I'm becoming very suspicious about people who are very suspicious about...

[wyldwolf]

...Clark. Or any candidate for that matter.

I don't disagree that there WERE prospect's of Clark campaign that raised questions. But they are the same questions daily.

And they're usually either addressed and/or debunked daily. I no longer post possibly disturbing info about Howard Dean because we've all seen it before - multiple times.

Are people intentionally keeping them in the forefront?

I'm not assuming that all of DU's members visit GD everyday so it is quite possible someone missed the same questions the first dozen or so times they were addressed.

But what Clark supporters (and Dean supporters and all candidate supporters) should do is huddle in our various camps and create definitive issue statements and explanations for all perceived "problems" with our candidates to point newbies (and others to) whenever they raise the same questions.

Perhaps post them in a slow moving forum.

I don't want anyone to feel like they're being ignored when they address these "problems" but I'm tired (and I'd bet some of you are, too) of addressing them everyday. Its like having to constantly give someone a summary of all the chapters so far before you continue with reading a book.

With this plan, we can just direct them to the explanation post.

Thoughts?

[jonnyblitz]

1. THAT is a good idea.

That is a much better idea then biting people's head off when they ask. You might actually gain supporters to your side instead of driving them away. Keep the thread in the Politics and Campaigns forum maybe and post a link to that thread everytime somebody asks the same questions that annoy you and the other Clark supporters. It sure beats personally attacking the people who ask the questions.

[QC]

2. I suspect you're right. A couple of things that give me pause....

1. Some of those most persistently announcing their "doubts" about various candidates are brand-new and sound like the very conservabot caricatures of granola-gobbling, tofu-triumphant, Birkenstock-brandishing liberals that exist only in the imaginations of Limbaugh's most slavish listeners, and

2. I've never encountered a Western European under the age of 70 who did not take great pride in speaking and writing flawless English.

[Padraig18]

3. I have largely noticed

"Are people intentionally keeping them in the forefront?" --YES!

By and large, it's the same set of trolls who consistently post the exact same CRAP day after day after day after day after day, with slightly different wording to their flame bait/troll bait!

:grr:

[wyldwolf]

4. Here is an example,,,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=415355#415403

[jonnyblitz]

5. and on the other hand...

I noticed an influx of new Clark supporters with low post counts going on and on about "left wing fringe extremists" if people didnt just shut the hell up and fall in line.

[wyldwolf]

6. Well, if that is your experience, fine...

...but that isn't the point here. We should work to curb the constant (intentional or unintentional) baiting.

[cherryperry]

7. I agree with you, wyldwolf and

it sickens me when a certain substrata of DU continually brings up bashing threads against one of the candidates who doesn't have a chance in the world of becoming either the candidate or even a VP...but, more than that, the silliness of some of the quoting/yelling back-and-forths make me just get off the thread immediately ... now, I plan to simply ignore them altogether!

:pals:

[Closer]

13. Oh Geez People

Quit playing all nice to these Clark supporters in this thread, when several in this thread post BASHING threads CONSTANTLY!!!

You folks are being playing by these rabid Clark supporters! This thread is a joke. A big circle jerk to take attention away from the threads that have ACTUAL CONTENT on Clark that points out his shady history.

[Pepperbelly]

10. point to some please... nt

[10digits]

8. I have a question.

I am new here. I always read the late breaking news which has every forum as it is posted.
Why do posters talk about being in this or that forum.

I like to see the whole thing. Am I wrong here?

[jumptheshadow]

9. It's probably a mixed bag

I suspect we have a couple of types of posters here: The newbies who are sincerely questioning Clark's stands, and the deliberate disruptors who are publishing the same questions over and over.

It's particularly suspicious to me when, days or weeks after an issue has been addressed over and over again, we suddenly see more than one thread asking the same damn question again.

The sincere posters generally hang around for a bonafide discussion. They don't use the guerilla tactics of making an inflammatory statement, then disappearing from a thread.

The idea of posting a detailed explanation is a good one. I wish I had time to volunteer to help out now.

[Rowdyboy]

11. One Clark bashing post was locked

yesterday. The moderator cited SIX other current threads currently active on the same topic! This is , at least in part, a deliberate attempt to smear. Either that or the posters were incredibly stupid, which I don't believe.

[Padraig18]

12. Your first guess is correct

And as certain candidates threaten to completely disappear from the electoral radar, it will get worse.