General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThere are posters who vigourously support HRC
for President who may be doing her more harm than good...
If being rude, insensitive and brash are what Hillary thinks her supporters need to be, I have to question her approach is improving HRC's image as strategized, or merely shutting up supporters of other candidates. Or maybe this is not the strategy of HRC, who seems like a friendly woman......I could wish.
I have not been won over by any HRC supporters in this group but I have become more in favor of candidates whose supporters are more objective in their support of others and less subjective than those supporters of HRC.....and less abrasive.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Cha
(295,929 posts)supporters I know are cyberbuds.. and they're nice. I don't support Hillary at this point in time but then I'm more concerned about the Midterm Elections than who's going to be the Dem Candidate in 2016.
But, fadedrose evidently has encountered some that I'm not aware of. fadedrose.
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)but some other posters have. Hillary does not handle non-supporters (some extremely rude) in this way and gets out of her situations by her wits, quick-thinking, and smiles. I probably will not vote for her if there's a primary, but (whether I vote for her or not), I have to complement her on her resilience....
I generally like people who lets stuff run down their backs without a clue that they've been insulted. (Obama does this well) . .
But I'm starting to think that there are other candidates who are equally resilient.
Cha, I keep telling you, you're just too nice for politics.
Cha
(295,929 posts)really not too nice for politics. The bush error fixed me of that.
BainsBane
(53,003 posts)and they usually aren't Clinton supporters. Today I was called an anti-Semite. Yesterday I was called a fascist, Third Way, and libertarian for providing a critique of the capitalist state. Usually it revolves around man-hating or being too "extreme," or carrying about things that just aren't "real," like SCOTUS decisions establishing inequality under the law or violence against women.
If I posted an OP every time someone insulted me, I've had time for nothing else. Moreover, if I held a particular candidate responsible for the inane comments made around here, I'd be as out of it as the folks who can't tell Mussolini from Marx.
Algernon Moncrieff
(5,780 posts)I posted under another name. I hit 10,000 posts and walked away from that handle for personal reasons. Let me tell you -- starting over has been an eye opener. Many have been warm and welcoming, but there are some here who are complete jerks to lower post-count posters. This includes some I thought would know better.
BainsBane
(53,003 posts)They'll give you shit for that too. Of course it's all a way to make up for the fact they have no substantive response to make.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)and where a poster stands re: Hillary.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Skittles
(152,967 posts)fadedrose
(10,044 posts)Skittles
(152,967 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Mo Ramtor
(2 posts)I don't think we should be too vocal on division otherwise the Tea Farty will get jiggy
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)and Welcome.
There's no such thing as being too vocal for DU.
gopiscrap
(23,674 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Algernon Moncrieff
(5,780 posts)Last month...from the "Ready for Hillary" folks. The abrasiveness memo?
Must've just been me
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Cha
(295,929 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)"Abrasive" is putting it extremely kindly indeed.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)The candidate should never be judged by the supporters. That's like judging the message by the messenger. You don't stop breathing because Chris Christie says he likes air, and you don't change candidates simply because some or even most of the people you run across who support that candidate are asses. (Well, I say 'you don't' generically, but yes, sometimes some people are shallow enough to do so. Which is why the OP does have a point that applies no matter the candidate - you're a better ambassador for your candidate when you're (again, generic you, not you personally) not abrasive or condescending or insulting towards those you wish to win over.)
It may be old and trite, but 'You catch more flies with honey than vinegar' only got to be old and trite because the overall sentiment rings true.
JI7
(89,182 posts)first of all, you don't need to support her.
so far i would vote for Biden and Sanders over her of those who have been as maybe running. so why not just support who you want.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Negative.
Here is a link to HRC on the issues:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Hillary_Clinton.htm
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)For what it's worth, I'm supporting HRC at this point (if she runs), but there's a long way to go before the voting starts.
yortsed snacilbuper
(7,939 posts)Me too, I picked Hillary to follow along with for the time being.
Nobody's perfect!
RKP5637
(67,032 posts)political machinery to do that. No candidate is ever perfect. I also like Elizabeth Warren. As you say, there's a long time before the voting starts. I just want to be sure we get a democratic president in 2016. Whichever democratic candidate can make that happen I'm with.
Tommy2Tone
(1,307 posts)So supporting the next Democratic candidate for president is being some kind of a subversive?
delrem
(9,688 posts)Her laugh was so infectious. I just can't wait for 8 years solid, of that laugh.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Last edited Sun Jul 20, 2014, 05:25 AM - Edit history (1)
Again.
And maybe not do some lame Bob Shrum values voter campaign where we pretend the absolute most controversial position a candidate can take is whether Jesus is the "most influential" human ever, or only just the bestest.
She wants the nom, fine- a lot of us think she COULD be a strong candidate- but make the fucking sale, and that includes brave and clear policy initiatives and positions.
Gman
(24,780 posts)The couple of hundred people here at DU scattered all over the 50 states who have the same complaint make no difference in helping Hillary win.
You should pardon Hillary people here who may be a bit aggressive. They put up with a whole lot of the same from the Obama supporters in 08.
You're either going to vote for her or you're not.
gopiscrap
(23,674 posts)wyldwolf
(43,865 posts)BainsBane
(53,003 posts)Because Clinton posters are the only ones who are abrasive.
Nothing at all abrasive by calling anyone who doesn't share a posters complete contempt for Obama, Clinton, and essentially the majority of the Democratic Party and its voters as "fascist," "libertarian," "authoritarian," or "Third Way." All because their incomes aren't high enough, their skin not white enough, their chromosomes not Y enough, or their sexuality not straight enough so that it actually doesn't make a difference if a Democrat or Republican holds the Presidency, House, or Senate.
wyldwolf
(43,865 posts)The OP sad some rude, insensitive and brash stuff about Hillary except it wasn't rude, insensitive and brash because, well, the OP thinks he/she is merely speaking "truth to power" or some nonsense like that. So some Hillary supporter pushed back and was being rude, insensitive and brash for daring to defend that corporatist fascist DLC Dino...
... think it went down like that?
Phlem
(6,323 posts)usually the ones that yammer the longest until people just get fed up and always has to have the last word. I just put one on ignore. Coincidentally a staunch Hillary supporter.