Which DU GD-P supporters have been the most civil?

[usregimechange]

We all have lost it and freeped ourselves, some more than others. Which candidate's supporters have been the most civil here?

[Barack_America]

1. .

self delete.

[valerief]

2. As they say in India on Jan. 14 and 15

Go fly a kite.

[Occam Bandage]

3. Depends on the timeframe.

Edwards supporters were the best during this race bullshit, but were the nastiest after Iowa.

[Barack_America]

5. That is an excellent point.

I assumed the OP meant recently.

Perhaps the question could be clarified?

[Name removed]

4. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bicoastal]

6. PLEASE take this down--it's not going to help anything or anybody. nt

[Divine Discontent]

12. hmm, it's baiting the question of who's got the meanest supporters, isn't it?

and we all know who they are (singularly) so we don't need a poll about it. there's unfriendly supporters for each candidate. It's not a candidate thing. It's like asking who is more charitable among the races of humans, ya know? It's an argument starter, even though I'm certain it wasn't meant as such.

[Bicoastal]

16. We don't need an "argument starter" about which DU'ers are the nastiest.

That's a "I'm calling you punks out" thread in spirit, if not in name.

[Zynx]

7. That's like asking whose shit doesn't stink.

[Divine Discontent]

8. why does Obama get notated as 'Obama'

but the other two get the first name treatment?

[Occam Bandage]

9. Especially since few ever really call Edwards as "John."

[FrenchieCat]

10. True Dat!

I like Barack...the name, I mean.

[Divine Discontent]

14. I liked Barack's first name also!

It's cool. I just wondered why the first names for the other two, but the official sounding last name only, for Barack. It's not a big deal at all, just wondering why it was posed that way.

[RaleighNCDUer]

20. Edwards is Edwards, because John is a common name and the

name of a front running republican. Hillary is Hillary because a differentiation needs to be made between the two Clintons. Obama - Barak, it's a toss up for me, but the convention is the last name, as it is for most the candidates.

[JDPriestly]

21. It's obvious

Obama is an unusual name. No one wonders who is being discussed. Clinton is a pretty common name, and there is Bill Clinton and then Hillary Clinton. So I just say "Hillary." Both John and Edwards are pretty common names so I say Edwards or John Edwards. Just John could mean John Kerry or John McCain. So John Edwards is best. (Or Edwards)

[JohnnyLib2]

11. Interesting but divisive post.

Sorry.

[Bicoastal]

13. Alerted, and encouraging others to do the same.

If I know DU, this will turn into a flamefest faster than a "Cindy Sheehan is dating the Duke Lacrosse team!" thread.

[rucky]

15. Undecided. n/t

[MadBadger]

17. This thread really doesnt help anything

We need to stop tearing each other down and life each other up!

[Catherine Vincent]

18. How odd? I tried to respond to the poll and a message came up that said I already voted.

WTF?

Anyway, I think it was the Edwards supporters with the exception of three supporters which I will not name. :) Of course, that doesn't mean the supporters of Clinton and Obama weren't civil, it means they weren't as civil.

[Catherine Vincent]

19. Okay, I figured out what you did.

The original poll asked whose supporters were the meanest and I voted, that's why it said I voted already.

What a weasel you are!

[NMMNG]

22. Those of John Edwards

By far.

[killbotfactory]

23. Gravel supporters.

[Perry Logan]

24. The Obama people routinely smear Hillary, Bill, their campaign workers, and their supporters.

[ellisonz]

25. Kucinich.

[H2O Man]

26. That is definitely correct.

The majority of the supporters of Obama, Clinton, and Edwards are fine. There is a small but obnoxiously vocal and self-righteous group that behave like a pack of rabid chihuahuas, attempting to bite the ankles of everyone else. But the Kucinich supporters stand out as the most polite as a group.

[ellisonz]

27. Got to admit.

I bite ankles. But I don't have rabies...

[Yukari Yakumo]

28. Most - Hill's

Least - Either Kuch's or Edwards's
Though the sheer number of them and the rule of averages may be playing a role here. There will always be one asshole in the lot. And when there's a whole bunch of lots, there'll be a whole bunch of assholes too.

[elaineb]

29. WHO is an a**hole??

Oh, I see, "Hill" has the most civil supporters, and "Kuch" the least, huh?

I'm defending Kucinich right now against your negative ranting over in GD. Do you somehow act differently in GD/P than you do in GD? Because if not, I find it highly amusing that a poster who frequently exhibits such hostile derision and foul language in the Kucinich threads has the gall to try to rate the civility of others. Clean up your act first, and then you have the right to judge others. Check my posting history and see if I've ever said anything against the other candidates. All my time on DU is spent on the Kucinich threads defending him against uncivil, angry people like you. There are a lot of other Kucinich supporters who spend more time promoting and defending him than attacking other candidates, but you wouldn't notice them, would you? Or do you consider someone who calls you on your b.s. "uncivil" because they dare to challenge your smears?

Every candidate has their a**hole supporters. But for any DU'er who has said anything against any of the Democratic candidates: Keep your hilariously "objective" and hypocritical attempts to rate the civility of others to yourself, until you correct your own behavior.

I didn't vote in this poll, nor will I attempt to answer it in this post, because unlike some of you apparently, I haven't done a scientific analysis of the postings on DU to presume to answer the question objectively. Perhaps it's a very clever trap to get the uncivil candidate bashers to embarrass themselves by making hypocritical statements? It's already worked on the poster to whom I'm replying.

[elaineb]

30. I apologize to the casual reader for my anger and "uncivility"

but the number of threads that have turned into Kucinich-bashing fests over the last few weeks have increased exponentially, and I'm getting really fed up with it. I'd like to go back to lurking, but I'm not going to sit by and let a good Democrat be bashed with right-wing talking points. As soon as those threads stop, I'll go back into lurk mode.

In other words, Aya, keep it up and I'll be there to debate you. Control yourself, and you probably won't see me again.

[hayu_lol]

31. What a wonder it is that we(all of us)can take a simple question and...

either forget to read the threadstarter or, begin with an attack, or pick on the word order, or....

Doesn't much matter. We can attempt to be decent but all it takes to set us off is one individual who wants to flamebait. None of like or enjoy seeing our own personal candidate attacked. The less so if the attack is based upon disinformation or bias or outright and outrageous lies.

This thread has a few reasonable people trying to make the effort to get along. Some go off track. Others decide to make a war out of the thread, and yet others are oblivious of the meaning of the thread. That all seems to affect all threads at one time or another.

Think back about 3 weeks ago. Which group did the majority of attacking? 2 weeks ago, it was another group. One week ago, yet another group. Take your pick as which was the most'evil.'

We do have our trolls and freepers on this board. They are not here as peaceful spies, but rather are here to tick us all off at each other. Perhaps we should be watching them a bit more carefully.

[elaineb]

33. Well, obviously this thread was going to degenerate from the start

I'm sure the OP had the best of intentions, but with the current state of DU, how could it not end up being full of posts which completely turn the original question on its head? First of all, nobody who hasn't done a comprehensive analysis of all the posts since the campaign started could objectively state whose supporters are the most "civil" (which is a subjective term anyway).

So instead of getting an answer to his/her possibly well-intentioned question, the OP sees a thread that quickly degenerates into candidate-bashers pretending to make an objective assessment about OTHER candidate bashers.

I shouldn't have jumped in, but I've just been defending Kucinich against one of these bashers over on GD, and I couldn't believe he/she had the nerve to come to this thread and rank other people's postings for civility.

[demommom]

32. Let me make it clear:

I am not bashing anyone,and I am not by a long shot racist; I no longer have a candidate in this race.
However: I find the nickname "Obama Nation" offensive because of how it can be interpreted. Now scream away if you must.