HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Warren, Sanders beat Hill...

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:58 AM

Warren, Sanders beat Hillary in poll of DFA members

Last edited Sat Nov 22, 2014, 04:29 PM - Edit history (1)

by Alex Seitz-Wald

“If you only listened to Washington pundits, you’d wonder why Democrats are even bothering holding primaries and caucuses.”

- Charles Chamberlain, Democracy for America


The members of the progressive group that grew out of Howard Dean’s presidential campaign are not exactly ready for Hillary.

Democracy for America (DFA) has been asking their roughly one million members whom the group should support in a hypothetical 2016 Democratic presidential primary. Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren was the clear favorite, with support from 42% of respondents, according to results shared with msnbc ahead of their release later Thursday.

In second place was Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is seriously considering a presidential bid as a Democrat, with 24%. Just one point behind was former secretary of State Hillary Clinton at 23%.

From there, the numbers drop off significantly, with former Labor Secretary Robert Reich – who told msnbc he is not interested in running – capturing 3% of the vote, and Vice President Joe Biden getting just 2%. Former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb, who announced an exploratory committee Thursday, received less than 1% of the vote.

Warren has repeatedly said she is not running for president and there is no evidence thus far that she’s interested. Sanders is seriously considering a run, and recently hired a top Democratic strategist to help plan a bid.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/warren-sanders-beat-hillary-poll-liberal-groups-members?adbid=746970968691085&adbpl=fb&adbpr=114945745226947&cid=sm_m_lastword_4_20141121_35989557


392 replies, 14480 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 392 replies Author Time Post
Reply Warren, Sanders beat Hillary in poll of DFA members (Original post)
Douglas Carpenter Nov 2014 OP
Tierra_y_Libertad Nov 2014 #1
billhicks76 Nov 2014 #137
TheBlackAdder Nov 2014 #287
Warren DeMontague Nov 2014 #2
woo me with science Nov 2014 #3
arcane1 Nov 2014 #127
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #177
joshcryer Nov 2014 #4
baldguy Nov 2014 #24
Marr Nov 2014 #37
baldguy Nov 2014 #74
Voice for Peace Nov 2014 #80
baldguy Nov 2014 #84
Voice for Peace Nov 2014 #96
Rex Nov 2014 #90
noiretextatique Nov 2014 #190
baldguy Nov 2014 #370
2banon Nov 2014 #204
Scootaloo Nov 2014 #89
Rex Nov 2014 #92
baldguy Nov 2014 #97
Scootaloo Nov 2014 #99
baldguy Nov 2014 #106
aspirant Nov 2014 #120
billhicks76 Nov 2014 #138
baldguy Nov 2014 #152
RiverLover Nov 2014 #160
baldguy Nov 2014 #169
Aerows Nov 2014 #285
billhicks76 Nov 2014 #365
baldguy Nov 2014 #369
billhicks76 Dec 2014 #388
baldguy Dec 2014 #389
billhicks76 Dec 2014 #390
baldguy Dec 2014 #391
billhicks76 Dec 2014 #392
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #178
baldguy Nov 2014 #367
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #373
baldguy Nov 2014 #374
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #375
baldguy Nov 2014 #376
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #377
baldguy Nov 2014 #378
saintsebastian Nov 2014 #380
baldguy Nov 2014 #381
saintsebastian Nov 2014 #382
baldguy Nov 2014 #383
saintsebastian Nov 2014 #384
baldguy Nov 2014 #385
saintsebastian Nov 2014 #386
Scootaloo Nov 2014 #366
baldguy Nov 2014 #368
Voice for Peace Nov 2014 #98
baldguy Nov 2014 #102
Voice for Peace Nov 2014 #110
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #179
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #180
baldguy Nov 2014 #187
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #191
baldguy Nov 2014 #194
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #207
Aerows Nov 2014 #289
arcane1 Nov 2014 #128
baldguy Nov 2014 #130
C Moon Nov 2014 #5
TerrapinFlyer Nov 2014 #6
Recursion Nov 2014 #7
True Blue Door Nov 2014 #8
RiverLover Nov 2014 #9
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #11
aspirant Nov 2014 #12
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #17
aspirant Nov 2014 #27
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #29
aspirant Nov 2014 #35
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #36
RiverLover Nov 2014 #42
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #44
SunSeeker Nov 2014 #145
aspirant Nov 2014 #149
SunSeeker Nov 2014 #151
aspirant Nov 2014 #153
SunSeeker Nov 2014 #157
aspirant Nov 2014 #45
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #46
aspirant Nov 2014 #49
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #52
aspirant Nov 2014 #69
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #91
aspirant Nov 2014 #105
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #107
aspirant Nov 2014 #115
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #119
aspirant Nov 2014 #122
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #124
aspirant Nov 2014 #125
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #126
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #185
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #188
ZombieHorde Nov 2014 #205
LawDeeDah Nov 2014 #100
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #101
LawDeeDah Nov 2014 #104
RiverLover Nov 2014 #48
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #50
aspirant Nov 2014 #56
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #59
aspirant Nov 2014 #65
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #66
tritsofme Nov 2014 #70
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #73
aspirant Nov 2014 #79
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #81
aspirant Nov 2014 #94
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #95
aspirant Nov 2014 #112
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #117
aspirant Nov 2014 #129
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #131
aspirant Nov 2014 #132
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #133
aspirant Nov 2014 #135
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #141
aspirant Nov 2014 #146
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #164
aspirant Nov 2014 #166
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #167
aspirant Nov 2014 #173
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #174
aspirant Nov 2014 #197
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #199
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #192
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #195
aspirant Nov 2014 #201
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #203
aspirant Nov 2014 #215
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #217
aspirant Nov 2014 #225
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #227
aspirant Nov 2014 #229
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #230
aspirant Nov 2014 #232
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #234
aspirant Nov 2014 #241
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #242
aspirant Nov 2014 #245
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #246
aspirant Nov 2014 #249
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #250
aspirant Nov 2014 #252
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #253
aspirant Nov 2014 #258
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #259
aspirant Nov 2014 #261
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #262
aspirant Nov 2014 #265
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #266
aspirant Nov 2014 #269
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #270
aspirant Nov 2014 #272
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #273
aspirant Nov 2014 #278
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #280
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #277
aspirant Nov 2014 #279
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #281
aspirant Nov 2014 #282
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #283
aspirant Nov 2014 #284
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #286
aspirant Nov 2014 #290
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #291
aspirant Nov 2014 #294
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #297
aspirant Nov 2014 #299
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #301
aspirant Nov 2014 #302
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #304
aspirant Nov 2014 #309
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #288
aspirant Nov 2014 #292
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #293
aspirant Nov 2014 #296
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #334
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #260
aspirant Nov 2014 #263
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #264
aspirant Nov 2014 #267
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #268
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #256
RiverLover Nov 2014 #58
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #182
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #186
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #196
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #198
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #209
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #212
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #213
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #216
woo me with science Nov 2014 #13
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #18
woo me with science Nov 2014 #63
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #77
woo me with science Nov 2014 #113
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #114
L0oniX Nov 2014 #355
woo me with science Nov 2014 #360
OilemFirchen Nov 2014 #14
LawDeeDah Nov 2014 #103
OilemFirchen Nov 2014 #134
Kermitt Gribble Nov 2014 #19
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #20
aspirant Nov 2014 #30
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #32
Kermitt Gribble Nov 2014 #33
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #34
Kermitt Gribble Nov 2014 #41
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #43
Kermitt Gribble Nov 2014 #62
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #71
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #67
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #76
JEB Nov 2014 #23
woo me with science Nov 2014 #25
Marr Nov 2014 #38
Erich Bloodaxe BSN Nov 2014 #28
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #31
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #181
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #184
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #189
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #193
Aerows Nov 2014 #298
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #300
aspirant Nov 2014 #303
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #307
aspirant Nov 2014 #311
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #313
aspirant Nov 2014 #316
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #318
aspirant Nov 2014 #319
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #320
aspirant Nov 2014 #322
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #324
aspirant Nov 2014 #329
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #332
aspirant Nov 2014 #338
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #340
aspirant Nov 2014 #345
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #346
aspirant Nov 2014 #347
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #348
aspirant Nov 2014 #349
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #350
Aerows Nov 2014 #305
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #308
Aerows Nov 2014 #310
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #312
Aerows Nov 2014 #314
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #317
Aerows Nov 2014 #321
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #323
Aerows Nov 2014 #326
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #327
Aerows Nov 2014 #328
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #330
Aerows Nov 2014 #337
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #339
Aerows Nov 2014 #341
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #343
RBInMaine Nov 2014 #158
Logical Nov 2014 #387
Scuba Nov 2014 #10
woo me with science Nov 2014 #15
L0oniX Nov 2014 #356
OilemFirchen Nov 2014 #16
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #21
frazzled Nov 2014 #22
billhicks76 Nov 2014 #139
Erich Bloodaxe BSN Nov 2014 #26
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #39
brooklynite Nov 2014 #40
aspirant Nov 2014 #51
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #54
aspirant Nov 2014 #64
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #68
aspirant Nov 2014 #82
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #85
aspirant Nov 2014 #116
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #118
joshcryer Nov 2014 #144
aspirant Nov 2014 #147
joshcryer Nov 2014 #155
aspirant Nov 2014 #159
joshcryer Nov 2014 #162
aspirant Nov 2014 #163
peacebird Nov 2014 #226
marlakay Nov 2014 #295
Spitfire of ATJ Nov 2014 #47
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #86
Spitfire of ATJ Nov 2014 #88
VanillaRhapsody Nov 2014 #53
Marr Nov 2014 #60
VanillaRhapsody Nov 2014 #61
baldguy Nov 2014 #78
Beacool Nov 2014 #379
jwirr Nov 2014 #55
Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #123
jwirr Nov 2014 #351
Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #352
jwirr Nov 2014 #353
Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #357
Union Scribe Nov 2014 #57
pa28 Nov 2014 #72
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #75
baldguy Nov 2014 #87
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #274
maced666 Nov 2014 #83
bluestateguy Nov 2014 #93
aspirant Nov 2014 #121
frazzled Nov 2014 #142
aspirant Nov 2014 #148
frazzled Nov 2014 #165
aspirant Nov 2014 #170
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #175
aspirant Nov 2014 #210
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #211
aspirant Nov 2014 #218
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #219
aspirant Nov 2014 #224
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #228
aspirant Nov 2014 #231
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #233
aspirant Nov 2014 #236
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #237
aspirant Nov 2014 #238
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #239
aspirant Nov 2014 #243
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #244
aspirant Nov 2014 #247
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #248
aspirant Nov 2014 #251
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #254
aspirant Nov 2014 #271
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #275
aspirant Nov 2014 #342
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #344
aspirant Nov 2014 #358
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #361
aspirant Nov 2014 #362
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #363
JonLP24 Nov 2014 #108
frazzled Nov 2014 #214
JonLP24 Nov 2014 #257
Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #109
TheNutcracker Nov 2014 #111
Fearless Nov 2014 #136
Cal33 Nov 2014 #200
sadoldgirl Nov 2014 #140
MisterP Nov 2014 #143
Odin2005 Nov 2014 #150
aspirant Nov 2014 #154
Odin2005 Nov 2014 #156
aspirant Nov 2014 #161
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #168
aspirant Nov 2014 #171
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #172
MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #183
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #202
aspirant Nov 2014 #206
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #208
aspirant Nov 2014 #220
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #221
aspirant Nov 2014 #223
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #255
aspirant Nov 2014 #331
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #333
aspirant Nov 2014 #222
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #306
aspirant Nov 2014 #335
wyldwolf Nov 2014 #336
Raul Hernandez Nov 2014 #176
hrmjustin Nov 2014 #235
L0oniX Nov 2014 #240
brooklynite Nov 2014 #354
baldguy Nov 2014 #371
bigwillq Nov 2014 #276
Aerows Nov 2014 #315
Droning Predator Nov 2014 #325
NCTraveler Nov 2014 #359
NCTraveler Nov 2014 #364
PowerToThePeople Nov 2014 #372

Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 04:11 AM

1. Sanders/Warren would make a nice ticket.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 10:57 PM

137. I Saw This

 

The overly prolific commenters on DU trying to shove Hillary inevitability down our throats are going to have a meltdown over this. Hillary is horrible. Of rather have Liz regardless that she used to be a Republican. Hillary was President If The College Republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to billhicks76 (Reply #137)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:28 PM

287. Warren 2016 - I grew up in a GOP household. Now, none of them are Republican.

I have reservations with Hillary too.

If it came down to her or a GOPer like Christie/Ryan/other... I'd begrudgingly vote for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 04:12 AM

2. No one has told them she's inevitable, yet?

Get BUSY!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 04:15 AM

3. Warren double digits over Hillary. Sanders came in second.

Third Way inevitable Hillary places THIRD right behind Sanders.

This THIRD place finish despite having been in the public eye for years and years as both First Lady *and* Secretary of State...while he is routinely ignored or dismissed/discounted by the MSM.

And this is just the *beginning* of public familiarity with the policies of Warren and Sanders.

Go away, Third Way Hillary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #3)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 06:33 PM

127. Sanders got the "Colbert Bump" this week, and the crowd already knew and loved him.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #3)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 03:56 PM

177. Yep. Exactly

 

Hillary is not a progressive at all. She will not be winning the '16 nomination because she's the same old, same old - nothing new and exciting about her. She has lips firmly planted on the corporatists ass, and her support will not endear any progressives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 04:15 AM

4. Liberals need to get the ground campaign going.

I myself don't have the stomach for it. After being part of Draft Gore (larger than Ready for Warren by a mile), the Dean campaign, and basically fighting for the underdog, I can't and won't do it.

The 2016 election will be easily a $2 billion, more likely $6 billion campaign (thanks to Oligarchy United). It's going to be rough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #4)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 12:20 PM

24. It should have been started 3 yrs ago.

 

The problem with people promoting Sanders and/or Warren is that they don't even understand or acknowledge the fact that elections aren't won on Election Day. Then, when their chosen savior loses, they give up, toss up their hands & say "They cheated! The game is rigged! The winner is no better than a Republican!", instead of buckling down and getting ready for the next campaign & the one after that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #24)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 01:08 PM

37. You could've saved time and just said "lazy hippies".

 

In my experience, by the way, the left wing of the party is a hell of a lot more involved, knowledgeable, and active in politics than the self-described "moderates", DLC/Third Way, Reagan Democrat types, who can't even be bothered to show up on election day half the time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #37)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:10 PM

74. Your comment proves you've never met a real hippie.

 

The people that went back to the land in the '60s & '70s - and are still doing it are some of the hardest working people I've ever met.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #74)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:17 PM

80. i think you misread nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Voice for Peace (Reply #80)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:23 PM

84. I didn't mention hippies in my post. Yet the poster felt to need to make il-informed assumptions

 

and cast aspersions on people whom I generally respect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #84)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:43 PM

96. you're correct and I am the one who misread

 

although I think it was you, not hippies, that was being cast upon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #37)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:30 PM

90. What I don't get is why some supposed moderates are so anti-democratic.

 

They seem to hate the electoral process, which seems strange for self-proclaimed progressives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #90)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:13 PM

190. democrats against democracy

they made that pretty clear with Nader.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to noiretextatique (Reply #190)

Thu Nov 27, 2014, 10:01 AM

370. As if Stalinist purges are in the Democratic Party tradition.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #37)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:31 PM

204. Hear, Here!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #24)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:30 PM

89. You sure seem to have a lot of stored hatred for liberals, baldguy

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #89)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:31 PM

92. And for democracy as well.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #89)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:43 PM

97. Not at all. Just phonys who claim to be liberals.

 

They do more damage to the cause then Republicans ever could in their wildest dreams.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #97)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:50 PM

99. So... Anyone who doesn't share your candidate is a "phony liberal"?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #99)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:59 PM

106. A "phony liberal" is anyone who works to defeat the Dem nom even before they're nominated

 

And getting behind someone who isn't even running - and has publicly said she supports someone else on top of it - is a sure way to lose. America can't afford to have the Dems lose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #106)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 05:01 PM

120. There's no dem nom until after the primary

Nobody is defeating anybody, they are freely choosing the candidate they want to support.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #106)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 11:01 PM

138. That's Stupid

 

Clinging to someone who moves the center further to the right is criminal. Why do you think we have crazy Tea Partiers in power now? Because of that...it's that simple. We have cultural divides in this country so people want to differentiate themselves from the opposition so when we keep acting like normal republicans then the real republicans have to go off the cliff to the right to separate themselves. Get a clue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to billhicks76 (Reply #138)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 05:49 AM

152. So, you're advocating the use of Tea Party tactics in the Democratic Party.

 

Purges, litmus tests & pogroms. That's one way to make sure nothing ever gets done & let the RW win by default.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #152)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:06 AM

160. Its shining a light on the truth. Exposing, not purging. ~nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #160)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 03:19 PM

169. I'm sure that's how Stalin put it, too.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #152)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:26 PM

285. Pogrom?

 

For supporting someone other than Hillary????

That is so much hyperbole, it needs to be called supermegabole.

Wow. Words have meaning, and I don't think you know what that word means.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #152)

Mon Nov 24, 2014, 09:43 PM

365. Don't Put Words In My Mouth

 

We all know the money and power and media influence the Repubs have at their fingertips. We even see all their surrogates all over the web advocating for them and sometimes posing as someone they are not. It all gets exacerbated when we lose out way and move further right to please these jerks. All it does is push the center further to the right. If your suggesting Democrats should abandon their core principles and ignore what they stand for out of fear of alienating those scared of bogey-man litmus tests then you really are kidding yourself. We already list the Senate because if that ridiculous position.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to billhicks76 (Reply #365)

Thu Nov 27, 2014, 09:59 AM

369. I'm not putting words in your mouth. You've got Karl Rove to do that.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #369)

Thu Dec 4, 2014, 04:11 AM

388. That Sounds Stupider Than Anything Ive Read Yet

 

I do think Karl is close with people like the Clintons....more than people are willing to accept.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to billhicks76 (Reply #388)

Thu Dec 4, 2014, 09:39 AM

389. Except that Karl Rove was one of the people orchastrating the attacks on the Clintons

 

as he would for ANY Democrat.

And here you are following in his footsteps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #389)

Fri Dec 5, 2014, 01:10 AM

390. BS

 

It's all theater to divide us. He likes Hillary as she represents Wall St and is a Democrat In Name Only.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to billhicks76 (Reply #390)

Fri Dec 5, 2014, 07:55 AM

391. It's all theater to divide us. You're a major performer in that theater. At least on DU.

 

And casting any center-left Dem as a DINO oligarch is a central plot point.

If the Democrats are divided, who do you think wins? How do you think the minority party has been able to maintain power for the last 45 yrs?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #391)

Fri Dec 5, 2014, 05:02 PM

392. Good Luck With That Viewpoint

 

I've grown up. You should do the same. The game is rigged. Extreme measures and not playing footsie with power brokers needs to be taken. For some of us this is real life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #106)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 03:58 PM

178. And you describe Hillary Clinton and her fans perfectly

 

A phony liberal.

Yep, that's exactly what she is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raul Hernandez (Reply #178)

Thu Nov 27, 2014, 09:27 AM

367. Hillary's fans aren't the ones calling for purges. The phoney "liberals" are.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #367)

Thu Nov 27, 2014, 11:03 AM

373. It's the other way around.

 

May i remind you the same exact shit happened in 2008?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raul Hernandez (Reply #373)

Thu Nov 27, 2014, 11:16 AM

374. Someone hasn't been paying attention.

 

(That's you BTW.)

The people explicitly calling for purges & litmus tests are supporters of Warren & Sanders who want to get rid of the Clinton supporters.

Imagine what Warren & Sanders would have to say about that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #374)

Thu Nov 27, 2014, 03:11 PM

375. Thats because we do not consider Secretary Clinton a viable candidate

 

Therefore not purging her. Just dont need her drama and her baggage the size of Texas. Thanks, but no thanks. Therefore Hillary is not a viable candidate for the Democratic Party. Its called a process of elimination not purging.

Nice try.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raul Hernandez (Reply #375)

Thu Nov 27, 2014, 06:49 PM

376. Well, let's just have a few primaries & see.

 

And tell the purgies to fuck off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #376)

Thu Nov 27, 2014, 08:09 PM

377. Fine, let's have a primary - I guarantee you this: Ms. Clinton will lose every caucus and primaries

 

because Americans are actually PISSED off at the idea of a "dynasty" and "same old shit".

Third Way Democrats are not true Democrats at all. They are Republicans in disguise, and they need to be thrown out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raul Hernandez (Reply #377)

Thu Nov 27, 2014, 10:57 PM

378. If you believe that, then you've swallowed the RW Rovian lies hook, line & sinker.

 

Who's the real DINO here? You - a supporter of Stalinist purges who believes the very people who've been successful in getting Democrats elected "need to be thrown out" of the party? Or me? I have repeatedly stated the I will support the Democratic Party nominee for President in 2016. I doubt you can say the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #378)

Thu Nov 27, 2014, 11:37 PM

380. Purges

You talk a lot about purges, without really considering what or who is being purged. Is a purge necessarily bad if those that are being purged are pro-war corporatists? Is it automatically a bad thing to expel, say, fascists from your ranks simply because expelling them may be described as purging them? I get that "purge" is a buzzword among the establishment crowd, but I'm not buying the argument that being a "big tent party" at any cost is always, unquestionably and without caveat a good thing.

Hell, it may even be helpful to judge ourselves on who doesn't consider themselves welcome in our party. If the bankers, weapons manufacturers, torturers, war makers, etc. begin to feel that they have a foe in the Democratic Party, it may signal to us that we're finally doing something right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to saintsebastian (Reply #380)

Fri Nov 28, 2014, 08:27 AM

381. "Liberals" advocating purges believe that they can't gain support in the party through other means.

 

They believe they can't successfully articulate their positions. They believe they can't win in an open debate. They believe they can't gather enough votes, either in the party or nationally. They believe their arguments are too weak & their support is too thin, so they need to summarily remove the competition.

Bernie Sanders doesn't believe that. Elizabeth Warren doesn't believe that. I don't believe that.

So, who's the DINO here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #381)

Fri Nov 28, 2014, 07:22 PM

382. Did You Even Read My Post?

You failed completely to address the point I was attempting to make. Is a "big tent party" something you're striving for even if it means the inclusion of warmongering oligarchs?

In response to your reply: I'm not sure what you mean when you say that progressives "can't gather enough votes", and are therefore cleansing the party of those they're supposedly afraid of. Do you realize that any so-called purge would happen via the ballot box? Without a primary, this scary purge you speak of wouldn't even be possible. So, the idea that we're incapable of getting out the vote and so, by getting out the vote in a primary we're purging the party, doesn't make very much sense.

Ironically, it seems to be the Ready for Hillary crowd who largely scoff at the of competition for the nomination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to saintsebastian (Reply #382)

Fri Nov 28, 2014, 07:46 PM

383. Not liberals; but "liberals". Note the difference.

 

Liberals want actual progress, recognize that there are processes & procedures required to get there, understand that wishing dictatorial powers on one person is fantasy, but that it takes hard work by many dedicated individuals to achieve these ends, and while sometimes may be disappointed, are not disheartened in the quest to improve their lives & the lives of others.

OTOH, "liberals" only say they want progress, refuse to accept that simply wishing for something won't make it so, pout like spoiled children when they don't get their way, and - just like the fascists you accuse moderates of being, are likely to stab good Democrats in the back, and - just like fascists, have an authoritarian streak that demands purity, calling for purges and litmus tests, and - just like fascists, are happy to see the Democratic Party defeated.

You don't seem to understand OR CARE that I DIDN'T PULL THE IDEA OF PURGES OUT OF MY ASS - IT CAME DIRECTLY FROM THESE SUPPOSED "LIBERALS" THAT YOU'RE DEFENDING!!

So, again - who's the real DINO here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #383)

Fri Nov 28, 2014, 08:28 PM

384. Repeating Myself

Again, I am not doubting that a purge/litmus test mentality exists. It does. The question I'm raising, which you seem not to want to address, is whether or not purges and litmus tests are automatically and inherently bad. Surely there are some principles, whether or not they regard economics or war and peace, where a line should be drawn. Or do you think it is possible to be both the party of Wall Street fat cats and the working poor? Doesn't it sound like a better idea to be the party that pledges to put an end to perpetual bombing campaigns than it does to be the party whose slogan is "Eh the Other Guys Are (Slightly) Worse"?

And quit asking who is and isn't a DINO. I never called you a DINO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to saintsebastian (Reply #384)

Fri Nov 28, 2014, 09:45 PM

385. You replied to my post, and you seem to taking an opposing side.

 

And you seem further to be an anti-Democratic Party line that been originated & promoted by RW Republicans. To wit: It's fucking obvious that purges & litmus tests are automatically and inherently bad. THEY'RE ANTI-DEMOCRATIC AND AUTHORITARIAN BY THEIR VERY NATURE!! If you weren't a DINO you'd understand that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #385)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 12:16 AM

386. Anti-Democratic?

It's rich, frankly, that you describe any potential expulsion of moderates as "anti-democratic" when it's through the ballot box and by voting that any "purge" would take place. Is voting suddenly anti-democratic when the votes are cast for progressive populists?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #106)

Thu Nov 27, 2014, 06:02 AM

366. So... yes, whoever doesn't fancy the candidate you favor is a "phony liberal"

 

Ironically, you're "de-liberaling" people for not agreeing with you, demanding the abandonment of debate and democratic process, and seeking an appointment of someone by overhead fiat... and you think people who like Sanders are the problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #366)

Thu Nov 27, 2014, 09:55 AM

368. What I favor is a Democratic victory. If Sanders joins the Party & wins the nom, I'll vote for him.

 

I've said it repeatedly: I will vote for the nominee of the Democratic Party for President in 2016. I just don't think it's going to be Sanders. Or Warren, for that matter. ITOH, the people explicitly calling for purges & litmus tests want to get rid of the Clinton supporters.

They want to bypass the democratic process. They want to weaken the party. They want to alienate the great majority of the electorate. And they want to ensure a Republican victory on 2016.

Authoritarians do purges. Purists do litmus tests. Neither are in the Democratic Party tradition.

The people shouting loudest against Clinton & for Warren & Sanders mistakenly see the Democratic Party as hopelessly corrupt & in the pocket of Wall Street. What they don't see & really can't answer honestly is: If the Democrats are so hopelessly corrupt, why did their "liberal savior" Elizabeth Warren join the Party? Why is old uncorruptible Sanders looking to run as a Democrat?

I've never stated a preference for a candidate as yet. You can prop up you mistaken beliefs with unfounded assumptions based on your own biases & prejudices, but that won't change until we actually have some candidates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #24)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:46 PM

98. I think it's always a good idea -- when casting generalized aspersions, and proclaiming

 

what others should be doing -- to set an inspiring example,
to encourage, instead of criticizing.

So we didn't start three years ago, let's start today. Let
us know what you are doing for the cause.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Voice for Peace (Reply #98)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:54 PM

102. Hillary started running the day she resigned as Sec of State, and Warren isn't running at all.

 

Getting behind someone who isn't running is a sure way to lose.

Why don't we try not to lose for a start?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #102)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 04:13 PM

110. The odds are purportedly very good that almost any Dem can win in 2016

 

and I wish I could remember where I was reading about that,
it was pretty convincing and a somewhat technical explanation.

Hillary started running for President when she ran for Senator.
She has always been 'third way.' I have never liked her or
Bill either for that matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #102)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:01 PM

179. Uh. Exploratory group? Announcements to the link...

 

Right.. you have nothing at all, baldguy.

So shove your phony assumptions and accept that Hillary Clinton is not a nominee and will never be one. Even if she runs, she still has to get through the debates where she will be trounced by any true liberals. Her polls will drop and get beat again after her "inevitability" again, just like in '08.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #102)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:02 PM

180. Link? Proof?

 

Please do provide the link, or stop your phony assertions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raul Hernandez (Reply #180)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:11 PM

187. Warren has stated repeatedly that she is not running for President.

 

Here for example: Elizabeth Warren: ‘I am not running for president’

And she has also said repeatedly that she wants Hillary to run: Elizabeth Warren: I hope Hillary Clinton runs for president

The only "phony assertions" are those coming from the phony "progressives" who state categorically that they won't vote for anyone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #187)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:14 PM

191. I *AM* not talking about Warren....

 

I am talking about Ms. Hillary Clinton.

Thank you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raul Hernandez (Reply #191)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:18 PM

194. Are you under the impression that Hillary isn't running?

 

Have you been living on Mars for the last decade?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #194)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:45 PM

207. I am not under impression on anything. She hasn't announced her candidacy or formed an exploratory

 

group.

She isn't running as far as I know. You know that.

If she declares her candidacy, fine, but she still won't get my vote. If she is the 2016 Democratic nominee, I'll vote for her, but I will not work or donate any money to her. She has tons of PACs and her 1% friends that she doesn't need me to give her any money.

I want you to understand something: Pushing a person to vote for someone that they don't want makes voters sit at home.

Think about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raul Hernandez (Reply #207)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:29 PM

289. You and I agree

 

completely. I'll vote for her if I have to, but I will do everything I possibly can to make sure she isn't the nominee, and I won't be donating or working for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #24)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 06:35 PM

128. Three years ago we were trying to reelect Obama

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arcane1 (Reply #128)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 07:27 PM

130. The RW Republicans began looking for a populist conservative candidate in 1964.

 

They didn't succeed until Reagan in 1980. They didn't decline to put up a candidate during those years, but they didn't spot building their base either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 05:58 AM

5. Maybe Hillary can be Secretary of State. :)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 06:09 AM

6. I see this as good news.

 

The Democratic Party needs to start leaning more left.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 06:14 AM

7. I'm fairly confident they'll win polls at DU and Kos, too

And, there are worse places to start from than that, in fairness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 06:21 AM

8. I seriously hope Jerry Brown runs.

Anyone else is likely to be a disaster, and Hillary would be a disgraceful disaster.

Of course, I'm always open to new candidates, or old candidates exceeding expectations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 07:41 AM

9. Finally, some reality in the press. We don't want Hillary!!!!!

Most of us anyways.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #9)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 10:41 AM

11. This article is 'reality' insofar as it shows what a percentage of DFA members prefer.

It's certainly nice to hear good news about your candidate (or non-candidate in this case) but to think this reflects the reality of the Democratic Party at large is naive.

These are points that should also be considered from the linked article:

DFA grew out of the 2004 presidential campaign of Howard Dean, who has said publicly that he’s supporting Hillary Clinton in 2016.

The poll is not scientific and should be read with plenty of caveats, but offers the temperature of one group of committed progressive activists. For instance, Ready for Warren, a super PAC which is trying to draft the senator into the race, has been sending emails to supporters this week urging them to vote for Warren in the DFA poll.

Larger public opinion surveys show Clinton in a dominant position in the likely 2016 Democratic presidential field, even among progressives



Good luck to Elizabeth Warren. She's being rewarded for her loyalty to Clinton and the Democratic party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #11)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 10:48 AM

12. How are 'Public opinion surveys" scientically factual and not full of caveats?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #12)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 11:34 AM

17. Polling is done by a random sampling of registered and/or likely voters

This poll was little more than an online poll for DFA members only where people could tell others how to vote to sway the results. Very much like how people on DU 'DU' vote in online polls to sway the results.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #17)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 12:26 PM

27. Progressives speak.

This was a poll of national progressives, 1 million strong, and the results were enlightening. You accuse people in DFA of voter fraud,"tell others how to vote to sway the results" so present your factual info with names, dates and times. If you have accusations that are scientific bring them for all to see or understand this a valid indicator of a national group of progressives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #27)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 12:37 PM

29. In a closed poll for members only



This was a poll of national progressives, 1 million strong,

0ut of over 1,000,000 members, 164,733 (approximately 10%) voted online. Warren pulled 40% or so of that 10%.

You accuse people in DFA of voter fraud, "tell others how to vote to sway the results"

No, the OP's linked article does. Quote: Ready for Warren, a super PAC which is trying to draft the senator into the race, has been sending emails to supporters this week urging them to vote for Warren in the DFA poll.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #29)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 01:01 PM

35. A poll is a poll is a poll.

Present the e-mail evidence so we can see just how threatening they were to DFA'ers. Then uncover and reveal which of those 164,733 were so intimidated by being TOLD they have no choice of their own in voting and must sway the election or else.

Was your poll a closed poll of Dems only or did it include Repubs and Independents? What percentage of progressive/millennials/conservaDems were represented in your cited poll? Also exactly how many responders were in your poll,1000 or 164,733?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #35)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 01:05 PM

36. that is ridiculously naive

Present the e-mail evidence so we can see just how threatening they were to DFA'ers.

Who said anything about threatening?

In a closed poll for members only who already lean a certain way, how else do you think the 'poll' will turn out. Rather like asking vegans what america's favorite food is then announcing meatless burgers are the most popular food.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #36)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 01:20 PM

42. Trying to figure out your skewed thinking reminds me of trying to figure out rethugs' thinking.

hmmm...



They polled DEMOCRATS & Hillary wasn't the favorite. Deal with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #42)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 01:24 PM

44. They polled DFA members who happen to be Democrats (well, mostly I guess)

NO ONE is denying the polls results. What is being questioned is that results are consequential based on the leanings of those polled.

Like this one from DFA:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #44)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 03:56 AM

145. The DFA poll is predictive. Ask President Kucinich.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #145)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 05:00 AM

149. The 2008 polls predictive, ask President Hillary Clinton!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #149)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 05:25 AM

151. The "2008 polls" showed Obama beating McCain.

And if you're talking about the Dem primary polls, those showed Obama beating Hillary soon after the start of the primary season.

Do you really think this DFA poll is predictive of who the Dem nominee will be?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #151)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:46 AM

153. Who can predict?

" after the start of the primary season" so you ignore all polls before the primary begins, right? That means all these Wall Street Hillary polls and the DFA polls should be ignored because the 2016 primary hasn't begun yet. Do you agree that if the DFA poll isn't predictive, then the Hillary polls aren't predictive either?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #153)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:10 AM

157. Tell that to the OP. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #36)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 01:32 PM

45. This is ridiculously evasive!

When you tell someone how to vote, your NOT suggesting, recommending, begging, asking, kindly hinting or any other gentle nudging.

Answer my questions on your cited poll or we will all know how sciencitifically ridiculous your position is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #45)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 01:34 PM

46. How did I evade? It is a FACT Warren supporters contacted DFA members...

... and suggested they vote for Warren. Is that not a fact?

Answer my questions on your cited poll or we will all know how sciencitifically ridiculous your position is.

What poll did I cite?

Oh, here's one:



WOW! Eerily accurate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #46)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:06 PM

49. Poof, it's gone

"Suggested they vote for Warren" and in post #17 "people could TELL others how to vote" so now when you're pushed into a corner you change your words hoping none of us will notice. This is ridiculously naive.

"What poll did I cite"? Let's go to post #11, "larger public opinion surveys show Clinton in a dominant position in the likely 2016 Presidential field". Then when I ask for facts on these 2016 polls you present a 2008 poll and pretend again your previous words are forgotten or never existed. I stand by ridiculous evasions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #49)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:20 PM

52. Go to McDonalds and get me an egg mcmuffin... better yet...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #52)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:06 PM

69. No on the egg sandwich and no on swaying my vote, which you implied they did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #69)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:31 PM

91. that's what the OP said they did.

And regardless of your answer, I TOLD you to do things without threatening you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #91)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:59 PM

105. But you didn't sway my vote

"People could tell others how to vote to sway the results" is your statement. If you told me to do something and I didn't then how could you sway my vote or any DFA voter to alter the poll and skew the results? This is an untainted poll and it's results should be understood. Hillary is in third place and falling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #105)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 04:02 PM

107. So? You equated "telling" with "threatening"

I just proved the two aren't the same.

Warren isn't running. I'll bet Sanders won't either. And if they did, they'd go the way of DFA's last pulse poll winner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #107)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 04:39 PM

115. Third place and falling.

No, you suggested that e-mails were telling people how to vote to screw up the results. I pointed out that telling people was a lot stronger then suggesting, but suggesting wasn't as believable as telling when you implied their votes were swayed. With Hillary sitting in an embarrassing third place, how can this poll be right? Now you persistently point to a 2008 DFA poll as your basis of disputing this recent poll. I cite the 2008 Presidential Primary where Hillary is a proven loser.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #115)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 05:00 PM

119. aspirant: Last place and desperate

you suggested that e-mails were telling people how to vote to screw up the results.


Quote me where I suggested that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #119)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 06:05 PM

122. Wolfie desparately hanging on to a loser

Post # 17 "people could tell others how to vote to sway the results"
Post# 31 " were encouraged to vote one way by another progressive group and in no way represents the democratic electorate at large".

Now don't get evasive on me again. I'm having patience with you because I know your memory is fading and I have to keep pointing to your posts. I remind you again of the 2016 Clinton presidential polls and the questions I had for you.

How am I in last place when I'm not running for anything or maybe you have forgotten again?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #122)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 06:16 PM

124. That's what the OP states, Sherlock

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #124)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 06:31 PM

125. Which OP states are democratic?

The OP has many words, those are the ones you chose to represent your views. Now I know its only been a few minutes but have you forgotten again to answer my questions on the 2016 Clinton polls. I first asked a few hours ago but that's probably forever lost in your short-term memory.It's been interesting with you always suggesting to "look over there, not here, over there". Wolfie, you have to remember here has value too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #125)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 06:32 PM

126. The OP states what you are so mad at me for repeating LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #107)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:10 PM

185. Sanders is already in exploration mode.

 

And he has hired a really good Democratic strategist.

He's in for '16, and he'll get my vote unless there are more attractive potential candidates who is left of Obama and Clinton that has closely matched my ideals and policies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raul Hernandez (Reply #185)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:11 PM

188. Ok well good for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #52)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:33 PM

205. I love Egg McMuffins.

I'm glad they stop selling them early, or I would eat them several times a week. So yummy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #49)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:50 PM

100. No polls are valid unless The Inevitable is leading by 124%! and is the most progressive in history!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LawDeeDah (Reply #100)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:53 PM

101. ok, right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #101)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:57 PM

104. I know, it's hilarious and I've been seeing that here a lot lately.

 

Watchout Busters, she's Gonna Graph Ya!
or
Achtung Baby, a weighted Hillary Poll is About to Drop on Your Head!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #45)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 01:45 PM

48. This poll doesn't exist on the Democracy for America website. I found it attributed to them elsewhe

I think its BS.

Give us a link from their website, and then I'll believe you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to wyldwolf (Reply #50)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:26 PM

56. The 2016 polls!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #56)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:27 PM

59. So your denying the 2016 poll results?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #59)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:59 PM

65. Nice try,you cited them now support them with the info requested.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #65)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:02 PM

66. I cited the 2016 DFA poll results? WTF are you asking?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #66)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:07 PM

70. You are a saint.

This is one of the most bizarre exchanges I have seen on DU in some time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tritsofme (Reply #70)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:09 PM

73. True.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #66)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:15 PM

79. Post #11 Clinton 2016 presidental polls (my edit)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #79)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:18 PM

81. What, exactly, are you disputing from post 17?

I made two claims:

1. Polling is done by a random sampling of registered and/or likely voters
2. The online poll for DFA members allowed people to tell others how to vote to sway the results. Very much like how people on DU 'DU' vote in online polls to sway the results.

Which one isn't true?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #81)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:35 PM

94. Evade to invade.

Why are you so ridiculously evasive. What claims, scientific claims, how can you do that when your so evasive. Isn't it true you are evasive and the issue I'm questioning about,you are evading. Evasion can be harmful when coupled with memory loss. Is evasion a positive trait? If it is should we teach this in our schools?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #94)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:37 PM

95. Tell me exactly what you are disputing if you want an answer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #95)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 04:18 PM

112. My post #35 second section and post #79 should solve your evasions

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #112)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 04:58 PM

117. Your post #35 second section and #79

Was your poll a closed poll of Dems only or did it include Repubs and Independents? What percentage of progressive/millennials/conservaDems were represented in your cited poll? Also exactly how many responders were in your poll,1000 or 164,733?


Again, I ask what poll you are referring to?? Quote me the post where I cited a poll.

Post #17 Clinton 2016 presidental polls


In post 17 I didn't cite Clinton 2016 polls. Here is the EXACT wording of post #17:

Polling is done by a random sampling of registered and/or likely voters. This poll was little more than an online poll for DFA members only where people could tell others how to vote to sway the results. Very much like how people on DU 'DU' vote in online polls to sway the results.

So what are disputing?

Do you deny polling is done by a random sampling of registered and/or likely voters? All public opinion polling is a social science with strict rules about sample size, random selection of participants and margins of error.

Do you deny the DFA poll quoted in the OP was an online poll for DFA members? Do you deny the PAC 'Ready For Warren' emailed DFA members telling them to vote for Warren?



Just what the fuck are you denying??

Democratic primary polls are ALWAYS from registered voters who are Democrats or lean Democratic. And to your obvious chagrin, Hillary leads among liberals. All of the most recent data suggests that Clinton doesn't have any real problems on her left flank. Indeed, she's actually stronger with liberals than she is with more moderate Democrats. And very, very few liberals have anything but nice things to say about her.

To wit:

* A new CNN/Opinion Research poll shows that when voters are asked whether they would prefer Clinton, a more liberal alternative or a more conservative one, about twice as many non-Clinton voters say they prefer the more conservative one (20 percent) to the more liberal one (11 percent).

* A Washington Post/ABC News poll this month showed Clinton taking a bigger share of the vote in the 2016 primary among self-described liberals (72 percent) than among moderate and conservative Democrats (60 percent).

* The same poll shows 18 percent of moderate Democrats don't want Clinton to run. Just 6 percent of liberal Democrats agree.



* The WaPo-ABC poll also shows liberal Democrats approve of Clinton's tenure at the State Department by a margin of 96-1, while moderate Democrats approve of it 84-12. Sixty-seven percent of liberals strongly approve of Clinton's performance, nearly 9 in 10 say she is a strong leader, and only slightly fewer say she's honest and trustworthy.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/06/16/hillary-clinton-doesnt-have-a-problem-with-liberals-not-hardly/

And, she leads among millennials:

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2014/10/hillary-clinton-millennials-poll
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/10/poll-hillary-clinton-millenials-111723.html
http://reason.com/poll/2014/07/17/millennials-plan-to-vote-for-hillary-cli



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #117)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 07:06 PM

129. My mistake post #17 is post#11 and was posted on #49 earlier.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #129)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 07:31 PM

131. So, again, what are you denying?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #117)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 08:25 PM

132. Will the honest pollsters stand-up

I'm going thru each of your polls. Preliminary results;
1) Your Millennials polls are from 2 sources, Fusion TV and Reason-Rube polling
a) Fusion tv is a 1 YEAR OLD COMPANY catering to the English speaking Hispanics, doesn't sound like an all-encompassing TV poll to me, more like DFA. DfA had 164,733 voters, how many did Fusion have?
b)Reason-rube is a self-defined right wing libertarian group. I give about as much credence to that poll as Fox News polls.

"A social science with strict rules about sample size, random selection of participates and margins of error" Did you forget the variability in polls? How can 4 polls on the same issue has different results and still be called a science. The Turtle's national polling was too close to call on Nov 3 and turned out to be a 15% blowout. If the national polls are so precise, why do lots of politicians waste their money on secret internal polls? Could how the questions are asked play any role in the outcome?
Now to denying. "online poll for DFA members" stated plainly in my posts." e-mailed DfA members telling them to vote for Warren"; I used that in my arguments. "Hillary leads among Liberals" ;not in the DFA poll.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #132)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 08:33 PM

133. So you're going to attack the pollsters because it's the only thing you have left

That's something that Republicans usually do. Not that I haven't seen it on left leaning sources.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #133)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 09:54 PM

135. Would you risk your life on a poll?

Last edited Sat Nov 22, 2014, 11:13 PM - Edit history (1)

This is great. You make statements and I counter and you have no rebuttal. You attack the DFA poll and then say I have nothing when I attack your poll results.Time to re-think that one. Now you accuse me of being a repub and left-leaning sources too. What a stretch, the repub that is.

On to your polls;
!) CNN/ORC ;respondents 306 dems 175 independents : poll taken in JUNE 2014 5 months before the mid-terms. Poll was between Hillary and no names (ghosts), they didn't even put in Bernie's name. Hillary as nominee 42% satisfied but not enthusiastic 41% enthusiastic, no landslide here. Methodology;" Subgroups with a sampling error of 8.5% or larger are not displayed and instead are denoted with an N/A,is this poll all-inclusive?
2) Wash.Post/ABC News, another May/June poll ; Again Clinton vs generic liberals(ghosts). The article says " things can always change and the Clintons can indeed be tied to the 1% pretty easily", can that be the resounding affirmation we look for in a poll?

See how easy it is for non-evasion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #135)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 11:46 PM

141. Do you make a habit out of...

Denying reality? Trying to find every little out to the point you look desperate just to prove an internet poll means something?

Face it, every scientifically conducted poll has Clinton ahead. One internet poll where members of a left leaning group votes by clicking a button is your one little ray of faux hope. Sad, really.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #141)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:36 AM

146. Trolling down the avenue.

I've already answered your denying questions. Why are you so desperately trying to prove a ! year old company's TV poll as having meaning? Again no rebuttals to your unscientific polls, just want us to fall inline behind Wall Street Hillary. Hillary leading a little known ghost is not science. Voting by clicking a button is so passe and must be outlawed in your strict rules. It' sad isn't it that progressives have a way to have their voice heard in this Hillary dictatorship. Now it's time to get to the heart of the issue, WILL YOU RISK YOUR LIFE ON A POLL? We both know what a sane person's answer is!

"one little ray of faux hope" does that mean your an Obama hater too?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #146)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 09:45 AM

164. I've been here for over 10 years you need to look up the definition of troll

You've not answered anything you just made excuses. You sound like people trying to spin their way out of global warming because they find one or two scientists they can convince to say it's not true.

It's the mark of a true progressive to deny spin and insult. congratulations

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #164)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 02:43 PM

166. Poll that

Now you accuse me of being a global warming denier, talk about grabbing for straws. Is that all you got? You could be here for a 1000 years, it's my right to define it as I see it.Excuses, no I've just presented the other side, the argument that 500 people could never define 360 million people. If you think human beings are that simple, then it's time to elect a monkey.Your unscientific science is a joke, plain and simple.National polls are nothing but brainwashing propaganda to guide the masses in the direction our corp. masters want. I've answered every question you asked, that's why you have no questions in your post. I will present my unanswered question for a third time, WILL YOU RISK YOUR LIFE ON A POLL? Now answer the question.It's the mark of a true repub to accuse others of the things they are doing, trying to turn their weaknesses into strengths. I hope all my progressive brothers/sisters read this to see your true colors or probably they already know. Just move on to the repub party where you belong because your insults(progressive trait) aren't cutting the mustard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #166)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 02:54 PM

167. Why? You'd just deny the results

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #167)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 03:45 PM

173. What's the probability you will answer the question?

Wolfie you're being evasive again. "Deny the results" of a 1 person probability poll, no I would weigh the results. Any poll has a probability of truth no matter the size.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #173)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 03:48 PM

174. Why do you deny science?

Science denier

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #174)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:20 PM

197. The science of statistics is probability, guesses at best

Poll denier, it's time you go back to your Republican home, they've missed you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #197)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:22 PM

199. Why do you continue to deny science?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #81)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:16 PM

192. Graded: 50%

 

F.

You are assuming #2. I was not influenced in any way when I voted in that poll. No-one told me how to vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raul Hernandez (Reply #192)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:18 PM

195. Graded: 0%

Since no one was talking to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #195)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:30 PM

201. Wolfie why are you so angry? Calm down remember the big tent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #201)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:31 PM

203. Aspy, why do you deny science?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #203)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:52 PM

215. Wolfie,will you risk your life on a poll?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #215)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:53 PM

217. Aspy why do you deny science?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #217)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 05:14 PM

225. Wolfie is your life more important than a poll?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #225)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 05:17 PM

227. You can't pick and choose science out of conveniece

Stop doing it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #227)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 05:27 PM

229. Will you risk your life on probable guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #229)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 05:29 PM

230. Did you go to a Bible college? Sounds like it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #230)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 05:33 PM

232. Will you risk your life on probable guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #232)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 05:34 PM

234. What was the name of your bible college?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #234)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 05:57 PM

241. Wolfie World. Will you risk your life on probable guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #241)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:00 PM

242. Pat Robertson?? Spare us!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #242)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:06 PM

245. Will you risk your life on probable guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #245)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:09 PM

246. Why are you a science denier?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #246)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:19 PM

249. Science of comedy,is your life more important than probable guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #249)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:20 PM

250. You've denied global warming and evolution

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #250)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:24 PM

252. Science of plumbing will you risk your life on probable guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #252)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:26 PM

253. You believe global warming is the science of plumbing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #253)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:32 PM

258. Are all sciences the same?Will you risk your life on guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #258)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:33 PM

259. why are you on DU if you don't believe in global warming?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #259)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:36 PM

261. Science of evasion is your life more important than guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #261)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:37 PM

262. Why do you keep evading my questions?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #262)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:40 PM

265. The science of the game, will you risk your life on guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #265)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:43 PM

266. The science behind vaccinations is solid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #266)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:49 PM

269. science of solidity, will you risk your life on guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #269)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:50 PM

270. But you keep denying it and evading my questions

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #270)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:55 PM

272. science of questioning, will you risk youer life on guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #272)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:57 PM

273. You're not even questioning you're evading

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #273)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:00 PM

278. Science of you, will you risk your life on guesses

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #278)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:05 PM

280. More evasion

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #269)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:59 PM

277. Nothing solid from where you stand it's all evasive

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #277)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:02 PM

279. Science of nothingness? is your life more important than guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #279)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:05 PM

281. Nothingness yes a very good description of your non-answers

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #281)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:11 PM

282. science of good vs bad, will you risk your lfe on guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #282)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:20 PM

283. Why are you a science denier?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #283)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:23 PM

284. science of science, will you risk your life on guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #284)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:28 PM

286. And you deny it all

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #286)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:30 PM

290. Science of all there is, will you risk your life on guesses

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #290)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:32 PM

291. why are you on DU if you don't believe in global warming?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #291)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:36 PM

294. Science of DU, willyou risk your life on guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #294)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:39 PM

297. why are you on DU if you don't believe in global warming?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #297)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:41 PM

299. science of believing in polls, is your life more important than guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #299)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:43 PM

301. why are you on DU if you don't believe in global warming?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #301)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:47 PM

302. Science of believing in polls,Will you risk your life for guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #302)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:50 PM

304. why are you on DU if you don't believe in global warming?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #304)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:54 PM

309. science of hot and cold, is your life more important than guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #282)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:28 PM

288. More evasion

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #288)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:32 PM

292. Science of more or less, is your life more important than guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #292)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:35 PM

293. why are you on DU if you don't believe in global warming?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #293)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:39 PM

296. Science of believing in polls,Will you risk your life on guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #252)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:35 PM

334. why are you on DU if you don't believe in global warming?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #241)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:34 PM

260. Why are you ducking my questions on science?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #260)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:38 PM

263. The science of debate, will you risk your life on guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #263)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:38 PM

264. Why do you keep evading my questions?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #264)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:43 PM

267. The science of questioning,will you risk your life on guesses

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #267)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:44 PM

268. You question global warming really??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #215)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:28 PM

256. Debate 101 at the Crystal Cathedral from Aspy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #50)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:27 PM

58. Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #29)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:06 PM

182. So you're pissed that you didn't sign up for DFA?

 

Ok. your loss.

I am a DFA member, and I appreciate that they asked me who I would prefer in '16.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raul Hernandez (Reply #182)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:10 PM

186. What makes you think that?

I signed up for DFA ages ago. And OFA and Moveon and ... and...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #186)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:19 PM

196. So did you vote on that poll or not?

 

If you didn't, kwitcherbitchin.

You sat out on that poll, didn't you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raul Hernandez (Reply #196)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:21 PM

198. Makes no difference

And kindly point out where I've been 'bitchin.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #198)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:46 PM

209. You're whining about the fact that Ms. Clinton came on third

 

on the DFA poll.

"It makes no difference' - it means you sat out on that poll and have no right to whine about it.

I did, and I have the right to discuss it.

You don't. You sat out the vote.

End of story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raul Hernandez (Reply #209)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:49 PM

212. Quote me. Link or slink.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #212)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:51 PM

213. No need to. The avatar of yours says it all.

 

Have a nice day. If you want, Google yourself and Clinton on that search bar top right of your screen..

I had more than enough to know what your loyalties are.

Typical Third Way behavior. You have been accused of evading several questions. And your credibility isn't a very good one when it comes to Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raul Hernandez (Reply #213)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:52 PM

216. Another amazing display of your psychic ability

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #11)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 10:57 AM

13. Savoring the "whoosh" of goalposts moving.

A few months ago, we were lectured that somewhere around a million percent of "liberal Democrats" preferred Hillary Goldman-Sachs:


This is just the beginning of the implosion of corporate Turd Way PR...

Wait 'til Sanders and/or Warren are actually talking to the electorate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #13)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 11:38 AM

18. The article linked in the OP says the very thing you are denying.

Larger public opinion surveys show Clinton in a dominant position in the likely 2016 Democratic presidential field, even among progressives.


So we should believe the reported DFA results but not THAT part?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #18)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:50 PM

63. You must get so dizzy from all that spinning.

Of *course* she started out ahead, professor! She was First Lady and Sec. of State!

But now she's fighting at third in this major poll of over a *million,* and her numbers have also been falling steadily in the polls of the total electorate. Yeah, people are starting to pay attention...

This whole thread is a comedy of tortured Third Way spin...but *particularly* interesting for how ostentatious the flailing is.

Honestly, I find that as fascinating as the corporate Third Way's "Accept Doom" email campaigns right before the midterms...


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5824859













Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #63)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:13 PM

77. So quoting the article is "spin?" LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #77)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 04:25 PM

113. No, but pretending to miss the point is. Pretending Post 63 was anything but straightforward is.

What a base occupation. And a fascinating performance, from the perspective of motives.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5824859

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #113)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 04:27 PM

114. What point did I pretend to miss?

Last edited Sat Nov 22, 2014, 05:19 PM - Edit history (1)

Vagueness is your strong suit.

Of *course* she started out ahead, professor! She was First Lady and Sec. of State!


Where have I ever said she started out ahead? Not that she didn't, but where did I say it?

But now she's fighting at third in this major poll of over a *million,* and her numbers have also been falling steadily in the polls of the total electorate. Yeah, people are starting to pay attention...


You think this DFA poll is a 'major' poll? It it is, it's a sadly inaccurate one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #13)

Mon Nov 24, 2014, 11:55 AM

355. LOL ...those goal posts are on castors.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #355)

Mon Nov 24, 2014, 01:17 PM

360. Roller skates, baby!

Downhill all the way!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #11)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 11:03 AM

14. In fact...

she's specifically being rewarded for her fealty to Obama, without whom she would remain an unknown.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OilemFirchen (Reply #14)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:55 PM

103. you mean Warren? if you do you think Hillary Rodham would be a 'known' without Bill

 

If you want to play that game.

Warren became a senator on her own steam and she owes no one her successes. She supported Obama and he her, that is what adults do for common causes. No one can say that about Hillary and her political 'successes'. So if you meant Warren, there ya go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LawDeeDah (Reply #103)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 08:37 PM

134. Correct on both assumptions.

Warren gained recognition as a result of serving in Obama's cabinet, and prominence due to Obama's desire to see her as head of his Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Clinton's notoriety is a direct result of her stint as First Lady.

Would either or both of these women be national figures without those relationships? Perhaps. But we have no way of knowing. Nonetheless, we do know how they did achieve their current stature.

ETA: I presume that your inference about Clinton is as I described it. Reviewing your question, however, I'm not sure as it makes no sense whatsoever. I don't even know if it was a question. Was it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #11)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 11:52 AM

19. My take from this poll

is that politically informed Democrats prefer anyone but Hillary. Hanging your hat on support from low-information voters, who most likely go by name recognition, does not say a lot about your preferred candidate. It does, however, speak volumes about the propaganda machine in this country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kermitt Gribble (Reply #19)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 11:56 AM

20. So unless you're a DFA member, you're politically uninformed?

The article essentially states it was a popularity contest for DFA members.

It's the 'smarter than thou' attitude that keeps 'progressives' in a corner. Or as Michael Moore once said, 'this is why people don't like you, you're so far up on your high horse.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #20)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 12:40 PM

30. Where does it "essentially states" this?

Calling this a "popularity contest" after you have already called it a "online poll" is revealing the weakness of your agreement. Now who is trying to be "smarter than thou" by lecturing us on a nationa, 1 million strong progressive poll?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #30)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 12:42 PM

32. This is really easy to understand

1. The poll was only open for DFA members.
2. Out of over 1,000,000 members, only 10% voted.
3. An outside group emailed DFA members to encourage them to vote for someone that isn't even running.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #20)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 12:57 PM

33. I didn't say that.

My point is that mainstream polls are taken from the general populace, which is largely uninformed, politically.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kermitt Gribble (Reply #33)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 01:01 PM

34. it's the same thing

The uninformed general populace vs. the informed 'progressives.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #34)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 01:18 PM

41. No, it's not.

If there is any "us vs them" it is Progressives vs the corporate media machine, who bear the responsibility for the "uniformed general populace". Are you denying that the general populace is largely uninformed or misinformed, politically?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kermitt Gribble (Reply #41)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 01:22 PM

43. here are your words:

politically informed Democrats prefer anyone but Hillary.

The opposite is politically uninformed people prefer Hillary.

mainstream polls are taken from the general populace, which is largely uninformed, politically.

The opposite of which is closed members-only polls are taken from largely informed people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #43)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:45 PM

62. Sorry, I'm not seeing the "gotcha" here.

Do you not agree that most US citizens are uninformed or misinformed? Do you not agree that people who participate in political groups or discussion boards are more politically informed than the general populace?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kermitt Gribble (Reply #62)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:08 PM

71. There's no 'gotcha' here.

Do you not agree that most US citizens are uninformed or misinformed?

Not necessarily.

Do you not agree that people who participate in political groups or discussion boards are more politically informed than the general populace?

Not necessarily. In this thread alone there are people claiming the DFA poll is scientific. WOW! That's informed - NOT.

DU is full of historical revisionism and political ignorance. At the same time, the brightest political people I know never read the netroots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #34)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:03 PM

67. In general polls people can claim to be whatever they want. A lot of HRC supporters claim to be

 

progressive but they are fooling themselves. Do you consider yourself a progressive?

DFA is made up mostly of progressives and they don't choose HRC. Most HRC supporters wouldn't have anything to do with DFA. While the Clintons and Obama are socially progressive, they are strongly conservative on foreign policy, economy and civil rights. To me favoring same sex marriage and also supporting the oligarchy does not make you a progressive.

A vote for HRC is a vote for 8 more years of Conservative ideology.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #67)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:13 PM

76. Anyone can join DFA to vote in their polls, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kermitt Gribble (Reply #19)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 12:11 PM

23. Bingo. Exactly correct.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kermitt Gribble (Reply #19)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 12:22 PM

25. Yep. Exactly.

And the trajectory is down, down, down as people learn more. These poll results would have been unheard of six months ago.

And Democrats had better pay attention, because the fall in her numbers is happening not just among liberals, but in the electorate as a whole: http://presidentialpolls.com/carriere/hillary-clintons-lead-continues-to-dwindle-as-elections-approach/

Of course, that may be the entire point of running her...for the corporate/infiltrating/Third Way faction of our party:

I believe it is wholly deliberate
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5824859

We misunderstand politics and our politicians in 2014 when we assume their goal is always to win. That was the old system, democracy.

In oligarchy, the goal is using the two parties you own in whichever way best furthers the corporate agenda of the oligarchy.

This is not a problem of bad strategy in a functioning democratic contest. This is oligarchy pretending to be democracy. Corporate Democrats did everything possible to depress turnout in the midterms, from their utter lack of a positive agenda, to the outright campaign to demoralize and insult the base online, to the "Accept Doom" DCCC email campaign:

DCCC email campaign: "Accept defeat"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025736826

I believe the PTB have decided it's time for a Republican figurehead next time. The illusion of democracy is nearly dead, and will continue to die as all the elements of fascism continue to be put into place by our bipartisan, purchased cabal of a government. But putting a Republican in next time will at least offer a boost to the propaganda machine, as all the Third Way corporate shills and mouthpieces online will be able to put on their liberal costumes again and pretend to wail alongside the rest of us as the last vestiges of the democratic nation we once knew are drowned in the toilet, this time by Republicans. Of course, all that "opposition" will be carefully and mysteriously futile in terms of policy.

But the important thing is that Dems will be consistently SAYING the right things again, and looking like the firebrand populist party we need them to be.

And the people will be reassured that we really do still have a democracy, we can stop all this silly talk about oligarchy and needing fundamental change and such, and we can all go home and watch "Hunger Games" and grouse because our only problem will be that Republicans are in office for a little while and we need to get them out and the Third Way Democrats back in.









Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kermitt Gribble (Reply #19)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 01:12 PM

38. +1 Well said. I'm with you there. /nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #11)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 12:29 PM

28. This is a caveat?

"but offers the temperature of one group of committed progressive activists." Those are the people who do the groundwork in getting voters ready to vote. Having the 'committed activists' on your side is a big plus, not a 'caveat'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Erich Bloodaxe BSN (Reply #28)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 12:40 PM

31. of course it is

About 10% of DFA members voted, were encouraged to vote one way by another 'progressive' group, and in no way represent the Democratic electorate at large.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #11)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:05 PM

181. Howard Dean, yes, he is supporting Clinton

 

But remember, he can change his support anytime.

Right now, there's no-one running for President for 2016.

Just a bunch of people "exploring" their presidential aspirations.

I know Dean wants someone more left of Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raul Hernandez (Reply #181)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:07 PM

184. How do you know that about Dean?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #184)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:13 PM

189. I will leave that for you to figure that out.

 

since I already know Dr. Dean is ready for another change - he wants to re-implement his 50 state strategy that has worked wonders in '06 and '08.

DWS is an idiot and has lost Democrats because there is no messaging, and no unity around the President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raul Hernandez (Reply #189)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:17 PM

193. Oh, another psychic deaniac with a mental connection

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #11)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:39 PM

298. Even if Warren supporters "ordered" DFA members

 

to vote for her ... that should tell you she has some pretty damn staunch supporters. I've seen a fairly tepid response to Hillary in many Democratic spheres. The most enthusiastic supporters of Hillary are 1%-ers who believe (and rightly so) that they will benefit tremendously by supporting her if she is elected.

99%-ers? Not so much, and certainly not among the younger demographics. If you will recall, in 2008, that's exactly who didn't vote for her in the primaries, either. No Dem is going to win without young voters, and Hillary is about as appealing to that demographic as a bag of turds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #298)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:43 PM

300. Who are you quoting with "ordered?"

She has staunch supporters, sure. Who's denied that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #300)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:49 PM

303. Science of quotations. will you risk your life on guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #303)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:51 PM

307. why are you on DU if you don't believe in global warming?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #307)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:57 PM

311. Science of DU, will you risk your life on guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #311)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:02 PM

313. why are you on DU if you don't believe in global warming?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #313)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:08 PM

316. science of repitition, will you risk your life on guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #316)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:09 PM

318. Why do you keep repeating yourself?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #318)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:13 PM

319. science of the self, is your life more important than guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #319)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:14 PM

320. why are you on DU if you don't believe in global warming?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #320)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:18 PM

322. Science of dos and don'ts, will you risk your life on guesses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #322)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:19 PM

324. why are you on DU if you don't believe in global warming?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #324)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:30 PM

329. Science of all Wolfie has left or right, is your life worth more than a guess?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #329)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:33 PM

332. Aspirant aspires to nothing but science denial

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #332)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:41 PM

338. science of aspirations, are you worth more than a guess?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #338)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:42 PM

340. why are you on DU if you don't believe in global warming?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #340)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:52 PM

345. Last word

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #345)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:53 PM

346. Science. You don't have to like it.

But it's a fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #346)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:55 PM

347. It's a guess, last word

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #347)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:59 PM

348. Science. You don't have to like it.

But it's a fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #348)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 09:02 PM

349. The science of statistics is probability, guesses at best, last word

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #349)

Mon Nov 24, 2014, 06:30 AM

350. why are you on DU if you don't believe in global warming?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #300)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:50 PM

305. Yes, she has staunch supporters

 

Glad you recognize that.

A Democratic candidate isn't going to win without the youth vote. As I stated, that is exactly who didn't vote for her in 2008.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #305)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:52 PM

308. yes, President Kucinich won this same poll in 2008

And Hillary has no issues with the youth vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #308)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:55 PM

310. Pardon me

 

I forgot that she has been nominated and elected President twice in a row.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #310)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:01 PM

312. We're discussing a very specific poll

One that Warren supporters are claiming has national implications. President Kucinich won this poll in 2008.

Is it your contention this poll means Warren is the front runner and all other polls are wrong?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #312)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:02 PM

314. I'm discussing reality

 

Let's discuss the reality of who got the youth vote in 2008 - I mean, aren't you the one that is insistent about discussing "reality"?

Let's start with some reality.

Here are some hard numbers, in case you forgot.

http://www.pewresearch.org/2008/02/11/young-voters-in-the-2008-presidential-primaries/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #314)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:08 PM

317. This poll doesn't mention youth vote



If your point is Obama got the youth vote in the 2008 election, who has denied that?

If your point is the winner of DFA's pulse poll in 2008 got the youth vote, that would be false.

Either way, DFA's pulse poll doesn't predict the youth vote.

There are plenty of live threads on DU discussing the youth vote if that is what you have the hankering to discuss.

But people are not obligated to engage you in discussion when you change the thread subject.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #317)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:14 PM

321. People aren't obligated to engage you

 

in discussion on how realistic one politicians chances are because of your specific opinion, either, but here we all are.

So you can ignore reality or you can think about what happened in 2008. Clinton and Clinton supporters can choose to forget it, but it certainly doesn't change what happened.

For a collection of folks that insist on discussing reality, when it gets pointed out that Clinton didn't do well with the youth vote, all of the sudden, it's not a topic said folks want to discuss.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #321)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:19 PM

323. It isn't my opinion that DFA's pulse poll...

.. is nothing but an indicator of how DFA members WOULD vote if their candidate of choice was even running.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #323)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:23 PM

326. Considering the responses you have offered in this thread

 

You *ARE* of the opinion that nobody but Hillary should even consider running and that anyone who is looking at other candidates is unrealistic. I just decided to interject some facts into that narrative.

I find it interesting that suddenly the last thing you want to discuss is the reality of 2008.

And by interesting, I really mean hilarious because I derailed your train with the reality you have so ardently argued for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #326)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:25 PM

327. Quote me. Provide quotes and links

Link or slink.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #327)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:28 PM

328. A link?

 



Is someone else posting in this thread under the name "Wyldwolf" that isn't you and you've suddenly entered the conversation?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #328)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:31 PM

330. That's what I thought

You can claim something but can't back it up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #330)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:40 PM

337. Your opinions

 

have been upfront and plain in this whole thread (and many others, I might add).

I made my claim, that Hillary didn't get the youth vote when you said she has no problem with the youth vote, backed it up, and now you are attempting to pretend you aren't an ardent proponent of the "Hillary is inevitable" and "Hillary is the only one that can win" doctrine.

Oops, it is shown that maybe Hillary isn't inevitable, and maybe that Hillary isn't the only one that can win, and suddenly, you want to question my ability to *read* and *reason* to change the subject.

Hopefully you can find yourself marginally mollified in the notion that someone, somewhere thinks you've scored a point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #337)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:42 PM

339. Quote me to prove your point.

Just one quote. Go ahead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #339)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:45 PM

341. Wyldwolf

 

You get the last word. As I said, I hope you feel mollified that you have convinced yourself you've scored a point.

You GOT THE LAST WORD! That's what COUNTS! Feel free to go nya-nya-nya-nya at me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #341)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:49 PM

343. Link or slink. I guess you slink.

I mean, with all the time you spent dancing around, you could have given one little link out all the ones you claimed to have seen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #9)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:13 AM

158. It's ridiculous to write off Hilllary. Warren is not running. Sanders can't win. Find reality.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RBInMaine (Reply #158)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 12:26 AM

387. The reality is Hillary lost a 30 point lead to Obama. Sound like a winner to you? Nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 10:19 AM

10. Yes, but a poll of Wall Street hedge fund managers had Hillary running away with it.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #10)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 11:05 AM

15. +1

And that's no joke!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #10)

Mon Nov 24, 2014, 11:59 AM

356. ^^^this^^^

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 11:10 AM

16. In other news...

78% of the Water Is Wet Institution (WIWI) agree that water is wet, with 14% voting that water is sometimes wet. The other 8% were too parched to respond.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OilemFirchen (Reply #16)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 11:58 AM

21. 70% of vegans polled prove meatless burgers are America's favorite food.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 12:08 PM

22. And Ben Carson won the CPAC straw poll

while Ted Cruz won the Value Voters Summit (Family Research Council) straw poll for the Republican 2016 race.

Neither one of those guys is going to be the Republican nominee. Just saying: Interest group straw polls are not indicative of anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #22)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 11:06 PM

139. Good Point

 

Although the sample size is much bigger here. And if your Progressive base doesn't like the candidate then it's best to scrap them. Hillary Goldman-Sachs is not who should be representing us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 12:24 PM

26. I seem to recall in the early days of that poll, the pro-Hillary folks were posting

how Hillary had a commanding lead among DFA types, and Warren and Sanders were far below.

Looks like things turned around quite a bit.

(Edit: Hmm, or was it an OFA poll in which Hillary had a commanding lead? Now that I think about it, it could be a different poll.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 01:15 PM

39. DFA's pulse poll has always been deadly accurate

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 01:16 PM

40. Indeed they do but...

....DFA are supposed to be liberal activists. Why would nearly as many members support Hillary as Bernie. Could she be more popular across a broader spectrum of Democrats than DU thinks?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #40)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:19 PM

51. Let's poll Democratic Millennials and see?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #51)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:22 PM

54. which would give the results of DU Democratic Millennials who participate in the poll



NOT Millennials and not Democrats but DU Democratic Millennials who participate in the poll.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #54)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:55 PM

64. DU counts too.

Brooklynite stated "broader spectrum of democrats, then Du thinks. If we want a broader spectrum of dems we must go beyond DU, but you knew that. So you are saying DU Millennials don't count? Let's poll DU Millennials to see where they stand. Since your an active member I'm sure this info is important to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #64)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:04 PM

68. Sure they do. DU occupies an itty bitty place in the Dem electorate

DU millennialists - even smaller.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #68)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:21 PM

82. If this is such an itty bitty insignificant place,what are you doing here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #82)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:24 PM

85. There's a quaint little restaurant up the street I frequent often

I enjoy the food and entertainment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #85)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 04:46 PM

116. You mean the restaurant with the itty-bitty food and the insignificant sitting

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #116)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 04:58 PM

118. yep, that one

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #51)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 02:03 AM

144. Boomers will decide 2016. They have a higher registration rate.

And they come out and vote.

Women boomers especially will be who Clinton will be targeting.

And Clinton can say she would never put SS cuts on the table, unlike Obama who campaigned on doing just that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #144)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 04:44 AM

147. If boomers always come out and vote, what happenned in 2014?

Talk is cheap,but if her Wall Street masters want to put their grubby, dirty, little fingers on those trillions of SS money, we both know what Hillary-Sachs will do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #147)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 06:53 AM

155. Boomers voted.

There's no proof that Boomers are liberal or progressive.

Winning the Presidency is about getting the votes. Clinton will do that.

And it is objective fact that Clinton was opposed to Obama's position to "put everything on the table." She can point to that in 2008 and pull a "lockbox" maneuver, and it would be impossible to disprove.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #155)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:04 AM

159. Do objects have facts?

I don't care who the boomers are, they didn't win the 2014 elections, period.You state the boomers will win the 2016 election because all the boomers vote so where are all the extra boomers coming from? Clinton can't win, she's just not electable. Hello President Bernie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #159)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:16 AM

162. Good luck with that.

Look at the data, Boomers overwhelmingly showed up in 2008, 2012, 2014, and they will in 2016.

If you hinge the vote on Millennials, you're going to have a really hard time. They haven't shown up since 2008. And they didn't show up in the primaries, btw. It was a literal coin toss, with Obama edging out Clinton in caucuses which are undemocratic. Clinton got more votes in 2008, her ground game and PR failed her. The media didn't help.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #162)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 08:38 AM

163. Onward and upward

"Boomers overwhelming showed up in ...2014" and we lost. Then you say boomers will overwhelmingly show up in 2016 and we will win. How does that add up? Don't give me millennials and change the subject, just how are the boomers becoming the life savers in 2016?

Poor Hillary, she lost because of the Communist Iowa caucuses. Those dirty media crooks favored Barack Hussein Obama, the black muslim, anti-American(Jeremy Wright), terrorist(Bill Ayers) born in Kenya. Hillary's ground game and PR was under her leadership, so does that make her a failure too. Hillary-Sachs can't win, onward with President Bernie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #144)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 05:15 PM

226. I'm a woman boomer, and no way will I vote for HRC

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to peacebird (Reply #226)

Sun Nov 23, 2014, 07:38 PM

295. I don't like her either...please give me a choice! Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 01:39 PM

47. The Pundits claimed the '08 election was going to be Hillary versus Rudy.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spitfire of ATJ (Reply #47)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:26 PM

86. DFA in '08 picked Dennis Kucinich to be the Dem nominee

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Reply #86)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:27 PM

88. That was my vote in the primary.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Original post)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:21 PM

53. and here is the poll that matters..

 

Ohio: Christie vs. Clinton FOX News Clinton 46, Christie 39 Clinton +7
Ohio: Paul vs. Clinton FOX News Clinton 49, Paul 40 Clinton +9
Ohio: Bush vs. Clinton FOX News Clinton 48, Bush 38 Clinton +10
Ohio: Perry vs. Clinton FOX News Clinton 49, Perry 39 Clinton +10
Ohio: Kasich vs. Clinton FOX News Clinton 47, Kasich 43 Clinton +4

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #53)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:37 PM

60. She won't be running against Christie and Paul in the primary.

 

We're talking about name recognition and low-info voters there, and that's it. We've seen how popular pro-working class rhetoric can be when it's used by someone who can do so legitimately (or at least, without a decades-long monkey on their back singing a different tune). Obama won big by giving the impression that he'd put Main Street's interests ahead of Wall Street. Hillary Clinton can't do that without inspiring laughter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #60)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:38 PM

61. but whoever WINS that Primary will...what are THEIR stats against the competition?

 

I vote for who will WIN....not just who I think is the best dressed Democrat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #61)

Sat Nov 22, 2014, 03:14 PM