Given all of the lies, expecting unity right now is unreasonable

[Vattel]

Last edited Wed Mar 16, 2016, 10:24 PM - Edit history (1)

Nevada was a crucial win for team Hillary. It stalled Sanders' momentum. And that is where her campaign and many surrogates got really ugly with their lies and distortions.

This ad, which aired three days before the Nevada caucuses courtesy of Correct the Record, contains text that is vile beyond belief: “Bernie Sanders on Immigrants: Silly, Tribal, and Economically Illiterate” Newsweek, July 30, 2015."

Anyone in Nevada seeing that ad would naturally think Sanders had described immigrants as silly, tribal, and economically illiterate. He did no such thing, of course, but voters who didn't know much about him no doubt thought otherwise.

That is just one example. There was a well-coordinated effort to distort Sanders' record on immigration issues, not to mention his civil rights record. And we Sanders supporters are supposed to just forget about shit like that to unify the party? How does that work?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

1. The unity feels a lot like this to me

Very uncomfortable, and completely fake.

[1StrongBlackMan]

3. Maybe ... But the bigger picture is ...

NOT, this:

https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.M798f772860e1331b4124c3eed5d4b811o1&w=144&h=110&c=7&rs=1&qlt=90&pid=3.1&rm=2

and/or NOT this:

https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.M798f772860e1331b4124c3eed5d4b811o1&w=144&h=110&c=7&rs=1&qlt=90&pid=3.1&rm=2

That can only happen if Democrats and the Left come together, as we all benefit.

[ibegurpard]

18. you get right to work on that

[1StrongBlackMan]

23. Get to work on what? ...

I'm not the one talking about not coming together to vote to prevent a gop president.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

76. If it werent for the people who would suffer so terribly and the possibility

of World War Three, I would say we might just need to have these "my way or the highway" folks taught a lesson and let them have a full fascist government for 4 years.

But there is an actual risk, regardless of which GOP candidate is the nominee, of WW III so I guess we cant do that, or hope we dont do that.

[1StrongBlackMan]

96. That would be a lesson that they would not benefit, or learn, from ...

besides fascist governments tend to last more than 4 years.

[Autumn]

42. No that's just a small part of the picture. A very small picture of a boogyman, not even a man to be

afraid of, the republican leadership will never allow him to be the nominee. It's ironic how some people insist on separating the Left from the democrats and then turn around and insist we come together.

[azurnoir]

13. No closer to this

?quality=100&strip=all&w=664&h=441&crop=1

[1StrongBlackMan]

24. That's ridiculous ... So should I now, search the internet for ...

a picture of Sanders shaking hands/hugging Bush?

I'm pretty certain/hope you don't really believe that HRC = Bush; but, I will ask the question ... do you really believe that HRC = Bush?

[azurnoir]

26. no she's never been a coke head or an alcoholic either

however the centrist and progressive wings of the party are expected to come together

[1StrongBlackMan]

32. I'm not sure I understand you response; but ...

however the centrist and progressive wings of the party are expected to come together

Yes! The centrist and progressive wings of the party are expected to come together, if we hope to avoid a trump or cruz presidency.

[SoCalMusicLover]

31. Please Find That Picture....PLEASE!!!

The picture you mention of Sanders hugging Bush close, with a BIG smile on both their faces.

Please post that picture here.

HRC is a whole lot closer to W than Bernie will Ever be. That much I'm certain of.

Funny how Bill is good buds with Sr., but I somehow doubt that if Trump becomes Prez, that he and Obama will be buddy buddy.

[1StrongBlackMan]

35. Sorry, I won't waste my time looking ...

But this:

HRC is a whole lot closer to W than Bernie will Ever be. That much I'm certain of.

Nor, this:

Funny how Bill is good buds with Sr., but I somehow doubt that if Trump becomes Prez, that he and Obama will be buddy buddy.

Has anything to do with Democrats coming together to defeat the gop ... which is what all Democrats and all people of the left, should be all about ... even if, their preferred Democratic candidate doesn't make the cut.

But that said, given President Obama's private nature, I suspect he will be buddy buddy with few people in or of DC, once he leaves.

[Avalux]

46. You don't get it do you?

It doesn't matter the political party - the Clintons and the Bushes are members of the 1% and they ALL stick together. What they call themselves is irrelevant. Their goal is to maintain the status quo and continue making money for themselves and their buddies.

If Obama chooses that route, wouldn't surprise me. I hope he doesn't though. I hope he works with us to fight economic inequality after his presidency.

[1StrongBlackMan]

48. No. I don't get it. I stopped fearing Boogey men, long ago. eom.

[Avalux]

50. Me too, at least we have that in common on this topic.

That's why voting for Hillary to keep Boogey man Trump from winning isn't a good enough reason for me.

[1StrongBlackMan]

57. Trump is not a boogey man ...

he is a very real and direct threat; whereas, "the 1%" is a bumper sticker slogan.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

62. Choke...

[AzDar]

111. Right? Holy Shit...

[peacebird]

78. Hillary admits Bush BOUGHT her IWR vote with a promise of $$$ for New York. She said so in the

Last town hall. I understand horse trading in politics, but not when a decision is life or death. This one was war. Her "Hard Choice" indeed.

[1StrongBlackMan]

92. Did she really? eom.

[peacebird]

100. Yes. Here's a link

http://usuncut.com/politics/hillary-clinton-iraq-war-vote-bribe-video/

During tonight’s Democratic town hall on MSNBC, Hillary Clinton shockingly defended her vote for the Iraq War as a favor for President Bush helping New York after 9/11. Around the 4-minute mark of the video below, Clinton admitted that she had “a different set of experiences” with George W. Bush than Sanders did, in response to Chris Matthews asking her why she was wrong on Iraq War while Sanders was right.

“I’m sitting there in the Oval Office, and Bush says to me, ‘What do you need?’ And I said, ‘I need $20 billion to rebuild, you know, New York,’ and he said, ‘You got it.’ And he was good to his word,” Clinton said in response to Matthews’ question on why Bernie Sanders was right on the Iraq War vote and Clinton was wrong.

“Literally, that same day, I get back to the Capitol, and the Republicans are trying to take that money away. We kept calling the White House, Bush kept saying, ‘I gave them my word, I’m going to stick with it.’ So, you know, I had a different set of experiences.”

[1StrongBlackMan]

107. Oh. Okay. eom.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

79. What you say about HRC and Bill is true. So let me ask you this, SO WHAT?

What does that have to do with the reality that the difference between a GOP White House and a Democratic White House is possibly life and death?

That is a reality, surely you agree, therefore what does any of this matter?

[Kelvin Mace]

55. If you can find any, they will be few

How cozy are the Clinton's and the Bush's?

But, by all means, see how many you can come up with.

[1StrongBlackMan]

58. I really don't care who high profile people are seen with. eom

[Kelvin Mace]

61. "Seen with" is not the same thing as

colluding with, sucking up to, soliciting advice from, and bragging of friendship to.

Lot's of people have been "seen with" John Wayne Gacy, but you don't see them cuddling up to him or writing fawning reviews of his paintings.

[1StrongBlackMan]

66. Okay ... I really don't care who high profile people ...

suck up to, solicit advice from, or brag of friendship with. And, who they collude with only matters to me, depending on the subject of the collusion.

In real life high profile people hang with other high profile people, including former presidents.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

65. I bet you would...given the person.

[1StrongBlackMan]

69. No ... I really wouldn't ...

ETA: Well, maybe my wife!

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

71. It's strange that you have 5 hides yet are able to reply.

[1StrongBlackMan]

91. Yesterday ...

Skinner, et al., changed the rules in order to deal with the alert stalking ... and I'm pretty sure a certain corner of DU got a big sad, as they had their only tool of debate removed from the box.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

95. I hadn't heard that. Mostly too busy.

I've had my alert stalkers as well, FWIW.

TY for the heads up.

[Live and Learn]

105. +10,000 nt

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

60. Ouch!

How cozy they seem to be.

Quite at home with each other.

[Kelvin Mace]

54. How do we go to the polls and vote for Clintons when these pictures exist:

How do we go to the polls and vote for Clintons when these pictures exist:

?quality=100&strip=all&w=664&h=441&crop=1

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=&w=1484



How hard is it for HRC supporters to understand that:

YOU.DON'T.ASSOCIATE.WITH.WAR.CRIMINALS!?

These people have murdered men, woman and children. If you vote for them, you endorse those murders! You put the blood own your own hands willingly!

[Kip Humphrey]

88. or, perhaps this one which is more comfortable and more genuine

[840high]

109. yep

[1StrongBlackMan]

2. May I offer ...

There was a well-coordinated effort to distort Sanders' record on immigration issues, not to mention his civil rights record. And we Sanders supporters are supposed to just forget about shit like that to unify the party? How does that work?

that you consider that the G/E election results are bigger than your personal hurt feeling?

[jeff47]

7. May I offer

that a party that has abused half to three-quarters of its members for 30 years is not in a good position to say "shut up and think of the general"?

[UglyGreed]

11. +1000

[1StrongBlackMan]

14. Problem is the Party ...

that there hasn't abused half to 3/4 of it members (accepting for the sake of argument that there has been "abuse&quot ... check the vote total of the Primaries, since you are unlikely to believe the polling.

Secondly (and again, accepting for the sake of argument that there has been "abuse&quot , no is saying "shut up"!

[jeff47]

40. You realize you don't have to literally say the words "shut up" to get the same point across, right?

For example, you could tell someone that the general election is more important than their "hurt feelings". Like you did in the post I replied to.

As for no 'abuse', ya might wanna take a look at the dwindling percentage of the electorate that are registered Democrats.

[Myrina]

34. +1001

Thank you.

[Still In Wisconsin]

41. True enough! The winner gets to twist the knife. Hillary and her supporters are the winners.

Yes, I supported Sanders, and yes you and I had a couple of contentious exchanges about that before I got sent away with five hides. But now it's done, so I plan to keep my mouth shut and vote for Hillary in the GE. I run marathons... I can take some pain.

[polly7]

5. Yep, lies, lies and more lies .......... they stick in the minds of those searching for

someone they believe will represent them well. It was a massive disinformation campaign - and, slimy.

[truedelphi]

6. I read on DU yesterday that there was 32% turnout of voters in Illinois.

So how can anyone expect Unity when the Primary system is so incredibly badly supported at the polls?

The largest block of voters right now are those not affiliated with any one Party.

Forty three percent of Americans are non-affiliated voters. (The figure is from a recent Gallup poll.)

Why should the nation as a whole depend on 32% of all voters to tell them who the two candidates for the WH will happen to be?

Oh and BTW, the 32% is a rather high turnout. For instance, in the Carolinas, you don't see even 20% of the voters getting to a polling place on primary election days!

[MerryBlooms]

21. Here are our numbers from Illinois

Includes all races.

http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/illinois

[truedelphi]

25. Thanks for that link. The stats prove my point -

Of the 7,282,540 voters who are registered with one or the other Major Parties, in the state of Illinois, you have almost 2 million people voting the Democratic ticket. (Choosing either Clinton, Sanders or someone else, though the "someone else" is a very small number, less than 1%)

So 20% of all registered voters choose to vote for a Democrat, rather than a Republican.

Then roughly half of those voters chose to vote for Hillary Clinton. So basically Illinois' choice in terms of the Presidential candidate ends up being the choice of 10% of the registered voting populace.

[NCTraveler]

8. Sanders position on immigration reform is one...

Of the biggest reasons Clinton got my vote yesterday. As far as I know I was one of the first here to talk about it this primary season. Its not something I simply stumbled upon. It pisses me off. Over 15 million people would be out of the shadows today.

[DanTex]

9. All of Sanders' lies are forgiven if he bows out gracefully and endorses Clinton.

The sooner the better. We need to beat Trump.

[azurnoir]

12. and we care about your forgiveness whY? remember you NEED us for your candidate to win the GE

[DanTex]

20. Not you, Bernie. And not my forgiveness, the forgiveness of the party and the Democratic

electorate. A lot of people don't want to see Trump be president.

[azurnoir]

27. or what they won't let him vote with them? honestly your comment makes little sense to me

[frylock]

17. Good luck in your endeavors.

[DanTex]

19. Why thank you! Going great so far.

[frylock]

22. It's gone swimmingly!

That'll change when the DNC is no longer in control.

[1StrongBlackMan]

43. When will that be? eom.

[frylock]

44. Take a guess.

[1StrongBlackMan]

45. I don't see the DNC going away anytime soon ...

But my guess would be when there is no more Democratic Party.

[frylock]

47. I don't see them having as much control in the GE as they have had in the primaries.

Debbie Waterboy isn't going to be able to hide your candidate in oddly-scheduled debates during the GE.

[1StrongBlackMan]

49. LOL ... Okay. eom.

[MaggieD]

10. I opened this thread thinking you were talking about the lies....

Still being told to this day about Clinton.

Sadly, everything in this video is true. It's a major reason I refuse to support him.

[Vattel]

37. Did Sanders call immigrants silly or tribal or economically illiterate?

[stevenleser]

38. Same here. I'm still waiting for them to stop. nt

[bravenak]

39. Me too

[frylock]

15. Yeah, fuck that shit.

[Persondem]

16. Oh, I get it ... so many lies about Clinton by Sanders supporters so here's another one

You are right. I want no peace with those Sanders people who continually think quoting people = lies.

Damn straight, no unity until this shit stops.

You might want to educate yourself on just how far your guy went in 2007 to kill the only real chance this country had for immigration reform in the last 30 years.

[gcomeau]

28. Worse than lies.

Attacked Single Payer.

Attacked the entire basis of the progressive social safety net by mocking it as "free stuff" GOP style.


This isn't just hurt feelings because someone played rough, she declared war on the left in her lurch to the right. And her supporters are either turning a blind eye or are just fine with it. Either way, screw "reconciliation". Might as well "reconcile" with the GOP while we're at it.

[vintx]

87. Worse than lies <- exactly.

Not just lies, no that wasn't enough.

Lies which further chip away at concepts that are the foundation of the progressive idea of a commons, and the common good.

That's unforgivable.

[amborin]

29. horrible, as were all the other swift boating smears and lies; just reprehensible

[bkkyosemite]

30. Who can honestly support someone who would do this to another human being.

dishonest....................Feeling the Bern

[arcane1]

33. Brock brings his right-wing sleaze machine into the Dem primary. And some even cheer it on.

I'll have no part of of that organization, or anyone they promote.

[BeyondGeography]

36. Bill Maher called this compulsively cleaning up your corner

when you're surrounded by giant piles of shit.

The he-said she-said between two primary candidates is bigger for you than voting against someone who is diametrically opposed to both? Please.

[CentralMass]

53. Bill has a fat wallet. His interest will be taken care of either way.

[BeyondGeography]

103. You're right, which is why it is good of him to care

The last Republican train wreck in the White House destroyed a lot of lower- and middle-class lives. He's telling you to avoid a repeat.

[Jester Messiah]

51. It works like this:

"Shut up and fall in line, peon."

That seems to be the gist. You'll be threatened with President Trump, and held responsible for him if he wins, nevermind that they could have unified behind a less objectionable Democratic Party nominee, but instead chose to insist on Hillary and demonize everyone who didn't agree.

[yallerdawg]

52. "I'm a Democrat."

Let's start with that lie.

[Kelvin Mace]

67. Only because the "Democrats"

made it a lie by becoming Wall Street Republicans in all but name. Bernie was a much better Democrat than most Democrats.

[yallerdawg]

73. If you can't win with the Democratic Party...

by condemning it and insulting it's members, how can you win?

I guess Senator Sanders (I-VT)* will return to the Senate and his 'party of one.'

[Kelvin Mace]

77. The Democratic Party has been against his candiacy from Day One

because they want Wall Street's hand-picked candidate to win. They can't afford to antagonize their corporate masters from which all money flows.

The truth is, Bernie makes them look bad by reminding people what Democrats used to stand for before they were bought, lock stock and soul.

[yallerdawg]

80. Good God!

Do you really believe this mythology?

[Kelvin Mace]

83. You are the guy with the user name

that means your loyalty is to a label, and only a label. As long as the person has "Democrat" after their name, they have your vote.

[yallerdawg]

94. "I would vote for a yella dawg...

before I'd vote for a Republican!"

Words to live by, my friend!

[merrily]

84. Still got more substantive bills and amendments that he wrote passed into law than Hillary's zero.

Got nominated by the Vermont Democratic more than once, even though he did not seek the nomination.

Democrats don't even bother to run any Democrat for Senate against him. But, what do U.S. Senate Democrats and the Vermont Democratic Party know about Sanders compared to you?

[yallerdawg]

97. I don't know much about Sanders.

I'm not from Vermont.

[merrily]

99. Zzzzz

[upaloopa]

56. I can't tell if this is for real or what. You mean to tell me all the crap posted here about

Hillary over the last year is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

The narcissism on Bernie's side is just over the top!

[msanthrope]

59. I shall be blunt. Get over your butthurt because we have the Senate within our grasp

and SCOTUS with major turnover.

Being pissed off about how Bernie Sanders... White establishment senator from Vermont was treated.... is precious and privileged. There are bigger things at stake here. The Senate. Scotus. Those are more important than concerns of either you or me.

I hated the tactics of the Obama campaign in 2008. But don't think I didn't work my f****** ass off to get him elected. I knew that what was at stake, it was far more important than my hurt feelings.

The day after Hillary conceded I went to my first organizing meeting at the Obama campaign. I wasn't happy, I wasn't pleased with President Obama I didn't think he had a shot in Hell of f****** winning. But I dug in and worked a voter registration Drive. I didn't expect anybody from the Obama campaign to personally apologize to me for my feelings. I just knew that he was shitloads better than any type of Republican being in control again. I sucked it up.

[gwheezie]

63. Same here

And when Obama got the nomination I figured it was because more democrats voted for him, I wasn't mad at him about it. He ran a better campaign, he won fair and square and he needed our support to be elected president.

[msanthrope]

70. Our candidate lost. We sucked it up. And worked to get a Dem elected.

It's what Democrats do.

[gwheezie]

85. My husband and I were both Hillary supporters

And while I continued to support her, at some point I knew Obama would be the nominee. I was already attending our local dem party meetings at the next county and involved with campaigning so all I had to do was ask, what do you want me to do? My county had no dem headquarters so a group of us splintered off and started inviting democrats from my county who previously supported Clinton to come to our homes and we started campaigning for Obama.
I don't regret voting for him twice for a minute. He's done a much better job than I expected and I'm still glad he is our president.

[Kelvin Mace]

64. I will not vote for the friend of war criminals

PERIOD.

Obama didn't pal around with Henry Kissinger and George W. Bush.

[msanthrope]

68. But you'll vote for the guy who supports the F-35....

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/09/bernie-sanders-loves-this-1-trillion-war-machine.html

[Kelvin Mace]

74. Support for building weapons, while certainly objectionable and deplorable

is not a war crime, using them is.

Addressing Iran directly today, Hillary Clinton said unequivocally that she “will not hesitate to take military action” as president if the country attempts to obtain a nuclear weapon.

And does HRC oppose the F-35?

No.

Does she have war criminals as friends?

Yes, she does, and proudly so.

And since you cite The Daily Beast, shall we discuss this story as Gospel:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/03/17/the-wedding-that-explains-the-election.html

[msanthrope]

75. I hope to hell any President would prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

Do you really think that President Bernie Sanders wouldn't take military action?

[Kelvin Mace]

81. Will the intelligence of such a move be as reliable

as it was in Iraq?

Will HRC display the same gullibility/blood thirst she showed off when she backed an invasion based on lies?

Thanks to HRC and her pal Bush, we have been "at war" longer than any time in our history and we have accomplished nothing except breed new terrorists.

Oh, that, and squander over a million lives and waste a trillion dollars.

[msanthrope]

82. Again....do you really think President Bernie Sanders would not take

Military action to support removing nuclear capabilities from Iran?

[Kelvin Mace]

86. I would hope the Hell not

By the way, you do know that you are advocating "The Bush Doctrine" that states it is okay to attack a country simply because someone told you it was a threat. Those are some impressive neocon credentials you (and HRC) are sporting.

[forjusticethunders]

89. The media has 100% mainstreamed the Bush doctrine

Hillary supporters get most of their political understanding from the mainstream media which among other things, thinks that Republican neo-con insanity is a reasonable stance.

[Kelvin Mace]

102. Yep.

I am watching HRC supporters defend her with Bush logic.

[msanthrope]

90. Let's be real here for a second. If we had actionable intelligence that

Iran have nuclear capabilities, there is no way in hell that President Bernie Sanders would not be acting on that. In fact I'll go so far as to say we would probably have a joint Mission with a few of our closest allies... Britain France and Israel. Given Bernie stated support for the Drone program., there is no doubt in my mind that he would make sure that he would safeguard the Middle East.

[Kelvin Mace]

98. One more time,

you are citing the Bush Doctrine. There are LEGAL, international venues with which to address, and evaluate such an accusation. Bush claims to have had "actionable intelligence", but turns out, it was a lie (and he bloody well knew it).

Oops, guess we'll just say sorry to the tens of thousands of people we kill. That'll make it right.

Also, you are now moving the goal posts and bringing other issues into play. The original question refers to Sanders acting unilaterally on an accusation of possession of nukes, not in conjunction with other "coalitions of the willing" or whatever they decide to call and illegal invasion force next time.

You asked a specific question, predicated on an illegal doctrine, promulgated by the worst president in U.S. history, and I answered you.

Now, I'll ask you a question:

Are you prepared to have murder committed in your name on the say so of an organization with a proven 68 year history of lying?

[msanthrope]

101. I was totally fine with the raid on Osama Bin Laden. How about you? nt

[Kelvin Mace]

108. Moving the goal posts again

We are discussing HRC's quite militant promise to use the Bush Doctrine to illegally invade a sovereign nation on the basis of "actionable intelligence" from an agency with a long and sordid history of lying.

We are not discussing Osama bin Laden.

I oppose, and hope President Sanders would oppose, the use of the Bush Doctrine.

Also, I asked you a question and you didn't answer.

Are you prepared to have murder committed in your name on the say so of an organization with a proven 68 year history of lying?

I answered your question unequivocally, so please do me the courtesy of the same.

[msanthrope]

110. Like I said. ..I was totally fine with killing Osama Bin Laden based on actionable

intellegence. If you want to call that murder, fine.

[Kelvin Mace]

112. Except we were not discussing

bin-Laden, we were discussing Iran.

Also, if you accept that invading a country to assassinate a specific person without trial is legal, it opens U.S. citizens up to the same treatment. If it is okay for us to do what we did with bin-Laden, then it is okay for any foreign government to invade and assassinate any U.S. citizen it determines "needs killing" for any crime.

So, let's get back to Iran. The CIA and the usual suspects tell President Sanders that they have "actionable intelligence" that Iran has a nuke. Are you okay with the invocation of the Bush Doctrine to commit murder in your name?

[msanthrope]

113. So you do have a problem with us killing Bin Laden? He wasn't "assasinated."

He was shot.

If president Bernie Sanders came back with actionable intelligence as to Iran and elected to go a military solution I would support him. And wouldn't you too? Because it Bernie Sanders honestly thought that a military solution was the only way to fix this wouldn't you trust him?

[Kelvin Mace]

114. I oppose summary execution/assassination, PERIOD

There was never any serious intention to bring bin-Laden in for trial, since the U.S. really did not want him on the stand talking about CIA operations in Afghanistan during the 80s Soviet occupation.

Once you dispose of tedious trials and rights for one person, it opens up the same option for everyone else.

I would oppose ANY decision by ANYONE using the Bush Doctrine. If you accept that it is okay to attack a country you believe will attack you, then you basically say that the Japanese were perfectly justified in attacking Pearl Harbor.

So, you support the Bush Doctrine?

[msanthrope]

115. Osama Bin Laden had no constitutional right to trial. Are you honestly comparing shooting Bin Laden

to Pearl Harbor?

[Kelvin Mace]

116. No, I am comparing attacking Iran because of "actionable intelligence"

to Pearl Harbor, and at this point I suspect you are being disingenuous in this discussion. You keep bringing up bin-Laden when HRC's quote about Iran was the topic of discussion.

One last time: Do you subscribe to the Bush Doctrine?

[Amimnoch]

93. 0rly?

Of course, I realize that's what being a national level politician entails you meet with all levels and types. So neither these nor the photo's of Clinton bother me. I can see where A minor player from the 2nd smallest state population wise, and the 2nd most homogeneous state in the country is much harder mark to attack with these kinds of fallacy arguments.. after all, they've never really done anything or met anybody to be measured against. It's easy to do the right thing when there's no real consequences for doing so.

[Kelvin Mace]

104. As I pointed out and I am sure you bloody well understand,

there is a difference between being photographed with a person, and willfully consorting with them, befriending them, and bragging of your friendship with them.

It is one thing to be in a picture with John Wayne Gacy, another thing entirely to claim him as a friend, confidant and to write fawning praise of his artwork.

[synergie]

72. Well, you guys could try to stopp lying and then perhaps we could attempt to forget about the

nastiness that's been going on and see if we can figure out how to forgive and forget. If you wish to be reasonable about unity, you have to stop the bad behavior. All that abuse of certain demographics, the numerous dishonest right wing smears and the nasty things with Brick and other horrible things you've said are going to make it rather unreasonable for you to seek unity. The HRC supporters are not the ones hurling the abuse or signing pro-Trump pledges after all.

The well coordinated effort to stalk and silence voices that disagreed with the BS fan club, and the gross distortions that are STILL going on and the right wing smears are happening right now, how are we HRC supporters supposed to forget about the shit that was said, the juries that were abused, the alert stalking and the misogynistic abuse?

How does unity work when those responsible for the nastiness pretend they're the aggrieved parties?

[Armstead]

106. OMG I didn't realize they were THAT BAD...That's fucking scumbag behavior

Anything to win, my ass.