2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forummetroins
(2,550 posts)All the smears against the Democratic front runner and nominee.
I could sit here writing Bernie basher posts all night, but I just don't think that's how a Democrat should treat another Democrat. I do my best to not smear.
It's just sickening how I see all the RW talking bs points against our fellow party member.
Especially one as broad as this.
Stand and Fight
(7,480 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)because I have seen smears about Bernie posted by somebody using it.
metroins
(2,550 posts)I think the closest thing I could do is point out the realist math on delegates that he won't be the nominee.
I don't think I've mentioned him as a person or his family.
My wife and I routinely say we'd be happy with either, we just think Hillary's ideas will pass Congress and we think she will win the GE.
I have nothing at all against Sanders, if he was as far ahead as Clinton right now, I'd be backing him.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)And that's why you replied as you did?
metroins
(2,550 posts)We both know where this was coming from.
I'm not going to act as if anybody is ignorant.
ancianita
(36,055 posts)We're moving into the General soon, and I just want everyone to remember that, no matter who is the nominee, we have oligarchic, corporate capture of this government.
Something should happen to it, and it won't happen with Trump.
Response to ancianita (Reply #19)
Live and Learn This message was self-deleted by its author.
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)Since she has weathervaned to claim all of his ideas as hers.
Lunabell
(6,080 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)tazkcmo
(7,300 posts)of any candidate besides Sen Sanders. I understand if you don't think we're living in an oligarchy now and I'd disagree but that's wasn't your complaint. You took it as an attack on your candidate though none were named or even implied. I took it as an attack at the whole corrupt system. Interesting.
metroins
(2,550 posts)Then it's fine by me.
I doubt that's the case but I'm not going to put words in the OP that aren't there.
You already did. That's what I responded to. I can see why you'd assume it was about Sec Clinton.
metroins
(2,550 posts)Clinton in my first post.
tazkcmo
(7,300 posts)"It's just sickening how I see all the RW talking bs points against our fellow party member."
In this sentence you claim the poster is a RW smear, used by and against one fellow party member. No, the word Clinton isn't in there but who else would be the "fellow party member"? You seen several of these so there must be one particular person the RW smears have been used against.
I understand why you would assume it was about "a fellow party member" though, even though those words didn't appear on the poster.
metroins
(2,550 posts)Or you can have a lovely night, like I am having.
I'll choose to wish you a good night, because I assume we both know where we stand and there is no reason to continue a word game.
We both know where this ends 10 posts from now.
tazkcmo
(7,300 posts)It's not semantics. You complained about the poster calling it a RW smear against a fellow democrat. I pointed out it isn't, it doesn't even mention a candidate. You say you doubt it's not against Sec Clinton. Then you say you didn't mention her in your first post, pretending that you your second post doesn't exist and say it's semantics.
You know, calling that poster a RW smear against a fellow party member is a smear by you against a fellow DUer. The one that posted it. You've accused them of smearing a fellow party member with RW bs talking points,and then admit you believe it to be against Clinton although the word Clinton appears no where on the poster. That ain't semantics.
metroins
(2,550 posts)In Austin Texas.
I hope your weather was as splendid.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)seekthetruth
(504 posts)....is that she is just not a progressive. Sure, she's a Democrat, but she's a new corporatist Democrat which means she takes money from corporations. No matter what she says, as long as she continues to take contributions from big business, she won't get a large portion of Sanders supporters' votes in the fall, if she gets the nomination. And that will hand the presidency to Drumpf.
It's not smearing if you're pointing out facts about a candidate. Is she qualified? Sure. But so is Sanders. And he refuses money from corporations.
Get it now?
When she is this far ahead, the deficit is extremely unlikely to be overcome.
Thus, I don't agree with attacking a Democratic candidate.
I could respond to the other portion of your post, but it all boils down to delegate math and Clinton had a better strategy coming in.
Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)would say. Always give-up, Always surrender.
metroins
(2,550 posts)It's just the current rules show an extremely likely win for Hillary.
The only thing I've actively asked for are less attacks on non policy issues.
I think Bernie campaigning is a good thing. My wife and I think a lot of Bernies stances are good, just not winnable in a GE this year or through congress in the next 8 years.
PonyUp
(1,680 posts)She has so many bad non-policy issues she can't even keep up with them.
I will never vote for her or any other Clinton EVER.
MillennialDem
(2,367 posts)(provided she is the nominee)
She's infinitely better than any republican. But she is not progressive enough. She will not get anything done to get money out of politics and she will not get anything done, other than perhaps one small token piece of legislation and will probably nominate some supreme court justices.
She also fares worse in head to head polls against the republicans than bernie does. I don't think she'll lose if she's the nominee, but it's definitely possible and not something we want to risk. Remember what happened when we ran from the center in 2014?
grasswire
(50,130 posts)Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)In fact, I didn't think about HRC at all when I saw this. I thought about Bernie's argument about our government in general and how it's run by rich "elected representatives" who serve the rich, and not "We The People."
So very interesting (and revealing) that you immediately thought this was "smearing" Hillary Clinton.
bvf
(6,604 posts)We've reached the point where just the mention of the name "Bernie Sanders"--or merely a simple image with no mention of Clinton whatsoever--sends them into conniptions.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)If it is a bash of anything, it is of the oligarchs.
Hillary supporters seem to be overly sensitive.
Do they feel guilty or something?
I did not see the OP as directed at Hillary at all?
How could anyone see that it was a bash at Hillary?
bvf
(6,604 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)snort
(2,334 posts)Just cut it out!
Skittles
(153,160 posts)in general
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)ancianita
(36,055 posts)RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)And every day more and more people are realizing they have the same wish.
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)tomm2thumbs
(13,297 posts)btw, unless you are part of the oligarchy, it shouldn't even offend... so I guess that speaks volumes
ancianita
(36,055 posts)pugetres
(507 posts)humorous than the graphic.
K&R
LiberalLovinLug
(14,173 posts)I can almost hear him saying just that!
Interesting how the Hillary sups just assume Bernie is talking about her. Which he's not. Hillary is wealthy, and worships at the feet of the new Democrat Corporacracy, but she is small potatoes, merely a puppet lackey for the big boys.
ancianita
(36,055 posts)CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)Oh, I love this! I definitely laughed out loud.
I think Bernie would get a kick out of this. Someone should send it to him.
ancianita
(36,055 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Skittles
(153,160 posts)I like that
SciDude
(79 posts)Sad, very sad.
ancianita
(36,055 posts)raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)And, of course will stop being the oligarchy when she frowns and says "stop it".
ancianita
(36,055 posts)She's got enough bourgeois background as the rest of us to see the point.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)The pic doesn't even mention Clinton,
but her supporters are outraged!
Oh well, any opportunity to attack and smear Bernie I guess.
ancianita
(36,055 posts)Know what I mean?