Why would anyone on DU hate any of the Democratic candidates???

[Raven]

Maybe I'm just naive or stupid but I can't think of any reason to get rabid about any Democrat in this race. I can see not liking or not supporting a candidate but the venom being spewed on this Board goes far beyond that.

One of these Dems is going to be nominated and I would like not to see that person eviscerated by people in our own party.

I will vote for Edwards on Tuesday but I will work for and vote for whoever wins the nomination and I hope that they won't be totally skinned by their own party by the time they get to that point. This is simply because the alternative is so thoroughly horrific...another Republican in the WH and what's even worse is one of these Republicans in the WH.

Let's conserve our energy for the real enemy and be thankful that we have such a great group of candidates to choose from.

[NoBorders]

1. I think people become increasingly entrenched /partisan

As a result of participating in these discussions. I know it has affected me.

[Raven]

3. One thing you learn in litigation is that you can fight like hell with

the lawyer on the other side and still be civil, as well as friends, when you leave the courtroom.

[LiberalUprising]

29. Yea it's only a game afterall

Maybe THAT is the problem, no conviction.

lawyering is not the real world, it's all a game which depends on how deep ones pockets are as to what kind of 'protection' you recieve from a completely corrupt system that is stacked in favor of the wealthy.

Lawyers make money either win or lose, so why should they care about doing the right thing

Maybe you are naive :shrug:

As for the Dem candidates, they are lawyers,which is reason enough to question their motives and sincerety but when the corporations own them outright, I would be pissed if people bought their bullshit and lies in the first place. Lawyers are nothing but trained liars (sanctioned by the government which in turn is sanctioned by corporations which is sanctioned by the banking system) and politicians are only wealthy lawyers ...

It's not that hard to figure out.


Game over for the rest of us.

[LordJFT]

34. oh yes all lawyers are horrible people

[LiberalUprising]

39. I was only answering the op's question

Thanks for the kneejerk response though, I never said horrible

Why not give examples of what good a lawyer is instead or better yet what good a politician is?

Make a rational attempt at least

But, any profession where lying and manipulation of facts are required to succeed is not a job that I would consider ethical or moral

[MaineDem]

2. Hi Raven!

:hi:

I agree. But we both have seen this at DU and know that most Democrats in the real world feel like you do. They will support the nominee. The important thing is to replace this horrible administration with a Democratic one and it will be done.

Stay warm.

[Raven]

5. Hi back MD! You stay warm too...it's like a tundra up here but

it's going to warm up by Tuesday. Good for the turnout!

[Honeycombe8]

4. Words of Wisdom, Oh So Raven. I was wondering the same thing myself. nt

[PATRICK]

6. Raw fan behavior

fueled by intellectual reasons and platform passion. Can't see in the mirror the common human emotions of a heated contest.

The first sign is that sickness in the stomach when your way or guy is not prevailing. That emotion in itself is the same as for your home sport team. Then come the sparked words and thoughts and poor judgment revealed most by their resemblance to GOP talking points and simply poor sportsmanship. Winners lustily gloat over their prey. The losers vow revenge and rationalize. Any logic or cause in that becomes swiftly accidental to the anger.

What this is all about is lost in the demonization that comes from the inner demons of a contest not seen for what it is and the candidates for who they really are. We all get into this and some dive right in dragging everyone off the side of the pool.

We contradict ourselves if we give way to what becomes very evidently unfair and shallow expressions of mere personal spite and our candidates and the goals of this that never change no matter which person "wins". We forget that we are fighting for a civil society and opposed what we are wielding against pols not our perosnal choice. In short, we get stupid and leave scars, which can be enjoyed as the quirky brawl common to vibrant historical politics, but rationally inappropriate in these times of dire need.

[robcon]

7. I think hatred of other Democratic candidates is rare.

There are a few DUers who seem to hate one or another of the candidates, but most will rally around the nominee, IMO.

[Kucinich4America]

42. Unless it's Dennis Kucinich, right?

;)

[democrat2thecore]

46. With Dennis it's not hate - it's just....well....embarrassment -nt

[robcon]

49. agreed, dem2core

He's an embarrassment.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. I Hope This Makes Sense

A little homily...

My best friend is a Bucs fans...For a long time they weren't a very good team...My friend told me this story...

He was leaving a Bucs home game with his girlfriend after they lost to the Cowboys... A Cowboys fan got right in his face and said "the Bucs suck and they will never be any good."


There are a lot of people like that on this board...

[MGKrebs]

9. I think for a lot of people, they invest so much hope and commitment

to their choice, that they put themselves in a position that to lose would be emotionally devastating. Therefore, they feel free to attribute satanic qualities to their opponents. It becomes almost a life-or-death choice, if nor for themselves, then for some other demographic group that they are trying to "protect".

Of course, the flip side of that is that it might be claimed that we so-called dispassionate observers wouldn't see the second coming of Adolf Hitler until it was too late. :shrug:

[kentuck]

10. Good question.

Any of our Democrats are better than any of the Republicans.

[rucky]

11. If all of the candidates (and supporters) "went positive" for the rest of this...

We'll have record turnout - no matter who wins.

They can all run on their merits, and all of the attacks so far have backfired - so why not?

[davidinalameda]

12. ideological purity

you have moonbats on here who have decided that if a candidate doesn't meet their high standards,they're going to attack them, their supporters and do everything they can to slur good people

go back and look at the Tom Lantos threads

yes, he supported the war but he was also one of the leading voices for human rights in Congress

people can't reconcile that sometimes people have other opinions and attack them

[ananda]

21. I hope I'm a moonbat because..

.. I see no point in being wishywashy
or nice about destruction, killing,
corporatism, corruption, and flouting
of the Constitution and the rule of law.

AFAIAC, free trade agreements are pure evil.
The recent aggressions and wars are pure evil.

Anyone who supports these agreements or aggressions
should be attacked and held accountable.

[davidinalameda]

43. so you're more of a no loaf than half loaf kinda person?

in the real world, people have to make deals with people they don't like and those deals are sometimes not the deals they want

you have to sometimes hold your nose and move on to the next battle

[eridani]

45. In other words, don't ever dare to ask for the full strength version of what you want

Start out with your wussiest compromise, and then go downhill from there. Kucinich supporters are not averse to compromise. Politics is about compromise after all. Knowing that, we start off asking for all of what we want, most of which is on the Kucinich web page. If you would take $3000 for your used car, ask for $5000. If you want a kitten, ask for a pony. If you hope for 75% of your legislative agenda to get passed, ask for 150%. Can any of the people ranting about "purity" come up with even one good reason why this is a bad strategy?

[ToeBot]

13. Because a knife in the back is worse than a punch in the face. nt

[surfermaw]

19. You got that right,and the Big Corporat Media is picking our nominee

[Kucinich4America]

41. Well, they're trying to.

But it seems to have backfired on them in Iowa.

[Vickers]

14. Pathological Cheerleader Syndrome

Rah rah sis boom bah.

[Triana]

15. Don't speak for me....

...I do not HATE any of the Dem candidates. I prefer one over the others but I admire and respect them all. I speak to their substance, policies, proposed solutions, record, how much $ they get and from whom (tells a lot), etc.

NOT to whether I like or dislike them personally. I don't KNOW any of them personally. I only know their political side and that's all I care about.

Not that you ASKED me before making such a rediculous assumption. Sheesh.

[bigwillq]

16. I don't hate any of them

I just disagree with a few on their policy and approach.

[wndycty]

17. K&R

:kick:

[ananda]

18. My emotions are high because..

.. so much harm and killing is being done
by my current government, with officials
and politicians either complicit or seemingly
powerless to do anything about it.

Thus, I am looking for a candidate who will
speak for my values: inclusion, social safety
nets, affordable and accessible healthcare,
responsible stewarding of the economy and
the environment, and respect for everyone in
any targeted group whatsoever.

Of course, none of the candidates meet my
liberal needs completely.. but of all the
viable ones, the only one that even comes close
is Edwards.

Go Edwards!

[zalinda]

20. As I made my way through the candidates

to pick the one I wanted to support, I noticed a distinct trend. First it was Kucinich supporters stomping on threads with things like Kucinich is the only true Democrat. Then it was Clinton and Obama supporters throwing lobs at each other. Then it was Kucinich supporters coming into Edwards threads and zeroing on all his faults, real or imagined. Then it was Clinton and Obama supporters coming into Edwards threads telling Edwards supporters the same thing over and over what was wrong with Edwards. Then a few Biden supporters jumped into the Edwards threads kicking stuff up.

I had been undecided for months. And even with the Kyl/Lieberman vote, I was still willing to give Clinton a chance, she is my Senator after all. I watched/listened to all the debates, watched/listened to the videos posted, and I found that I had no idea where Clinton or Obama stood on anything. When I would ask supporters of either candidate, I found them to be condescending, at best, and rude at worst. I would be sent a link or a huge chunk of text from their web site would be posted. I stopped asking. What I wanted was someone to tell me what their candidate stood for in what one poster here called "an elevator speech". I didn't want to be talked down to, or made to read a book to find out what the candidate wanted to do as President. Neither candidates supporters could or would do that. And where I started off as an unbiased voter, I soon became really turned off to Clinton and Obama.

I never thought Kucinich had a chance, which I stated early on. He ran in 2004, and was polling lower than Biden and Dodd, I think, so unless a miracle happened, he didn't have a shot. But his supporters kept posting threads about Kucinich as if he walked on water. While that shows true belief in their candidate, it is also a turn off, and to non-Kucinich supporters, it became almost like the St. Dennis cult. But, Kucinich turned me off when I saw him in a debate early on. I couldn't tell you which debate it was, but Kucinich was asked a question, and as he answered it he looked at the moderator, when he came to the punch line, he turned his head toward the audience, said the line, and smiled. Of course, he got a huge applause. That was when I got turned off by Kucinich. To me, it seemed his ego had taken center stage, and that this was all a game.

Biden and Dodd's polling numbers were low, but I would have had no problem in getting behind them if they started to move up. Since my primaries are in Feb, and they hung in there and Edwards was out, I would have proudly pulled the lever for either of them.

When it came to Edwards, he spoke to me and for me. I have not had a voice in this country for most of my life and I will be 60 this year. I am just one of the millions who have never been able to make over minimum wage, who have been the struggling poor. It's not that I didn't try to get ahead, but life just kept interrupting my well thought out plans. I'm a survivor, but the pain (physical) and near poverty (I make a little too much for medicaid), has worn me down. Edwards has come along and has given me hope. He is the only one who has even mentioned the poor, much less wants to be their champion. After reading his bio in the Times and other publications, I can relate to him. His life was much like mine, lower middle class. Just enough money to buy your clothes at K-Mart, but not enough money to buy your clothes at JC Penney. I now buy clothes when I need them, at thrift stores. Yes, he is now rich, but his working class values have stayed with him. As for his house, that is his refuge, his sanctuary for him and his family, if this country goes awry. He earned his money, and now he and Elizabeth have their dream home, good for him, his hard work paid off. This seems to be the ONLY luxury that they have purchased. They drive sensible cars, the kids dress like real kids, and they dress like they buy their clothes from JC Penney, not Saks Fifth Avenue. Is he perfect, can he deliver on all his promises? I don't know, but what I do know is that he will try. I don't know, maybe I'm to low class to appreciate what or how Clinton or Obama is going to change things. But with Edwards, I know, he's told me. I want to do A,B and C, this is how I want it to be, and this how we are going to do it. Simple. No flowery words, no guessing at what he means, I understand. I can give "an elevator speech" about Edwards, and have. And if the media is going to be in the future like it has in the past day, there are going to have to be a lot of "elevator speeches" given to get the word out.

And still, Obama and Clinton supporters mock Edwards supporters. It doesn't matter whether their candidate has won either the money race or the Iowa caucus, they have to come and rub our noses in their win.

And, those of you who are Edwards supporters who seem to have to stir the pot with questionable threads about other candidates.........STOP. You do Edwards no service to demean any other candidate. Yes, please continue to speak up, but try to understand that this is a fight for our country, and appearances matter. If we appear to play dirty, then that will reflect on our candidate. If we appear to be strong and resolute, that too will reflect on our candidate. We must work harder and smarter, as we don't have the media or money on our side. But know too, that what ever we do, we are a reflection of our candidate.

zalinda

[Flora]

25. I agree.

If you compare the candidates to a check-list of Democratic beliefs, Kucinich would be the most qualified for the title.

I'll be so happy when the nominee is selected, so this in-house fighting and name calling will end and we can come together as one, as the Democratic party is intended.

[Nightjock]

31. Thanks zalinda

I've been leaning towards Edwards since Gore dissapointed me. I love the way you expressed your support for JE because I feel the same way about him when he speaks. I REALLY hope he wins (but will support any of the others even though they don't impress me and even scare me a little.)

[spooky3]

22. Thanks, Raven, I agree.

[stellanoir]

23. Consider that hatred in general often only empowers one's opposition

within or without shared party affiliation.

I've been going on and on about this for quite a while.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3569357

How pray tell this land formerly lauded as being the "land of the lively discussion" has digressed into vitriolic shouting matches has been astonishingly disheartening to me.

However, I just heard on this show,

http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=24113

an interesting interpretation for the rather oblique King James' version of "Love thine enemies."

Since Arabic languages are far more multi leveled than the Greek, Latin, and English ones, for decades I've been intrigued by the scholars who are fluent in Hebrew and Aramaic who translate the verses directly into English.

One I had not heard until moments ago was translated by Neal Douglas Klotz (not sure that's the correct spelling of his surname) but he will be a guest on the visionary activist show next week.

The host described this interpretation as "a vast instruction manual of great mystery."

"Love thine enemies" = "Love your enemies. From a hidden place, unite with your enemies from the inside. Fill the inner void. That makes them swell outwardly and fall out of rhythm, instead of progressing step by step. They stop and start harshly out of time. Bring yourself back into rhythm within. Find the moment that meets with theirs', like two lovers creating life from the dust. Do this work in secret. This kind of love creates. It does not emote."

This approach is reinforced in Buddhism and here as well.

http://www.zerolimits.info/

[Armstead]

24. I don't "hate" any of the dems candidates BUT....

I am very passionate about what direction a nominee will take the Democrats and the country.

In my opinion, we need to restore some teeth and clear liberal/progressive principles and fight back against the Rule by Oligarchs. Democrats must start kicking the ass of the Corporate Elite instead of continuing to kiss them.

Yes, that's harsh, but the situation is dire, and I'm sick of the so-called democratic opposition being enablers and supporters of the corporate agenda instead of the counterbalance that represents the interests of the majority.

[Enrique]

26. why would someone hate the Packers?

just because they happen to live in Chicago? And I mean HATE.

[mod mom]

27. I don't hate any candidate but I hate the policy of FREE TRADE and what it is

doing to the middle class in this country.

[onehandle]

28. The stalkers of a single candidate are usually one issue fanatics.

I will back any of our candidates in November.

With more class than some people.

[TheWraith]

30. Hating and attacking Democrats is a staple of the diet around here.

God forbid that the left should ever be happy, united, and satisfied.

[Zynx]

32. They'll all reverse the Bushist trend to varying degrees.

That's what we need. Any sense of improvement. There's a feeling all across this country that we are failing.

[krabigirl]

33. I don't hate any of the candidates. I may dislike someone as a candidate, but hate? No.

[Pushed To The Left]

35. K&R! I agree 100%.

Criticism of candidates is fine, but the smearing of Democrats only helps Republicans.

[Sulawesi]

36. Good thread but the worst hit and run perpetrators are not here

[MalloyLiberal]

37. Because they act more like Republicans than progressive democrats?

[Forkboy]

38. I'm way too cynical to have that kind of emotional investment in any candidate, love or hate.

[Nailzberg]

40. We're all racist and sexist.

:shrug:

[eridani]

44. I don't. I just hate the big money people for the way they limit our selection

In a crisis, any of them might well get up the nerve to tell their corporate backers to fuck off. We know for damned sure that none of the Rethug candidates will.

[Perry Logan]

47. Most Democrats today were weaned on lies about the Clintons. They have internalized this hatred.

Keep in mind, people who are brainwashed don't know they're brainwashed. This applies to the Clinton-haters here at DU.

[sendero]

48. I don't hate HRC..

... but I hate to see her as our nominee.

I hate her positions on the most important issues.

I hate the way she tries to pass off her experience as first lady as being meaningful.

I hate the way her husband hobnobs with Bush I and I hate the fact that people think it means nothing.