What's with all the hit pieces?

[MaineDem]

This is going to be a long campaign.

Maybe the Administrators will institute primary rules earlier than in '04.

The hate is palpable and it's pathetic.

[aquart]

1. Yeah, but we're getting to know their names real early.

That's just sloppy.

[William769]

2. No they won't, I think it's being encouraged.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

3. Interestingly, very little of it seems to be aimed at Edwards.

I've seen an awful lot of posts aimed at discrediting both Clinton and Obama, but relatively few abusing Edwards. If I were one of his supporters, I'd take that as a bad sign.

FWIW, I think that any of the big three would make a perfectly good candidate; I think that Edwards would possibly make marginally the best candidate, but I'm vaguely hoping for a Clinton primary win because her critics on DU are the most obnoxious (although Obama is running her a decent second); as a Limey I'm not really supporting any of them.

[Hart2008]

4. A lack of discussion of serious issues. Negative campaigning is easier to do.

Look at the Bushes.

Case in point.

Raise more money so you can run more attack ads and hire more opposition researchers.

We all lose when the issues aren't discussed.

[davidwparker]

5. I guess people thinking slamming someone would make readers not

want to vote for the slammed candidate. To me, it has no effect. It actually says some person can't say anything positive about his/her candidate so he/she can only slam some other candidate.

[LWolf]

6. It's safer.

It's so much safer, and easier, to go negative on the opposition, and to be a faithful cheerleader for your chosen,

than to actually discuss records, issues and positions. What if your chosen doesn't compare well on the issues? Spin, triangulation, propaganda, and "ignoring" the better positions available will only go so far. They won't prove your candidate better than all the rest.

Safer to go negative.

After all, it's not about making the best choice. It's about doing whatever it takes to get your choice to the winner's convention, where he or she can be proclaimed "best" regardless of truth.

[Grandrose]

7. My question too?

The bashing and viciousness to Senators Obama and Clinton is to the point, I do not like it here very much! The negativity is sickening and counter-productive!

Dedication to a candidate is one thing, but hit squads are another!

Silly me....I thought the Republics were to be defeated, but we are giving them the ammunition to knock ourselves off!

:eyes: :dem:

[venable]

8. The effect of the slammers is not what they think

when my guy, Edwards, is slammed by the supporters of one person, typically, it provokes a slight distaste for that person (though they have nothing to do with the assault, obviously).

On the other hand, one Obama supporter, IllinoisProgressive, is very gracious towards Edwards and his supporters, not patronizing, just civil and respectful - this provokes a generous feeling towards Obama.

Others should take a notice of IllinoisProgressive, and the effect of civility.

[progdog]

9. Thanks for posting this.

Having come back to DU after a long vacation the hostility I find is very discouraging. There are a few Clinton supporters who have demonized other candidates so much that they have pushed this fence sitter far away from Hillary. I may be wrong but I don't think this is what she would want representing her.

[Longhorn]

12. Welcome back!

:hi:

[Solon]

10. Fanboys and fangirls having their "fun"...

Being a gamer, this reminds me of the "console wars", which are equally stupid.

[Forkboy]

13. Oh yeah...the exact same mentality.

Some are so blinded by their console..er..candidate of choice that it's frightening.I see a level of delusion in a few that is downright disturbing. :scared:

[calteacherguy]

11. I will not hate. nt

[Trajan]

14. First I railed against it ...

Then I simply avoided it ....

It is pathetic, and extremely short sighted ....

It's all about ego at this point, and who can rank hardest on what candidate .... and it's nearly ALL negative ....

I laughed when I read a post tonight that said dont worry 'as long as we get behind whoever wins' in the general election ....

I would ask: Do people forget the insults and petty recriminations so quickly ? .... hardly ....

We are humans FIRST, and humans rarely forget .... The selfish egos will not be so easily forgotten ....

For the time being: they are ALL my candidate, because surely ONE of them will be, and I am not sure who yet ..... but who ever it is, I will not have to pretend to support a candidate I spent the previous 18 months flailing and ranting about ceaselessly ....

But hey; it's a free existence, and all are free to express extreme, incessant criticism til the cows come home. if they so desire .....

Have at it .... But I will not participate .....

Nor can we expect complete turnarounds from many of the worst detractors .... Why would they suddenly convert to supporters of those they have lambasted over and over again ?

[MaryBear]

15. Hey, Trajan!

How goes it in the cold, wet northwest these days?

Thanks for your post on this thread.

I would go one more and say that the attackers are scared.

Probably both scared and ignorant of the benefit any candidate might bring to the Dems.

I am with those who think we have a good group of prospects.

Let's put forth their strengths.

[Eurobabe]

16. At least this time we have an IGNORE button

IRRC, I don't think we had the option to hide threads last primary, or am I wrong?

I use mine LIBERALLY and often.

[MaineDem]

17. I love the Hide Thread ability

I'm not sure if it was around in '04 but I think not.

I'm still evaluating all the candidates and really have decided on one yet. I can't understand the vitriol expressed in so many threads.

But Ignore and Hide Thread are great options that I will also use, I'm sure.