General Discussion

MrsCoffee

(5,825 posts)

26. +1

Reply to mcar (Reply #19)

Sat Oct 21, 2017, 06:28 PM

Oct 2017

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

240 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

DNC chairman aims for diversity with delegate nominations [View all] DonViejo Oct 2017 OP

Thank you for posting the facts. SunSeeker Oct 2017 #1

Thank you for a nice, informative article, murielm99 Oct 2017 #2

I like the "everyone gets a voice" approach. Wwcd Oct 2017 #3

I Quite Agree Me. Oct 2017 #57

Hello & thanks. I'm finding some smart, aware & friendly ppl here. Wwcd Oct 2017 #59

You Are So Right Me. Oct 2017 #62

Its truly the people's party Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #71

Yes. :) Planned increased representation by millennials is Hortensis Oct 2017 #129

Indeed. And THESE young people were also becoming aware, some 40+ years ago Wwcd Oct 2017 #136

Yes, that was my generation too. I was in Nevada in high Hortensis Oct 2017 #142

Thanks for posting this. Was just browsing the other thread when it was locked. eppur_se_muova Oct 2017 #4

Amazing the difference using this as an attack against Dems and simply laying out a story factually. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #5

Criticism of something someone in the party does is not "an attack against Dems". Ken Burch Oct 2017 #20

Criticism lacking fact equals, bad. We see too much and this is a perfect example. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #24

Look, nobody on this side of the spectrum dismisses the need for diversity. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #28

Look, I disagree. I have watched and continue to watch the effort to put some aside. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #29

What do you mean when you say "the effort to put some aside"? Ken Burch Oct 2017 #32

I am referring to your claim that this side is not putting diversity to the side. I argue that point Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #36

We are all for diversity and we all support the fight against social oppression. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #56

I call bullshit to gaslighting. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #65

And I don't gaslight. I don't have power over you and I don't have the capacity Ken Burch Oct 2017 #70

You are right. You do not have that ability which is the theme of my posts, repeatedly. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #73

If you accept that I wasn't even trying to gaslight you Ken Burch Oct 2017 #80

I do not "need"anything from you, lol. You put out division and then step back. I do not play. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #81

I didn't put out division. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #82

Correct... NurseJackie Oct 2017 #93

Finally, someone describes it in words that make sense, I have been trying to do that, well done Eliot Rosewater Oct 2017 #203

THANK YOU! (nt) ehrnst Oct 2017 #179

Not when issues that involve POC, women and LGBTQs are dismissed as ehrnst Oct 2017 #178

It was one former candidate who said that. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #199

A former candidate that is posturing himself for a future run. It matters to us, the Democratic base Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #201

OK, so put it on Bernie, as an individual. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #207

Incorrect. we hear the language today. That is what we are addressing, today. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #210

I'm not telling you to hush up. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #214

This Op was DNC and a faction attacking DNC. I do not need your help on how to maneuver my political Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #215

+1000. (nt) ehrnst Oct 2017 #217

Straw man. ehrnst Oct 2017 #218

That is the response I've seen every time anybody mentions the words. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #219

No. It gets mentioned whenever there is hyperbole that was not ehrnst Oct 2017 #233

No straw man. I'll narrow it down...it was the response I got to all the post-election OPs. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #234

I think you need to re-read the posts you are referring to. ehrnst Oct 2017 #235

I know what the posts I wrote said. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #236

Doesn't sound like it. (nt) ehrnst Oct 2017 #237

They were nothing but positive suggestions for change. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #239

I read what you posted, and commented on it. ehrnst Oct 2017 #240

Sounds like you're going to post "The Party is Always Right" song again. betsuni Oct 2017 #38

I am done with that. I am done with the coddling. Done. Some refuses to learn from the past. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #39

For some, diversity apparently means angry, impolite "street level" radicals who think Democrats betsuni Oct 2017 #41

What I feel, adamantly, is some people telling me what is happening, is not happening. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #42

Yes, the gas is turned up real high. betsuni Oct 2017 #43

I am hoping we are seeing the Democratic Party taking a stand too. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #47

I'm not gaslighting you. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #48

I do not really care about your end result. I do care about the effort to once again, trashing the Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #49

There are a lot of people who had issues with the personnel thing. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #54

As we clearly see, it was presented for some to cause controversy that wasn't there. I oppose. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #66

Yep, sure was. Eliot Rosewater Oct 2017 #204

Mostly, these are people who cannot accept 16...and are bitter..those who hated the Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #183

I have personally proved that I accept '16. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #206

I will repeat my point this once, for you. Sanders is posturing for a future run. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #211

Then it's enough to put it on him as an individual. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #213

My conversation isnt about you. It is about the divisiveness being created for the Democratic Party. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #216

+1000 (nt) ehrnst Oct 2017 #238

I have no doubt he is posturing for another run...but he won't win a primary...I hope he does not Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #220

I am right there with every thing you said. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #222

I am as much of a Democrat as you are. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #52

No. And I admitted that was a stupid thing to do, so why are you still mad about it? Ken Burch Oct 2017 #45

Oh right, that was in The Apologies of Ken, Volume Two. betsuni Oct 2017 #51

I apologize when I make a mistake. People make mistakes. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #53

You have made another one with this issue. See Mrs. Coffee's #25 below. stevenleser Oct 2017 #78

No I haven't. It's enough that I've said I hope it works out well. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #79

Oh wait, suddenly now it's okay to be flawed and make mistakes? betsuni Oct 2017 #92

I've never demanded flawlessness. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #150

Support Is Always More Progressive Me. Oct 2017 #58

There's nothing that's being done that people need to be hardballed into accepting. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #63

No One Is Me. Oct 2017 #64

I am so done with being told I really do not see what is in front of my face. I agree with you. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #69

Too Much Of That Lately From All KInds Of People Me. Oct 2017 #72

Yes. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #74

Exactly. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #68

The support comes in the form of working to elect the candidates. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #208

Yes...if we say we will unquestioningly vote for the Democrat...it will lead to an electoral Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #182

I agree. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #190

Sounds good to me... Wounded Bear Oct 2017 #6

Diversity is something Democrats have always stood for. sheshe2 Oct 2017 #7

"Diversity" achieved entirely at the expense of the Sanders/Ellison wing of the party markpkessinger Oct 2017 #8

Just as you did not bother to read the article in the OP, I cannot be bothered to read your comment. DonViejo Oct 2017 #9

Neither can I. nt Atticus Oct 2017 #10

. . . markpkessinger Oct 2017 #11

There is nothing in what that post said that contradicts the article Ken Burch Oct 2017 #22

I look forward to reading your letter to Tom Steyer, telling him he and his money are no longer DonViejo Oct 2017 #27

Well shit... GulfCoast66 Oct 2017 #60

I wasn't saying anything about you, for God's sakes. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #67

I read your op and the Vanity Fair article and a number of other articles this morning.. CentralMass Oct 2017 #133

Out of the 75 Eko Oct 2017 #12

,,, lapucelle Oct 2017 #40

Huh, look at that. Eko Oct 2017 #46

This is a great list! mcar Oct 2017 #106

Stop posting divisive stuff, please. No reason for that. nt Blue_true Oct 2017 #15

Seems to me the divisiveness is coming from Perez n/t markpkessinger Oct 2017 #16

Getting underrepresented Democrats Blue_true Oct 2017 #17

Yes, how divisive of Perez to include LGBTQ, AA mcar Oct 2017 #23

No wonder Perez named Ellison to the Executive Committee. lapucelle Oct 2017 #44

Nope, see Mrs. Coffee's #25 below. The facts are against what you are saying. nt stevenleser Oct 2017 #77

Baloney. MrsCoffee Oct 2017 #25

And there you have it. All of this nonsense from people trying to manufacture outrage against the stevenleser Oct 2017 #75

Not at all baloney. The DNC's official line is classic misdirection. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #88

Petty squabbles and attacks on Democrats or the party do not seem reasonable. Period. MrsCoffee Oct 2017 #90

At least you're impliedly admitting that there was retaliation involved. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #116

No, I implied that it is the job to make the nominations. MrsCoffee Oct 2017 #124

No, it completely blows up the arguments people are using to complain. stevenleser Oct 2017 #99

And I thought DU was a place to SUPPORT the party, but attacking the party is welcome Eliot Rosewater Oct 2017 #205

And there it is...this is always and continues to be about Sen. Sanders...who cannot have a "wing" Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #184

How is it an attack angrychair Oct 2017 #13

Wow. Eko Oct 2017 #14

Yes he did angrychair Oct 2017 #18

How is it parsing words? Eko Oct 2017 #21

Pres. Obama supported the Keystone at one time...there are differing opinions...and it is no longer Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #31

To be clear angrychair Oct 2017 #85

The Dems have always been a big tent. But I too was unhappy with the endorsement of Mello. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #134

The Democratic Party is a big tent party...and what you consider important...may not be Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #177

With all due respect angrychair Oct 2017 #196

What would you do about the "anti-choice" Democrats? Jim Lane Oct 2017 #212

Perhaps Keith Ellison should turn down his nomination by Perez lapucelle Oct 2017 #50

Yet again, to be clear angrychair Oct 2017 #86

Anyone who is not happy with the "compromises" lapucelle Oct 2017 #91

Again angrychair Oct 2017 #131

The post I responded to was your defense of criticism lapucelle Oct 2017 #145

We don't need to kick people out of the party because they have jobs you don't like...too bad. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #30

Maybe you replied to the wrong person? Eko Oct 2017 #33

I did sorry...we are in agreement...Mea Culpa...I should be more careful. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #34

No problem, Eko Oct 2017 #37

During my misreading episode...sorry again mea culpa mea maxima culpa. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #135

People have jobs and we have never based party membership or activism on jobs. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #35

See Mrs. Coffee's #25 above. It's an attack and it ignored the facts. nt stevenleser Oct 2017 #76

These are the "lobbyists and corporatists"? mcar Oct 2017 #19

+1 MrsCoffee Oct 2017 #26

+2 betsuni Oct 2017 #55

+3 JHan Oct 2017 #113

Democrats should be in good shape from here if we all pull together. oasis Oct 2017 #61

K&R... spanone Oct 2017 #83

K&R betsuni Oct 2017 #84

On some matters, DU is less credible than progressive boards like JackPineRadicals. philly_bob Oct 2017 #87

### NurseJackie Oct 2017 #95

LOL SunSeeker Oct 2017 #96

Lol JHan Oct 2017 #110

I don't see how anyone could look at that sentence without bursting into peals of hearty laughter. betsuni Oct 2017 #161

My thoughts exactly. (nt) ehrnst Oct 2017 #176

Is JPR still photoshopping feces onto pictures of Hillary Clinton? yardwork Oct 2017 #97

Incorrect, see MrsCoffee's #25 above. JPR is never credible on anything. stevenleser Oct 2017 #102

Wasn't JPR founded so people mcar Oct 2017 #103

Pretty much...although some left willingly and some are back. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #185

Oy. greatauntoftriplets Oct 2017 #104

That would be the site that calls women harpies, at the very least? No identity politics. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #105

Cool story bro JHan Oct 2017 #109

Especially if Russian propaganda is what you consider "credible." brer cat Oct 2017 #148

They're on Prop Or Not's list lapucelle Oct 2017 #151

Which means they and their posters revmclaren Oct 2017 #164

That's true, but there's one respect in which they're almost exactly the same. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #166

I dont see you attacking JPR posters the same way, tho. R B Garr Oct 2017 #167

I'm not going to fight with shadows. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #168

Okay. Its just obvious that JPR engages in conspiracy R B Garr Oct 2017 #169

It's truly amazing how often you "respond" to something I haven't said Jim Lane Oct 2017 #172

Sorry, not buying it. This is just your version of "both sides do it" as an attempt to R B Garr Oct 2017 #195

Both sides do it, both sides are the same, what about the men, blue lives matter too. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #198

Me too. Im tired of the browbeating that we have R B Garr Oct 2017 #227

Totally, and absolutely agree. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #228

There's only one sentence in this post of yours that makes sense. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #209

Sorry, but your posts here attempted to ridicule R B Garr Oct 2017 #226

I went into one link, calling women, Democratic women, harpies. That said everything. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #229

Great post! Squinch Oct 2017 #232

There isnt a real progressive in the lot at JPR. Its a cesspool of posers. MrsCoffee Oct 2017 #173

+1 betsuni Oct 2017 #175

Uh...LOL...Bwahaha...etc. MineralMan Oct 2017 #202

Did you really write that? Squinch Oct 2017 #231

The official spin about "diversity" is not completely congruent with the facts. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #89

Isn't the Intercept Greenwald's site? George II Oct 2017 #98

Correct. Russian propaganda 24x7. nt stevenleser Oct 2017 #101

I don't know. Is the statement I quoted true? or do you not care about that? (n/t) Jim Lane Oct 2017 #108

JPR, Breitbart, Greenwald/Intercept, FR, and various others aren't worth the effort to check stevenleser Oct 2017 #112

Isn't Greenwald connected to Assange? I know that doesn't work for me. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #114

Exactly. And they are lying again now, MrsCoffee's #25 above has all the facts. stevenleser Oct 2017 #115

I stopped listening to Greenwald at least a couple years ago. He has proved his agenda counters Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #118

Your subject line is false. Demonstrably false. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #120

People are done, and hopefully the DNC and Democratic Party is done with the petty fighting. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #122

There are two ways to be done with the fighting. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #126

I have watched childish, false, irresponsible attacks on the Democratic Party. Done. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #127

And I have watched childish, false, irresponsible attacks on progressives. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #130

I am a progressive. You mean populist, right? Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #132

Getting into an argument about who deserves the title "progressive" is generally unhelpful. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #138

Using it to bash the majority of the Democratic base is harmful and untrue. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #139

Sick of these empty threats. You have to live in the same R B Garr Oct 2017 #140

You post yet another straw-man argument, again based on huge distortion Jim Lane Oct 2017 #146

No, your wall of words is where the straw man arguments R B Garr Oct 2017 #147

What right wing? lapucelle Oct 2017 #153

The right wing that holds power in the federal government Jim Lane Oct 2017 #165

There is already one minor party lapucelle Oct 2017 #170

+1 betsuni Oct 2017 #171

People can read the posts and agendas on JPR. R B Garr Oct 2017 #137

I agree. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #141

Your post is a good example of a distinction without a difference and manufactured outrage stevenleser Oct 2017 #128

Their well-known reputations precede them. I must say, it reveals much about anyone who would... NurseJackie Oct 2017 #117

I agree. And I have to read MrsCoffee #25 that you all are pointing out. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #119

I respectfully request that you also read my # 88 in response. Get both sides. Thanks. (n/t) Jim Lane Oct 2017 #123

It is not "both sides". I am done with agitators that caused our problem 2016. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #125

Lots of attention is being paid to those who were removed, little attention to.... George II Oct 2017 #121

Then pray enlighten me about the new members OF THE COMMITTEES Jim Lane Oct 2017 #191

I don't know much about them yet, but I sure as heck didn't jump on the bandwagon... George II Oct 2017 #193

Your response epitomizes one view of how to oppose Trump Jim Lane Oct 2017 #194

This message was self-deleted by its author Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #200

No it is not true...it is about helping the Russian loving Republicans. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #186

"It helps the Republicans" doesn't prove it's false. Try again. (n/t) Jim Lane Oct 2017 #192

Anything that helps the GOP is wrong...period. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #223

If you want to say that something is wrong, fine, but don't say it isn't true. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #224

I categorically deny that the assertions you made are true. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #225

+1. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #230

Nothing the Intercept writes should be trusted. It's Greenwald's site. nt stevenleser Oct 2017 #100

Well... THAT certainly explains a lot. (And I'll just leave it at that... NurseJackie Oct 2017 #107

+1000, thanks Steve, that sure explains everything. R B Garr Oct 2017 #111

so if they make a claim, somebody could correct the record. Sure, take it with a pile of salt. Are JCanete Oct 2017 #144

Nope, just like we dont bother with other reichwing sites stevenleser Oct 2017 #149

They are now like Breitbart...so none of their statements need be addressed...they Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #187

It looks like the Party is hurting for money also. Maybe this diversity will help fill the coffers. jalan48 Oct 2017 #94

Sanders grassroots organization was a prolific fund raiser during the primary. Do think that .. CentralMass Oct 2017 #152

We have no idea who contributed to Sanders. It could R B Garr Oct 2017 #154

We have some pretty good data on who contributed to him CentralMass Oct 2017 #155

There were pages of discrepancies promoting a R B Garr Oct 2017 #156

When you have millions of contributions being takien by a newly CentralMass Oct 2017 #157

Just because you are a Believer doesnt change the R B Garr Oct 2017 #158

What I believe is that the DNC just made a mistake with this recent purge. CentralMass Oct 2017 #159

Lol. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #160

Bernie purged himself a while ago. If he makes R B Garr Oct 2017 #162

Now that is an excellent point. MrsCoffee Oct 2017 #174

You took the words right out of my mouth! NurseJackie Oct 2017 #181

No-but at least we have Wall Street and the billionaires to fall back on. jalan48 Oct 2017 #163

I dispute that they are not being listened too...and why should anyone follow a Senator Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #188

Cool...sounds like a puff piece though. If you are going to talk about who got nominated as if JCanete Oct 2017 #143

Why...would that be useful? You can infer anything by such choices... and it is just more endless Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #189

You don't give a damn about it. Other people do. But of course it would be useful. If some people JCanete Oct 2017 #197

"Stop giving them your support" and elect Republicans...not a great plan but one that works out Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #221

'draw a distinction between his priorities and those of President Trump.' Baconator Oct 2017 #180