The Sad, Sisyphean Struggle of Hillary Haters

[William769]

Writing for Politico, Jack Shafer explains why he thinks “Being a Clinton apologist is a hard life.”

Which got us thinking: what must it be like to be a die-hard Hillary hater? Obsessing over one of the most accomplished and resilient public figures on the planet? How depressing and demoralizing is it to latch onto fabricated scandal after fabricated scandal, only to have every one fade away?

How frustrating is it to expend so much time and mental energy bashing, bashing, bashing, only to have Hillary come back stronger than ever?

And how awful is it to be on the wrong side of women’s history, to help reinforce the gender barrier that prevents women and girls from realizing their full potential?

http://www.hillarymen.com/latest/sad-sisyphean-struggle-of-hillary-haters?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=socialnetwork

[MannyGoldstein]

1. So is not being a fan of Hillary

being on the wrong side of women’s history, and helping to reinforce the gender barrier that prevents women and girls from realizing their full potential?

It feels like I'm getting that message a lot.

[msanthrope]

30. Remember, Manny, when you voted for Reagan?

as you look upon that decision do you not feel that you were on the wrong side of history? Do you not feel that given his anti-choice policies you helped reinforce negative gender stereotypes? given his homophobia and his refusal to even mention AIDS do you not feel that votes for him reinforced anti gay stereotypes?

my suggestion is that you vote for the Democratic nominee this time..... whomsoever that is.

[MannyGoldstein]

45. Voted for him just once

so I don't think you can reasonably aim at least some of your bile on me.

And Carter was a bit of fundy as you no doubt recall, had the Southern Evangelicals behind him, and a right-wing Democrat (for that time) and Reagan was divorced. So I'm not sure that things were so clear cut in 1980, other than for you, of course.

1980 was my first election, and IIRC the last time I voted for a Republican, because by 1984 certainly I realized that Republican policies were bankrupt. But do you know who still hasn't figured that out?

[randys1]

54. Are you or are you not voting FOR Hillary, for President, in Nov 2016 if she is the

nominee of the Democratic Party?

Just curious

[djean111]

71. Oh, WOW! The Pledge-y Thing has made its first appearance today! Awwww........

you do realize that the only way you can really count on a vote is to get someone's mail-in ballot and fill it out yourself, right?

[randys1]

80. sigh

[JustAnotherGen]

112. I will - but I won't be if it's

Sanders.

[HERVEPA]

125. Yeh. I'm sure the Republican will work out much better for you.

Pray tell, why?

[JustAnotherGen]

131. We are rich

Filthy rich.

[840high]

227. If it's Hillary - I'll write in Sanders.

[HERVEPA]

231. Well, that would be dumb. Really, really dumb.

[840high]

234. Not dumb at all. I will never

again vote for the 1%.

[HERVEPA]

238. Yet of de facto you're doing that by helping put a Republican in..

who will be much worse. And you're condemning those of color and those less fortunate perhaps than you to a worse lot in life. But you have high ideals, so no problem.

[randys1]

132. If Bernie is the Dem nominee in Nov 2016, I would beg you to vote for him.

I wont lecture you as to why, but I would beg you.

[MannyGoldstein]

133. If you rephrase that question to make it non-antagonistic

I'll answer it for the umpteenth time.

[randys1]

135. I was trying to be brief, regardless of who the Dem is in the ACTUAL election, not the

primaries, do you vote for that person, whoever it is?

And I see one of my close friends here has said something about not voting if it is Bernie, and I will beg and encourage them to change their minds the same way I would a SINCERE liberal who said that about Hillary, I know my friend who said that is sincere, but I dont know everybody the way i know that person.

[MannyGoldstein]

137. I will probably vote for Hillary if she's the nominee

Depends on what's happening at that time, of course.

[randys1]

138. Curious, what could POSSIBLY happen "at that time" that would make you

vote or not vote in such a way that the result would help SCOTT WALKER/KOCH BROS or I HATE WOMEN JEB BUSH AND I HATE EDUCATION win the election?

What could possibly be happening, I sincerely am asking.

BTW, protest vote sounds good to me too, seriously.

But if i then ask myself what about the people the cons will target, i cant do it

[AgingAmerican]

144. Rigging the primaries

By either her campaign, or her surrogates in her name. In that case I would be loathe to vote for her.

[HERVEPA]

232. The probably is ludicrous and ridiculous.

[840high]

226. None of your business.

[msanthrope]

139. Your "Thanks Obama!" defense of your vote for Reagan is priceless.

And not racist at all. nope, no 1 should even think that.

I mean you've discussed many times that your personal demographic is white upper middle class male Ivy League educated.

So of course it makes absolute sense that while defending your vote for a racist homophobic misogynist upper middle class privileged white male actor..... a man who kicked off his 1980 campaign in Selma Alabama with a racist speech...... you invoke a black man.

A black man who by the way you wished would have lost the 2012 election.

nice slamming of Jimmy Carter too Manny.... I was proud to canvas for his campaign, girl though I was.

[MannyGoldstein]

142. I guess when you've got no facts to counter with,

a poo-bomb is your only weapon.

LORD knows, you've discussed my demographics many, many more times than I have. Weird.

[msanthrope]

148. Manny.....you chose exactly how you would defend your Reagan

vote. Don't blame me that you slammed both President Obama and President Carter.

[MannyGoldstein]

155. How was it slamming?

While Goddess, if she exists, can define and create perfection, all that us mortals can do in this world is to make comparisons. I was sharing some bits of how I made my comparisons 35 years ago.

Instead of disputing the information, all you seem to be able to muster is various phrasings of "Manny, you suck!"

OK. I suck. I get it.

But at least I try to deal in evidence and truth.

[msanthrope]

161. calling President Carter a "fundy" isn't a slam? Your word. nt

[MannyGoldstein]

165. And again... do you actually disagree?

Or just flinging poo?

And you mischaracterized what I wrote; please use the entire phrase if you'd like to be accurate, thanks.

[msanthrope]

166. Manny.....I do not answer your questions. I merely

note what you write. "Fundy" is your word, written about a very good man who is currently dying of cancer.

[MannyGoldstein]

169. That's the best you can do?

Sad.

[msanthrope]

173. Your word, Manny. Defend it as you wish. nt

[still_one]

230. wow, I didn't realize that you voted once for reagan

[Maedhros]

103. I wonder what the women and girls of Libya think about Hillary,

since she was so giddy after we destroyed their country and subjected them to untold misery.

[brooklynite]

120. Uncovered: The macabre sex chamber of Libya's Colonel Gaddafi

It has been more than two years since the capture and death of Muammar Gaddafi, the Libyan dictator whose reign subjected an impoverished people to four decades of murder and terror.

When the bedraggled former leader was hauled out of a drainpipe and shot in October 2011, his death ended the bloody Nato-led civil war that had ravaged the country since the start of that year.

The full horror of his brutality has been slow to emerge, with many Libyans still fearing retaliation by those who continue to be loyal to their late leader. But it can now be revealed that the most heartbreaking of Gaddafi’s victims include hundreds, possibly thousands of teenage girls who, throughout his 42-year reign, were beaten, raped and forced to become his sex slaves.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2545819/Uncovered-The-macabre-sex-chamber-Libyas-Colonel-Gad

Right. DEFINITELY better when Gaddafi was in power.

[adigal]

168. That is the line that leapt out at me and made me realize this post was nonsense. So we should have

supported Sarah Palin because she is a woman???

If you have to say that because I support Bernie, I am on the wrong side of women's history, you may as well say that about me because I didn't vote to make Sarah Palin the first woman VP of the USA.

I vote policy, not gender. Now, if Hillary is our nominee, I will support her. But until then, I'm for Bernie and that others say that makes me against women, well, that's just absurd.

[RiverLover]

2. Funny stuff!

I especially like the part about "reinforce the gender barrier that prevents women and girls from realizing their full potential" if you don't like Hill.



As a woman, to me, this is playing the female card a little too strong. Can you say manipulative? But that's our Hillary.

[Plucketeer]

47. I LOVE women

I admire women in positions of power. I really DO think they afford new and positive facets to the world of politics. Further...

I was born of a fabulous one, am married to a great one and even sired one myself. But there's no way I'm voting for an "example" rather than an individual.

[peacebird]

109. Exactly.

[whatchamacallit]

119. + lots n/t

[juajen]

149. How have you been choosing all the me that

have been elected all these many years. I am really tired of this crap. Women with her qualifications do not come along, period. She's the best qualified of everyone running. and everybody knows this.

The opposition is throwing crap right and left to keep her out of the competition. But, ya'll go on . It's way to scary that women might just reach for the stars, let alone get elected. Who the hell do they think they are. I hope that every woman working for elections all over this country, just quits as a protest for how Hillary is being treated. I'm signing off, filled with disgust for a party given the gift that Hillary is and too stupid to unwrap it.

[frylock]

150. YOU'RE LUCKY SHE EVEN CAMPAIGNS FOR YOU BASTARDS!!!

[djean111]

3. Gee, who would have guessed - I am a woman, and I evidently fail to see that electing a woman

is more important than issues! IMO, that is about as sexist as a statement can get - not supporting Hillary has NOTHING to do with electing women. In fact, most of Bernie's supporters would have been just as happy to support Liz Warren. Who is, you know, a woman.

This election is about this country, it is not about Hillary Clinton.

Another hyperbolic OP, concerned not with the issues, but only concerned with "women's history" and Hillary.

[ladjf]

61. Now this is a beautiful post. It clearly points out the significant issues and

lampoons the distortions present in the OP. You are a good thinker and writer.

[senz]

180. + 1000

Beautifully stated.

My vote reflects my hopes for the American people, not just for a candidate. It's not a popularity contest; it's choosing the future of our country.

Therefore, the candidate I support is the one who cares more about the American people than about money, power, and ego.

[sibelian]

222. The whole "sexism" thing is really weak.

I think it's very likely to backfire really badly.

[djean111]

223. I am certainly not saying I would have supported Hillary otherwise, but the campaign

roll-out that smugly assumed that women would of course vote for her was insulting, as if we women are just Stepford voters. And it was divisive. And it was/is totally incorrect, of course. And bringing out Bill this early? Gag me. But then, I won't be watching, so there is that.

[magical thyme]

4. so I should have voted for McCain/Palin? for Fiorina?

"to help reinforce the gender barrier that prevents women and girls from realizing their full potential"

Sorry, but I'm voting on the issues. I haven't forgotten the co-President's stance on welfare reform, which hurt a lot of women, on 3 strikes, which hurt a LOT of women, on NAFTA, which hurt a LOT of women...

not to mention her close ties to her wall street constituents and her warhawk mentality.

[CoffeeCat]

5. LOL! So if we don't like warmongering, neocon corporatists...

….then we are oppressing women and on the wrong side of women's history?!



Who gives a rip about her scandals? Most of them are ridiculous and we know that those scandals are Republican-manufactured bull puckey. Why waste time on Whitewater, Benghazi and her emails, when the biggest scandals are her neocon, warmongering, corporatist ways?

Her biggest political donors are Citibank, JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs, for Pete's sake. She's for fracking and she sure as hell has never stood up for any environmental groups who are trying to fight tracking. She's against regulating the big banks and doing anything to stifle their reign of terror (see her list of corporate donors). She's got a long history of warmongering that is NO DIFFERENT than the worst neocons. She just spoke at the Brookings Institute yesterday and kow towed to the PNAC scumbags, instead of standing up to them like a real Democrat should.

I don't give a rip if a warmongering, corporatist, neocon is a man, woman or alien from some other galaxy.

It's about policies that are wrong. And everyone knows that.

Hillary Clinton is no Elizabeth Warren. And that is the problem.

[kenfrequed]

13. Indeed

Her Scandals are mostly lies and nonsense and I spent the better part of the 90's defending the Clintons and swearing terrible vengence on those that would spread such stupid and pointless lies about the Clintons.

The benghazi bullshit theories are in the same bullshit box.

The problem is that their policies were always a bit too conservative.

Now I look at the donor list and the Third Way website I decided it wasn't good enough. So I support Bernie Sanders. I don't understand why the most aggressive Hillary backers on this website don't get that.

[beam me up scottie]

15. Yep. I still have to defend her to right wingers irl.

The email and Benghazi scandals aren't why duers don't support her.

[msanthrope]

32. who gives a rip about her scandals?

Those who recommend threads about her scandals.

[mak3cats]

6. Sorry, it's 6 for 6 thinking this post is misguided...

...and that's coming from someone who has carried nominating petitions for Hillary when she was a NY senator.

[beam me up scottie]

7. Pfft. I reject Hillary because of her record, not her gender.

If you have to spend your life being an apologist maybe you should blame the product instead of the people who don't want to buy it.

I despise proselytizers who think there's something wrong with me because I won't drink the koolaid.

[kenfrequed]

8. Uhm...

When the majority of your fellow Democrats go with Bernie Sanders in New Hampshire and Vermont will you still call all of us 'Hillary Haters'?

Just wondering.

[William769]

9. The irony in this thread so far is hilarious!

[beam me up scottie]

12. What's hillaryous is expecting us to take this seriously.

People on DU aren't professional haters, we're just sick of politics as usual.

[whatchamacallit]

16. Ah... Ye old 'If you reject my argument, you validate it' fallacy

The crap icing on a crap cake.

[mak3cats]

18. ??? (Unless it's the "other's false conceptions" part)...

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irony

Full Definition of IRONY

1

: a pretense of ignorance and of willingness to learn from another assumed in order to make the other's false conceptions conspicuous by adroit questioning —called also Socratic irony

2

a: the use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of the literal meaning

b: a usually humorous or sardonic literary style or form characterized by irony

c: an ironic expression or utterance

3

a (1): incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result (2): an event or result marked by such incongruity

b: incongruity between a situation developed in a drama and the accompanying words or actions that is understood by the audience but not by the characters in the play —called also dramatic irony, tragic irony

[LondonReign2]

21. Irony

[jonno99]

122. One of the greatest movie lines ever! ("you keep using that word...").

[demwing]

188. Do you remember what the word was? /nt

[jonno99]

204. Inconceivable...

[cali]

10. ugh.

Tom Watson. .

[PowerToThePeople]

11. Nice work of fiction. n/t

[Blus4u]

14. I kick and recommend this post

NOT for the OP, but the inciteful comments of the responders.
These people make real sense!!

Peace

[JTFrog]

224. "the inciteful comments of the responders"

Whether intentional or not, you nailed it.

[99Forever]

17. Nice fresh steaming pile...

....you have there.

[greatauntoftriplets]

19. Kicking for an article that references Sisyphus.

[cyberswede]

100. pssst...wanna buy a watch?

http://www.philosophersguild.com/Sisyphus-Watch.html

[greatauntoftriplets]

102. LOL.

[stevenleser]

20. K&R, so true. And considering how Hillary supporters and other folks not fans of Bernie for

President are being alert stalked and in some cases stalked via US Mail ( http://www.democraticunderground.com/118724424 ), a brave thing to post.

[LondonReign2]

22. So to clarify, you think that not peferring Hillary

"help(s) reinforce the gender barrier that prevents women and girls from realizing their full potential?" You are agreeing with the OP we should vote for Hillary based on her gender?

[stevenleser]

23. The last time I got asked a question like that, it was from a Republican about my excitement for

Barack Obama being the first black President, as if that being a positive factor in my decision to vote for him was somehow bad.

I think you need to think about your question some more.

[LondonReign2]

24. LOL, nice dodge attempt, especially the part confabulating it as a "Republican" question.

You K&R'ed the OP. Do you agree that not voting for Hillary "help(s) reinforce the gender barrier that prevents women and girls from realizing their full potential"?

[stevenleser]

26. It's not a dodge. That is my opinion of your question. nt

[LondonReign2]

27. So do you agree with the OP that not voting for Hillary

"help(s) reinforce the gender barrier that prevents women and girls from realizing their full potential"?

[mak3cats]

52. ***Crickets*** (eom)

[99Forever]

72. I think he's asking his cronies at Fox Snooze what to say..

[DeadLetterOffice]

211. jury results

On Fri Sep 11, 2015, 01:44 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

I think he's asking his cronies at Fox Snooze what to say..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=582863

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Associating a DU member with Fox is beyond the pale. We are Democrats here and that is noting but a bullying tactic.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Sep 11, 2015, 01:54 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Oh puh-lease.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[retrowire]

53. 40 minutes later he's still dodging. I love it when that happens. n/t

[stevenleser]

206. My opinion in #23 and #26 hasn't changed. Sorry you all were waiting so long but there was

no reason to do so.

I'm not changing my opinion because you don't like the answer.

[LondonReign2]

217. It's not that we don't like your answer, it's that you failed to give an answer

You've stepped in a hole and can't figure out how to get yourself out. No probs, Steve, I'll help you out.

Rather than dodge, here's what you should have said: "If all other things were equal, I would be excited about the chance to vote for a woman for POTUS. However, the OP's claim that not voting for Hillary hold back all woman? That's some really stupid stuff there."

You're welcome. If you need some help coming up with non-Colmesian answers on Fox I'm here to help.

[Logical]

240. Don't you need to prep for a Fox News appearance? Nt

[bvf]

25. "some cases"?

I doubt anyone around here at this point is still unaware of the U.S. Mail episode you're referring to with the link.

You mean this happened again?

[beam me up scottie]

49. Read his op blaming Bernie supporters for it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110718441

[leftofcool]

57. If the shoe fits.

But don't you worry yourself about it. The postal inspector is on it, as well as a few others. I hear Bernie may even be getting a copy of it.

[beam me up scottie]

59. Which shoe is that?

Care to elaborate about which supporters are guilty and of what?

[frylock]

151. You're all on notice. Please make no attempt to leave the forum.

[beam me up scottie]

153. That's something, isn't it?

Accused of guilt by association, tried in absentia and sentenced to hearing about this every time we disagree with a HC supporter.

[frylock]

157. You knew they were going to use that despicable letter as a cudgel against Sanders supporters.

[beam me up scottie]

158. Of course.

It's easier than discussing the issues, I guess.

[revmclaren]

207. Oh yes...

copy sent.

Have to do my part too.

[bvf]

67. I did, thanks.

I don't expect an edit from him here, although that would be the honest thing to do.

ETA:

OTOH, I did expect the crickets.

[cali]

28. I've been alert stalked for years here

And your fellow Hillary supporters are the worst offenders now. And yes, I know this for a fact; a forum host sent me an IM about it.

[SouthernProgressive]

31. Post your IM. It simply isn't believable on face value.

With ninety percent of this board supporting one person, you are making a claim to the impossible. You claim you have proof. I say you don't.

[beam me up scottie]

35. I've served on several juries for cali, she's telling the truth.

Last time the alerter blatantly lied about cali's post in order to get a hide.

[SouthernProgressive]

37. I don't believe she is.

She says she has facts but will not share them. Triangulation at it's best. If one is going to make the false claim she is, they should back it up. It is on her. Your comments have absolutely nothing to do with alert stalking and cannot be sold as you are trying. Anecdotal evidence as to why alert stalking is a fact. I'm learning more and more about how people understand "facts." Pretty comical.

[beam me up scottie]

38. What's "comical" is claiming HC supporters are being persecuted.

While denying that bullshit alerts on Bernie's supporters don't exist.

And coming from someone with such broad experience, knowledge and wisdom of DU it's especially laughable.

Stick around, maybe you'll learn something.

[SouthernProgressive]

43. "HC supporters are being persecuted."

You do understand that your comment here has nothing to do with my post or the one I was responding to. Not one single thing. Deflection is often the last refuge for a foolish comment. Impressive. I see you have added nothing more to back up the claim you or the other poster are making. It might take a minute for you to think about this concept, but one can read this board for as long as they want without signing up. Surprised you aren't aware of that. Or was it just a cute little thing you were doing in order to back up from your original claim.

[beam me up scottie]

48. Mmmhmmmm.

Just playing along with the current meme.

Bernie supporters are evil, we alert stalk and rig the jury system.

Absolute power and all that noise.

Rah rah go team!

[SouthernProgressive]

51. Nice to see the honesty that your comments weren't about the issue the other poster brought up.....

without backing up. Moved on to something about memes now. I love it. I'm not sure what you post here has to do with anything I was addressing with the other poster. The thought process is transparent.

[beam me up scottie]

55. Lol, wut?

You're not making any sense.

But do go on.

I'm dying to hear more about my curious behaviour.

[SouthernProgressive]

88. It's actually a very easy line of thought.

Not hard to see. Did you see the other poster was not able to back up their claim. Wasn't that the conversation you jumped in on? Would you like to change your thoughts on the actual topic after the poster fell back on what they claimed?

[beam me up scottie]

91. Back up your own claim that "ninety percent of the board supports Sanders"

I'll wait.

[SouthernProgressive]

94. It is abundantly clear that you will show me respect if I make claims and don't back them up.

I still can't figure out what you are doing here. Why interject yourself into a conversation just to try to move it off topic?

[beam me up scottie]

95. I'm simply pointing out your hypocrisy. Now can you back it up or not?

And this is DU where anyone can reply to anyone else, your characterization of me "interjecting" myself into the conversation is ridiculous.

Now back to that 90 percent, I know you're concerned about facts since you said you were "learning more and more about how people understand "facts."", so do you have any to back up your claim?

[SouthernProgressive]

98. It's clear from your first post to me that you were deflecting.

It truly had nothing to do with pointing out hypocrisy as you are now claiming. You are simply all over the map. Do you think the other poster should back up their claim or not? That was the topic when you attempted to hijack it. I see you aren't being serious here so I will tell you to have fun by yourself. I am laughing my ass off at the original assertion by the other poster and their complete failure to back it up. What is even more amusing is that you are here fighting for them. It's given me a good smile.

[beam me up scottie]

104. "She says she has facts but will not share them." Sound familiar?

She says she has facts but will not share them. Triangulation at it's best. If one is going to make the false claim she is, they should back it up. It is on her.

You said 90% of the board supports Bernie, can you back that up or not?

It's put up or shut up time.

[jeff47]

170. Well, Cali was just alert stalked into silence,

and BMUS just got a bullshit alert for the post above.

You need a hand with that third nail? Or would you like to pontificate some more about how rough it is on Clinton supporters?

[SouthernProgressive]

171. The offenses are public thanks to the owners of this site.

I would have voted to hide each one. The jurors did their jobs in my opinion. No need for such hostility. Once again, zero to back up the "alert stalking claim." I alerted on none of their posts nor was I a juror on any of them.

[jeff47]

174. Then stop being hostile.

Since you're so new, you are probably unaware that disagreeing with you is not grounds for hiding or alerting on posts. Perhaps you should actually become familiar with our community before attempting to lecture on what our community standards are.

[SouthernProgressive]

189. I have been reading here for two years.

I have not been hostile. Those hides are the predictable outcome when one fights something that doesn't exist. The poster themselves said they had proof and have yet to show it. I'm over it at this point and have moved on. You are the only reason I'm commenting again. Respect for the fact you deserve a response. Thanks.

[jeff47]

197. Excellent demonstration that you don't actually know.

Those hides are the predictable outcome when one fights something that doesn't exist.

Yeah, not something that's actually against community standards. Otherwise, lots and lots of other posts would be hidden. Like yours in this thread where you made claims you just couldn't quite back up.

Should we hide those posts of yours too?

[jeff47]

175. AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

On Thu Sep 10, 2015, 04:01 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

What's "comical" is claiming HC supporters are being persecuted.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=582754

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Is it necessary to make personal attacks based on how long someone has been at DU?

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Sep 10, 2015, 04:11 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: People need to stop alerting on everything. This was not a personal attack.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It's just an opinion right or wrong.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Trying to balance the scales on alert trolling?
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Now, let's hear more about how only Clinton supporters are alert trolled.

[beam me up scottie]

177. WTF? That's like the 10th bullshit alert in the last week - that I know of.

It's not enough that they baited cali into a hide and silenced her now they're going after anyone who defends her too.

At least the alerter gets a time out for their trouble, just like the last one who tried to get my post hidden.

So sick of this bullshit.


Thanks, jeff.

[jeff47]

178. :hat-tip: (nt)

[polly7]

183. Oopsie!!!!

Someone can't alert for a whole day.



[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[beam me up scottie]

192. Yep!

Go sit in the corner!

[jfern]

200. Hillary supporters love to cry the victim card

While trying to get posts they don't agree with hidden.

[cali]

64. I'll look for it. And sorry but I don't make things up.

I suspect you are projecting your habits on to me

[SouthernProgressive]

68. I'm clearly not projecting as you haven't backed up your claim in any way.

How in the world do you get projection from that? You make a claim with nothing to back it up. Your claim flies in the face of common sense(ninety percent of the board supports Sanders). Then you deflect by claiming projection. I beginning to think this is a parody. Just not sure what it is a parody of.

[beam me up scottie]

73. "a claim with nothing to back it up"? You mean like "ninety percent of the board supports Sanders"?

Care to post your proof of that?

[cali]

69. here's one- not the one I was thinking of, but I have lots of examples

of the type of bullshit alerts that hillary fans send on even the most innocuous of my posts. You can apologize now for your accusation.that I'm lying

FYI...they're after you.
AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
On Sat Dec 6, 2014, 11:04 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

yikes. what are they thinking? Hillary PAC puts out country music vid "Stand with Hillary"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025915201

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Don't want to add an explanation. Correct the record in the thread, not by alerting.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Then ask the OP to get a better link.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is not alert worthy. Leave the correct link/video in the comments. Honestly, I think this alert is just a mere attempt to get Cali's post hidden.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sorry, I can't vote to hide. Alerter's true link 'giwkp01 etc.' is included in the alerted-on post.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Are you fucking kidding with this alert?
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Cali, do your homework on your Hillary hate.

[SouthernProgressive]

70. That doesn't back up your claim in any way at all.

Might want to revisit your previous claim about projection after claiming this is your evidence. lol.

[cali]

75. bullshit. it certainly does, but you're not honorable enough to admit you're wrong

As one of the jury members states, it's an attempt to get my post hidden. And it couldn't be clearer that there is no basis for alerting. I'll be posting anymore examples. This happens every day, sometimes several times a day. Utterly baseless alerts.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Don't want to add an explanation. Correct the record in the thread, not by alerting.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Then ask the OP to get a better link.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is not alert worthy. Leave the correct link/video in the comments. Honestly, I think this alert is just a mere attempt to get Cali's post hidden.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sorry, I can't vote to hide. Alerter's true link 'giwkp01 etc.' is included in the alerted-on post.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Are you fucking kidding with this alert?
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Cali, do your homework on your Hillary hate.

[SouthernProgressive]

76. Keep going. This is good.

How this is proof of alert stalking as you claim is funny. I do appreciate the smile. You won't be posting anymore examples of alert stalking? You would have to post one in order for their to be more. lol.

[William769]

143. Would you believe this OP was alerted on?

It survived a jury 1-6.

I know what alert stalking is first hand.

[jeff47]

172. So does Cali. She just got #5 from a bogus alert.

Oh, I also was just on a jury for a BMUS post in this thread.

Now, tell me again how this all flows only in one direction.

[LondonReign2]

83. War is peace. East is west

[SouthernProgressive]

85. war is peace is a little tricky.

East and west a little more cut and dry.

[LondonReign2]

90. You can do it. Refuse to be bound by reality, I always say!

[SouthernProgressive]

96. I know, right.

I'm being alert stalked and have proof!!!!!!!!!! I just can't show you the proof I have!!!!!

The reality of some is pretty comical.

[polly7]

99. You probably haven't been here long enough to have served on a lot of juries.

It becomes apparent after a little while, when the same person's posts are alerted on and you're called on as a jury member and you scratch your head wondering wtf?

Give yourself some time, it takes more than a few weeks to figure things out ......

[SouthernProgressive]

108. Simple process. I know enough to know the results are emailed.

Can you show the litany of alerts on the poster who made the claim? What you are saying is actually extremely easy to back up according to your own comments. This keeps being said, along with the fact that it is "the same person's posts are alerted on and you're called on as a jury member and you scratch your head wondering wtf," while knowing these comments have actual emails to back them up. You are now making the claim of alert stalking that from your own post is verifiable if you wanted to do it. Show the email of all of these posts you have been called to be a juror on where the alert goes to one person. So simple to actually back up the claim you are making.

All I did was ask the original poster to back up a claim that they clearly stated they had evidence of. Now through their own admission they don't have what they claimed. It just isn't there.

[polly7]

116. I often go in and delete my junk emails after I read them

so they're probably long gone. Sorry.

And ......... I don't take orders.

But seriously, a few weeks on any board where you don't know the members, the dynamics .... you're completely flailing around here and not really even making sense. People have told you of their experiences - you don't believe. No problem. Why are you going on and on and on and on and on about it?

Patience.

[LondonReign2]

134. Oh oh, don't look up

[cali]

89. member since August 26, 2015

Lol

[Puglover]

97. No kidding.

Move along. Nothing to see here.

[beam me up scottie]

74. Don't bother, cali. They're baiting you.

Anything to get you another hide, that's how the game is played.

Others have seen the evidence and commented on it.

[polly7]

78. It sure is !!!!

And cali is right, I've also served on juries for her that had me wondering why anyone would alert on them. There are definitely a few posters here who are on the get-rid-of list, and cali is one of them. I don't think some appreciate her directness and honesty, imho.

[beam me up scottie]

79. Hey you!!!

Glad you're back!



Don't let them get to you again, if the newbies are already going after cali you won't be far behind.

[polly7]

86. Ty, bmus.

I don't blame anyone but myself for my hides, I posted knowing they would be and don't regret a single word I said, but good advice, and I might even consider it lol.

[beam me up scottie]

111. Good for you! Most of us know how to dodge a jury and sometimes we get caught.

It's so much easier to blame others for our own bad behaviour.

I've only had two hidden posts, both were 4-3 to hide and one was totally worth it (I called out a homophobe).

I'm no saint!

[cali]

82. you're right. It's obvious I'm not the liar.

[beam me up scottie]

87. They haven't backed up their claim that "ninety percent of the board supports Sanders" yet.

I can't imagine why.

[whatthehey]

113. I'm not "they" but that's easy.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251573953

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026592890


Yah yah we all know self selected internet insufficient options unscientific yada yada.

But when you have two consistent results in unrestricted (in either time or access) polls months apart with hundreds of responses the options for them not being close at least on a relastve basis to overall DU opinion are

a) widespread machinations of concerted efforts among DUers to post inaccurate preferences on purpose (why? how?)

b) in both cases, for the several days that the polls were prominently displayed, a huge swathe of Clinton supporters were simultaneously absent or otherwise unwilling/unable to post (how? why?)

If they had hugely separate results we could discard both, but together, and with no hint of push poll techniques, they support a reasonably confident inference that Sanders has a roughly 9-1 ratio of support over Clinton on DU.

[beam me up scottie]

115. Bzzzzzzt! That's not 90% of the board. Try again.

And SouthernProgressive should be along shortly to scold you for "interjecting" yourself into the conversation.

Because they're not a hypocrite.

[whatthehey]

118. It's 90% who expressed a prefernce; why should we assume the rest differ greatly?

There is an obvious overwhelming prefernce in posts, and in polls, very consistent polls with hundreds of responses, that suggest 90/10. What's the evidence they are wrong or misleading?

[beam me up scottie]

121. Why should I assume anything? I'm asking for proof of a claim.

They were all over cali for supposedly not backing up her claim (even though she did) so why should SP be held to a different standard?

[whatthehey]

128. And that is good inductive support for that claim

We have hundreds of data suggesting a 9/1 split, zero suggesting anything different. Deductive proof in this case is impossible practically speaking and all the inductive support is for 9/1. This matches a normal "gut check" subjective review of posts for further, albeiut weak, inductive support.

At some point a decision has to be made to either assume two exactly matched hundreds strong polls are realistic, are massively improbable repeated outliers, or the result of a huge and complex hoax for no apparent reason. Trying to suggest anything but the former with no competing evidence is like trying to seek definitive proof every evening that your car will start tomorrow when it has been very reliable to date before you set the alarm for a normal commute time.

[beam me up scottie]

129. Again, I'm waiting for SouthernProgressive to back up their claim.

I'm clearly not projecting as you haven't backed up your claim in any way.

How in the world do you get projection from that? You make a claim with nothing to back it up. Your claim flies in the face of common sense(ninety percent of the board supports Sanders). Then you deflect by claiming projection. I beginning to think this is a parody. Just not sure what it is a parody of.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=582841

If you can't help then we've nothing to discuss.

[SouthernProgressive]

93. Whatever you want to call it to feel better.

You made a claim. Said you had evidence to back it up. And then failed to produce the evidence. It's actually very simple.

[cali]

101. not only did I provide evidence, 2 longtime duers backed.me up.

You are new here, very new. You are in no position to talk about board dynamics as you are so very new to du.

Oh yeah, and welcome to du

[beam me up scottie]

110. They think that "I don't believe you" = proof you're wrong.

That's what's really "comical".

[msanthrope]

34. Kindly post said evidence. nt

[Admiral Loinpresser]

92. Yeah, I started getting

some really weird, unjustified alerts from a Hillary Backer. It goes on both sides. It's crazy. To say one side is blameless is not true.

[beam me up scottie]

107. It does go both ways, you're right.

I have served on so many juries lately where the alerter just wants to shut down the conversation.

It's ridiculous.

[merrily]

130. "in some caseS," plural. Ugh.

[bvf]

140. Glad to see someone else caught that too.

Ugly, right?

[SouthernProgressive]

29. Comments back up how much you actually nailed this one. lol. nt.

[LondonReign2]

33. Also, up is down and black is white

[SouthernProgressive]

36. Up is down is a little tricky.

Black and white is a little more cut and dry.

[BlueCaliDem]

39. K&R, William769. Good post!

[William769]

136. Thank you.

[Armstead]

40. So I guess you'd vote for Carly Fiorina as your second choice

[Android3.14]

41. The Sad, Sisyphean Struggle of Christmas Warriors

[NorthCarolina]

42. If a person

prefers a candidate other than Hillary solely on the basis of their politics, does that person automatically "hate" Hillary?

So, the tens of thousands that show up for Bernie rally's are ALL folks that unequivocally hate Hillary... simply because they back another candidate that fits their political style better?

Got it. So much hate, so little time.

[retrowire]

56. exactly, i do not hate Hillary

I love Bernie! Clinton is a heck of a fighter for women's rights and as a male feminist, I support that! I find her thxbox gifts of household products a bit sexist and bribe-ish but that is another matter.

point is, Hillary is a good politician, great even. but presidential material, she is not. not in my book.

[NorthCarolina]

58. So then,

why do you Hate Hillary?

Just kidding....

[retrowire]

60. haha oh you.

you going to see Bernie in Greensboro, NC this Sunday?

[frylock]

159. They start off all those Sanders rallies with a Two-Minute Hate with Hillary's face on the screen..

it's very cathartic.

[stupidicus]

44. the sad and masochistic ways of the Hillary Lovers

is generally speaking, on full dispay with most of their selling efforts.

A person could hardly be blamed for thinking that she's the first female Messiah, and achieved perfection (or a suitable level of it for the title) previously only attributed to males, given the way all criticisms are transmuted into hate, etc, by her certainly enamored and often ecclesiatical-like minions. This is no doubt why they, like a HUckabee or a Davis, can't see the huge logical flaw in proposing that opposition to her somehow leads inexorably and only to motivated patriarchs or supporters thereof.

Do you know anyone like that?

Then there are always the more profoundly stupid, that lack the mental/integrity acuity to resolve the rightwing critiques and leftwing critiques into the two separate and distinct things that they are, usually in both origin/motive and substance.

[TwilightGardener]

46. Weird stuff. I love how it always comes back to gender, too. If Hillary wins, all women win!

If Hillary loses, all women lose! Um...no.

[beam me up scottie]

50. PUMA speak.

New and improved for 2016!

[frylock]

160. 20% more bullshit!

[DemocraticWing]

62. If you actually think I'm sexist for supporting Bernie for President, then I give up

There's no fucking point to politics anymore. I could talk about being a feminist but I don't think that will help anything.

I've said repeatedly I'll gladly vote for Hillary is she's the nominee. I like Hillary Clinton, I even support her to an extent. The tarring and feathering of left-wing Democrats for supporting the only admitted socialist in major American politics is amazing. God forbid we have the same political views as a Presidential candidate.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

66. Voting for someone because of their gender = voting against someone because of their gender.

[mak3cats]

106. Excellent observation! (eom)

[LeftOfWest]

167. This.

well said.

[polichick]

63. Once you call your critics "haters" you've lost the debate.

[Garrett78]

65. Clinton is helping to "reinforce the gender barrier."

Sign up now and the Clinton marketing team will send you cleaning products, cosmetics and a pink outfit for your avatar. Gee, that's not promoting gender stereotypes. No, not at all. Being a woman no more makes you a champion of women than being black makes Ben Carson a champion of persons of color.

I support Jill Stein. I support Elizabeth Warren. And many other women. I think it's downright criminal that we've never had a woman POTUS. 44 presidencies and not a single woman in spite of women making up approximately half the population. The US is incredibly patriarchal, and I hope like hell the barrier will be broken.

But, as I've said many times before, there is a valid leftist critique of Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden and Barack Obama and so on. Such as Clinton's many ties to Beacon Global Strategies, other defense contractors, the massive donations from big banks, Burson-Marsteller, Corrections Corporation of America, and on and on and on.

You might say she's being pragmatic, she's doing what she has to do in order to win, and she's still the lesser evil. But when does it end? When do you take a stand and say enough is enough?

[Hatchling]

235. Really?

I could use some cleaning products.

[libodem]

77. Who you callin' a sissy?

[img][/img]

[Kelvin Mace]

81. Strawwoman argument

Would vote for Warren without a second thought. Her sex is irrelevant, it's her past choices, decisions, and the company she keeps.

[Warren DeMontague]

84. what I think is weird is the singlular fixation some people seem to have on her, that she alone

is the only possible vanguard to break the glass ceiling and finally put a woman in the White House.

A lot of people who express varying degrees of reservation (aka "haters"?) around HRC as primary candidate, were extremely enthusiastic boosters of one Elizabeth Warren to get in the race- how that gels with widespread misogyny and gender bias as motivator behind Hillary antipathy from those folks, I've yet to see a remotely coherent explanation.

No, what seems to me is that it is some people who- for some reason- have got it in their heads that Hillary specifically represents something to them, something beyond simply long-overdue equality for women in the highest office in the land.

Something that would NOT be satisfied by having Liz Warren take the same spot. Because Warren, for some reason, doesn't represent on a fundamental, maybe subconscious level, whatever it is that Hillary does.

Maybe it's 'payback' for 2008, maybe it's 'payback' for .....something else- some personal slight in her supporters' lives, some long-simmering grudge... but for whatever reason, it's GOTTA be Hillary. No. one. else. will. do.


I don't understand it, it's above my psychoanalytical armchair pay grade.

[Autumn]

105. In order for women and girls to realize their full potential I must vote for Hillary

or I am on the wrong side of history?? Now I'm sad.





Nah not really.

[Lisa D]

114. Great article!

Love the photo!

[William769]

127. And the hits jst keep comming in this thread.

I swear comedy rights itself!

[AlbertCat]

117. “Being a Clinton apologist is a hard life.”

I love fantasy fiction, don't you?

It's so silly and usually fun.... but not much fun in this case even tho' it's supremely silly.

[beam me up scottie]

124. Religious apologists got nuthin on the author!

Waiting for the film 'Hillary: Persecuted Messiah' starring Kirk Cameron as the man who wouldn't leave anyone behind!

[pinebox]

126. LOL This is hilarious

However what isn't hilarious is this---

Hillary being propped up by the for profit private prison industry http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/24/1405229/-Private-Prison-Corporations-Stand-With-Hillary-Clinton

Hillary's biggest donors are big banks http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jul/07/facebook-posts/meme-says-hillary-clintons-top-donors-are-banks-an/

Hillary's stance on LGBT rights which recently have changed http://gawker.com/remember-when-hillary-clinton-was-against-gay-marriage-1714147439

On and on it goes. I want a candidate who isn't bought and paid for unlike Hillary, who can answer questions when they're asked and doesn't waver in their position like a weather vane when the wind blows.

Let's examine this for a moment shall we?

One stands out, the other 3 are all quite similar.

I know where I stand and who I support.



And how about this?



Why would you support a candidate who is more closely aligned with Republicans of the Bob Dole era than progressives like Elizabeth Warren today?

[upaloopa]

154. Most people don't see the world through your

paradigm.
You define Hillary for yourself no one else.

[pinebox]

214. I define Hillary with facts

and yes, most see her as I do. Besides Palin, she is the most polarizing figure in politics and my view is backed up with her numbers for being "untrustworthy".

You think gridlock is bad now? If she's elected it will be the biggest Roto Rooter wet dream you've ever seen.

[upaloopa]

218. You select the facts you want

We all do. You define her in the way you need her to be for your purposes. We all do that.

[pinebox]

219. Facts are facts

and what matters is integrity. Why support a candidate who is embroiled in controversy and is backed up by some very shady entities? Do we really want a candidate who's to the right of Obama on things? As I said, she's more closely related to Bob Dole era Republicans than anything else.

[upaloopa]

220. I agree facts are facts but most of the time we

have our own facts. A man sees what he wants to see and disregards the rest.

[sibelian]

221. You've essentially just posted "there is no truth" three times in a row.

The value of this argument is to place the entire concept "truth" as something nebulous and beyond the reach of mere mortals.

Very useful for people who have no facts on their side.

[McCamy Taylor]

141. Most admired woman a gazillion times. The haters are NOT the majority.

[Hiraeth]

145. lol ... irony. Now that you blocked me from the Hillary group I will unsubscribe. Kind of hard to be

a member of a group that blocks you.

[upaloopa]

152. Why would you want to be a part of a group

that has it's purpose for being to support someone you don't support? The groups are set up so like minded people can talk together without input from those who are not like minded. Did you not know that?

[Hiraeth]

156. I guess you think that because It shows the bernie group on my profile you think I can't also like

Hillary. Is that where you are coming from with your attitude?

Honestly, people here need to take a chill pill.

This place is hostile all around. It really is not conducive to intelligent discourse.

Can you all not see what has become of this place?

I have not been here long but, if these past few months are any indication very few people on here are worth the attempt to try and converse.

The decorum around here has devolved into general melee all over the board.

Sheesh.

[upaloopa]

162. The groups are not for intelligent discourse

They are to support each other
GDP is for intelligent discourse

[Hiraeth]

163. LOL ... got it.

really did laugh out loud.

Because after what I went through today with the two groups it is just hilarious. Thanks for the laugh.

The whole thing is funny to me because I thought I was a member but, I think you have to be a "member" and know some secret handshake or something because some "members" are more important than other members.

There must be some secret roster somewhere with all the "real members".

The rest of us are just .... for kicking around.

[upaloopa]

164. Well we really do have those too

[Hiraeth]

176. I believe it ... probably via PMs. (haha) But, really ... I found it educational to be told by

by a "member"

that color makes no difference in today's USA especially in light of what has happened with bravenak.

[upaloopa]

181. No not via PM's

[upaloopa]

182. I did not say anything about color

Don't make shit up

I see lately attempts to define people based on made up bull shit why is that?
I think it is because the person has no grounds to say what they do and it is a disparate attempt to create what doesn't exist.

[Hiraeth]

184. I was not talking about what you said. I was talking about what happened with me today.

First in one group and then in another group and Yes, PMs were involved.

I am not making up shit. I can provide links and copies of PMs if you need. Name names, if you want me to do so.

What do I care. I am the newbie here. The Johnny Come Lately. The New Kid in Town.

I am the one with no dog in this fight. I just came to watch the mudslinging and some got thrown on me too.

but, Hey that is what I get for watching a mud fight, yes.

[upaloopa]

185. I am a believer in the idea that we all see

the world through our different paradigms. We all see the same thing but we interpret it differently.

[Hiraeth]

186. I can agree with that.

[ibegurpard]

146. I don't give a shit about her "scandals"

I care about her votes, what issues she focuses on, and what policy she has championed. All versus what she says now.

[Jamaal510]

147. K&R

[artislife]

179. What would the h supporter post

If they couldn't post about how victimized H is? Or how she is a "fighter", or that she is a grandmother.

I always wonder where she would be in the national dialogue if her husband hadn't been elected president. The cascading events that followed are altered by that very fact. Not that she didn't work it and seize opportunity and stradegize. She also go the education.


But~~

Sarah Palin did it all on her own. That is a mighty girl, even if she has bat shit crazy stands on issues.

And neither one of them is anywhere near my top 5 list to vote for.

But spare me, a woman, the

how awful is it to be on the wrong side of women’s history, to help reinforce the gender barrier that prevents women and girls from realizing their full potential?

[Hiraeth]

187. and the truly ironic irony of the fact that a man said this:

how awful is it to be on the wrong side of women’s history, to help reinforce the gender barrier that prevents women and girls from realizing their full potential?

I believe it is called mansplaining, right?

[artislife]

190. Yup nt

[restorefreedom]

191. hating someone's policies

even despising them is NOT the same as hating a person.

sorry some of us are not getting in line to genuflect...doesn.t make us haters

but i can see how some of the inevitability types could see it that way, as the "big lead" keeps circling the drain.

when this is all you have left to stand on, it doesn't bode well for your candidate, fyi.

[merrily]

193. These threads get uglier and uglier. Sad.

[sadoldgirl]

194. Gee, I suppose I have to apologize

for voting for Obama during the 08 primaries.

What a silly and flame baiting OP.

[Cha]

195. How frustrating is it to expend so much time and mental energy bashing, bashing, bashing, only to

have Hillary come back stronger than ever?"

So True! Hillary only comes back Stronger!

Bring it on Haters!

Mahalo for this from #HillaryMen, William~

[DisgustipatedinCA]

198. Are you referring to your own screeds about Hillary Clinton being an untrustworthy liar?

or are you referring to someone whose position has not yet...evolved?

Edited to add a link to Zidzi/Cha's post so that people understand the reference.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5692646#5699056.

[beam me up scottie]

201. Better post the link or someone will try to hide your post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5692646

[DisgustipatedinCA]

202. Thanks. I guess it's a sign of the times when you can't quote people on the self-same website...

...where they originally posted the words in question.

[cherokeeprogressive]

213. According to you, in April of 2008 Hillary Clinton was...

A morally depraved, tenacious liar.

Heap big turnaround.

[AgingAmerican]

196. Another thread bashing Bernie and his supporters?

Say it isn't so!

More projection.

[Cha]

199. Go Hillary!

[Bonobo]

203. A day does not go by without "Hillary Hater" meme posted here.

It's a sad bit of whining, it really is.

[Marrah_G]

205. yup- it's primary season

Everyone is sure their candidate is being picked on by the evil opposition.

[cherokeeprogressive]

208. Did you just call me a sisy? (Did he just call me a sisy?) I feel like you're calling me a sisy.

Why would you call me a sisy?

"Accomplishments"? By the time Syria and Libya are finished dealing with Secretary Clinton's foreign policy "accomplishments"; the best and brightest (those that haven't already been killed) will have fled the country and there will be little if no hope for either place.

Stop calling me a sisy.

[bernmobile2016]

209. I cant even believe you posted this

So anyone whose a woman and runs for president by your own statement deserves to be elected President? How obtuse is that? Let me clue you and Hillary supporters why a conservative such as myself is crossing the aisle to not vote for Hillary but to vote for Bernie Sanders. Hillary has done the damage to herself. I don't listen to CNN, MSNBC, or Foxnews as they are all about sensationalism. I get my news from MULTIPLE news sources of actual news stations from around the country, and not from liberalnewsnow.com or teapartymuststopobama.com, etc. Hillary has had NO true message that she has coalesced around. Hillary's campaign is so stale and her managers/handlers haven't a clue to make her more "human" to the average voter. She has universal name recognition, BUT that in itself is the problem... she has not in any way, shape, or form re-invented herself to make her seem "fresh". Also, she could have won the nomination outright by coming out back in the beginning of the year and held a press conference to answer any and all question about the emails, and Benghazi and done it until reporters ran out of questions and thus would have showed true leadership and that she isn't cowering from anything..but Nooooooo. She wanted to "control" the situation and it instead blew up in her face in an epic way, adding more fuel to the "untrustworthy" claims against her... more proof of an incompetent campaign.

Hillary is tolerated..to a point. Bernie is LOVED.. that is the difference between the two. Hillary no matter if she spent a billion dollars on trying to sound "renewed" and "changed" she would not have people going out of their way to vote for her as Bernie Sanders already has done. Bernie's movement is basically the 2016 version of the 2008 Ron Paul campaign, but on a far more popular level. Paul himself made valid truthful arguments and won loyalty and brought in new voters for the GOP.. and then the GOP in their dumbest mistake in modern history killed the libertarian movement (with the help of the tea party's rapid swing to the extremist right) which had it allowed to continue, would have resulted in countless more victories for the GOP and the Democrats would have nowhere near the power they do now as Libertarians pulled in a ton of moderate and liberal new GOP voters. And now, we are seeing the Democratic version of the Libertarian movement but this time its socialism. And for many people, they simply have had it with being squeezed so tightly financially. And that is why Bernie, and not Hillary is winning over new legions of voters. He knew what worked and made it his badge of honor. Hillary just acts like she is entitled. And in an anti-establishment election cycle, she made a campaign killer decision by allowing PAC'S and big money to donate to her as it simply proves where her loyalty lies. She can try and smoothly talk about being in it for the average man and woman, but her connections to big investors and banks and elitists throw her into the ring of hypocrisy. Also trying to have her force the party to limit debates just emphasizes the point of her being out of touch and afraid to confront any issues anyone has with her. It says in yet another way that once again she is trying to hide something.

You can vote for and support whoever you want. But in the end, Hillary is going to lose this election cycle due to her making poor decisions and not being more direct, up front, and honest about where she stands on any/all issues. Every single day she tries to avoid any media spotlight through hard core interviews, she digs her political grave even deeper. Bernie Sanders may not have all the answers but at least we do see him out there and taking on anyone and everyone with a question, vs Hillary whose always acting so distant and shadowy.

[sibelian]

225. Welcome to DU!

[840high]

229. ....x10+

[Cha]

210. KICK

[eridani]

212. I'm a TPP hater, a hater of endless war, a Keystone XL hater and a bankster hater myself n/t

[Cha]

216. Hillary only comes back stronger!

[HassleCat]

228. Stronger than ever

Might want to change that to, "...strong enough to outlast Sanders and get the nomination."

[Maedhros]

233. The problem with your post, and probably your entire political awareness,

is that you are unable to discern the difference between calculated Republican obstruction (i.e. Benghazi!) and actual principled objection to policy (i.e. disgust at Hillary's appointing private prison lobbyists as fundraising bundlers). Thus, you smear all opponents of Hillary's policies with the "hater" label.

This is disingenuous, and you know it, so the transparency of your attempt to disparage Hillary's opponents with these assertions is all the more ludicrous.

[mike_c]

236. it's no struggle at all....

I rarely give Senator Clinton a thought. I wrote her off years ago.

I do have something of an advantage, I think, in that I also disposed of my television many years ago. I'm not subjected to the musings of pundits or the political reporting news cycle. Frankly, I think turning off the squawking box is one of the most politically effective things we can do. It quiets the din and gives me some head space to think.

[Jason Huh]

237. Kick

+Rec. Hear hear!

[akbacchus_BC]

239. Just because people do not agree with Mrs. Clinton's policies, they are haters.

Please, try something different.

[Logical]

241. Desperate much? Nt