belt to swing an election for Trump than it is to believe that Hillary's campaign/The Democratic party did anything less than perfectly.

[honest.abe]

356. It is a solution..

if it helps to remind people not to repeat the same mistake.

If anyone claims to be a liberal or progressive or Democrat then they should support and vote for the Democratic nominee... period.

[louis c]

306. I would have wrote that, but I didn't need to

you did.

We can all argue during any primary season about who the better Democrat is in any given General Election.

But, after that, it's a binary choice. At that point we vote "blue, no matter who."

[rzemanfl]

217. bookmarking n/t

[oberliner]

376. 71 percent of Jewish voters voted for Hillary Clinton

Only 24 percent voted for Trump.

[vi5]

389. So.......

....again....my point is that wouldn't it seem like 29% of jewish voters actively voting for an anti-semite who appeals to literal nazis bear more responsibility than 1% of people who voted for Jill Stein?

I'm not sure why we have to keep seeing posts about a much group with much less significant numbers and impact.

I'm actually not sure why we should have to see ANY posts still bitching about how any group voted in 2016 rather than looking forward and seeing what we can change in 2018 and 2020, but the point remains that it's even more ridiculous to have to keep seeing one insignificant group of people blamed more than the many other groups who bear even more of a numerical impact by Actually and directly voting FOR Trump.

The only group that gets let off the hook is African Americans voted with near unanimity once again for the correct candidate.

[oberliner]

390. Only 24 percent of Jewish voters voted for Trump, not 29

100 percent of Jill Stein voters voted for Jill Stein.

[vi5]

391. Which number of voters was higher?

People love to talk about numbers that would have swung the election, so....let's spread that blame around.

And the number of other Demographics who bear some responsibility for Trump by voting against their own interest is much higher than the number of Stein voters.

[Gothmog]

397. A vote for Stein was a vote for Trump

[Gothmog]

396. Yes the Jewish vote went to Clinton heavily

[HenryWallace]

222. I'd like to give a shout out to .....

All those voters who refused to vote for either Presidential candidate (in Michigan they nearly tripped the Stein voters)!

Another round of applause for all the Obama voters in the midwest who somehow realized their best chance for "hope and change" lie with a celebrity reality show host....

These types of post have long-past moved from annoying to embarrassing....

[BobTheSubgenius]

224. Living in a world without consequences.

Must be nice.

So many points with which to agree on this thread. The one that stands out, ATM, is where I live. Small-to-medium sized city, seat of provincial government, naval base, not very far N of Bremerton, Whidby Island or Seattle.

First strike target, almost for sure.

[philly_bob]

232. Another DU factional hate thread.

Loss to Trump in 2016 was a complex event, caused by many things. A political friend refers to it as "a perfect storm."

Blaming it on progressives and radicals ignores the possibility that Democrats' own actions in the primary and GE campaigns contributed to the defeat.

[KPN]

265. I think they are aware of what it ignores. It strikes me that it serves, for some, a purpose of

marginalizing progressives who are a bit too far left for their way of thinking/comfort. Some genuinely buy into the whole incrementalism schtick.

[Raine]

339. Exactly

and it gives away your power when something is all someone else's fault. It was all in their hands, none in yours to change anything, such a powerless way to think.

[KPN]

236. Why don't you take this to JPR instead of here?

[philly_bob]

249. Because I have some loyalty to DU.

I've been here for 13 years.

I just want to see DU be open to a wide range of anti-Trump opinion. These hate threads discourage newcomers who may be attracted by Sanders-style idealism.

[KPN]

266. Huh?

[kimbutgar]

252. On Facebook they went after those who expressed doubts about Hillary and talked them

Into voting for Jill Stein. A friends daughter was one of those on Facebook who fell for the hoax. She got all these suggested pages that bashed Hillary. A couple of them she passed on to me and I refuted them and sent her back links showing they were bs. In the end her Mother and I told her she would regret to voting for Hillary.

[philly_bob]

271. Your story rings true; nasty tactics were everywhere on Facebook.

Your friend's daughter may have been targeted by foreign troll farms.

I bet she'll be a lot more discerning in future elections. Do you know how she evaluates her vote NOW? (Allowing for recent revelations of Facebook data-theft and the fact that no one wants to admit to their mother that they were wrong.)

I hate Facebook.

[liberalmuse]

264. This was the thing that did it.

I’m fully enraged at everyone responsible for Trump as of yesterday. They’ve endangered us all. This isn’t some game or about “ME, ME, ME”. This is about all of us and it’s more than certain we are fucked.

[BlueDog22]

267. Past

This is in the past. This kind of behavior does not help us build momentum for November, and being judgemental towards building blocks we could sway towards our side doesn't help us win them over in the next election. We, as a group, need to move on.

[Wwcd]

277. No, it is exactly what's needed to build momentum.

Geez, anyone who still stands on the side of Stein & JPR at this point needs to be called out!

When they take the lives & future of our nation so damned lightly as to pit their Anti American messages before the country's best, then they have placed themselves in the same group as those who intentionally open the door & laid out the welcome mat to the Russian Crime Syndicate.

The mob is now running our country.
That's motivation to campaign against & everyone still on board with RU definately should be called out.

It will come down to the point of "Are you with America or are you with Russia's criminal org."
Because you can't be on both sides.

[disillusioned73]

318. Embracing their tactics is not a winning strategy.. jmo

[Wwcd]

322. Neither is embracing those who intentionally set out on a mission to undermine our US govt

Russian crime syndicate or American free society.

One was worked against and one was worked for.

It is that simple.

[BlueDog22]

345. Voters

Usually to change people's minds by talking to people - on their level, not at them. That is if their open to their minds being changed.

If their not open minded, then yes they are against us. I don't want to paint everyone with that brush however.

[stevenleser]

280. Nope, that mindset could be supported after Nader, but not after it happened again and it is clear

that some aren't learning the lesson.

[Cha]

343. Not really.. stein and sarandon will do this shite again and

again.. ad infinitum.

[SFnomad]

281. I saved the world from Hillary and all I got was this lousy Rapture (and $1.50 a week)

[lovemydogs]

283. I wonder why none of you are ripping on moderate dems who swung to Trump

Far more voted that way then the handful that went to Stein.
You are always dumping on progressives and blaming them for Hillary's loss.
It was those moderate blue collar dems that voted Trump and yet you ignore them.
Besides, you can keep writing about Hillary, 2016 and the election and your bitterness or you can work towards making sure democrats are elected in a couple months for the 2018 midterms so they take over the House and Senate.

[arthritisR_US]

287. I wonder if any of their family members will be deployed to Iran

when/if that happens?

[honest.abe]

307. Its a reminder to not commit the same mistake.

Hopefully some will have learned.

[chwaliszewski]

313. One thing that is being missed in all of this...

During every election, there will always be voters who don't vote for either the Republican or Democratic nominees or don't vote at all. That will never change. The Democrats need to figure out how to get more of the non-voters and 3rd party voters to vote for their candidate instead of blaming them for our losses. It's not their fault for not voting for Hillary, it's their right. It's our fault for not winning their vote and OPs like this one don't help our cause; it just makes us look like a bunch of petulant crybabies.

[Raine]

342. You're totally on point!

[BlueDog22]

347. Exactly

Nicely Said!

[honest.abe]

357. And many of them didnt vote because..

they thought Hillary was no different from Trump and that concept was supported by the Stein/JPR/BoB bunch.

If we had full-throated genuine support by all those who claimed to be Liberals/Democrats/Progressives Hillary would be in the WH now.

[betsuni]

358. +1

[Faux pas]

317. Oh barf

overdramatize much?

[Cha]

338. Look who's talking.

[Gothmog]

381. Nader taught stein how to screw Democrats

I will never forgive nader Rove funded Nader in 2000 and 2004 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/ralph-nader-was-indispens_b_4235065.html

Furthermore, Karl Rove and the Republican Party knew this, and so they nurtured and crucially assisted Nader’s campaigns, both in 2000 and in 2004. On 27 October 2000, the AP’s Laura Meckler headlined “GOP Group To Air Pro-Nader TV Ads.” She opened: “Hoping to boost Ralph Nader in states where he is threatening to hurt Al Gore, a Republican group is launching TV ads featuring Nader attacking the vice president [Mr. Gore]. ... ‘Al Gore is suffering from election year delusion if he thinks his record on the environment is anything to be proud of,’ Nader says [in the commercial]. An announcer interjects: ‘What’s Al Gore’s real record?’ Nader says: ‘Eight years of principles betrayed and promises broken.’” Meckler’s report continued: “A spokeswoman for the Green Party nominee said that his campaign had no control over what other organizations do with Nader’s speeches.” Bush’s people - the group sponsoring this particular ad happened to be the Republican Leadership Council - knew exactly what they were doing, even though the liberal suckers who voted so carelessly for Ralph Nader obviously did not. Anyone who drives a car the way those liberal fools voted, faces charges of criminal negligence, at the very least. But this time, the entire nation crashed as a result; not merely a single car.....

On July 9th, the San Francisco Chronicle headlined “GOP Doners Funding Nader: Bush Supporters Give Independent’s Bid a Financial Lift,” and reported that the Nader campaign “has received a recent windfall of contributions from deep-pocketed Republicans with a history of big contributions to the party,” according to “an analysis of federal records.” Perhaps these contributors were Ambassador Egan’s other friends. Mr. Egan’s wife was now listed among the Nader contributors. Another listed was “Nijad Fares, a Houston businessman, who donated $200,000 to the Bush inaugural committee and who donated $2,000 each to the Nader effort and the Bush campaign this year.” Furthermore, Ari Berman reported 7 October 2004 at the Nation, under “Swift Boat Veterans for Nader,” that some major right-wing funders of a Republican smear campaign against Senator John Kerry’s Vietnam service contributed also $13,500 to the Nader campaign, and that “the Republican Party of Michigan gathered ninety percent of Nader’s signatures in their state” (90%!) to place Nader on the ballot so Bush could win that swing state’s 17 electoral votes. Clearly, the word had gone out to Bush’s big contributors: Help Ralphie boy! In fact, on 15 September 2005, John DiStaso of the Manchester Union-Leader, reported that, “A year ago, as the Presidential general election campaign raged in battleground state New Hampshire, consumer advocate Ralph Nader found his way onto the ballot, with the help of veteran Republican strategist David Carney and the Carney-owned Norway Hill Associates consulting firm.”

It was obvious, based upon the 2000 election results, that a dollar contributed to Nader in the 2004 contest would probably be a more effective way to achieve a Bush win against Kerry in the U.S. Presidential election than were perhaps even ten dollars contributed to Bush. This was a way of peeling crucial votes off from Bush’s real opponent - votes that otherwise would have gone to the Democrat. That’s why the smartest Republican money in the 2004 Presidential election was actually going to Nader, even more so than to Bush himself: these indirect Bush contributions provided by far the biggest bang for the right-wing buck.