2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIn its first endorsement ever, Planned Parenthood endorses Hillary Clinton. Do you stand with them?
Mrs. Clinton will officially accept the groups support Sunday at a campaign rally in Manchester, N.H. The decision to break with tradition and endorse Mrs. Clinton comes as the House has approved a measure, endorsed by the leading Republican presidential candidates, that would repeal parts of the Affordable Care Act and strip away federal financing for Planned Parenthood, which provides reproductive and health care services.
Everything Planned Parenthood has believed in and fought for over the past 100 years is on the ballot, said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood.
http://tinyurl.com/z8u8mxf
73 votes, 8 passes | Time left: Unlimited | |
Yes | |
40 (55%) |
|
No | |
33 (45%) |
|
8 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided. | |
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll |
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Not to Hillary.
randys1
(16,286 posts)which is great, by the way, but...
Planned Parenthood supports HIllary, so if Bernie loses, do you?
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Not Hillary.
randys1
(16,286 posts)to go into.
What will really piss some of us off is if we have to suffer the behaviour of those who stayed home and pouted in 2010, if they do it again.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)uppityperson
(115,765 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)any political party.
I am loyal to the lives that will be LOST if the terrorist teaparty takes the WH.
Sorry if that bothers you...
Last time I tried that one, 2 days ago, I was accused of fear mongering.
pnwmom
(109,426 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)Shit's getting old.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)mike_c
(36,321 posts)...which was nonetheless manifestly obfuscatory. Neat how that works, isn't it?
George II
(67,782 posts)verb (used with object), obfuscated, obfuscating.
1. to confuse, bewilder, or stupefy.
Karma13612
(4,660 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)For candidates of my choosing.
randys1
(16,286 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)I voted for a woman for president in 2012. A woman very much against killing women....even Iraqi or Afghan women.
randys1
(16,286 posts)You voted for a Woman president in 2012?
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)We're you talking about her?
randys1
(16,286 posts)assholes, you can lie to yourself, but you cant lie to me.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)0 - 0 = 0
You seem to assume that if I vote 3rd party that Hillary will lose a vote. No she won't.
0 - 0 = 0
You seem to assume that if I vote 3rd party a Republican will gain a vote. No he/she won't.
Did Jill Stein lose a vote because you voted for Obama?
cali
(114,904 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)retract it.
I said, and have said, that OUR CANDIDATES do and we must support THEM
randys1
(16,286 posts)Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Say he wanted to kill women?
Hillary sent women to die in a war, sad
randys1
(16,286 posts)Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Also purposely did not say Republicans are the ones you are talking about. It is plenty clear of your meaning, sad.
randys1
(16,286 posts)said this sigh
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)You all may dislike me for my liberal positions, but you damn sure know what they are by now
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Specific. You seem to not be and expect everyone to be able to read your mind. But you are very clear about Hillary.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Or you could realize there was a better way to say what you set out to say.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)do you pretend I am talking about Bernie.
Do you have that little respect for Bernie that you think someone like me would say that about him?
You are doing him a disfavor in ways you clearly cant see.
MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)And you're a Sanders supporter FFS!
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Jesus fucking christ. Is that the new talking point???
SMH
.
randys1
(16,286 posts)hoping someone can get me banned.
I dont blame them, true Bernie supporters like me do not fit in around here.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)and what/who you chose to include and leave out. We are in a primary, so the people you would be choosing between who are viable at this point (sorry O'Malley) are Hillary and Bernie. Now if you had specified the general election then we would know you are talking about the GOP, but you didn't. So since the next vote is between Bernie and Hillary, your sentence structure and information provided leaves Bernie as the person who kills women.
.
randys1
(16,286 posts)Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)But that's just a guess on my part.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)It's an antidote to the rhetorical whipping Hillary gets here
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)fleur-de-lisa
(14,654 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)Strong women rock. In a cruel twist of fate my mom and I were both raised by widows, me from when I was fourteen years old, my mom from when she was nine months old.
I regret you dislike me, though.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Hillary supported a ban on late term abortions and pandered to anti-choice activists.
My mother taught me never to trust people who betray you for personal gain.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Hillary_Clinton_Abortion.htm
Even the Supreme Court placed limits on when in the gestation period a legal abortion can occur.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)As a man you'll never have to make that decision so it seems reasonable to leave it up to politicians instead of women and their doctors.
And "partial birth abortion" is a right wing term.
Disgusting.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Hillary_Clinton_Abortion.htm
However, in that vein , what I italicized, even SCOTUS in Roe V Wade places limits on when abortions can occur.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Posting that quote doesn't prove anything except that she'll say anything to get elected.
And that you're tone deaf.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)She said she supports late term abortions where the mother's life or the ability to have children in the future is in jeopardy.
However Roe V Wade never conferred a right to a third trimester abortion for any reason.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)This is the second time this week you've used my rights to score points on DU, we're done.
Afaic you've proven what's more important to you.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)This is a teachable moment. Imagine you like the Clintons and you see them trashed here on a daily basis. Empathy! How would you feel? And the ironic thing is I didn't trash anybody in this thread.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)There is a war on women going on and you're exploiting the issue here for sport.
Damn right it's a teachable moment.
I learned quite a bit about your character this week.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)It is fun to tout HRC's endorsements from other progressives and progressive groups. It is fun to know that you are not alone. It is fun to post positive things about Hillary Clinton to balance out all the negative things that are posted about her here.
I have a stellar character. If you believe otherwise there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Your op isn't a positive thread, it's exploitation.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)And all the threads that denigrate Hillary Clinton and her supporters are they positive?
My favorite (sic) thread was the thread that stated Clinton supporters were Harper supporters despite their loud and impassioned protestations they weren't. Did you take umbrage at that?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Glad you cleared that up.
Like I said, a teaching moment.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)I am applauding an endorsement from a progressive group. It lets me know I'm not alone, I'm not a crypto-Republican, not a corporatist, not a Turd Wayer, not a paid by the post hack, or any of the pejoratives hurled at me and my friends on this board.
I/we have feelings. We hurt. We bleed. We feel bad when we are insulted.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Because he won't vote in your poll, that's exactly what you had in mind when you posted it.
I'm glad you're enjoying yourself while others are having their motives impugned for not participating.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)It would nice to see Clinton supporters on this board treated with the same respect.
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)This is you, a man, trying to lecture a woman on her rights. That is like if you were a whate person trying to lecture a POC on their rights.
You are the one that needs to sit down and learn from a woman with way more experience in this issue than either of us. I've learned a lot from BMUS and other women here about their issues. Not ours, theirs.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)Mea culpa, mea culpa, ...mea culpa...I take instruction on reproductive issues from Planned Parenthood. That is why I started this thread. I am delighted with their work. I am delighted with their endorsement. If they give Ms. Clinton their seal of approval it's good enough for me.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)Mansplaining why we should put restrictions on abortion to the little lady then turning around and calling it "a teachable moment"?!? WTF?
uppityperson
(115,765 posts)Doctors do not do late term abortions "for any reason" but there are certainly reasons beyond the life of the pregnant woman. By limiting it to that, a great disservice is done.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)Glamrock
(11,931 posts)I have never thought those decisions should be up to anyone but the woman who's pregnant. I can't count the number of times I've told other dudes that until they can carry a child, they shouldn't even have a fucking opinion on the matter.
I realize you weren't speaking to me, just sticking up for my gender. We're not all misogynistic bastards you know.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Without our male allies we wouldn't be where we are now, and we need you to stand by us in the future.
Glamrock
(11,931 posts)I was raised/schooled catholic. I must have been in 3rd or 4th grade when the brainwashing began. I remember coming home just horrified, "they're killing babies!" "That's not entirely true, and you are to young to understand the conversation", she said. Little Ole me just went, "oh, ok". I mean, if Mom isn't freaked out about it, why should i be? And then the little baby feet pin we were given at school was put in a drawer never to be seen again.
For the record, it didn't necessarily change my opinion at the time, but her words kept their words from solidifying into part of me personality and belief system. I was able to mature and actually think about the issue and form my own opinion. I guess you could say she put the brakes on my indoctrination.
As far as standing by a woman's choice in the future? Always have, always will.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)239. Bernie is worse in my opinion. (Good thing I won't have to vote for either one, eh?)
I was considering Bernie, but his short fuse and anger worry me. I wouldn't feel safe.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=852163
That tells me all I need to know about you.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Too bad you forgot that one.
Response to NurseJackie (Reply #59)
DisgustipatedinCA This message was self-deleted by its author.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)explanation for that.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Things that make you go hmmm.
R B Garr
(17,355 posts)you are posting the very links you were asking me for.
I knew you saved all the threads about Bernie's Republican support. You acted confused yesterday... How dishonest to ask for links when you spam them everywhere. Busted again.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I knew you saved all the threads about Bernie's Republican support
Psssst!
Do you want to know how I "save" links? It's really complicated so pay attention, see I'm on my mobile so since it's not convenient to save thousand of bookmarks here's what I do!
Now quit stalking me, it's more than a little creepy although I am super flattered!
I've had to deal with real life stalkers so if you want to intimidate me you'll have to try another tactic.
R B Garr
(17,355 posts)it stalking? Explain how that works.
The point is the antics of asking for links as a deflection when you have them already. You used a link here to attack NurseJ, yet you were asking me for the same link. You have 8000 posts in 90 days, so its hard to avoid your obsession with certain posters here.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)All these conspiracy theories of yours about links are more than a little weird too.
Seriously if you have issues you really need to find another way to work them out.
Following me around yammering nonsense about saving links and looking at my profile constanly is not healthy.
R B Garr
(17,355 posts)you used here to attack NurseJ. Why would you ask me for links when we both know you have them stashed away.
Explain why you have MaggieD's threads saved and use them to attack people.
Explain why you only you can use your saved links to attack people and it's not called stalking.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)If you don't know how to use Google to find links then educate yourself, don't make up weird conspiracy theories about evil masterminds on DU.
That's just whack.
R B Garr
(17,355 posts)isn't stalking when you do it.
No one has to look at your profile to see your posts when every thread here is filled with them. Nothing wrong with noticing the obvious.
At least we've cleared up your phony exercise of asking me for links when you clearly already have them Busted again.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)R B Garr
(17,355 posts)asking me for links you already have except to post childish cartoons. Got it.
And you have no explanation as to why it's not stalking when you attack people with your many saved links. Got it.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)R B Garr
(17,355 posts)Remember I brought that up several posts ago.
Nice cartoons! Thanks for your devotion to Googling them with me in mind. How special you take the time.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)R B Garr
(17,355 posts)links you already have.
And anything to not explain why you attacking people with your many saved links is not stalking.
I would be posting cartoons too if I were you since explaining would show lack of credibility on your part.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)William769
(55,783 posts)I also won't support someone that writes a rape essay and can't stand anyone who would support such a person.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Men who exploit women's issues to score points are no friends of mine.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Bernie has never been halfhearted on any issues involving women and reproductive choice.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)All kinds of calumnies are perpetuated on Hillary Clinton and my friends here. The front page is replete with them. Just call DemocratSinceBirth the balance.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Or to call cowshit on the idea that you have to support HRC to "stand with Planned Parenthood".
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)I would cite all the calumnies but I don't want a hide. My friends and I have been called crypto-republicans, Turd Wayers, race baiters, homophobes, and other pejoratives and when some of us have deigned to defend ourselves we have had our posts hidden.
I am just the balance.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And most of what has been said about your candidate was simply fair comment. Compared to what every Clinton supporter NEW was the false accusation that Bernie didn't care about institutional racism(he had been fighting it his whole life), the comments about your candidate were trivial.
Your candidate never deserved special deference.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)Attacks on Clinton and her supporters here are justified. Attacks on Sanders are never justified* .My favorite was the thread with over two hundred recommends that said Clinton supporters were Harper supporters and were disappointed when Trudeau's Liberal party won. Whenever a Clinton supporter decried the charge that was just taken as cause for glee because the accusation hurt.
I started a poll and not one Clinton supporter supported Harper. Speaking for myself I would rather have a stick of dynamite inserted into my rectal cavity and set off than to vote for any right of center party. But that is what my friends and i have to put up with on this board.
I'm the balance.
*I rarely, rarely, rarely... rarely attack Senator Sanders. I'm too busy touting my candidate. I just wanted to make it clear.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)I wouldn't say he is "just" as pro-choice as HRC. He has proven to be "more" pro-choice than HRC who says we must find common ground with abortion opponents. Presumably that common ground is shaming women who have abortions since she does engage in that particular abomination.
cali
(114,904 posts)that if you don't support Hillary, you don't really support abortion rights.
Mansplaining.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)If I respond in kind I will have my post hidden.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)So tender. So restrained. So fearful of a wittle hidey.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)I don't want a hide and be put on a time out like so many of my friends here. If you can recommend another venue on the internet where we can speak freely I will be more than happy to have the tête-à-tête you seek with me.
Thank you in advance.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)It's passive agression nonsense. Put up or shut up.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)I speak my mind in real life where it counts and where I can't be silenced.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Hilarious.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)In real life you can't insult and disrespect someone, get him upset, and when he responds in kind you can't alert on him and have him silenced, am I right?
morningfog
(18,115 posts)suggest I am with PP or against them based on their endorsement. That would be insulting, offensive and dishonest. I wouldn't expect it and I bet you wouldn't do it. You quest for victimhood on a message board is sad and misplaced.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)This is the third time I am alluding to a thread that explicitly stated that Clinton supporters were also Harper supporters and were disappointed that Trudeau's Liberal party won. When a Clinton supporter earnestly decried the charge it was met with glee because the original poster made them upset. If my memory is correct it had hundreds of recommends.
That was magnitudes worse than my lil poll and the Recommends let me know what the people who recommended it think of me and my friends.
I am just providing balance.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)X-"DemocratSinceBirth, you are a Harper supporter and are disappointed Trudeau won."
DemocratSinceBirth- "Of course I supported Trudeau."
X-"Ha Ha Ha, you're mad,"
Anybody is going to be upset...
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Repeatedly. Classy and mature.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)-DemocratSinceBirth
This is about the third lecture on internet etiquette I have been given in this thread. It got me to thinking why these lecturers don't have the same umbrage for the behavior they are lecturing me about when it is exhibited by those they agree with.
SMH
morningfog
(18,115 posts)You set out flamebait to a targeted group, you get flames from that group. It's kind of a "no shit" idea, you reap what you sow.
No need to shake your head, it's basic stuff.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)What do you call people who decry the real or perceived misbehavior of those they disagree with while ignoring the perceived or real misbehavior of those they agree with ?
morningfog
(18,115 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)Kali
(55,630 posts)CTyankee
(64,754 posts)one in five American women have used PP for their care in their lifetimes. That is one boatload of women, folks, and if we mobilize them to vote in the 2016 elections, it will have a HUGE effect.
VOTE!
Bjornsdotter
(6,123 posts)Kentonio
(4,377 posts)PP is far too deeply endangered right now to be risking any kind of ostracizing of liberal supporters. They have the backing of damn near everyone in the party, so why on earth do something like this? It makes absolutely no sense to me.
zazen
(2,978 posts)pnwmom
(109,426 posts)I know that's not what his many fans here think, but many others do.
We know what they'll be throwing at Hillary, and she's withstood all of it time after time. With him, it will be a new experience.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)By getting involved in internal Democratic contests like this, they run the very real risk of tarnishing their image with some Dems, right at the time when we need to unify behind them the most. I hope to hell it doesn't cause any damage, but I fear it will, and that's what makes me angry. What they do is too damn important to put at risk.
hay rick
(8,149 posts)I support Planned Parenthood's mission but this is reckless and irresponsible behavior on the part of their leadership. I believe that the no pre-primary endorsement strategy towers over all the other available options and the Clinton endorsement is a demonstration of incompetence.
MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)ETA: This is big. Surprised I didn't see it in LBN. Thanks for posting DSB!
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)Parenthood in general?" Or do you mean, "do we support Planned Parenthood's endorsement of Secretary Clinton?"
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)the place to go for her.
I'm so happy they endorse my preferred candidate!
and rec'd
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)wanted and planned for is a noble goal we should ALL stand behind.
I'm excited that PP's first endorsement ever, is for a woman who's fought for women and children all throughout her political career. They made the best choice.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)--imm
mnhtnbb
(31,908 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)immoderate
(20,885 posts)--imm
randys1
(16,286 posts)what they have to do to survive.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)--imm
randys1
(16,286 posts)immoderate
(20,885 posts)--imm
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)...doing politics?
randys1
(16,286 posts)DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)I know it cant POSSIBLY be was I referring to voting for Hillary and not Bernie because I believe Bernie wants to kill Women
So what was it?
Since I have NEVER said I was voting for Hillary, in the first place.
this is bullshit...you can all just have a nice fucking day, sick of this shit
and BERNIE is the one losing out when you do this shit
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)not repeating something horribly offensive, knowing god damn full well my position, then smart on you
BTW, this harms Bernie, a lot.
Really does.
It goes on here all day long, is going on out in the real world.
3-5 Months ago I was actively and daily telling people about Bernie in a very excited way, much of that excitement has worn off given the terrible way certain people are acting.
It is this sick and twisted idea of Bernie or bust that I get from many folks here, really really sick and twisted, especially since Bernie would NEVER approve.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Still, the question posed IN THE SUBJECT LINE of #283 stands.
randys1
(16,286 posts)You said this
...doing politics?
in response to what I said
what they have to do to survive.
I couldnt have been more clearer, you are now just trying to avoid the real question in this thread, not question but the allegation here that ANY of you could have for one SECOND thought I meant Bernie was the one who wanted to kill Women
You ALL know that is total BULLSHIT,
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)You don't know me if you think I try to avoid questions. I'm not afraid of your questions, and I don't shy away from them. Don't try to imprint your ways on me; I'm not you.
Now that we've established that you're not going to answer my question, go ahead with this burning question that I'm running away from. You'll get a straight answer--not because you deserve it, but because I'm going to show you how straight answers are given. Fire away.
randys1
(16,286 posts)everyone can read it, that you even bothered to use that comment of mine to try and make an argument, is revealing.
I expect this treatment elsewhere, not on an alleged liberal message board.
Oh wait, maybe you disagree with the comment you seem to have so much trouble with, which was
what they have to do to survive.
Which part of my comment, that you have so much trouble with, do you disagree with?
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Planned Parenthood just "did" politics, as is their right. But to say they don't do politics is just incorrect. Please do move on to the burning question you've said I'm avoiding.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)Should she get elected those neutrals will find themselves out in the cold.
On the other hand, Bernie's PP and pro-choice support has been absolute and unwavering. And he does not take politics personally. So there is no downside in supporting Hillary over Bernie, but there is in remaining neutral.
sarge43
(29,127 posts)This just gives more ammunition to the Repugs.
I'd say the same if she had come out for Sanders.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)BUT Planned Parenthood has a voice, to try and encourage Democrats to vote for the likely most probable POTUS. There are a lot of people who understand the issues, and appeasing Republicans really isn't it.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)ALL dem candidates strongly support pp
PP chose to endorse one candidate for its own reasons, that is their choice but
one can support the mission of pp AND support ANY of dem candidates.
the insinuation that by supporting Om or sanders, one is not "standing with" pp is false and unfair.
C'mon, DSB. you don't need to waste your time with this partisan crap.
Response to restorefreedom (Reply #13)
1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)get bogged down in this crap. we can disagree without playing funky word games with the truth
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)And as I upthread it's an antidote to all the invective and vitriol hurled at Ms. Clinton on the board.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)endorsing or supporting hrc is not a requirement to "stand with" pp, all the dems stand with them.
a simple "what do you think" could have kicked off a discussion without suggestiong that the supporters of sanders and om are not with pp, just my two cents.
as far as the vitriol, there is certainly too much to go around, in all directions, imo
have a nice day, dsb!
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)With all the crap that HRC and her supporters gets on this board why begrudge me some fun.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Glad to see this issue is fun for you.
Unfortunately women don't have that luxury.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Smh.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)but since all the dems are on top of this issue, the whole discussion is insane. clearly pp is posturing for favor "when" their candidate gets elected.
they, imo, started the ball rolling of women against women. it won't be a popular opinion, but i am just in that kind of mood to say it.
edit.. and op's like this definitely do not help. agreed.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I don't know why I expected anything different, either from PP or DU.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)running against the establishment tends to garner enemies and piss people off. i am paraphrasing, but that was clearly the sentiment.
a big hill, and bernie and all of us knew it. but people fricking get up everest and k2 every year. we are gonna do this.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)and there is definitely a lot of crap flying around these days in all directions. only om and his supporters seem to be able to steer clear of it
as for fun, have at it if it works for you! perhaps elaine can kick things off
https://m.
cali
(114,904 posts)ieoeja
(9,748 posts)He is hitting bottom of the barrel on this thread.
progressoid
(50,600 posts)There is nothing innocuous or fun about this.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)There was/is nothing innocuous and fun about all the all the attacks on Hillary Clinton and her supporters on this board either. The selective outrage is manifest.
Oh, some times a poll is just a poll.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)This OP is nothing more than an attempt to smear Bernie supporters as anti-PP.
What a disgrace.
.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)no one will believe it has anything to do with him.
all the dems are on top of this. mistake by pp imo
randys1
(16,286 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)But it made it very clear to anyone that it would be very difficult if not impossible to claim you support PP and not vote for Hillary if she is the nominee.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)It is a clear attempt to smear Bernie supporters as anti-PP by asking a loaded question that doesn't not provide context or room for explanation.
.
randys1
(16,286 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)I will always disagree with this endorsement of theirs and pretty much disagree with them making one at all, I think, since it's stated that this is their first ever. It initially gives me the feeling they did it just because Hillary is a woman.
.
okasha
(11,573 posts)I'm sure, include.
1. The certain knowledge that any Republican President will sign a bill vetoing PP funding; and
2, A realistic assessment of which Democratic candidate is likely to win the 2016 nomination, and, also likely,
3, A greater trust in a woman President that she will do her damnedest to protect women's reproductive rights rather than "agree to disagree" to court Republicans
This issue is not one on which women's advocates can take a chance.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)agree on #1 although i doubt the defunding will stick
disagree on #2 but i understand why they think so
i can understand #3.... any prochoice woman has a visceral connection to the issue that men could not possibly understand. but as male candidates go, bernie and martin are ones i trust completely to do everything hillary would do to protect women's health and rights.
their option to endorse as they see fit..my issue was with the subtle op suggestion that supporting either om or sanders is not standing with pp...they all do imo
BlueMTexpat
(15,478 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)And will get alot of attention after the attacks on clinics including the one just a month ago.
Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Do I need sarcasm thingy?
comradebillyboy
(10,412 posts)msrizzo
(796 posts)But Hillary has been out front with her support of Planned Parenthood way more than any of the other candidates. This makes total sense. It is one of her big, key #1 issues. You can't honestly say that about the other two candidates, although they can't be faulted for their support.
Gothmog
(153,553 posts)Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)Parenthood in general?" Or do you mean, "Do we agree with and support Planned Parenthood's endorsement of Secretary Clinton?"
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)1. Parenthood's in general? Or do you mean?
2. Do we agree with Planned Parenthood's endorsement of Hillary Clinton and also support Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination?"
I agree with Number 1. I support and stand with Planned Parenthood in general.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)ON a separate issue - I support Bernie Sanders for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States.
Is that good enough?
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)Were we being asked?
A. Do we stand with Planned Parenthood?
or
B. Do we support Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for President?
If someone could simply clarify what they are asking - it would be a lot easier to give an answer.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)I stand with Planed Parenthood and their mission and support them.
On a completely separate issue - I stand with Senator Sanders for the Democratic Nomination for President of the United States and support him.
There is nothing complicated about that.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)As I understand it he stands with Planned Parenthood but not with Hillary Clinton. That's his prerogative.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)I re-read my question:
It is just as easy to assume it is a loaded question as not.
A simple answer is "I support (stand with) Planned Parenthood but I don't support (stand with) Hillary Clinton.
I would be disingenuous if I didn't say as a HRC supporter I think this is huge. And as to my motivation there are motivations for everything.
randys1
(16,286 posts)had not thought of.
If Hillary is the nominee, either you stand with PP or you dont, not you personally but you know what I mean.
uppityperson
(115,765 posts)clarify?
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)People asked for clarification of the question, and your response is "Just answer the question!"?
Your posts have descended into an unintended mockery of yourself.
I encourage everyone to put you on their ignore list, as I am doing, because you present nothing of value in your posts and are clearly just here to antagonize.
Bye.
uppityperson
(115,765 posts)so I can't stand with them. I donate money to them, have volunteered with them, worked for similar programs, so stand with their providing services. Or do you mean stand with their endorsement?
Doing a quick look around, nope, still not PP standing in my living room.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Why are you being so hostile and accusatory? Surely you understand that context is very important, don't you?
.
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)anybody who answers no to this slippery poll question is accused of not supporting planned parenthood in general by the Hillary supporters if the person doesn't support planned parenthood's endorsement of Hillary. They are trying to fuse the two different things as one issue. I don't dignify his bullshit by participating in the poll.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)So far, Hillary Clinton has gotten the endorsement from NARAL, Emily List, NOW, and Planned Parenthood. Is there any other major pro woman groups out there that haven't endorsed yet?
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)DFW
(56,272 posts)I absolutely stand with Planned Parenthood, and I adore Cecile.
On the other hand, I have not endorsed any candidate with my vote (or promise thereof), and will not do so until I'm good and ready.
Interestingly enough, I just met yesterday with a good friend who happens to be editor of The Nation (I'm in NYC for a few days), which openly supports Bernie. She is good friends with Cecile, who supports (apparently) Hillary. But this just mirrors what I have seen almost everywhere outside of DU: Hillary supporters and Bernie Supporters get along fine and amicably agree to disagree, and universally (again, except on DU) acknowledge that they will support the Democratic nominee, whoever it is. The brutal (un-)civil war of words seems to be confined (thankfully) to the DU teapot.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)Based on my years of reading DFW, that's not how he rolls.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)We and Hillary Clinton could use his support.
MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)I understand where you're coming from though. Always welcome more supporters.
DFW
(56,272 posts)You flatter me by hinting that my voice would actually make a difference on this board.
The problem for me is that neither Bernie nor Hillary has addressed certain issues that concern me greatly, and that is what I have been waiting for before adding my most insignificant of endorsements. Should that not be forthcoming from either of them in the next few months, I will make a decision one way or the other before the Texas primary.
In the meantime, I think Hillary will survive just fine without my expressed support, as will Bernie. If it makes you feel any better, I was banned from the Bernie group for inadvertently posting there. So, anything favorable I would have had to say about Bernie will not be showing up to plague you on DU
DFW
(56,272 posts)I roll my own way, really don't need to be guided in any particular direction--even been known to think for myself every now and then.
DFW
(56,272 posts)No one I'm close to or really want is running this time. I'm not sure you get that. Howard was my wish-candidate in 2004, and still is. No one of his caliber has run since. That's why I don't care if Bernie or Hillary wins the nomination. Either way, I don't get my first choice. I can handle that--a lot better than a lot of people on here, I'll bet. I won't yell and scream when my man (or woman) doesn't get the nomination, because I already know it isn't gong to happen.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)DFW
(56,272 posts)But he HAS earned that loyalty from me, you are quite right. My respect, too. Once I say that about someone, he or she would need to to sink low indeed for me to want to dissolve that friendship or lose that respect. I KNOW a lot of people. I am friends with few.
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)uppityperson
(115,765 posts)There is a place to click under every poll that says "Show usernames".
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=980808#
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)I'm guessing by your posts in this thread you are on board with that.
.
Eric J in MN
(35,620 posts)NT
Karma13612
(4,660 posts)tularetom
(23,664 posts)IMO, PP has made a serious tactical error by endorsing anyone. They are on very thin ice to begin with, under fire by a large portion of the population and crucified in the mass media. They can ill afford to alienate half of their remaining supporters, particularly by endorsing a candidate who will not hesitate to stab them in the back if it suits her political ambition to do so.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)I don't give a shit who they endorse.
This seems to be a real problem for Bernie supporters. Frankly, it's a bit scary and off-putting.
fredamae
(4,458 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)mhatrw
(10,786 posts)Gamecock Lefty
(708 posts)Fortunately all our Dem candidates support choice.
But when NARAL came out a few days ago with their support for Hillary, one of the Bernie posters (I could not reply because I was banned) made a snide remark about NARAL doing it because they felt pressure to do so! In other words Hillary was making them endorse her or else.
I wonder if that same person will make a comment about this endorsement???
Make American Even Greater Elect Hillary!!!
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)A Sanders Administration would be just as strong on choice as HRC...more so, in fact, since progressives are almost always more pro-choice than "moderates".
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)In your mind does supporting pp mean u support who they endorse? Hell no I don't support hillary and I think pp has made a foolish choice.
Killer Mike endorsed Bernie. If you don't support Bernie does that mean you hate black people?
What a childish way to post.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)As to your insults of me:
I refuse to respond in kind.
Love
DSB
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)See how thar's done and why it is silly?
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)K then. You have a good day.
mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)The explicit link is that if you don't support Hillary, you must not support PP and therefore, you are a mysogynist. People have refused to play the little game and have stated their positions clearly, yet the author of the OP keeps trying to badger them into supporting their narrow view that one has to support Hillary or they hate women.
Big, fat, steaming pile of shit.
djean111
(14,255 posts)The attempt to spin not supporting Hillary into not supporting Planned Parenthood is pathetic. But not surprising.
Goes into the trash with the "if you don't support Hillary you hate or are afraid of women" bullshit.
Kind of insulting, really. Either they are that dumb, or they think I am.
mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)because she's female. There is a very explicit link in this OP between a vote for Hillary and a vote for women. Thing is, I agree that it would be a good idea to have a female president. It's just that Hillary's negatives swamp that out, and Bernie's positives also swamp that out.
This whole OP goes against the pleas that people claim thay aren't voting for Hillary becuase she's a women.
azmom
(5,208 posts)sheshe2
(86,771 posts)Thank you, DSB. Yes I do stand with Planned Parenthood.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Great endorsement and PP is a blessing.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)oasis
(51,469 posts)Hillary will validate their wise choice.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)I really respect Cecile Richards. No one can forget this memorable performance
central scrutinizer
(12,390 posts)Don't see any contradiction there
MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)As if you care.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)But boy do I love these opportunities to show what a bad Democrat I am for supporting Bernie Sanders.
Bryant
MoonRiver
(36,945 posts)We simply have made different choices for the Democratic primary. You and I are the good people as opposed to that car full of clowns.
mcar
(43,336 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)Go PP!
Go HRC!
Starry Messenger
(32,375 posts)Love Richards.
okasha
(11,573 posts)Her mama raised her right.
Starry Messenger
(32,375 posts)She does her mom proud!
jillan
(39,451 posts)Bernie, Hillary and Martin will all fight for Planned Parenthood.
Honestly it kind of pisses me off, but it is what it is and I will continue to fight for PP.
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)I don't appreciate the title of this thread. "Do you stand with them?" I have stood with PP all throughout the repukelican bullshit fest when they tried to defund it. I still stand with Planned Parenthood. Do I stand with this decision? No, I don't. Do I think they should have endorsed Bernie? No, I don't. I think they should have a least waited to the general to make an endorsement. Of course they should stand behind Democrats all the way, considering the repukes hate them and think they are evil. cough* cought* carly. But they shouldn't have done this. I'm not bashing Hillary, I'm disappointed. We have three wonderful candidates who strongly support women's rights and all stand with Planned Parenthood. They should not have made this endorsement.
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)one_voice
(20,043 posts)I stand with Planned Parenthood!
NRaleighLiberal
(60,403 posts)but if, and until then, Bernie. and, always, PP.
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)what, you mean you can't have objections to their endorsement of HC while maintaining support for their mission?
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)lovemydog
(11,833 posts)and its decision-making.
My State's primary isn't until June and I don't yet know how I'll vote in it.
I love voting and will vote for candidates who support strengthening the Affordable Care Act, and continuing and increasing funding for Planned Parenthood.
still_one
(95,567 posts)apolitical and above all this.
I dare say that if the endorsement was not directed toward Hillary, but toward one of the other Democratic candidates, the comment, "they should remain apolitical" would not have even been suggested.
In fact, I venture that the posts decrying foul here would be throwing slings and arrows toward Hillary, and why the endorsement is significant.
I enjoy being in a glass house.
William769
(55,783 posts)Gloria
(17,663 posts)EOM
Autumn
(45,931 posts)I have no problem liking one and and disliking the other.
George II
(67,782 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)Oh I'll vote for that corrupt person, but I don't stand with unethical dishonest pols.
progressoid
(50,600 posts)No, I don't stand with PP's endorsement.
or
No, I don't stand with PP.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)and standing with their endorsement.
.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)from when I joined.
So childish and petty. OPs that are not written to open a dialogue, just spewed out without thinking in order to try to score political points. Twisting words and ideas in order to try to smear anyone who dares support another candidate.
I hope I grow strong enough to break this sick addiction I have to reading DU. It's a sickness to be sure. At least I won't be spending anymore money on it.
.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)So, don't let them keep you down. Keep up the good fight. Keep your head up .
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)I stand with PP always.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Knowing her decades long fight for women's issues, her speaking out, charity, and political push, her recent interview with Tweety, where she spoke with so much heartfelt emotion on women's issues, it's clear to me there is no comparison with how Hillary understands women's issues vs. Bernie. No comparison at all. Granted I can't quite get past Bernie's essays, but even without that, he just doesn't need to internalize women's issues the way Hillary does to truly get it.
BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)...of "Stupidest mother fuckers in the world"
williesgirl
(4,033 posts)Because of this endorsement.
SunSeeker
(53,398 posts)YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)And not just any woman, but one who has been at the forefront of women's issues for decades?
Just a thought.
Of course I stand with Planned Parenthood.
Hekate
(94,086 posts)Karma13612
(4,660 posts)If he is the nominee.
I stand with PP as an organization.
I Stand with Bernie.
I think PP made a big mistake with their endorsement of Hillary.
KentuckyWoman
(6,846 posts)That said, if Hillary gets the nod I will vote for her because of the alternative.
Either way my support for what Planned Parenthood does medical care wise and fighting for their legal right to do it will not waver.
DesertRat
(27,995 posts)ismnotwasm
(42,410 posts)Of course I stand with panne Parenthood AND Hillary
aikoaiko
(34,201 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)And obviously if you're not with Hillary you're a terrorist.
Or something.
TSIAS
(14,689 posts)I agree with the reasoning of most of the NO votes in this poll. I think it's clear the OP was trying to get his jollies out of riling up people, and it seems like that's exactly what happened.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Woke up happy about it. It's a great time to be a Democrat.
eridani
(51,907 posts)That is a level of wussiness that pro choice advocates really don't need.
TransitJohn
(6,933 posts)I voted no.
Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)Uben
(7,719 posts)Once they do, they run the risk of alienating a portion of their membership like MoveOn did in 2008. Why not just vow to support the nominee once selected? If PP endorses Clinton, I'm no longer donating to them, just like I no longer donate to MoveOn for endorsing Obama. Don't really give a shit what you think about my decision, it's mine! I'm not a Bernie supporter unless he wins the nomination, then he has my full support. Same for Clinton.
NPs should stick to the basics and stay out of the primaries. Why risk alienating supporters? I can see no gain by endorsements of primary candidates for non-profits. I may be totally wrong, but hey, I do what I want to do, not what someone else wants me to do.
R B Garr
(17,355 posts)Planned Parenthood is a huge endorsement.
Gothmog
(153,553 posts)Proserpina
(2,352 posts)and the fact that they did shows how corrupt the process has become.