This primary season is not some morality play

[upaloopa]

We don't have good vs evil here

We shouldn't portray it as such

[JonLeibowitz]

1. Thank you for the post, and the opinion.

I, and many others, however, do think there is an element of good and evil at play in selecting our nominee.

You are free to differ, but I do not take kindly to orders.

Thank you and have a good night.

[NCTraveler]

36. Where is the "order?" Nt

[Scootaloo]

2. Oh good. I'm glad to hear that you guys will be stopping.

Welcome back aboard the reality train.

[ibegurpard]

3. Yeah no shit

[Renew Deal]

6. I'm pretty sure he was talking to you.

[Scootaloo]

8. In error, obviously n/t

[daleanime]

4. Maybe not, but we do have.....

Less and More.

I'm very much in favor of More.

[WillyT]

5. I Think Morality Is Very Much At Play Here

As with every voter's vote.

[Punkingal]

13. Yeah, really!

[tk2kewl]

48. I'd hope people make moral decisions when they vote

[Juicy_Bellows]

7. I am not so sure of that. I feel morality and ethics are very much in play. nt.

[CajunBlazer]

9. That's what you get when people act more emotionally than logically

No insult intended. Just an observation.

[upaloopa]

16. I don't put any stock in what Bernie supporters

post here.

It's been evident in the past six months that they are not seeing things clearly

To be kind

[Kentonio]

25. So why would you imagine they pay any attention to your opinion?

When you have no interest in theirs?

[upaloopa]

42. I have no control over wether thy pay any attention to my opinion. They are just wrong about

Hillary and I don't give any weight to what they say.

[bobbobbins01]

10. Of course it is.

Nothing is ever black and white though. Seeing the nuance in things is supposed to be part of what makes the Democratic party so great. That said, I do think the differences between candidates both morally and in policy are pretty stark.

[sibelian]

11. That's nice.

Let's hope our newfound mutual understanding doesn't rapidly degenerate into mindless violence.

[Live and Learn]

12. Maybe not good vs evil but definitley moral vs highly questionable morals.

If you don't see that yet, I can't really help you.

[upaloopa]

15. I don't want your help

Nor do I want to see the world through your paradigm.

[zalinda]

17. Then don't ever become poor, or you will see it. eom

[upaloopa]

18. I've been homeless

I was raised poor

I have been up and down many times.

This is what I learned

When you are down you have to try things to get back up. There is no guarantee that what you try will work but you try something different .

If you don't try you have a guarantee you won't get back up.

[zalinda]

26. Some people have no where to go.

As an example: I am 67 and disabled. I receive $758 a month. I cannot have more than a certain amount in the bank. I cannot have a new car, even if I was given one. I cannot even receive monetary help with my expenses. Why? I will be thrown off disability and receive only social security of $111 a month. I am locked in tight in my poverty, and will never be able to get out unless there is a miracle.

With Hillary, I know my future is iffy, and will hold my breath as long as she is President. That stress will make my body worse.

With Bernie, I know my future is hopeful, and I will be able to breathe. It doesn't matter if all he wants comes true or not. I know he will hold the line.

Z

[upaloopa]

39. I don't get what you think electing Bernie is going to do for you. If he wanted to raise social

Social Security payments he can propose it today. It won't pass with the make up of the congress and it won't pass if he is President unless Congress changes.

He won't have long coat tails because he doesn't have a broad base of support. Hillary also wants to raise Social Security payments and she has the better chance of changing Congress to a more favorable one for us.

[zalinda]

46. I don't believe Hillary can win the GE

and more importantly, repubs will not work with her. I see her keeping the economy going as it is now. Not great. Jobs are scarce and full time jobs are even more scarce. I don't believe a word that comes out of her mouth. I don't think she wants to help people like me, or that she is even vaguely aware that people like me exist. She has no idea, what it is like as a poor person or the working poor, Bernie does. He eats lunch with them. I honestly don't think she even knows they are around unless she needs them to do something for her.

In 2008, I didn't care who won the primary Obama or Hillary, I knew they both would ignore the real problems facing the majority of the people. This time there is a choice. Bernie knows what it is to be a real person, for Pete's sake he flies coach. Does Hillary even fly on a public airline? She has probably thinks us poor people LOVE to go to garage sales and thrift stores. She probably thinks we LOVE to go to food banks for FREE food. She probably thinks that we are lazy and don't want to work. That is, if she thinks of us at all.

Z

[Live and Learn]

21. Sorry, I am still voting to help you, like it or not. nt

[upaloopa]

40. I think we all think that we are helping each other no matter who we are voting for.

That's the kind of people we are.

[Live and Learn]

54. I am not sure we are all the same kind of people at all. Nor, do I think all of our motivations

are so honorable.

[upaloopa]

55. This is primary season

After the nomination the Democrats here will unite behind the nominee.
Those who don't won't be here because of the TOS.
So I think most of us care for each other those that don't won't be here in a few months.

[leftofcool]

19. You mean high morals like voting 5 times against the Brady Bill?

[Live and Learn]

20. No, I mean questionable morals like voting for illegal wars for political expediency. nt

[hrmjustin]

14. Good point. All our candidates are good moral people.

[Starry Messenger]

22. Some have the need to cast it as a Manichean struggle.

It's kind of weird.

[Warren DeMontague]

24. Yeah

Sure is!

[Warren DeMontague]

23. Some people in GDP are saying some positively vile shit about Senator Sanders as we speak.

Perhaps you can pass your message - which I support, BTW; I've never come close to suggesting that Hillary Clinton is "evil" - along to them?

[beam me up scottie]

27. So we can count on you to call out posts like these in the future?:

According to Hillary supporters on DU Bernie is Israel's #1 shill, a pro gunner that thinks women enjoy being raped, racist, gun nut, scheming little sneak, drooling, sweating old fool, scumbag, pandering phony braggart with some kind of emotional instability, tool for the NRA, Republican man with his head between women's legs, who protects the minutemen militia, pedophiles, racist cops, has rape fantasies, thinks that orgasms prevent cancer and is supported by Stormfront.

[hobbit709]

28. Someone didn't like you linking to actual posts and alerted but didn't get far.

On Fri Dec 4, 2015, 06:39 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

So we can count on you to call out posts like these in the future?:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=872680

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Calling-out DU members in this manner is against the rules and makes DU an unpleasant place for everyone.

If a thread or reply is actually a violation (as this poster suggests) the individual post should be alerted on and sent to a jury. This poster is bypassing the jury procedure in bulk to play a public ridicule game.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Dec 4, 2015, 06:52 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It's not calling someone out to link to things the DU-er actually posted.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Actually I'm on the fence on this one but those are actually posts. Wars going on all over the planet and than there is this stuff.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: While I don't like the tone taken in the post, I don't find it hurtful, rude, insensitive or inappropriate. It borders on over-the-top, but the poster seems to be trying to make an uncomfortable point.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[beam me up scottie]

29. That is the 5th failed alert on me tonight, I kid you not.

But Bernie supporters are the ones trying to silence people?

And now we're not supposed to link to other posts?




Thanks!

[hobbit709]

30. There's a certain group here that projects a lot.

[Betty Karlson]

33. The Coronation Committee and the Blind Ambitions.

On a side note: There really ought to be a music combo with that name. That would be awesome.

[NurseJackie]

38. How do you know? nt

But Bernie supporters are the ones trying to silence people?

Hard to tell. It could be that the luck of the draw with random jury selection appears to favors the chances for success for one side over the other. But I doubt that (percentage-wise) one side alerts more frequently than the other.

The only way to know for sure would be if alerts were not anonymous, and voting was not anonymous.

And now we're not supposed to link to other posts?

Really? Is that against the rules?

[beam me up scottie]

41. Because the results were posted. 5 failed alerts - that I know of.

Since they were unbelievably frivolous alerts some folks are obviously trying to get my posts hidden in this forum, and I seriously doubt it's Bernie's or MOM's supporters.

Really? Is that against the rules?

You tell me. Why would linking to posts be against the rules?

[NurseJackie]

43. Well,

You tell me. Why would linking to posts be against the rules?

I really don't know. That's why I was asking. It doesn't seem like a bad thing, but I'd like to know for sure so that I can avoid doing it if it is.

What do you think would be the impact of non-anonymous alerts and non-anonymous voting? Do you think something like that would help to reduce the number of the "frivolous alerts" that you mentioned?

[beam me up scottie]

45. Linking to posts is not against the rules but a clever alerter may convince a jury otherwise.

So you are taking a chance if you do post them. If the links are relevant you may survive the alert.

I prefer the jury system to having mods, taking away anonymity would discourage people from participating so no, I don't favour changing the rules.

In this forum and in some protected groups we've learned to watch our backs, sucks but that's the way it is.

[NurseJackie]

50. Thank you.

[Bluenorthwest]

47. The 'rules' are the Terms of Service, they are not secret, admins show them to all who sign up

which means you saw them as well. If you don't know the 'rules' why not look them up?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

Confusion is not your friend, knowledge is power. It is most certainly not against the rules to link to or quote shit posters have actually said on DU. Why would it be? People should be very proud of all they write here. Because it is permanent.

[NurseJackie]

49. I'm probably not alone in quickly skimming or skipping-over ...

... such things. You should know that my question was sincere. It was just a question, not an attack, not a barb, not a smear. Your snarky elbow jabs and tone of superiority seem to be an odd way to respond. (But, thanks anyway for the link, I appreciate it.)

[treestar]

31. so true

people should not be working themselves up against another Democrat.

[Betty Karlson]

32. For years, Third Way campaigned with "at least we are not as bad as the GOP"

(The results, by the way, were lost elections)

For years, we were told to settle for the lesser of two evils.

And now that it threatens to prevent the coronation of HRC, we are no longer allowed to reference this repeated feature of Third Way campaigning?

But indeed: this not good versus evil. We have Imperfect but Mostly Good and Certainly More Electable versus The Lesser of Two Evils Which Could Well Lose us the White House in the GE.

[bigwillq]

34. Yes, we do.

And, yes, we should.

[99Forever]

35. Think whatever the fuck you like.

Not everyone agrees with you. That's called reality.

The fact that you don't like hearing that people don't agree with you and want them to shut up, means jack.

[upaloopa]

37. Who said anything about wanting them to shut up? If I don't want to read somebody's post I don't

read it. If I didn't want to "hear" people disagree with me I wouldn't be here. I have no control over anybody here.

That is reality, it's not what you posted. But your side doesn't do well with reality.

[99Forever]

44. Bullshit.

Your fucking words:

"We shouldn't portray it as such"

[upaloopa]

51. Do you understand english? "Shut up" isn't even implied in my OP

[99Forever]

53. Lame backpedaling.

Perfect

[retrowire]

52. Well, since lying and dishonesty is inherently evil.... nt

[kath]

56. And having no discernible consistent principles, constantly shifting with the wind...

Also evil.
Or at the very least, VERY very highly questionable morals.

[retrowire]

57. Thank you. nt

[kath]

58. You're welcome. Did you see she invoked 9/11 AGAIN yesterday? Really going Full Giuliani.

Just when I think I can't get any more disgusted with her, she makes it worse and worse.

[retrowire]

59. Yes. It's... Not very intelligent.

I find it manipulative to invoke bad memories in people in order to rationalize something bad that has nothing to do with it.