Our friends at JPR seem to have lost their unity...

[brooklynite]

They're now spreading between Bernie, Tulsi and Elizabeth. I wonder how the Founding fathers feel.

https://jackpineradicals.com/

[irresistable]

1. It was never about Bernie.

[hlthe2b]

4. just HRC hate? (asking...?)

[irresistable]

6. No, it was about policy.

[athena]

11. I hope they're pleased with their president.

I mean, what a policy disaster HRC would have been!

[irresistable]

12. Their view is that Bernie would have defeated Trump.

Losing to Trump created the disaster.

[trueblue2007]

107. Hillary would have been astounding. (I echo your scarcasim ..... )

Donald Rump is a monster.

[Adrahil]

37. Really? I don't believe that.

I've lurked over there often. I have seen the bile and vitriol. I have seen the denials about the case against Trump.

They have some deep-seated hatred in them. You can believe what you want.

[irresistable]

39. People who disagree with you on policy can also be filled with bile and vitriol.

[ehrnst]

264. In fact, that seems to drive their allegiance. Whatsoever validates their hate and entitlement

is THE ONLY OPTION, and no one had better disagree, or they are OUT.

See also: Trump supporters.

[MrGrieves]

51. Sorry but.... Bull....shit.

[irresistable]

58. How would you know, since you have only been on this site since Nov.?

[MrGrieves]

63. Wrong. I have been on this site since 2004.

I just had to switch usernames when I decoded to start posting again. Dayum you know EVERYTHING!

[irresistable]

65. Why did you have to switch usernames?

[MrGrieves]

67. What the fuck is it to you? And what does it have to do with JPR?

I know better than to sit and argue with a troll but seriously stay on topic.

[irresistable]

71. You volunteered the info. I was just curious.

I joined DU back in 2003 as a Dean supporter myself. I usually end up backing a person less likely to win.

Obama was the only person I've ever picked in the primary who actually won.

[MrGrieves]

92. Again what does this have to do with the topic at hand?

[ehrnst]

265. You're demanding that of someone else?

[irresistable]

268. Asking a question isn't a demand.

[ehrnst]

270. All depends on how you "ask."

Right?

You were asked.

[irresistable]

272. When they didn't answer, I didn't demand it. Are you demanding an answer of me?

[ehrnst]

274. That turned into a straw man pretty quickly, didn't it?

No need to get defensive.

When one makes an accusation, and doesn't accept answer they get, and persists, especially after someone gets upset, that begins to sound like demanding.



Just an observation. Not a demand or even a request.

[irresistable]

275. I am not defensive! How dare you accuse me of being defensive!

[ehrnst]

276. Quick thinking there....

[MrsCoffee]

55. Bwahahahahhahaha

The policy of being able to call Hillary the c-word.

Bunch of pathetic losers.

[irresistable]

60. since I never saw that, you will have to show me that post.

[MrsCoffee]

62. I don't have to do shit.

I wouldn't re-visit that site if you paid me.

It's not a secret. You will see many people have pointed it out.

[Hekate]

115. He's making friends today, isn't he?

sheesh

[Cha]

131. ...

[yardwork]

149. Love your response!

[LuvLoogie]

154. It is known.

You doubt yourself.

[fleabiscuit]

183. Just do a search of "fuck her" on the assholes front page. Or any other derogatory you favor.

NT!

[emulatorloo]

206. Hmm, I just searched "cunt" on their front page. Apparently Biden is a cunt now too.

Further down I learned that all DU'ers are cunts.

And "Anyone who pushes Russiagate in general is a cunt and also an enemy of global humanity."

I have a very very good memory, and I remember it all

Even though we are now being told JPR was just a place for calm, rational, high-level policy discussion.

They've apparently scrubbed some of the old pages from 2016, but waybackmachine still has them.

[Hortensis]

245. :) Thank you for your service. Perhaps once every

several months I get curious about whether that dysfunctional DU spinoff has decompensated further or just what conspiracy is being pushed now and drop by briefly. Last time was to see if a replacement for Bernie had finally turned up, but no, and your report suggests they're pretty much holding steady in orbit.

[Cha]

234. "Policy"..

Oilem.. https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11918478

Aloha, flea

[fleabiscuit]

315. Candidates entering the horse race signals the migration of ratfuckers and bots.

Cha!

[Cha]

316. Yes.. 2.0.

Lucky us.

flea

[Cary]

251. Resistable

[Tipperary]

73. Yep.

Spot on.

[emulatorloo]

159. Lol they didn't give a shit about policy. They never met a RW conspiracy about Clinton they

didn’t fall in love with. They happily fed at Putin’s propaganda trough and regurgitated it here on DU before they created their own little hell-hole where they could spew anything. Including some’s support of Donald Fucking Trump (he will bring the great revolution!11!)

Yes, there were some people in the beginningwho cared about policy, like Cali.

Those were driven away by the irrationality.

Or they were bannedwhen they asked the big boys to stop gleefully calling women cunts.

Don’t try to gaslight us with this ‘they were all about policy’ nonsense. We saw it all, and we have good memories.

[irresistable]

162. Why didn't I see any of that when I went there?

This sounds downright mythological.

[emulatorloo]

166. Don't even think about gaslighting us with "the i never saw it" routine

There are plenty of people here who will back me. And if you bother to look thru the archives of this site, you will see these thing discussed, linked to, and quoted as it happened.

And no, I am not going to look it up for you. I’m not your research assistant. You’re acting in bad faith so this conversation is done.

[irresistable]

168. It is easy to throw around accusations if you don't back them up.

It is also easy to accuse me of gas-lighting.

[emulatorloo]

172. We're done. Maybe someone else will dig up the banned because she objected to the word Cunt

gleefully used by the the big boys.

Or Clinton has Parkinson’s and lives in a metal exoskeleton.

And so on and so on and so on.

It’s not worth my time as you’ll move the goal posts or try to handwave it away.

You are getting tons of pushback on this thread. They all know what you’re up to: gaslighting

[irresistable]

173. I can live with your inability to provide proof...but now you imagine what my reponse would be....

if you did provide proof.

That is pretty funny....

All I'm saying is that whenever I go there, I don't see any vulgar name-calling.
I see a lot of talk about policy.

[emulatorloo]

182. I did a google for you because you seem to need help with that: Banned for objecting to Cunt Word

It is from July 2016.


Of course JPR has since scrubbed that page.

However, here is a snapshot of the entire JPR thread from the internet archive

Luminous Animal: This has probably already been addressed
https://web.archive.org/web/20160711142742/http://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/this-has-probably-already-been-addressed/

Luminous Animal was banned after that thread.




I’m not doing anymore googling for you.

I’ll ask you to stop claiming I made up “mythology” or whatever phrase you used to call me a liar.

Because I made up nothing, nor did the posters you are harassing down thread

[irresistable]

208. No one in that thread was using words to attack anyone.

It was a serious discussion on whether they would censor people. No one was calling anyone else there a name.

[emulatorloo]

213. As I wrote: "It's not worth my time as you'll move the goal posts or try to handwave it away. "

Which is exactly what you just did.

Go search for the word cunt RIGHT NOW on their home page.

Will take you to this thread:

https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/search/cunt/

Joe Biden's a cunt: "I hate that cunt!!!"

DU'ers are cunts. (SV (Site Voldemort) is their codeword for DU)

A good long-time DU'er is singled out as a cunt (another codeword is used)

People who take Russian interference in our election seriously are cunts: "Anyone who pushes Russiagate in general is a cunt and also an enemy of global humanity.”

Serious policy discussion indeed.

This time we are truly done.

You are not acting in good faith.

You are engaged in revisionist history, and that bullshit does not work here anymore.

[JonLP24]

239. It all seems to come from one person

Last edited Thu Mar 14, 2019, 07:17 AM - Edit history (1)

I don't go to JPR for that poster but that site should probably delete those posts. However, there was an off site for Clinton supporters during the primary and this site has pretty bad undelete posts.

I remember old "Best of DU" threads that exposed racism & sexism on this site. I remember in the Muslim forum at DU2 there was a post about "camel jockeys" which was allowed to stand by Skinner himself because there are literal camel jockeys the Muslim poster here said that there are immigrants that literally swam the Rio Grande but it isn't appropriate to call them "wetbacks". I do have a long memory when it comes to DU.

[irresistable]

277. There was a lot of anger on both sides after the primary, and most of that anger remains...

based on what I see.

[MrGrieves]

198. Stop trolling.

Just stop.

[marble falls]

286. Ironic message.

[DFW]

288. If this is talk about "policy," then I'm glad none of these people are in Congress:

Billy (170 posts) ( Reply to post 3 ) July 8, 2016 at 4:35 pm
Profile photo of Billy

"I like cunts, I don’t like seeing this word abused by referring it to a foul thing like Hillary. But I get over it."

THAT is about policy? Maybe Louie Gohmert's kind of policy, maybe Steve King's kind of policy, but no kind of policy I ever discussed with anyone.

[mcar]

177. Where's that sealion?

[Squinch]

307. Everywhere in this thread!

[mcar]

311. Yep

[Cha]

218. Yes, he is acting in "bad faith". Just

Because he Sez.. "he didn't see it". Doesn't mean it didn't happen.

JPR was exposed over and over again for their delusional bullshit.

[Cha]

216. Sez you.. who claims if you "didn't see it".. it

didn't happen.

Got news for you.. it did happen.

[ehrnst]

282. The old "absence of evidence equals evidence of absence"

fallacy.

[Cha]

295. He knows damn well it happened.

[ehrnst]

297. ....

Yep.

[mcar]

175. Have you ever been on JPR?

They still hate HRC with the fire of a burning sun. Policy?

[irresistable]

176. Their feelings are driven by policy....

[mcar]

178. ...

[OilemFirchen]

205. ...

[redstateblues]

207. LOL

[ehrnst]

261. JPR's feelings are driven by entitlement. And their policy preferences are driven by their feelings

which they believe are on equal footing with facts.

That's what entitlement is.

And it's not so much about policy as it is about people not walking lockstep with their preferences on tactics. For instance, they can't comprehend any path to universal health care other than Sanders' MFA - and anyone that points it out is a SHILL 4 BIG PHARMA/BIG MEDICINE/OLIGHARCY!!!111. They demand lockstep, and they get an angry when people don't get in line, single file, one-two, one-two behind them.

Because they just hate facism.

[NastyRiffraff]

294. Oh jeez

Are you TRYING to be ridiculous? You can't really be serious. Then again, looking at your other responses...

[ehrnst]

260. It's about butthurt because Democrats did not bow to their entitlement. (nt)

[SidDithers]

34. Yup. It was anti-HRC, anti-Obama hate...nt

Sid

[DFW]

289. Just look at the pasted post below. I think it pretty much answers your question

Billy (170 posts) ( Reply to post 3 ) July 8, 2016 at 4:35 pm
Profile photo of Billy

"I like cunts, I don’t like seeing this word abused by referring it to a foul thing like Hillary. But I get over it."
-----------------------------

Like you said: just Hillary hate. No policy mentioned.

[hlthe2b]

290. confirming what I'd believed... n/t

[R B Garr]

16. "It was never about Bernie"

[irresistable]

19. The split between 3 candidates proves my point.

The fact that many others are now also on-board with the policy cornerstones from Bernie's run also validates Bernie's policies.

[H2O Man]

23. Valid point.

[R B Garr]

24. "It was never about Bernie"

[irresistable]

27. Bernie's policies are dominating the 2020 primary.

[R B Garr]

29. "It was never about Bernie"

[irresistable]

35. Guess who it isn't about.

[ismnotwasm]

41. I don't know. Who?

[irresistable]

46. That is a question to be answered by the person taunting me with...

"It isn't about Bernie"

...over and over again.

[R B Garr]

47. There is nothing to answer because...

JPR.

That is enough time wasting for me. How disingenuous to say it was never about Bernie.

[ismnotwasm]

48. .

[irresistable]

68. How disingenuous to say it was never about policy. People flocked to Bernie because of policy.

It wasn't because he was a dashing young man.

[R B Garr]

75. How disingenuous to say it was never about Bernie.

Not enough people “flocked” to Bernie, as most saw through the savior dealio.

[irresistable]

76. Maybe this time will be different. Not everyone views things through your cynical lens.

[R B Garr]

78. Wrong again. Bernie lost in 2016 AND 2018, slip

sliding in the wrong direction. The blue wave showed the way, the real deal. What is cynical is not acknowledging that others have rejected the savior ideations.

[irresistable]

80. Bernie seems to be doing very well.

I like a number of different candidates, as do the members of JPR (per this thread) as well.

Sure, it disproves your savior theory, but that won't stop you.

[R B Garr]

84. Nothing disproves the savior theory because we are not

into revisionist history at this site. JPR, though,,,,.

[irresistable]

87. Will you vote for our Lord and Savior, Bernie....should he win the nomination?

[R B Garr]

88. That's laughable coming from a known anti/Democrat

site.

[irresistable]

89. So, you won't vote for Bernie if he wins the nomination?

I'll vote for the nominee without question....I voted for every Democratic nominee since 1988, my first election.

[R B Garr]

91. ......

JPR is where your concern should be.

[irresistable]

94. No, My concern is about those who can't bring themselves to say that they will support our nominee.

Nothing funny about that.

[R B Garr]

97. JPR is where your concern should be.

“Our nominee”.

[irresistable]

98. Maybe I should say "my nominee", since you won't commit to vote for the Democratic nominee.

Your tongue will not burst into flame just because you commit to doing that.

My hand didn't burst into flame when I voted for Hillary.

[R B Garr]

99. JPR is where your concern should be.

[ismnotwasm]

102. Why in the world would your hand do that?

That election will be a tragedy for this century. Every single one the Hilary haters that believed and/or promoted the most egregious bullshit I have ever seen against a candidate are responsible for him.

She has a great vision for the country. The best vision. The best policies.

Now we have Donald Trump.

[Act_of_Reparation]

112. Not to piss on your parade...

...but one of these days, an underpaid and underappreciated academic will get around to conducting a thorough postmortem of that election. I'm not, like, the smartest guy on the block, but I don't think they're going to include "People who didn't like Hillary but voted for her anyway" among the chief causes of her loss.

[ismnotwasm]

113. Not really talking about them. No piss need be involved

The dissection of the election will be interesting in about 20 years, and I’m just being a bit of a gadfly right now because I have the day off, and those JPR fuckers are assholes.

The “blame” has many elements, but in my opinion, the deliberate non-voters in this particular time, and this particular country, during that particular election kindaownit.

[Mr Tibbs]

164. Bernie started the 2016 primaries with 3% name recognition

This time he has a bit of a head start in that department.

[John Fante]

153. If and when Bernie loses the primary,

the "busters" will turn their attention to sowing division amongst democratic voters. They'll do this, of course, to help Trump.

It's not about policy.

[irresistable]

155. What will you do if and when Bernie wins the primary?

[John Fante]

161. Vote for him in a general election.

All while the Bernie Busters think up reasons why their savior Bernie has been corrupted by the "Democratic establishment corporatist machine" and thus won't vote for him against Trump. I have no doubt these frauds have these arguments on stand-by.

[irresistable]

163. Where are all of these Bernie Busters that you imagine?

[John Fante]

184. Handing WI/MI/PA to Trump.

[radius777]

156. White populism and backlash to "identity politics"

and diversity as embodied by the "establishment" Dem party of Hillary/Obama.

I've seen several articles on this, and one key thread of Sanders' support was a kind of white resentment towards "identity politics" (as Sanders himself often decries) and a longing for a return to the heartland populism of the FDR era when the Dem party centered the white working class above all other groups.

Many of Sanders' voters disliked Hillary for this reason, and were not neccessarily to her left. In fact many were non-ideological and/or even to the right of her.

[irresistable]

160. I never met anybody like that at Bernie rallies or meetings.

Most of the people that I met weren't white....so there's that.

[The Polack MSgt]

309. Excuse me, but i would like to see receipts. Show me the majority brown Bernie rally.

I never met anybody like that at Bernie rallies or meetings.

Most of the people that I met weren't white....so there's that.

Holy hell, look at this - This is a PRO BERNIE article listing his schedule and detailing how to get tickets.

Check the damn PHOTO.

Are Heavy editors out to get Sen. Sanders? Not getting an anti-Sanders vibe here...

But, this is the pic they chose to show Senator Sanders in the most positive light.

Not to go full on "Where's Waldo" and do a brown face content analysis BUUUUUTTTT

It sure looks to me that this crowd displays the same overall albedo as any trump rally I've ever seen.

[GulfCoast66]

222. In other words; racism

Wanted the Democratic Party to again focus on Whites.

Exactly as research has proven. There was not a forgotten white working class. There were whites feeling their privilege threatened.

The real poor voted democratic.

[TwilightZone]

195. Here ya go.

Try to talk yourself out of this crap.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11918271

[Hortensis]

246. Please. Sanders copied and tweaked Democratic policies

to sell them as different. And they certainly turned out to be when ALL expert analyses found them unworkable as presented.

Most of those who "flocked" to Sanders in repudiation of the Democratic Party did so because he presented himself as a populist leader feeding mindless hostilities toward "elites," focusing them above all not on Republicans but on the Democratic Party's evil establishment. Our Democratic platform of widespread progressive and civil rights advances just didn't satisfy that resentful populist urge to tear down. Misogyny was huge, also, of course, but came natural to many in this crowd.

There is a definite authoritarian note to his delivery, also, which I noted from the beginning. That compelling "I alone can fix it" note from both him and Trump. You might want to read up on authoritarian populism to help understand why somewhere between 12 and 20% of Sanders' followers voted for Trump or anti-progressive libertarian Johnson.

Looking at this left-wing leader that way also helps explain how he could try to illicitly take the primary nomination away from the majority of Democratic voters. He believed his followers would support oversetting the democratic process. Enthusiastically. And my observations of the rage of the JPR types when he failed were that he was appallingly, frighteningly correct.

[irresistable]

269. You have constructed quite a fantasy there. Do you write fantasy novels for a living.

[Cha]

293. Whoa.. look who's talking.

[George II]

271. One only need look at "Medicare for All" as though it's a revolutionary idea that "Democrats"....

....were unable to come up with it on their own.

It's only been introduced in one form or another by Democrats EVERY year since 1943!

[Hortensis]

281. :). Literally true!

To paraphrase Barney Frank’s bumper sticker, we may not be perfect, but those who think they need to oppose us are crazy.

[ehrnst]

284. Ted Kennedy said that one of his greatest career regrets was walking away from a deal with Nixon

on health care reform, because Democrats wanted single payer or NOTHING.

Nixon's response was a plan that was to the left of the ACA. Ted said that if he had gone ahead and worked with Nixon, we might have something much closer to what Europe had when the ACA was finally approved.

I think that's why Ted wasn't on the MFA or bust bandwagon with Bernie. Ted had been there before.

[ehrnst]

262. "Flocked?" (nt)

[ehrnst]

280. ....

[Cha]

236. "It was never about bernie"..

Oilem.. https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11918478

[Cha]

296. It doen't "prove" anything other

than some have moved on NOW.

[stonecutter357]

128. "It was never about Bernie"

and lol .

[Cha]

134. IKR! That Blows his Cred.. right

There!

[stonecutter357]

142. Hi Cha how are you ?

[Cha]

143. Aloha, stonecutter!

Doin' okay.. how are you!?

[stonecutter357]

146. I,m doing good today but we have big storms coming to Alabama tomorrow.

[Cha]

147. Be safe!

[emulatorloo]

167. But he never saw anything bad happening! It is all a myth!

Last edited Wed Mar 13, 2019, 08:46 PM - Edit history (1)

See exchange here:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11918137

I’ll probably get hidden for telling the truth about JPR, but so be it. I’ve had enough of the revisionist history. We lived through this and there is nothing wrong w our memories.

Oh by the way I found an archived version of the JPR thread where Luminous Animal questioned the use of the C-Word. The big boys totally rationalize it and act like she’s a bad person. She was banned after that:

Luminous Animal: This has probably already been addressed
https://web.archive.org/web/20160711142742/http://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/this-has-probably-already-been-addressed/

[revmclaren]

136. ' It was never about Bernie'...

OMFG that's funny!


My lying eyes must have deceived me....
Guess I'll have to rethink my opinion of JPR because of my lying eyes....

WOW....

ONLY!!! 2019 and beyond.

[irresistable]

137. it was about his ideas....why else do you think they liked him?

[revmclaren]

138. I read and saved a lot of the posts at JPR

during the General Election. I know EXACTLY why most were there.

But thanks for asking.



ONLY!!! 2019 and beyond.

[OilemFirchen]

148. It was the disembodied Bernie?

Yeah, no. "Feel the Policies" never happened there. The Policy Bros never showed up.

The only actual "policy" was that Hillary Clinton was a c***.

BTW, you hectored another poster over his or her tenure here. You're not exactly a senior fellow, yourself. What the fuck do you know about the subject?

[Cha]

240. Rofl.. "Feel the Policies.."

omg.. We won't be gaslit.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. The narcissism of small differences

[uponit7771]

116. +1

[The Polack MSgt]

310. OUCH. My empathy felt that burn

From miles away

Nice to see you again DSB

[hlthe2b]

3. so, it seems they only have 346 registered members?

I don't know what their "high water mark" was, but yikes.

[brooklynite]

5. It's quality, not quantity, that counts?

[TwilightZone]

56. Quality was never their strong suit.

These were the same geniuses who insisted that the Supreme Court was a non-issue because Clinton and Trump would nominate similarly-conservative justices. It was an idiotic argument then, and looks even more idiotic now, particularly in light of Kavanaugh.

[Cha]

141. See.. now that Is Idiotic.. they also

believed jill stein's and susan sarand0n's fucking Lies about Hillary and trump.

[John Fante]

158. Anyone so-called lefty who argued that kind of absurd bullshit

silently (or loudly) celebrated Trump's victory. I know a few morons who did.

They are living proof that the horseshoe theory in politics is 100% correct.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

7. Let's be sure it doesn't happen here.

[MineralMan]

8. From what I can see, there are only a few members who are

actually active there. Less than 2 dozen, I think, at this time. I quit checking that site regularly some time ago. It appears to be slowly failing.

[irresistable]

9. It isn't a money making operation, like DU is. No ads.

They get by on donations.

[MineralMan]

13. I see. Well, without a strong group of active members who post regularly and reply,

there's not much to see there. There are literally thousands of small discussion forums on the Internet. Most of them are small and not very active. They stay that way because there's not much of interest on them, and because it's just a small groups talking among itself.

I suppose it will go on as long as there's enough money to cover its costs, but the original founders have left and all that's left is a few folks who post from time to time. Not much reason for anyone to go there, really.

DU gets a lot of traffic because there are lots of discussions here and enough people posting and making replies to keep threads active and fresh. It's not that it's an ad-based site. Most of its truly active members donate to the site and don't see any ads at all. It's active because its members are active, knowledgeable, and willing to share their opinions.

JPR simply doesn't have a large enough active member base to sustain itself, really, nor to grow. It has shrunk dramatically since the original founders departed.

[irresistable]

15. I just see it as a safe space for disaffected DUers.

When the people that run it, do it as a labor of love, it does not require much to sustain it.

[MineralMan]

18. I no longer see it at all.

It's utterly irrelevant.

[irresistable]

21. yet you take the time to comment on it.

[MineralMan]

26. Yes, I did take some time. I even went to the site,

which I have not visited for a couple of months.

Why does my commenting on it mean anything to you? I comment on many things. I saw this thread, took a brief look at the site and commented.

Why do you care?

[irresistable]

30. you said that the site was irrelevant...so irrelevant that you visited it.

[MineralMan]

31. Oh, for pete's sake...

Let it go...

[LanternWaste]

52. Yes. You really should.

[MineralMan]

53. Oh, Hi, there.

[MrGrieves]

59. A dying site with a member list falling is irrelevant

But fight for their honor Mr. Cetera!

[Mr Tibbs]

169. It only makes sense that a forum about the 2016 election

...would die out once that election ended. But hey, I'm only the janitor.

[TwilightZone]

200. It wasn't about the 2016 election.

It was intended to be a competitor to DU and a long-term site for Bernie's "revolution".

It failed at both.

[Mr Tibbs]

211. Once the election ended, it fizzled

[TwilightZone]

217. It was never not fizzled.

It was the same small group of malcontents from the time it started.

[cwydro]

145. Very true.

[still_one]

40. You mean a safe place for those that refused to vote for the Democratic nominee in in 2016

and helped contribute to the loss of TWO SUPREME COURT appointments, because in THEIR TWISTED VIEW it didn't matter.

In those critical swing states the Democratic nominee lost by LESS THAN 1%. Jill Stein received 1% in those states.

Every Democrat running for Senate in those critical swing states lost to the establishment, incumbent, republican, and those Democrats were progressive by any standard.

My message to those over there is the same message they sent:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1280104210

"It is a labor of love"

bullshit

there was no labor of love involved. From the constant vile slurs against President Obama and the Democratic nominee, it was a pure cult of division and hate

[irresistable]

42. Some people there voted for Hillary....I posted the fact that I did on that site.

No one booted me off by saying so.

Nothing personal about the complaints about Obama......it was just about policy.
They disagreed with him.

[still_one]

49. Sorry, but don't piss on my back, and tell me it is raining. Calling President Obama a "POS used

salesman", and the recommendation to that thread tell the story, along with those who had no problem calling the Democratic nominee the "c" word, and every other vile, sexist characterization.

Those who want to be an apologist for them speaks volumes.

[irresistable]

54. I'm not giving a blanket pass for everything ever posted on that site.

But the root of discontent there was policy based.

I didn't go there often, but I never saw the "c" word used there, so apparently sometimes they posted about their objection to policy.

[TwilightZone]

64. "But the root of discontent there was policy based."

That's a laughable assertion. The root of discontent there was repeating 25 years of GOP propaganda about Clinton and being enablers for Trump. These are the same geniuses who insisted that Trump and Clinton would nominate similarly-conservative SC justices so the SC was a non-issue in the election.

[Grasswire2]

101. WP is/was not a member there.

And I have yet to see proof of the "c" word accusation. I never saw it. Was it here?

[seaglass]

108. It was there Grasswire, it's been linked to many times. The policy was that it was OK to use

as long as it wasn't used against a member. There probably isn't any proof because 1.) JPR had a habit of deleting a lot of posts that made them look despicable and 2.) Every time there is a new iteration of JPR they lose their history

Oh look - a screenshot:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10027991329#post434

[ronnie624]

117. "Page Not Found. Oops, it looks like this page does not exist."

But I'm a registered member. I read and post there regularly, so I know the word can be seen there occasionally, posted by one member in particular.

I don't care for it, but they don't censor words. However, they don't allow the posters to use right wing talking points, or to post links to right wing sites, except within a limited context, relevant to legitimate discussion.

Most of the posters here, posting vitriol about JPR, don't have the slightest idea what they're talking about. There have been problems with site, but they will work them out, and I think it will become ever more popular in the next couple of years.

[seaglass]

129. That's pretty much what I said, they lost their history/archives. Stockholmer is a fan of the word.

He's an ass. They DID allow people to use right wing talking points, especially against HRC, along with the most fucking ridiculous Seth Rich/Pizzagate/Hillary is dying etc. conspiracies. You can call those rw or lw, both wings seemed to agree. They had a longtime member who voted for Trump and was only banned after his nastiness got to be too much, not because of who he voted for.

I've read JPR since it was created and I don't see where the characterization here is wrong generally.

It will definitely become more popular if Bernie loses the primary again.

[TwilightZone]

223. Here ya go. Enjoy.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11918271

[emulatorloo]

224. Of course HRC was called a cunt there.. Screen shots in this post.

On edit: I see twilightzone already referred you to this post, def take a look at it:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11918271

Here’s a troubling thread from the waybackmachine. Big boys defending and rationalizing their right to call HRC a cunt. OP Luminous Animal was banned after her thread objecting to the use of C-word.

Luminous Animal: This has probably already been addressed
https://web.archive.org/web/20160711142742/http://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/this-has-probably-already-been-addressed/

Grasswire, it is disturbing to me that you would automatically assume DU’ers in this who telling the truth of what happened are either liars or delusional psychotics.

We aren’t.

I gotta tell you, you are very lucky you didn’t see it, but it happened

[still_one]

228. Yeah. it was here, and people got tombstoned for it. It was an ugly time here

[irresistable]

188. sigh

[mcar]

185. They literally started the site so they could call HRC the C word

What policy idea does that fall under?

[irresistable]

189. oh, please.

[mcar]

191. Thank you

[Hekate]

118. Still, when the hamster pellets give out the wheel that keeps the JPR site running will stop. ...

As to DU -- what are these ads to which you refer? I'm a site-supporter here and I see no ads.

[irresistable]

124. Many people post here without supporting the site.

[TwilightZone]

230. You sure seem obsessed about ads on a website.

Welcome to 2006.

[irresistable]

231. Not really....What I'm really obsessed with is...

[Codeine]

123. Users who became disaffected

because Skinner wouldn’t provide a platform they could use to call Hillary a cunt or post photos of her with feces photoshopped onto the seat of her pants.

Also, Pizzagate.

[Hekate]

150. But it was only ever about "the policies" according to them...

[sheshe2]

298. Manny was one of the ones that ran it.

Sadly, not, he is no longer with us after one to many watermelon and fried chicken posts on MLK day. A self proclaimed Repukelican.

It was not love, it was pure hate.

[hlthe2b]

44. Remind me: who were the original founders? It certainly wasn't JackPineRadical, who sadly was gone

(deceased) by that time.

[MineralMan]

45. If I remember correctly, it was Manny Goldstein and a few

other discontented folks from DU. I don't remember all the names, though, and never spent much time there. I never joined, so I couldn't post. So, there was no point in hanging around that place.

[lpbk2713]

82. Is that where Nadin went?

She was a hoot. Definitely unique, to say the least.

[MineralMan]

121. I think she was there for a while, but not long.

I wasn't paying close attention, though.

[Maru Kitteh]

219. If memory serves, Nadin even managed to get herself banned from JPR.

[still_one]

229. Yes, she went, and others, and while I am not going to go after Nadine who is not here to defend

herself, I believe she was over at JPR for only a short time, because it was so insane over there. That is actually saying something if Nadine viewed it that way

[Hekate]

119. Manny. Now there's a name to conjure with. ...

Not saying what would be conjured with that name, but something.

[emulatorloo]

256. Always half-suspected Manny worked for a Rove type. Attack Dems from the left, rarely if ever

had a bad word about Republicans.

I remember another DU’er characterized Manny as an arrack-from-the-left rightwing troll who fell in love with his “progressive” persona and the adoration of his fans.

Sounds about right to me

[Hekate]

283. He really seemed to enjoy himself...

He was one of the few people back then I finally just wouldn't engage with.

[emulatorloo]

285. His "Third Way Manny" routine was not nearly as clever as he imagined it to be. I tended to call

him out and had no problem detailing his trollish behavior to him.

But then like you I just stopped engaging. He wasn't worth it.

Although I'd still occasionally snarkishly thank him for bringing site traffic to DU. And tell him how much money he must be bringing in to support Democratic Underground, because the Admins could charge higher rates for ads the more clicks DU got. That usually shut him up pretty quick.

Manny thought he was a "Too Big To Fail" troll. Too popular, et cetera, for admins to ban. Admins thought otherwise, although it too a little to long for them to figure it out IMHO

[mcar]

186. Manny who was banned here for his racism

and sexism.

[sheshe2]

299. His fried chicken and watermelon posts on MLK Day.

[mcar]

312. SMDH

[Cha]

241. It was Manny Goldstein and marym625..

perpetuators of the non reality based club.

Manny was PPR and marym625 wouldn't sign the TOS.

[hlthe2b]

252. Manny, of course.. marym625 surprises me just a little bit.

I remember welcoming her to DU years ago and she seemed really overwhelmed but very earnest in wanting to contribute. Admittedly I did not follow her evolution after that though.

[Cha]

253. I know it was disappointing

about marym. I got to know her at the end of it.

[emulatorloo]

254. I remember it being Manny and WillyT (of AA voters have "Stockholm Syndrome" fame)

[hlthe2b]

255. that makes sense... Are any of the three still over there? (curious with the "new management")

[emulatorloo]

258. Haven't visited the site in several years until today, not sure if they are there any more

Last edited Thu Mar 14, 2019, 10:49 AM - Edit history (1)

Definitely got my fill of Manny and WillyT when they were stinking up DU with potstirring flamebait to get everyone at each other’s throats. Divide and conquer.

[hlthe2b]

259. Indeed.... n/t

[sheshe2]

301. Yep.

[Cha]

302. I knew that

was going to be you. You know.

[Docreed2003]

36. Then why join DU?

Just curious...since you joined DU last year and JPR's founding, which you seem familiar with, was two years prior to that. If DU isn't a "labor of love" and only a "money making operation", then why join??

[irresistable]

38. I'm a Democrat.

I'm completely on-board with DU as a money making operation.

[MrGrieves]

57. as someone who runs a member driven forum...

That’s pretty bad for them. if they don’t have active members they don’t have donations.

[Mr Tibbs]

170. They probably realized that going round in circles about 2016 was pointless

...and moved on to more relevant activities?

[Grasswire2]

72. I support your support of the site that is the offspring of DU.

Many good people went there during the unpleasantness. I miss some of them. Example. Octafish. 99thMonkey. And others.

An ideological split (or whatever that was) doesn't mean we have to beat them all up.

[MuseRider]

74. I agree and I miss many of them too.

I was a member but did not last long. I got busy and did not even come here much then just was too tired to root trough a new website and figure it out and in truth there was some wackiness there but there is here too. I have never understood the need to demonize people who do not agree with you, even to the point of goring your ox (did that come out right?). Whatever, I am preparing for hurricane pressures in the storm well on it's way here and I have to make a trip out of town and back in the meantime so.....I saw this and wanted to comment. I don't have to agree with people to not call them names and I can ever disagree strongly with some people and not turn my back and then call them names. Politics is dirty and always has been but I am beginning to tire of the nastiness in this place. If most of it made a point except to stick your tongue out and tell them they smell it would be better but really that is all this is.

[Cha]

140. JPR has been exposed time and time again

for their delusional hate club on Hillary and Dems.

You two are trying to rewrite history.. it's Not working.

[JonLP24]

238. There are a lot of members that left DU too

Last edited Thu Mar 14, 2019, 07:10 AM - Edit history (1)

I bet this site pales in comparison to traffic before Trump took office. One thing I do like about JPR is there are no ex freepers trying to pull the party into their direction but mentioning that seems forbidden at DU which is another positive at JPR or other sites I feel more open to speak my mind than I do here.

[Tipperary]

10. I thought that place crashed months ago.

[Mr Tibbs]

14. Awesome!

[ismnotwasm]

17. Sometimes they come back. A quote by

—Stephan King.

[R B Garr]

20. Yes, and some have come back manny times. nt

[irresistable]

22. LOL....good one.

[GulfCoast66]

225. You seem to admit it...

In post 71 you say you have been here since 2003. But your ‘current’ profile just joined last year.

Curious why you did not just reclaim your well established 16 year old profile?

Do I get 3 guesses?

[irresistable]

232. You get as many guesses as you like.

I took close to a two year break after the 2016 election to try to recover from my depression from the election of Trump.

I decided to go with a new name to play off of "resist"....with "able" rather than "ible". in honor of the "resistance"

I didn't want it to be "irresistible"...

[hlthe2b]

25. clever...

[MineralMan]

28. Hmm...whatever can you mean?

[ismnotwasm]

33. *snort*

Indeed.

[revmclaren]

81. Well played!

ONLY!!! 2019 and beyond.

[lapucelle]

214. ...

[sheshe2]

303. I see what you did there.

[Cha]

242. Perfect. Yes they do.

[Wellstone ruled]

32. Part of the Bot Network?

Hmmmm. Their demise was baked into their list of members. Brush Bunnies!

[Andy823]

43. Most of them are here. nt

[Renew Deal]

50. Mother Russia will soon give them guidance

[MineralMan]

61. Probably not.

I think that source of funding dried up already. Perhaps simultaneously with the disappearance of the site's original founders. Who can say?

[Happyhippychick]

66. I wonder if a bunch of DU people are over there stirring up trouble? Wouldn't want to disrupt

things over there now, would we?

That wouldn't be nice.

Not at all.

[Maru Kitteh]

212. LOL!

I just may have done that for a while in 16.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

69. My first percept was "at JPR have lost their sanity...". Then I reread it. . . . nt

[pwb]

70. I have no friends there.

.

[Grasswire2]

95. that's kind of sad. nt

[Gothmog]

77. What about Beto?

[Sherman A1]

79. I like threads like these

they are soooo very enlightening.

Nothing better to do is bash fellow liberals and progressives?

Nice touch.....

[GulfCoast66]

85. Your description is incomplete.

Should read fellow Liberals and progressives who hated Clinton with the passion of a burning star, spoke of her in vile misogynistic terms and left DU because they refused to vote for her in the general election.

Once corrected you will see they need to be fucking bashed.

[Sherman A1]

90. I assume that autocorrect

turned Liberal into Libyans in your post. If not it makes zero sense.

I was on the JPR for over a year and found it a very pleasant place. Certainly HRC was not a popular character, but I never noted anything to the extent which you describe. I only left because it was such a slow loading page and I found that technical issue to be very irritating when trying to read threads.

I found the disagreements to be mostly about policy and folks wanting more progressive stances on issues than was being offered by the Democratic Party at the time. Everyone is entitled to their viewpoints and how anyone chose to vote is up to them. I voted for HRC because I seriously disliked The "Esteemed" Mr Trump and thought him to be the worst of the two candidates offered.

[Grasswire2]

93. maybe the "fellow liberals and progressives...." you speak of..

...were the Russian bots who DID infiltrate and sow discord toward Hillary.

Your language is violent and abusive toward "fellow" believers. What's up with that?

[sfwriter]

83. What unity?

They were a mix of progressives, Bernie Bros, Hillary haters, Russian Trolls and unwitting stooges.

The are no mor disunited than we are at the moment.

[Pompoy]

86. Tulsi Gabbard?

Isn't she the right's favorite Democrat? These guys are sketchy.

[Grasswire2]

96. Isn't it a violation of DU rules to re-litigate 2016 primary? nt

[MrsCoffee]

103. Did Gabbard and Warren run in 2016?

This is clearly about 2020.

No need to get defensive or try to shut down the discussion. JPR deserves all the scorn and ridicule they get.

[Grasswire2]

104. LOL SMH nt

[Grasswire2]

106. So I guess the Democratic Party nominee won't be needing every possible vote in 2020?

We'll be too pure to need Greens and Bernie supporters and every possible vote to support Harris, or Warren, or Biden, or Beto, or .... gasp.... Bernie, or x candidate? So we can beat up those potential voters now? And think they'll be aboard in the GE? Is that the drill?

[MrsCoffee]

110. That was some segue.

[seaglass]

111. JPR members are useless. They have already proven once that they are selfish and aren't

willing to vote for the betterment of their fellow citizens.

This thread is about JPR members, not Bernie supporters or Green supporters in general. The majority of Bernie supporters did the right thing in the end, they were not as stupid as the majority of JPR members.

[The Truth Is Here]

127. Why even have this thread at all?

What good is it to bash a dying (as some say) website? I just googled and and looked at it. It looks very refreshing and has some new ideas and interesting debates. I have no problem with that. I just wish they'd get rid of that garish pink banner on top.

[seaglass]

132. Why not have this thread? It's fun.

The history of the site is gone and was not refreshing, it had a bad stink to it. But go for it.

[Cha]

135. ...

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

100. It's still up?

I haven't even thought about them for a while.

People like the JPRs hate being irrelevant.

[GentryDixon]

105. I see they have upgraded their website.

They really are too radical for me. I'm glad they split away from here.

[GulfCoast66]

109. Seems to me most have come back here.

[athena]

114. If so, let's prepare ourselves for total chaos once again.

DU was unusable for almost the entire primary season for anyone who was not an anti-HRC Bernie supporter. The pro-Bernie folk would get together and alert on and vote to remove any post that tried to defend Hillary from their smears.

I predict that the same thing will happen to the frontrunner this time around. I hope DU will be tougher on those who attack Democrats. We should not be the ones spreading Russian/Republican propaganda.

[GulfCoast66]

125. I remember. I had to stop posting till after the convention.

You remember the convention? The one where certain delegates booed John Lewis on National TV. Those booing weren’t Russian Bots.

I hope right wing tropes about any candidate will not be allowed.

My preferred candidate is Uncle Joe. Mainly cause he will win and is a lifelong loyal democrat. And he and Obama together on the campaign trail are electrifying. I respect others disagree.

I sincerely hope the smears I am reading about him on the right and MSM will not appear here if he declares.

[roamer65]

120. Jack Pine Russians?

[KG]

122. I lulz'd

[The Truth Is Here]

126. What's JPR?

And it's still early, brooklynite. They'll unite.

[GulfCoast66]

133. Yep. When the apparent candidate rejects socialism,

Because it is a losing message even most democrats reject, it will be scorched earth time.

But that is just DU. I am optimistic about our chances of winning the White House but don’t see it as in the bag.

[stonecutter357]

130. JPR / russian cricist actors !

[revmclaren]

139. JPR...Just Putin's Radicals...

Written in jest, but sadly with much truth attached.



ONLY!!! 2019 and beyond.

[betsuni]

144. Omygerd, there's a post about this post over there and it's hilarious.

We at "SV" are a "basket of deplorables" "Brockbots" -- old rich conservatives who will worship the "DLC's Chosen One." Calls Hillary a Republican sex worker (but the other word) among other things. They say it's about policy and it's all about blind anger needing a scapegoat. Without Hillary they don't have much to say.

[TwilightZone]

151. Still beating the dead Brock horse, huh?

That's actually kind of funny. It's like the last two-plus years never happened.

On second thought, the rest of those comments are like they're stuck in 2016, as well.

[betsuni]

190. Yup, poor Brock is STILL paying us all to post here.

[hlthe2b]

187. hmmm.. ok, I have to ask

what is "SV"?

[betsuni]

192. Site Voldemort, their name for DU.

They're not supposed to talk about us so they call the site SV.

[hlthe2b]

194. hmm.

thanks for the answer.

[TwilightZone]

193. site voldemort

As in the site that must not be named.

Apparently, they think it's witty.

[hlthe2b]

196. well alrightee...

silly, but...

[TwilightZone]

197. I always thought it was kind of funny in a twisted way.

They're not supposed to talk about DU, but it's basically all they talked about the last few months of the cycle last time.

So much so that they had to give it a cutesy nickname...but then still talk about it.

[Cha]

243. They'll grasp onto

to Brock until their last gasp.

Poor things.. he wronged them. I knew they had to be watching.

[NurseJackie]

152. That explains the influx.

[TwilightZone]

157. Um, yeah.

Noticed a few low-post-number posters who sounded awfully familiar. Or familiarly awful.

[Grasswire2]

165. My Democratic Party (for forty years) is.............

....welcoming, open, tolerant, engaging....and eschews grudges, loyalty tests, division and strife. The object is to garner and keep as many voters as possible, through good party governance and goals that focus energy on THE OPPONENTS IN OTHER PARTIES. A party divided by rancor or bitterness is not a winning party.

[jcgoldie]

171. What a joke

Its well known here that a bunch of misogynistic Clinton haters flocked to that joke of a forum in 2016 and sat over there swapping hatred towards democrats and spouting off about how Clinton and Trump were all the same. They cheered when Trump won and now you guys want to rewrite history and pretend that people on DU who see that place for what it is are the intolerant ones? Who the F are you trying to kid anyway?

[GulfCoast66]

180. Yeah, right. Like we have no memory!

Read one where the poster said they were here since 2004. Profile join date: 2018.

At least that person was honest.

I just read how pleasant is was over there. I guess it was if you did not support the Democratic Candidate.

[emulatorloo]

199. Agreed, we lived through this. We do have memories, and I remember everything. Yet we are being

told it never happened, and JPR was really just a rarified site for high-level policy discussion. A rational and sober think-tank.

Ugh

[mcar]

174. Poor dears

[OilemFirchen]

179. A gift for the "climate" denialists:

Here are few more gifts, from their "Hillary nicknames" thread:





Look! More gifts!





Oh fuck it. It's Christmas over here.

[emulatorloo]

220. Thank you. Our friend swears he never say anybody call Hilary a cunt, I ass-ume he'll try to claim

your screen shots were just a "discussion" about the c-word as he did to my webarchive link.

[Cha]

235. "dorkzilla" is such a Brainwashed little twit.

Mahalo, Oilem, for the freaking proof on this Gaslit gang of idiots.

[seaglass]

247. TM99 voted for Trump. His nastiness got him banned from JPR, not his vote. n/t

[sheshe2]

304. Pretty sure they got canned at DI as well.

Perhaps they went to their true home to post at CC.

[ehrnst]

266. Crickets...

[irresistable]

267. In your example, the moderator explicitly states that the "c" word is not allowed on JPR...

along with the "n" word. Thank you for disproving the allegation against JPR.

[OilemFirchen]

273. ... against another member.

Have you noticed yet that you're not fooling anybody?

[irresistable]

278. Good, because I'm not trying to fool anyone.

[RhodeIslandOne]

313. Glad you posted this

The defenders here are sickening.

[Squinch]

181. Looks like they sent one of their trolls over to post in this thread.

[TwilightZone]

201. Yeah, just like old times.

[sheshe2]

305. Short straw?

[OilemFirchen]

202. "It was all about PAWHLICY"!

[TwilightZone]

204. lol

That pretty much sums it up.

[betsuni]

215. Heh

[emulatorloo]

221. ...

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

227. Ouch!

That's going to leave a mark

[Cha]

233. LOL@All Things BS!

Score, Oilem! Mahalo!

[sheshe2]

306. "It was all about PAWHLICY"!

[WeekiWater]

203. The only thing that unifies them...

Is their desperate need to oppose things. It is a personality issue. Such an issue always ends up unbridled hatred for just about everyone. Most grow out of it as it’s simpleton thinking. Those who don’t fester in their own hatred and are miserable to be around.

[Maru Kitteh]

210. JPR is a personality disorder collective

It attracted a pitiful troupe of the hopelessly delusional, the chronically victimized and more than a few pathological shit-stirrers for a short period of time.

Now it is dying.

Womp. Womp.

[GulfCoast66]

226. And its like back to the future.

The most strident defender of JPR on this thread claims early in this thread to have been at DU since 2003. But their ‘current’ profile joined last August.

I’ve only been here under 4 years but am proud of my profile and count. What would lead someone with 16 years of history not to use their original profile?

Guesses anyone?

[JonLP24]

237. A lot of posters are gone from this site as well as that one

I'm someone that doesn't exactly fit in anywhere but I'm a real person and a voter registered with the Democratic party. I miss what this board used to be like before the primaries. I used to learn so much here now I just stay on Twitter. At least it isn't a hate site like Discussionist. With all the toxic shit coming from the right I don't know why people care so much what JPR says.

[betsuni]

248. Why do people care what JPR says?

Because it's what fake progressive sources push: that Democrats are the problem, not Republicans. Only Republicans fall for right-wing propaganda, but when supposedly progressive people get all worked up and emotional and passionate that Democrats are corrupt and horrible, the politically naive get sucked in. They think Michael Moore is on their side and when he says that the Democratic Party is a greater roadblock to social progress than Trump, they listen. They listen when Bernie Sanders says Democrats are ideologically bankrupt and don't care about the working class. They believe that any Democrat benefiting from PAC money is corrupt. Obviously the only way to pass progressive legislation is to elect a majority of Democrats, what the hell is the purpose of making them the enemy? To let Republicans off the hook. Why?

[JonLP24]

250. I think Republicans are the bigger problem

Joe Crowley who AOC defeated is now a lobbyist that is a big problem in politics is the revolving door. I created my own site one where I could talk about Russia and the Mueller investigation that was also a progressive site but only had 3 posters outside myself post there. A few at JPR don't buy the Russia investigation which is their right but I blame Jimmy Dore (who I don't find to be a reliable source at all) for that more than Russia.

I tried to send a friend request for William Pitt not so much for him but so I can join in the discussions with DUers but I'm not sure he knows me or does but doesnt want me there like I said downthread I don't really fit in anywhere but I am a registered Democrat.

I support Sanders so I don't browse much here. When JPR had a lot more people it was worse with Trump troll TM99 who was also a moderator I started coming back because it is too hostile here for me. I appreciate what Donkees is doing in the Bernie forum part of what helps me keep coming back here.

[emulatorloo]

287. I am truly sorry you are feeling DU is too hostile for you. I for one would hate to see you go.

We do indeed recognize that Republicans are the problem, which is something JPR simply is not capable of. They seem to believe if all Democrats were swept away the glorious socialist revolution would come. That's neither rational or logical.

I think we are generally united here at DU about electing democrats who are liberals and progressives. But also understand having a democratic majority in the House and Senate means we get to set the agenda on what bills are voted on and what goes on rather than having asshole Republicans (McConnell and formerly Ryan) control that. And I know we are ready to work like hell to get a Democrat in the White House to undo the heinous things Trump has done.

There is a lot of harshness right now in the Primary Subforum.

Some of it is legitimate questioning so folks can figure out who is the best candidate to defeat Trump. Who is financially transparent, who is tough and fast on their feet at attacking Repubiican politicians, what are their voting records and are they willing to answer tough questions about their records and statements.

To make maybe a bad analogy it is like a job interview. There is stuff we need to know to chose the best candidate.

However there is also stuff that is just divisive bashing and name calling.

For example, I saw a post today that insinuated Beto must be a liar like John Edwards because they had similar poses on a magazine cover. While I'm unlikely to support Beto in the primary, I did push back on that slimy piece of innuendo. Leave that to fox and the crazies on twitter. We are here to talk policy, discuss actual statements and voting records. So if things seem hostile and over the line, please push back.

On the other hand, I am also considering hiding the primary forum this time out. That might be an option for you as well.

[JonLP24]

291. Thank you for the kind words

I'll stick around, I agree with everything you say but I definitely try to avoid to be baited as far as push back goes. I didn't post here after a couple of ridiculous threads months before the actual primary in 2016 so I will probably trash the forum.

And I know we are ready to work like hell to get a Democrat in the White House to undo the heinous things Trump has done.

I want to see Trump defeated badly which is why I donated to candidates for the first time. The same 3 candidates the OP mentions. Warren has been the most responsive to donors so I hope to see her poll numbers rise. I may switch my support around depending on poll numbers and debates.

[emulatorloo]

292. Yes Warren's great! She's on my shortlist as well.

[CrossingTheRubicon]

244. Are these JPR folks some of those HRC-hating assholes who helped elect Trump?

[betsuni]

249. Yes.

[CrossingTheRubicon]

257. Swine.

[ehrnst]

263. They have issues dealing with dissent.

For a group that calls itself 'radicals' they sound a lot like facists.

[Afromania]

308. I'm out of the loop with this. What exactly happened with the people at that website?

From what I've gleamed over the years they were members of this board at one time then left for whatever reason?