Is it worse in here than in '04

[u2spirit]

I remember the infighting during '04 but was it this bad, or has time healed all wounds?

[Adelante]

1. It's worse now nt

[splat]

2. much worse

[MercutioATC]

3. I disagree....seems about the same to me.

People tend to forget what primary season is like....just roll with it...in less than 8 months, this'll be over.

[Uzybone]

4. Its worse by far

Dean vs Kerry is childs play compared to this. It only gets worse. Gore v Nader was bad but not as bad as '04. The only common theme is that we keep losing because we dont focus on the real enemy.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

5. It is worse here than in the middle ages!

[newmajority]

I believe it's worse.

I was only lurking back then, but it seems the more Hillary loses, the angrier her surrogates get.

And since you're a fan of both a certain Irish band and the next President of the United States, here's a picture you might like....

[u2spirit]

11. Thank you

I haven't seen that pic b4. It is my new wallpaper.

[CK_John]

6. Does it matter. n/t

[FrenchieCat]

7. Pure hatred now.......

and it's ugly!

[Frances]

16. Frenchie Cat, were you here in 2004?

I don't remember you.

[FrenchieCat]

32. Yep....I was right here!

[Frances]

35. Did you feel as strongly about one of the candidates in 2004

as you feel about Obama now?

[Bucky]

8. It's not worse, but the fight is closer and the mods aren't tombstoning people as in 04

The mods had marching orders to smack down any name calling posts last time. They're not doing it this time. Without that regulation, people aren't holding back. But even with that regulation gone, it's not intolerable in here. The squeaky wheels still squeak, but if you use your ignore button liberally, you do get some good & useful news around here.

[high density]

9. By this point John Kerry was the obvious winner

Lots of hate on this board. I'm willing to vote for either candidate in the general election, but I really can't believe some of the threads that are being originated in here. I am absolutely baffled as to why more moderation is not going on.

[u2spirit]

10. I've seen posts that say it was as bad 4 years ago

Maybe it's because the race is so close but it is sickening. I remember after Kerry lost, the anti-Kerry folk were out in force to say I told you so. I fear that whoever wins the nomination, if by some act of the devil McCain wins, the people who were on the side of the primary loser will make this current group of postings seem mild in comparison.

[sniffa]

12. I've felt for a while, that yes, it is actually worse this time around

Today, Skinner finally affirmed my perception - it is worse because, in 2004, DU went for a hard line moderating angle; this time DU is taking more of a hands off approach for the primaries. I thought I noticed it earlier, but Skinner's posts today (can't remember which thread it was - and now that I think about it, maybe that thread was from yesterday? eh, that's besides the point) now makes me see why this seems worse than 2004 (which was really fucking bad). I don't think it's a bad idea, as 2004 was the first crack at it, and this is the next round. 2012 will be a hybrid. ;)

[Adelante]

24. I really crossed some kind of line during this past weekend

I started feeling myself just shriveling up being hateful and resentful. That's why I went along today with my Ignore button, pop pop pop - GONE. What a relief.

[sniffa]

29. That's a good thing

We're on our way to the nomination, and there's no reason to look back, especially if it's to the last decade. ;)

[Frances]

13. Times 10

[Frances]

14. Times 10

[Crunchy Frog]

15. The '04 race was over alot more quickly than this one.

I think the worst ugliness in '04 actually happened before the primaries began. Kerry emerged as the presumptive nominee so quickly that people didn't have time for the nastiness. This was especially true since it was the Dean and Clark supporters who were at it the most before the primaries, while as soon as the primaries actually started, they both faded pretty dramatically.

I think the prolonged period of having 2 candidates in genuine competition with each other is making it much worse this time around.

[madaboutharry]

17. It was so ugly then.

It is getting like that now. I don't understand why people have to be so rude.

[madaboutharry]

18. It was so ugly then.

It is getting like that now. I don't understand why people have to be so rude.

[madaboutharry]

19. It was so ugly then.

It is getting like that now. I don't understand why people have to be so rude.

[madaboutharry]

20. I'm sorry!

I don't know why my post showed up 3 times.

[calmblueocean]

21. I don't recall people cut'n'pasting posts from FR here in '04

Or if they did, it wasn't many. Lots worse, IMO.

[QC]

22. Very true. Much worse now. n/t

[JackRiddler]

23. The big difference is that the "unity at all costs faction" seems to desire mass tombstonings. nt

[LWolf]

25. Much worse. nt

[RedEarth]

26. Worse....seems to be a more trolls now

... now after the general election it get very, very nasty...lot of ugly people that post on du that pretend to be progressive, but don't even come close.

[NashVegas]

27. It Seems Worse

In late 2003 / early 2004, after Dean stepped out of the race things calmed down a lot.

Personally, that one felt worse for me because I was a Dean supporter, bigtime. This cycle I'm not as invested emotionally. Most of the pro-Obama who are acting up are too amateur to do real damage. The Hillary partisans, as nasty as some are (I have supporters of both in my ignore list), have mostly pulled their punches, considering what they *could* be coming up with.

However, the sheer volume ...

[mmonk]

28. Unequivocally. I learned how much of a misogynist

I was today. The thread got so bad I asked the mods to shut it down. No one came to my defense. I'm close to having enough. In fact, I'm backing out now. I'll be back if Sibel and lukery need help.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

30. It's worse, and here's why: the admins like it this way

They aren't trying to modulate the discourse. They created a Thunderdome where everyone can fight as viciously as they please. They realize that a large segment of DUers enjoy it, and they're giving them what they want.

Admins don't care about your "DU experience." They've provided the tools that let you control it by hiding forums, threads, other users. If you choose to engage in the Thunderdome, that's up to you. Users who get hurt or upset by it, or develop intense hatreds because of it, have only themselves to blame.

That's why the kind of rightwing lies and smears that were deleted during '04 are allowed to stand now. That's why there's a much higher tolerance for those who appear to be engaged in outright trollery. These things create excitement, and excitement increases participation. And every registered name represents an actual or potential donor.

That's also why this fund drive, like the last one, has been set up to fuel the rivalry between candidates' supporters. It brings in more bucks.

I think it's pretty cynical and will damage DU in the long term. To put it another way, I think it's bad for the DU brand. But I'm not the brand manager and, increasingly, I doubt I'm the target audience.

[ariesgem]

31. It's worse now.

This time around, racism & sexism has been added to the mix. For me to enjoy DU now, I delete flame-fest threads that I feel is offensive, post positive news about my candidate and have put more than a few dozen folks on ignore. I've never used the ignore feature until recently.

Clarkies vs Deaniacs - Those were the days.

[nonconformist]

33. Fuck yes it's worse. It was bad then, but this is different.

I think it's because it's gone on so long. By this point last time, there was a very clear front-runner. Plus, I think everyone had more of a common goal that time - get Bush OUT. Now, it doesn't seem like getting a Democrat in the White House is the most important thing to everyone.

[krabigirl]

34. It's worse now.

(I have an old account to which I lost the password, in case you are wondering how I'd know.)