Let me tell you what the bashing does to me. . .

[eileen from OH]

It makes me sick, and depressed, and I feel like I'm turning into one of those defeatists that add to the polls saying that Bush can't be beat.

For the first time in my entire fucking life I have worked for and GIVEN to a campaign and have also GIVEN to the Dem party. For the first time I've done more than follow the news, bitch, and vote. And it's been very uplifting and positive and made me feel like a real goddam American.

And then I swing by here, where it's usually loud and messy and unruly and funny - just like our Party. But it's taken a new, nastier tone, since Clark jumped in. I'm not blaming the Clarkies AT ALL, there's enough blame to go around. But that seems to be the point in time where it all started to get REALLY vindictive.

I don't like everything about "my" candidate and there's stuff I don't like about yours either. I don't mind a reasonable discussion and commentary, even a good ol' slugfest - but the overall vicious undercurrent on some of these threads has made me think why bother? We ARE just a circular firing squad.

eileen from OH (last glass of wine may have been a mistake)

[stevedeshazer]

1. If just half the energy

that is expended on trashing each other on this board were transferred to meaningful action against the real enemy, the Republicans and Bush, the multiplier effect would be overwhelming. Hell, have another glass.

[fabius]

6. GET OUT AND WALK AND TALK!

I agree let's channel this energy. Who is doing what? My wife and I have contributed money to Dean. Also some to Kucinich actually.

We handed out Dean literature twice, and walked two neighborhoods for voter registration. In the last two weeks.

Let's all do something for the Democratic Party and/or for our candidates at least once a month! Let's do it.

Don't despair anybody, this is a crowded primary field and passions run high. I lived through 12 years of Reagan-Bush and it was awful for anybody paying attention, but we kicked their butt in '92 and again in '96. It's worth it when you win.

And Newtie going down after the Clinton impeachment was sweeeet!

Repuglians are by nature arrogant and stupid and it always leads to overreaching. As we see right now. It catches up with 'em.

:evilgrin:

[w4rma]

2. IMHO, each second spent on slamming another candidate is a second that

could have been spend slaming Bush and rasing the general election poll numbers of all the candidates.

[ronzo]

3. Can't argue with that.

Without tipping my hand, let me say that there were a couple of idiots flying my guy's colors, much to my chagrin. Sorry about that. I don't miss them. :)

[LiberalVoice]

4. I tip my glass to you

I have been trying to say that for sometime now...Its ok to have discussions and even arguements about eachothers candidates but some of this stuff is like playing with a childs toy that repeats the same thing over and over.

Think of it like this. The more time you waste acting like squabbling children the more people will start to think you are.

[Dover]

5. I think everyone's commitment to their candidate and need to

believe they have made a good choice is what is behind the hyper-reactive responses. Like you, people have become emotionally and intellectually involved and spurred to action. That's a good thing, though it does obscure everyone's objectivity. Can anyone who has already committed to a candidate at this point be objective and open to new information about their candidate? If one's choice is questioned then they themselves feel that their own critical abilities to choose are being assailed.

The stakes are high and there are very real differences among the candidates. Clearly we all feel a much greater responsibility to put the right person in office and don't want to make a mistake. We also learned to mistrust the media, and I'm sure their bias toward one candidate or another makes them suspect on the one hand, while that candidates supporters are relieved for the media's agreement. Also, as we dig for information, some of the information that is turning up about some candidates is setting off alarm bells...and trust is at a low ebb. Can we voice those concerns here without being considered a basher? Can it be presented in a more objective way?

[stevedeshazer]

7. What is frustrating is

that there are a lot of us who have not committed to any candidate yet.

It's still September, there is an eternity left until decision time. A whole lot can happen. Why focus on one candidate, unless you are so into your choice that you're campaigning already and walking around with blinders on? <rhetorical question>

[SoCalDem]

8. I have not committed to anyone in particular either

We have bigger fish to fry out here.. When the primaries are over, I will support whoever makes the cut, but I will not participate in the naysaying and nanni-nanni-boo-booing...

[cmd]

9. I don't know who will be on the ballot at the end

I have a favorite right now, but I'm not going to dis someone I might be voting for on election day.

[noiretextatique]

10. here's a suggestion: STOP READING THE THREADS!!!!!

or...continue posting new threads that decry the other threads, and keep the entire mess going.

[eileen from OH]

11. Oh, trust me, I HAVE

but the sheer number and vehemence of the SUBJECT LINES is enough to make a body ill.

And since it's been going on for well over a week, I figured I was allowed to put up ONE personal thread on how it made me feel.

eileen from OH

[FlaGranny]

12. The trouble is,

you can't avoid the TITLES of those stupid threads.

[Ruby Newsbee]

13. why pay attention to it?

There has been vindictiveness on this bulletin board since I've been reading it off and on for the last several months between Greens, progressives, liberals and Centrists. It's certainly nothing new here.

I find it amusing that some treat their candidates like Jesus Christ and the Dem Party like it's the Church. OH THE BLASPHEMY.

Politics has never been morally or spiritually uplifting. It's full of liars, theives and opportunists promising you the world if only you would follow. We know what happens to the good and honest ones who try to get involved. They kill them and remember, the pen is mightier than the sword.

I commend you on volunteering for your favorite candidate, but think it's a little pathetic if that is what makes you feel like a "real American".

[Robbien]

14. Because the bashers have turned into bullies and

have taken over the board. They are overwhelming any discussion with their bashing threads. I now automatically go to page 2 and skip page 1 because I know that page is full of basher bullies.

[Ruby Newsbee]

15. Page two isn't full of bashing

I fail to see your logic. The anti candidate threads I can handle because I glean the information and skip the rest which mostly consist of bashing the poster.

[Solomon]

16. That's exactly why I started these threads:

http://democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=427763


http://democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=415268


http://democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=419876


Keep your chin up. We gonna make it. B-)

[RichM]

17. You SHOULD be blaming the Clarkies -- it's their fault. Most of those

who have been on DU for a significant length of time realize that the forum quality plunged into the abyss when the large horde of organized Clark peddlers got here. (Many chose screen names like "Clark_for_Prez," etc.)

They are the ones trying to ram a Republican militarist down the throats of the DU community. This is exactly why the forum has become vicious -- it isn't possible for there to be mutual respect when a group arrives insisting you have to worship their militarist, or face their bullying.

[JVS]

18. RichM knows the score

[sangh0]

19. Yeah, right! Fight bashing with bashing

That will lead to a decrease it bashing.

Excuse me for not being impressed by that logic

[JVS]

21. Who advocated that?

[sangh0]

22. RichM

by blaming it on one specific faction. The bashing began long before Clark was an issue

[JVS]

23. He didn't advocate bashing.

He blamed it on the Clark faction. He didn't mention bashing them. If anything, the logical extension of his post would be to propose a purge.

[sangh0]

25. He didn't advocate it. He just engaged in it.

and actions speak louder than words

[Japhy_Ryder]

20. You just illustrated the point

disappointingly so.

I haven't picked a candidate yet. I'm reading and trying to learn as much as I can about them. There is a contingent here for virtually all the candidates that erupt with bitterness anytime their candidate is questioned. It's not just Clark (what's wrong with someone supporting Clark and having "Clark_for_prez" as their name?) or Dean or anyone. All the candidates have their backers and people are being WAY too insensitive to "allowing" others to back other candidates.

Though I'm not likely to support Clark myself, I say welcome to all Clark, Dean, Kucinich, Gephardt, Kerry, Braun, Sharpton, Edwards, Graham and Lieberman supporters. The more people that are excited about the Democratic party, the better. Let's leave the intolerance and the "we own the party" bullshit to the other side. The Democratic party is a big tent, and that's what makes it great.

[RichM]

24. Here's what's wrong with the screen name I mentioned --

It has nothing to do with the name itself, of course. For example, there's a long-time poster at DU whose screenname has "Kerry" in it. This person came to DU to discuss political ideas in general -- not just to plug Kerry all the time. Thus, the "Kerry" in his name is not objectionable; it merely shows where he's coming from.

But the Clark supporters are different. Many of these people showed up here a few months ago, all at about the same time. Many (not all) chose names like "Clark_4_Prez." And virtually the ONLY threads they participate in are those hyping Clark & savaging his opposition. So in this case, you had a large influx of people who came here for the SOLE purpose of hyping Clark. And you can see, by their screen-name choice, that this was their intent from the moment they signed up.

[Japhy_Ryder]

26. I'm sorry RichM, but that's politics

And politics can get ugly. There are 2 ways to win a campaign, either convince people that you are the right person for the job or convince them that your opponent is the wrong person for the job.

Like I say, I'm not signed up for anyone yet. And reading the flame wars, I get the impression that supporters of many of the candidates are doing what amounts to negative campaigning on here. There seem to be more Clark and Dean supporters doing so, but I think that's because these two probably have the most supporters. If Kerry and Edwards were the top 2 right now, there would be people bashing them more too.

When they bash your candidate, tell them why they are wrong. I'd like to see the tone improve here too, but it's not going to, not until the primary is over. People have invested a lot into their candidates, and they want them to win. One way for Clark supporters to win, is to bash Dean, and vice versa. Politics is ugly sometimes.

[Bridget Burke]

27. One way for anybody's supporters to LOSE...

Is to continue with the most vicious bashing. It definitely turns the uncommitted OFF the guy the basher claims to support.

Speaking generally--wouldn't that be a good way to sow dissent among us? I know nobody HERE would actually do anything that underhanded, but "politics is ugly sometimes".

I generally avoid those threads, personally.