2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe DU is a place of seething disgust. No wonder dems aren't
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by BooScout (a host of the 2016 Postmortem forum).
voting in primaries and caucuses. GOP trolls on the DU and elsewhere are mucking up Democratic enthusiasm. While the GOP are breaking records in participation in their primaries, Democrats are not doing well.
If Democrats have nowhere to go to feel giddy with hope on the internet, why would they vote? Any time anyone says anything positive about Hillary on the DU the trolls show up and 'seeth'. Why would anybody feel excited when the choice is to follow the 'seether', supposedly Bernie fans, or the 'seethee', Hillary? Disgust is an emotion that keeps humans away bad pathogens. What the hell is it doing in our Democratic primary race, disgust every second of every minute of every day? No wonder nobody is showing up to vote or caucus.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)What is it? She only gets to vote for war once in a while?
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)the nanny posts that whine about it.
Dem2
(8,166 posts)Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)They are a bunch of hate bags to be sure. And I hate them back. But, they are not our problem. We need to talk more to each other and just ignore the hell out of the ignorant people that have caused this country to stagnate over the last 40 or more years. It is not their fault we don't have more activists, people willing to go to primaries and caucuses, or that we have as a party not promoted our agenda with the general public and that we as a party have not reached out more to people who have been left behind by our system.
CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)The readership is fairly small in the grand scheme of things, so it reflects the prevailing mood rather than creating it.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)D U is mo more a reflection of the general will than Kos, Huffington Post, firedoglake, the Cave, Discussionist, and Free Republic, et cetera. It is a place where people go to get their own views shouted backed at them so they can maintain the illusion that everybody else thinks like them. That's why the folks who frequent these venues are in a perpetual state of shock, because the world doesn't conform to their parochial world views.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Exactly. Even if every single DUer who said 'I'm not going to vote for Hillary' turned around and did so, she'd still be losing hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of voters who said it and meant it from the ranks of Dems and Indies who are truly disgusted with both her policy choices and the way she runs her campaigns.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)It is an ersatz internet watering hole where folks go to have their own views shouted back at them so they comfort themselves in the illusion that everybody thinks like them.
cali
(114,904 posts)Both takes are demonstrably wrong.
Makes you wonder, too, just what qualifies an internet watering hole as "ersatz." Are there genuine internet watering holes?
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... that has no similarities to the rest of the oceans and seas.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)Good night, my friend.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Laha
(407 posts)I'm sure I'm not about to make any friends here with this comment - I'm nothing but an outside observer here, but your comments only make you sound bitter that DU is no longer *your* echo chamber.
Overwhelmingly I see Hillary supporters put down Bernie supporters with similar arguments - this is an echo chamber, not representative of reality, "DU is a place of seething disgust", etc., etc. You wouldn't be saying these things if the majority were agreeing with the statements of your candidate.
You can't write off the opinions so flippantly just because you're upset that they don't share your own. And you won't win anyone over to your side by implying the opinions of the others are disgusting.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)My views are my views. I need not seek nor do I require validation for them.
I labor under no illusion that my views represent the majority of DU. I do labor under the reality that my views represent the majority of Democrats and that is why Mrs. Clinton will be our nominee. That is an empirical observation and not a normative one.
I don't know how you can make the inference that I find the opinions of others disgusting. If I thought so I would say so. I am merely describing a phenomenon and that is that folks come to sites like this, on both sides of the political spectrum , to have their views validated.
cali
(114,904 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)if it's such an echo chamber?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)46. So why do you come here,
View profile
if it's such an echo chamber?
I come to and contribute to the maintenance of this site because I believe in its mission:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice
and I have friends here. May I inquire as to why you come?
Thank you in advance.
DSB
NBachers
(17,007 posts)After they've finished committing Democratic Party Suicide, there will be no way to rebuild the ruins to beat the republicans in the general election.
The Acolytes will abandon the party they've temporarily occupied, leaving smoldering devastation behind.
Response to applegrove (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
stonecutter357
(12,682 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)NowSam
(1,252 posts)...for the truth, for the people, for fair play. A house divided cannot stand but a would be leader who engages in divide and conquer strategies 24/7 doesn't inspire me one iota.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)I did not vote for Hillary in the 2008 primary. I will not be voting for her in this primary. I do not think that she is a good candidate; I do not think she would be a good president. This does not make me a troll. For the most part I've been keeping my opinions on this primary so far to myself and trying not to get involved in what seems to be mostly ill-natured and ugly sniping from supporters of both candidates; however I'm also observant enough to've noticed that most of the criticism of Clinton on this forum, specifically, is from the left, and thus pretty fucking unlikely to be coming from "GOP trolls" (but you can tell yourself that, if it makes you feel better).
cui bono
(19,926 posts)about Sanders?
.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
bvf
(6,604 posts)If Democrats have nowhere to go to feel giddy with hope on the internet, why would they vote?
Maybe a sense of social responsibility?
Maybe you need to feel "giddy" from an internet site in order to vote. I vote to make a difference, and assume most grownups do too.
applegrove
(118,022 posts)I find good information makes me giddy too. And connected. I don't think we want people with only one type of reason for getting political. A big tent is the goal no? People have been commenting on how depressing the democratic race is. That doesn't serve us at all. People should find some meaning in getting political. You need that to fight at one's best.
bvf
(6,604 posts)Do you suggest that a "big tent" implies that criticism of one's party (or certain candidates within it) is off-limits?
If so, you need to review your civics.
applegrove
(118,022 posts)constantly, with no we bit of sunlight allowed to shine on her person without getting shot down with seething anger that she still exists, that her narrative as a person is destroyed, then we are all victims and we all lose. That the thing with dehumanization....the doers are victims of their own actions. It is an early step in doing a holocaust. Of course criticize. But to dehumanize? That should never be okay.
Laha
(407 posts)I've seen many people criticize Hillary for many things. I've also seen some horrible people dehumanize her.
On these boards, as an observer with no outside objective I have witnessed far more reasonable criticism of Hillary than dehumanization. DU is still a good place to go for meaningful conversation.
Please don't try to link criticism with your candidate to holocaust style dehumanization - I promise you are only damaging your own credibility.
bvf
(6,604 posts)Criticize Clinton for her unending fealty to Wall Street, her penchant for war, her race-baiting, her propensity to lie through her teeth, or the twenty-odd other things that make her unfit for the presidency--and the next thing you know, we're exterminating people by the millions.
Good god almighty.
Mike Nelson
(9,903 posts)...is a warning sign for Democrats. I'm surprised at the Republicans' record turnout - but there is hope in that those people are, in my opinion, voting on anger. They see a Black President, a possible female (or Jewish) successor, and Gay people getting married... They are negative voters. The Republicans are in more disarray than Democrats, despite the mud-slinging on DU. Hopefully the Republicans' angry mob will succumb to the Democrat's fair and optimistic message.
narnian60
(3,510 posts)stone space
(6,498 posts)Oddly enough, not one single caucus participant even so much as mentioned DU the entire evening.
Who told you that folks weren't showing up?
applegrove
(118,022 posts)stone space
(6,498 posts)sahel
(87 posts)its what they get told election after election, when the party serves up some stand-for-nothing centrist and the Left gets told to vote for them anyway otherwise we'll get stuck with the Republicans.
Its not going to plan this time. A leftist has a genuine shot at the nomination since...shit, I can't even remember. And just listen to them squeal.
It never works the other way. If the Left wins the nomination the Centrists will fuck them over blind. Its not just here. Look what the Blairites are doing to Jeremy Corbyn in the UK. It works the same in any country.
EdwardBernays
(3,343 posts)feel optimistic about Hillary in the first place?
There's the basic flaw in your premise.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Yes, she's done some good things in her time. But she's chosen... poorly... in a lot of her policy decisions over time, helping cause a lot of pain and suffering both at home and abroad.
Why is 'nobody showing up to vote or caucus'? Maybe you could take that question up with DWS of the coronation committee.
Lazy Daisy
(928 posts)There you go, blame it ALL on the Bernie supporters.
I've seen thread after thread of Bernie supporters with hat in hand trying to make nice. Not one from any Hillary supporters, only thread after thread about how we need to get in line if she wins the nomination.
Not one, not one Hillary supporter has come out and said they don't like the way she is running a racial/gender dividing campaign. And of the very few that admit it, they say tough beans, politics are rough. And how about the contempt her supporters have for the youth supporting Bernie. Some of those youth are MY children you are talking about.
Those poor kids are fighting for THEIR future, and what they see coming from her campaign is one icon after another lie to them, berate them and demean them.
And IF she makes it to the GE when they don't turn out for her, they'll be blamed instead of putting the blame where it belongs with her and her campaign.
She needs to EARN the votes and she's not.
Welcome to DU!
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)That is part of her baggage.
mhatrw
(10,786 posts)HOORAY!
The Traveler
(5,632 posts)My daddy was a Democrat. My mom was a Democrat.
The Clintons have me ready to bail to the Green Party.
It is all about what they do, what they say ... and above all how they savage language to shift position while claiming they were right all along.
At some point, an honest person just hits the wall.
But ... the Green Party just doesn't get the Black Lives Matter thing and how fucking important that is. As an environmentalist, I assure you it is vital. (Poor, racially marginalized folk always experience ecological problems first. So their cause is where the front lines are found. That simple. Time for white folk that stand fucking tall for people of color. Long past time, actually.)
Trav
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Jitter65
(3,089 posts)I frequent many boards during this election cycle and this is one of two places where, I believe, the posters are doing irreparable harm to the Democrat party. No matter if Bernie or Hillary wins we need to pull together. I believe that the elder woman on the stage could not clearly hear what was going on in the frenzy but she did hear the moderator say "English only." We should at least give time for her to explain her misunderstanding. At least give the opposing campaign time to correct the record. At a time when the GOP is putting up some of the most disgusting candidates she should be circling the wagons around both our candidates instead of making ourselves look bad.
djg21
(1,803 posts)You either subscribe to the DU groupthink, or the piling-on begins. These are not GOP trolls for the most part, but misguided DU members who seem to think that only they may divine what is best for the Democratic Party. Even reasonable disagreement is not tolerated. I thought there was a rule about not bashing Democratic candidates, but I guess that only applies when the Candidate has been anointed by DU.
Laha
(407 posts)The reason I lurk here is because of the intelligent conversation and inclusion of ideas and differing opinion. There are a lot of other places I could choose to get my information from, but there are many good reasons why I still come back here.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)DU is not the reason.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)We disagree on candidates but I come here because of people like you. You seem like a nice guy.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)You seem like a nice human.
We may disagree at times, but that's part of the fun.
Have a good one.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)But you are one of my favorite posters. I chuckled when you inadvertently suggested you were a HRC supporter by voting in one of my polls. I don't know if you remember it.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)lol
And I don't like threads that say "Hillary supporters only" or "Bernie supporters only"
Threads should include all DUers. Plus, those threads are always skewered anyway.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)DSB
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Writing about sports? Or sports?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)Do you cover Big Apple sports?
My dad and uncle were boxers, the former an amateur, and the latter a pro. They used to take me to MSG to see the Golden Gloves as a kid. That was the old Garden.
Are there any sportswriters you especially like?
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Occasionally one of our guys will go down and cover, but I never have.
No one in particular, which probably sounds strange.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)The first major magazine piece on Cassius Marcellus Clay was written by the greatest of all boxing writers, Liebling, in a 1962 issue of The New Yorker. Liebling had the spectacular good fortune to see the young boxer-poet get dumped on his seat by a tough journeyman named Sonny Banks. Clay was raw and unorthodox, but as Liebling wrote, "Honest effort and sterling character backed by solid instruction will carry a man a good way, but unearned natural ability has a lot to be said for it.''
I must have read over twenty five books on Ali.
Vinca
(50,172 posts)We are a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of Democratic voters. The impact of this site and our chatter on the election is pretty much zilch with the exception of directing people to fundraising sites. What makes it seem "disgusting" is that we are well versed on the issues and the candidates, unlike most people who turn up to vote. It's all subjective, anyway. What's "disgusting" to you may be "fact" to me and vice versa.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)I'm sure things will work out for you.
BooScout
(10,406 posts)Disruptive Meta discussion is forbidden.