Fundamental differences.

[cali]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Hassin Bin Sober (a host of the 2016 Postmortem forum).

Most Hillary supporters seem to think that oligarchy is a myth in reference to this country.

Most seem to think that bombing the hell out of Libya was the right thing to do. Many believe that it's good policy for the U.S. to take out dictators. Well, some dictators.

They believe that corruption in the democratic party is a conspiracy theory. They don't believe that democratic office holders can be influenced by big money. Only republicans can.

They don't have a problem with a Secretary of State promising to deliver a state for CLinton. Katherine Harris ring a bell?

Time after time, I've seen Hillary supporters rail against raising the social security cap and even argue that we have to compromise with republicans.

If Hillary thinks a no fly zone in.Syria is a good plan, they back it.

They don't believe there's any problem with the appearance of conflicts of interest.

Economic liberalism and income inequality are far less important than social liberalism.

Single payer is impossible. And it's really not a good fit for the U.S.



I have fundamentally different political beliefs than the vast majority Hillary supporters here. That's been one of the biggest surprises for me.


http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/videos/jimmy-carter-u-s-is-an-oligarchy-with-unlimited-political-bribery-20150731

And Snopes says that there is no evidence of violence at the Nevada convention. I condemn some of language used by Bernie supporters there, but Hillary supporters and the MSM lied their assets off about how violent Bernie supporters were and the perpetuation of that was gleeful. Imagine, all those phones and cameras and no evidence of the supposed terrible violence carried out by Bernie's "thugs".

http://www.snopes.com/did-sanders-supporters-throw-chairs-at-nevada-democratic-convention/

Hillary supporters largely cheer this stuff on:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2012413
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2004027

[boston bean]

1. Sorry to have provided my truthful opinion. A right you hold dearly only for yourself.

Isn't this post META though?

[libdem4life]

7. There you go again...Kill the Messenger. And isn't there something a bit

amiss about the declaration of "my truthful opinion" ? Would that then make the opposition a "deceitful opinion"?

And then there is the phrase "a right you hold dearly only for yourself?" Could it be more dismissive and hubris-filled? Don't think so.

Then, criticism about where it's posted.

The last, IDK, the the first two reek of put-down when someone has carefully and politely crafted their opinion. And it was rebutted as above? Nothing new.

Words and semantics matter.

So, challenge the points...say something useful but leave the personal attacks where they belong...and it's not here.

[boston bean]

8. umm, the poster is calling me out directly. Wow... can you castigate equally?

For the second time today, btw.

[libdem4life]

12. Well, I thought I missed something. Went back and read it and don't

see anything personal until the response. The Title is Fundamental Differences. I think that the problem began there. They are no longer "allowed"...differences, that is. So where you come in, I can't say...just logged in.

Nothing personal...apparently you have a different view. So?

[boston bean]

13. Well, that was the point. nt

[libdem4life]

19. "umm, the poster is calling me out directly" is what I replied to.

I just didn't see the "call out" or find a name...just a well-organized opinion.

[boston bean]

20. uh huh. you see what you want. that's ok.

[libdem4life]

22. Thank you. They were your words that I saw.

[boston bean]

23. And I meant them.

[libdem4life]

27. Clearly.

[boston bean]

28. Yes clearly.

[JTFrog]

10. Of course it is. n/t

[think]

31. The truth? The truth is hillary takes millions from criminal banks, the health care industry, and

other businesses that profit from collusion with her in office.

That's the truth...

[boston bean]

32. You have some proof of collusion? Please provide.

[think]

33. Hillary Helps a Bank—and Then It Funnels Millions to the Clintons

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/07/hillary-helps-a-bankand-then-it-pays-bill-15-million-in-speaking-fees/400067/

Oh wait. That was just huge COINCIDENCE! How stupid of me to think that was in anyway collusion....

[boston bean]

34. Um, thanks for answering you got no proof.

[think]

35. You keep believing in coincidences. Yeesh....

[boston bean]

36. a coincidence is not proof. LOL

[think]

37. Ya. LOL at corrupt behavior. That's typical from you.

[boston bean]

38. Proof of corruption, please?

[think]

39. They couldn't prove Bush was guilty either. Enjoy your stupid games.....

[boston bean]

40. Ok.

[think]

41. Just bury your head and ignore the long list of criminal banks Hillary took money from.

You're good at ignoring facts and demanding "proof"

That fact is most of her corrupt acts were legal because America is too corrupt and politicians watered down the laws so they could get away with it. But the sad part is you allow it to be that way.

Thanks...

[boston bean]

42. We should jail people for laws that haven't been broken? Jail people

based on suspicion? You want to ruin careers on innuendo?

Those aren't values I hold. YMMV.

[think]

43. Did I say she should be jailed? No I said she was corrupt but it was legal. And you condone her

behavior. Thanks....

[boston bean]

44. Legal behavior you mean? That people put an ugly slant on... yeah I condone the

first, not the latter.

[think]

46. Keep plugging away defending Hillary taking money from criminal banks

because it was "legal" to do so.

you can't deny she's doing it so your only recourse is to try and justify her behavior.

You're probably naive enough to think it doesn't influence YOUR candidate.

what a joke...

[boston bean]

48. I put my money in an evil bank. What am I? I also work for a corporation!

And they pay me!

Lions and tigers and bears! OH MY!

[think]

49. Millions lost their jobs and homes due to criminal acts by these banks. Enjoy your laugh at others

expense.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-04-14/goldman-sachs-misled-congress-after-duping-clients-over-cdos-levin-says

[boston bean]

50. Believe me I'm not laughing at your negative insuations.

[think]

51. Nor am I laughing at your vapid responses

[KPN]

52. Then you are complicit in causing our mess.

Which by the way is looking pretty bad for the Party, no?

[boston bean]

55. You are such a better person than me. How will i go on.

[libdem4life]

2. Good post. I would add the differences in campaign financing.

Oligarchs want to run the show, spend the money, et al without noisy chatter and inconvenient meddling from the Peasant Class.

Bernie wants, and has demonstrated, and Carter agreed, that not only do we have a de facto Oligarchy but that with focus and determination, the unwashed masses do care and do want a say in their political system. It's just no one before cared.

I don't blame the politicians, per se, because these were the rules to play. But now, there are options for both people and politicians to do it differently.

We've been through the Dean Scream, the Swiftboating of Kerry...being the most obvious that comes to mind. And they were Establishment...just Democrats. Now the Democrats have taken a page out of the Republican notebook.

I don't remember a prominent Republican candidate or candidate-to-be who was forced to get out of the race due to specious rumors and MSM blaring out the talking points 24/7, as it has been for the two above, and now Bernie.

[NCTraveler]

4. You have put the paint roller away...

And are now going with a commercial grade pneumatic sprayer to paint with.

You have repeatedly stated you will not vote for Clinton. So you won't vote for her and passionately trash Clinton and her supporters while saying very little about Sanders.

[NurseJackie]

5. It's unclear to me how this is supposed to help anything. Or are you just venting?

It's often difficult to tell what your motivation is, or what you hope to accomplish.

[cali]

6. Just noting that you, for example, and I have fundamental differences

[libdem4life]

9. Seems giving an opinion is no longer allowed, without the piling on of

certain groups. You should all be ashamed...by all means speak up, but contribute something.

[JTFrog]

11. So, you want us all to start threads calling out and demeaning

Bernie supporters? Linking directly to the posts of those we want to call out and demean?

Would you be okay with those opinions? Or are you just interested in trying to "shame" Hillary supporters?

[libdem4life]

15. Silly. No one should be "called out" for an opinion. That term in itself

is a pejorative. And demeaning? Where did that come from? And where did I shame anyone...please, show me? Another hot button, I know. I gave my opinion like OP gave her opinion.

So you don't agree. Either put your stuff out there or stop demeaning those who are putting out well thought out opinions.

But it's just easier to Shoot the Messenger. It takes a lot less intelectual effort, I get it. But realize, it's not all about you...at all. You get to have your opinions. Others may not agree.

[JTFrog]

24. "You should all be ashamed..."

I guess I misread that somehow, eh?

If you link to another poster's post and complaing about it, it's called disruptive meta. It is not allowed in this forum. Take it up with admins. I see cali has already been locked out of her own thread. Fitting.

[libdem4life]

25. Nope, it's right there. You said it yourself. Second sentence.

I'm not even "bitching", just commenting on the constant drum beat.

[JTFrog]

26. Your comments don't change the fact that the OP is a nasty call out and disruptive meta.

Not sure why you are defending that. Pretty sure this thread will be locked because of it.

It's not just simply an opinion, it's a rant that calls out specific DUers (follow the links). It's bullshit.

[libdem4life]

29. Well, I'm not defending any one person. I don't take it personally.

Which seems to be in the minority here.

I didn't see one specific DUer named. I'm totally sure that the HRC folks don't agree. I've read many, and composed a few responses myself, that make those same points. A rant? Sounds a bit like a campaign speech, to be sure. But I didn't know there was any limit to word count.

And a hide? Sounds rather Draconian. Disruptive? Is a Bernie post now disruptive? And still don't get the nasty call out. But seems I'll have more opportunities to respond.

[KPN]

53. Really, what's nasty about it?

Just went back and reread it -- didn't see anything nasty in it.

[George II]

14. Most?

[YouDig]

16. Politifact found that Bernie's conspiracy theories about being cheated in Nevada were false

Yet not only Bernie supporters, but the campaign themselves are repeating those lies over and over. Why did you omit that from your summary?

Snopes found that the violence charges were "unproven," meaning that despite being reported by witnesses, they weren't caught on video. So we don't know if there was violence or not, though it seems pretty believable to me given everything that is on video and given that I don't believe that there is a grand conspiracy to frame Bernie by getting witnesses to lie. We do know that Barbara Boxer felt fear for her personal safety, unless you listen to Bernie supporters, and you think she was lying about that. And so on.

It seems like you believe what you want to believe. The elections just must be rigged, because Bernie is losing them.

[Vattel]

17. Great post

[asuhornets]

18. Name one incident where corruption happened during this primary season...

You are just repeating Sanders insinuations, hoping they stick.

[The Polack MSgt]

30. Jury Results (for transparency)

Fundamental differences.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512013684

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Nasty divisive broad brush accusations and attacks on Hillary supporters. Over the top inappropriate.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri May 20, 2016, 10:31 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I think this OP is full of shit, but it is not OTT or abusive. This is a run of the mill GD-P screed against all things Hillary. Not exceptional - aaand not worth a hide
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Quit wasting my time
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sounds like someone doesn't like facts. I do. Leave it.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The post is baseless bullshit but probably not violating any rules. Besides, this poster will probably post a dozen more that are at least as bad before the day is out.

[Kip Humphrey]

45. Having a little difficulty with your new-found friends? If I may...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1280&pid=199242

[BootinUp]

47. Its hard to discuss fundamentals starting from a totally distorted picture, really,

She has been talking about Main Street vs Wall street from before she go in the race and has a very progressive platform on these oligarchy issues. Stop spreading disinformation! Get into the details of her plans, memes don't impress me.

Libya was a UN Sec. Council backed plan to protect Libyans from atrocities. It was not unilateral, it was with broad support.

Corruption is everywhere. She favors reversing trends in de-regulation and has a strong platform to do so. You totally ignore her anti Citizens United position and just spread memes. Does anyone read her published issues anymore?

She has taken a stand against any attempt to weaken Soc. Sec. and Medicare and in fact stands for strengthening them.

The no fly zone proposal was highly dependent on cooperation from Russia. It was a way for her to show she will work the problem in the Middle East by advocating for ways to get a handle on the situation with Syria. Clearly if Russia could not be brought into it it would never happen. No fly zones can be very effective in some situations, with minimal risk. I neither am for it or against it. I am for creative thinking and diplomacy combined with minimal risks.

At some point, people have to come to terms with the fact that Hillary's votes do not show conflicts of interest. Let go of the memes. If Sanders were a Senator from New York, do you think he wouldn't have voted to protect certain financial industry positions? As President she has different responsibilities.

You need to point to specific positions on economic liberalism where you think she is chucking the ball so we can debate them.

I am very proud of Hillary's record on Healthcare. Not only was she at the forefront of the fight on the 1990's, she took a more liberal position than Obama in 2008 and arguably has a better plan now than Sanders to actually help people.

Hillary and her campaign have said nothing about what they think happened in Nevada. She has stayed out of that. I can't speak for all of her supporters just as you can't speak for the people in Nevada that in my opinion resorted to an ugly display out of frustation that they couldn't game the system. Broadbrushes from either side are never helpful, yet we are also all human. Both sides have done and posted some stupid shit. When one side has many more online supporters they probably post more stupid shit because there are more, not too difficult to grasp really.

[boston bean]

56. Nice post.

[KPN]

54. Excellent comparative analysis Cali! K & R!