Interesting to see how the Hillary crowd is all of a sudden

[randr]

politely posting to the Bernie crowd. Problem is that most of them have been banned from the Hill site and can not reply.
So much for furthering our discussion and attempting to come to any resolutions about what the Democratic agenda should look like come November.

[NowSam]

1. A vote for Hillary is a vote for Goldman Sachs

and that is too bad.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

63. I do not welcome their politeness. Nt

[thereismore]

2. Hahahaha! I wouldn't know about that! They have some wild mood swings those guys.

[kcr]

95. And just where do they get the idea that there are Bernie Bros, anyway?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

[leftofcool]

3. You have GDPee and the Bernie Group where you can post.

Don't know why you need the Hillary Group.

[DrDan]

4. so the Democratic agenda is decided by an anonymous on-line political forum . . . did not know that

[randr]

21. DU and other on line discussion platforms

do in fact mirror the public discussion at large. Many of us here are rather active in local and national politics and find the views expressed here important indicators of general public sentiment.

[72DejaVu]

27. No, they really dont

My caucus went for Bernie by a 3-1 margin, but when they were asked if they would support the Democratic nominee no matter who it was, the entire crowd roared its approval.

[MaggieD]

78. Exactly

DU is in no way representative of Democrats in general.

[CoffeeCat]

45. What I have found...

is that the anti-Hillary sentiment is actually more profound and deeper--beyond DU.

DU has a jury system, unlike most online messageboards and comment sections. I do like that a system keeps Republicans trolls away and people who attack on a personal level. However, the jury system on DU is used by many who simply don't like the opinion being expressed. Most of the juries that I sit on (about 90 percent) are "tattle tale" alerts because the alerter simply didn't share the expressed opinion.

In effect, sharp arguments get smoothed over and sanitized, to avoid alerts. Posters in real life (and elsewhere online) aren't afraid to express their voting intentions either--as many are on DU. And DU is for Democrats who are wholeheartedly supporting the nominee, so the rules make perfect sense. However, true sentiment (and the extent of that sentiment) is often hidden, as a result.

The civility between Hillary and Bernie supporters on DU, is as good as it gets, I'm afraid.

[bettyellen]

57. I've never seen so much RW trolling here at DU, and the personal attacks have been off the hook rude

I guess I'm lucky to be able to say the civility in my liberal area is a hell of a lot better than it is at DU. We laugh at RW CTs in real life though- that may be the difference.

[DrDan]

46. 80% of DU prefers Sanders - less than half do in the population as a whole

the demographics do not mirror themselves. I doubt the discussion does either.

Use DU as a measure of more left-leaning Democrats but not as an overall indicator.

[redstateblues]

76. More like 90%

[MaggieD]

80. The only place I have seen political people like here....

And frankly, like some of the other online forums, is the extremist / socialist / anarchist groups in Seattle. Never seen Democrats like this in real life - not in 38 years.

[bettyellen]

56. I remember an OP claiming that the results in NH showed DU is reflective of nationals Dem sentiment

and no matter how people tried to explain that DU was more like NH than the country, the delusion persisted.

[sufrommich]

5. The world does not revolve around DU. In fact,it doesn't

matter at all what is said here. Some of you have decided forum wars equals real life,but it's far from it.

[msanthrope]

49. The presidency of Dennis Kucinich has not been kind. nt

[peace13]

6. I would be happy for their manner to change for whatever reason.

I'm not sure who is or will be left for them to talk to but it is important that it be civil conversation.

[leftofcool]

9. Once Hillary wins the nomination, there will not be a GDPee.

The TOS says you will support the Democratic nominee or leave.

[Lizzie Poppet]

12. And then return on Nov 8th...

...to rub your noses in it. Tit-for-tat...

[peace13]

15. What the heck.....don't we have to file for divorce first and who gets the kids?

That fight we had last night, can't we forget about it and start over. You still sound angry.

[leftofcool]

24. Me angry? Nope. My candidate did really really well!

[noamnety]

30. Is that accurate?

I thought we had our choice of supporting the democratic nominee, or holding our tongues on that race until GE is over.

[peace13]

36. As long as the mind police don't catch on..

...things should be fine.

[restorefreedom]

38. yes, dont fall for the bullying tactics

you can vote for whoever you want and you can continue to post on du even if you don't vote for the nom. you just cant put comments or threads trashing the nominee. and of course you can continue posting on other subjects and in other forums. some people stay in the lounge or gd.

and you might not want to advertise who you voted for.

but the idea that you have to leave du if you dont support the nominee is complete bullshit designed to make this the hillaryu

[leftofcool]

81. There will only be a general discussion.

Primaries will be over so there in no need for GDP. Please read the TOS

[restorefreedom]

39. no, the tos says you can't come on here and trash the nominee

people are free to discuss subjects other than the presidential race, no matter who they vote for as long as they keep that information private.


please don't spread misinformation.

[IdaBriggs]

73. I think Skinner addressed this very nicely.

And that isn't what he said.

Your words are not prophecy. You can't even unify a message board that was 80/20 Hillary a year ago - what makes you think you will unite a nation?

Trump is not the nominee yet. Neither is Hillary. Media prognosticators are frequently wrong. And so are pollsters.

[oasis]

7. If they were banned it was for good reason.

[Gamecock Lefty]

8. I’m not posting politely towards Bernie supporters.

I’m rather indifferent towards them. This is war and we’re going to squash this revolt of the peasants!!!

By the way, I’ve been banned from replying to quite a few Bernie threads, too. Very odd seeing as how I’m such a nice guy!

[left-of-center2012]

10. "This is war and we’re going to squash this revolt of the peasants"

So you won't expect the peasants to support your Queen?

[peace13]

26. Funny about the war comment.

I think that is the big difference between the Dem candidates and their supporters. I myself am sick and tired of war and using the word war to define political discussion is very disturbing to me. It's all a big war here in the US. If we aren't fighting each other we're fighting other countries. I would say the definition of a Bernie supporter is someone who is tired of war of any kind and is ready to heal this country up from the inside out. Unfortunately those who feed off of war and separation and privilege are totally threatened by that.

Edited to add that while our avatars are the same the poster above is not me! : )

[BlueCaliDem]

53. The vast majority of Bernie supporters will. The ones disguised as Democrats but who have admitted

being Green Party members and Naderites and only registered as a Democrat to vote for the Socialist who registered as a Democrat to run under the Democratic Party banner for media attention and $$s, won't. So no loss there.

As they say, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make'im drink, right?

[pinebox]

17. Peasants?

You're joking, right?
Tell me you're being sarcastic otherwise you and I are going to have a discussion.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

64. He's just being "classy", authoritarian-style.

[dana_b]

60. omg.. another one n/t

[PonyUp]

69. Yeah the ignore list is growing

[Lizzie Poppet]

11. Not all of 'em.

A quick perusal of a whole bunch of threads makes it clear that a good-sized contingent prefer to gloat, condescend, and ridicule in what sure seems like a deliberate effort to alienate Bernie supporters to the point of saying "fuck you" to Hillary in November.

And it's working...

[PeaceNikki]

14. Awww, you need a hug?

[Lizzie Poppet]

16. QED

Need me to explain that?

[PeaceNikki]

20. You complain when HRC supporters are mean, complain when we're kind.

I know, it's hard.

[Lizzie Poppet]

28. I wouldn't think of complaining when you're kind.

The kindness has to be plausibly genuine, though. I've read far too many of your posts to believe that for a moment.

[PeaceNikki]

32. That's so adorable that you think you know me. I am touched.

[Lizzie Poppet]

35. You're kinda bad at condescension. But pretty good at erecting strawmen. So there's that.

Odd, given the amount of practice at condescension you've had, but not everyone's cut out for that sort of thing. I'm sure you have talents in some area.

I don't claim to know you in any way beyond what your posts show, nor would I ever be likely to desire to. As I said, I've read enough to know all I really need to. And I'm pretty selective...

[PeaceNikki]

40. lol. You seem so nice.

[Lizzie Poppet]

43. Well, bless your heart!

Yep, that's me: sweetness and light.

[Nitram]

13. I was banned from the Sanders site for no good reason.

Many of us have been. It was illegal on the Sanders site to post anything that even slightly and politely questioned Bernie's inevitability. it was illegal to point out errors in logic, or statements that were not factual. Get of your high horse and rejoin us on common ground.

[Lizzie Poppet]

18. Cool story.

[Nitram]

19. Do you doubt the truth of my "story" Lizzie?

[Lizzie Poppet]

23. Actually, no, I don't.

Just felt like being snarky. It's what all the cool kids are doing this morning...

[Nitram]

71. That warrants a

[Tanuki]

29. I was banned from the Bernie group for my first post there. If you think this is a "cool story,"

see for yourself. I thought it was pretty innocuous:

"Has Mannie Garcia endorsed anyone yet?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mannie_Garcia"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/128091802#post2
----------------------------------------------------
"Automated Message
Automated Message: You have been blocked from a group

Mail Message
You have been blocked from posting in the Bernie Sanders group by smokey nj. If you believe this is an error, you may contact smokey nj for more information. "

[Nitram]

72. Tanuki, love your handle.

DU kept trying to change "Tanuki" to "Tank"

[Tanuki]

87. Hahaha....as you probably know, a tanuki can easily shift into becoming a tea kettle,

but a tank might be a little more difficult!

[Nitram]

89. We have a vintage Japanese scroll with that theme.

[NCTraveler]

25. Not hard to believe at all.

My one and only post in the Sanders Group. Was banned minutes after making it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/128069099

[peace13]

31. You do realize that even as you goad, the rest of us discuss with guarded discretion.

Every comment outside of the Bernie group has to be a measured one. Don't expect content or rebuttal to your comments. It's just not worth the pain. Consider yourself fortunate that your experience was limited to Bernie's group.

[NurseJackie]

42. "Every comment outside of the Bernie group has to be a measured one." (That's very amusing!)

[Nitram]

74. Peace, you can start playing thee long-suffering victim right about now.

Bernie supporters get 200+ recs on DU when they post. You take the truth as a goad. Try to work on a more balanced view of reality.

[bvf]

34. Time for this again.

Bernie Sanders group:

948 subscribers
292 blocked members
------------------------------------
Hillary Clinton group:

361 subscribers
724 blocked members


Based on the above, it's obvious who's interested in finding common ground, and who isn't.

[ismnotwasm]

44. There are other interpretations for that

Last edited Wed Mar 16, 2016, 03:23 PM - Edit history (1)

Besides finding "common ground". One is that the Hillary group has been around a lot longer than the Sanders group. Another has to do with math and numbers that are a bit more involved. Another has to to with the reasons people are blocked from protected groups.

As a for instance.

[bvf]

47. Fail, fail, and...

fail.

Not even one good try in the bunch. You'd be better off learning how to spell your candidate's name.

[ismnotwasm]

67. No?

Why don't you think so? And I'll correct my typo.

[bvf]

68. You haven't explained a thing.

You're hand-waving.

Glad I could help you learn how to spell your candidate's name, however. A decent person would have said "thanks" without having to be reminded.

[Nitram]

90. BVF, you write with the typically arrogantly unpleasant style of the Bernie supporter.

That might be a clue.

How old is the Bernie group? How many members have joined, stayed a few years and then left? Perhaps Clinton supporters are just plain more adult and nicely mannered than Bernie supporters. That's been my experience. Better sense of humor too! Obviously I'm biased...

[bvf]

91. Funny!

Perhaps Clinton supporters are just plain more adult and nicely mannered than Bernie supporters.

You follow up that title with this?

Now there's a laugh. I won't link to the cesspool we both know about, but there's your answer, right there.

I don't speak for anyone but myself. Deal with it.

Oh, and the numbers speak for themselves as well.

[peace13]

48. Thanks for this.

[joshcryer]

82. Except there are a LOT of Sanders supporters on the Sanders list.

Just look at the names, some really well known ones have been blocked.

[bvf]

83. Name one.

Last edited Wed Mar 16, 2016, 11:53 PM - Edit history (1)

Go ahead.

You have nothing to worry about.

[joshcryer]

84. I'm on my phone.

MorningFrog is one. A bunch stand out but I guarantee if I name without checking on my computer you'll dismiss it. Generally if you are a Sanders supporter against the nastiness you are blocked.

[bvf]

85. Who cares that you're on your phone?

I've been on nothing but for at least six months.

Link or slink, pal--no lame excuses.

[joshcryer]

86. I named one. Now move along.

I'll name more if you can wait for me to get on my computer.

I have PMs from fellow Sanders supporters who got blocked for disagreeing with trolls. I myself got banned for disavowing a banned troll who called out a fellow DUer and I have the PMs from the head host to prove it.

Ooh, and let's get one thing straight, I myself am a good Sanders supporter, so I know first hand how ethical supporters get treated online. Backing BLM, John Lewis, Planned Parenthood, Heurta, in the face of utter dreack.

The real litmus test is how many Clinton supporters were banned from their group, doubt you can think of one (and I would even wager that said ban would be lifted if it was protested, unlike mine which the lead host said she wasn't overturning even after admitting they would've locked the banned trolls thread).

[bvf]

88. *More?* You haven't even named *one.*

MorningFrog is not blocked. You're 0 for 1.

[joshcryer]

92. I named myself too.

Which you're not counting.

Oh, I meant morningfog not Frog. There's no good faith here. If you even cared to explore my complaint you should've caught that.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/~morningfog

Look at that horrible Sanders hater.

[bvf]

93. I checked once and found out you were wrong.

Once is enough.

Btw, is that your answer every time someone catches you "mis-speaking"? They should have known what you meant?

Okey dokey, then.

[joshcryer]

94. I knew I'd screw something up.

I try not to engage this crap.

The key is I took a stand. You just used an insinuation, no facts, assumptions.

I post a fact that the Sanders group bans Sanders supporters, and you go back to insinuation mode. This is the exact argument style used by creationists or climate change denialist.

Humans are fallible, I literally get one fucking letter wrong and you pull this crap. Give me a break.

[bvf]

96. "I named one. Now move along."

Yeah, you should get a break for that, too, I suppose.

If nothing else, you should be apologizing to MorningFrog for dragging him/her into this.

[joshcryer]

98. Another one:

longship got blocked for disavowing ToS violations.

Can you name even one Clinton supporter blocked from that group?

[bvf]

99. You owe MorningFrog an apology,

and I have better things to do than look through well over 700 fucking journal pages!

GMAFB.

[joshcryer]

100. You and all the Sanders "supporters" who block us from that group...

...while pretending to be "better" than the Clinton group owe us one.

If MorningFrog wants an apology for typing a name on my phone wrong (off by one letter) I'll gladly apologize to them. But not to people who won't accept that that group eats Sanders supporters that they don't agree with.

[bvf]

104. So you expect MorningFrog to show up and *ask* for

something that any grown-up would offer simply because it was the mature thing to do?

That says plenty about you, IMO, and explains more than you probably realize.


I'm not even going to bother asking what your last sentence was supposed to mean.

[brer cat]

105. Your sig line tells us plenty about you

and explains more than you probably realize.

[bvf]

106. Glad you liked it.

[ibegurpard]

70. No one cares

[Logical]

75. LOL. Sure you were. nt

[NCTraveler]

22. Overall, I have always been kind to Sanders supporters.

Minus the ones who have called me sexist, racist, anti-Semitic, etc.

I like many Sanders supporters here and share much of their ideology.

[Gregorian]

33. I was astonished to get a civil reply this morning. It felt disingenuous.

I still sense smug underneath their phony smiles.

[stillwaiting]

37. Most of them think we are looney-left, far-left crazies who are "fucking retarded".

I don't know if I will be able to stand with them any longer.

I am sick of voting for people that I don't like and still being treated like shit afterwards (from the actual politicians I vote for AND their supporters). They really, really, REALLY don't like me.

[Gregorian]

62. I didn't know I was progressive until this election!!!

I'm just a normal guy. Maybe I did grow up in a special neighborhood that was the polar opposite of being in Alabama, but I would have never called myself a progressive.

Well, thanks to this election, not only do I know who I am, but now I know who all of the other progressives are. It's great, if not disappointing.

We've made big progress just on this one point, in this election.

[JTFrog]

41. More whiny meta. n/t

[Beacool]

50. Why should Sanders' supporters go to Hillary's page to bash her?

Ditto in reverse. The candidates' sites are for the candidates' supporters. People also get banned from Sander's site. There needs to be one place where supporters of a candidate can go and feel free to discuss whatever they wish, without constantly having to defend their candidate and themselves from attacks. GDP is for everyone.

[randr]

54. I was banned for just asking a question

No bashing intended or indicated.

[Beacool]

65. Well, I don't know then why you were banned.

[marew]

102. The first time I ever went to the Hillary section

I was immediately banned for something so very mild.
I was stunned and the Hillary people have trashed me viciously ever since!
They have made sure that I will never vote for Hillary ever under any circumstances. I've been cursed at, called names, told I'm stupid (full Fellowship to grad school, graduated with honors), told to get off DU, told I'm not are real Democrat, and on and on. I have never said anything nearly as bad as I've received but if anyone says anything about Hillary that is true and even slightly negative, watch out.
One Hillary supporter wrote that this person outside of DU in some article saying something negative about Hillary and called that person a right wing hack. I researched the guy. Turns out he was a speech writer for Robert F. Kennedy but Hillary supporters insist he is a right wing hack! So now I am sure that anyone who worked with the the Kennedys or any member of the Kennedy family, living or dead, is also a right wing hack by association! That is exactly how they work! I truly like and respect the Kennedy family so I am sure in Hillary world, I'm a right wing hack also!
You cannot make this stuff up. All sense of reason is gone!

[Rebkeh]

51. They need us

Nothing personal.

[marew]

103. Way too little, way too late! nt

[RufusTFirefly]

52. Mmm! Mmm! This shit actually tastes better than I thought!

Yay corporatism!!

[demwing]

55. I give zero shits whether they're polite

they support a corrupt liar for president, so I ignore them

[Maedhros]

58. If we've learned anything from this primary, it's that the Democratic Party leadership

is thoroughly corrupt and a big chunk of the rank-and-file is totally OK with that.

[dana_b]

61. +1

I saw a quote last night and it's exactly how I feel:

Most Sanders’ supporters recognize that there is far more daylight between Clinton’s policies and Sanders’ than between Clinton and any of the Republicans.

[dana_b]

59. really??

You and I see a different DU.

[Skwmom]

66. I have had it up to here with agendas that are quickly forgotten after the election.

[HassleCat]

77. Who let that big fart?

"WE don't need you. We DON'T need you. We don't NEED you. We don't need YOU!"

"What? Huh? Who said that? Whuddya lookin at me for?"

[GoneFishin]

79. Good luck to them on that one.

[Hiraeth]

97. Now that Skinner so kindly removed their OPs from the front page, I have quickly

forgotten about their existence. Thank you, Skinner

[djean111]

101. If Hillary is the nominee, the Democratic agenda is the Third Way and neocon agenda.

There will be no discussion, really. Maybe "Eat your fucking peas and shut the fuck up. After you vote."

I have just started putting snotty or goading remark makers on ignore. Amazing how quickly the number grows!
GD-P is so much more interesting and informative. And threads get shorter and more informative, too, because there is a strange penchant for childish thread-jacking.

[pantsonfire]

107. I was number #608 banned apparently, according to folks in Sanders group nt