24% of Democrats think Pizzagate is true!

[Cattledog]

"Nearly half of the nation’s Republicans believe John Podesta’s leaked emails contain coded messages referring to “pedophilia, human trafficking and satanic ritual abuse,” according to a new poll from The Economist and YouGov. But more shocking is the number of Dems who have signed on to the asinine conspiracy: Twenty four percent say Pizzagate is “definitely” or “probably” true."


http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/12/a-surprising-number-of-democrats-think-pizzagate-is-true.html?mid=facebook_nymag

[yallerdawg]

1. I wonder which "Democrats" that would be?

Not really.

[Tarheel_Dem]

15. We know exactly who those "Democrats" are.

[Cha]

25. ..

[Chasstev365]

2. I don't believe it!

[briv1016]

3. Most people probably think"pizzagate" is related to pizza rat.

[sharp_stick]

4. I call bullshit

I'll bet far fewer than 24% of Democrats even know what this moronic shit refers to.

[Ms. Toad]

12. Especially given the vague & neutral wording of the reported question. n/t

[rumdude]

24. I agree

Most have no idea wth pizzagate is...

[PoliticAverse]

5. Direct link to the poll results...

https://today.yougov.com/news/2016/12/27/belief-conspiracies-largely-depends-political-iden/

[ProfessorGAC]

6. Doesn't The Chart Say It's 17% of Dems?

So how can it be 17% and 24%?

[former9thward]

7. No, 17% of Clinton voters.

Some Democrats voted for Trump. I tried to follow the various poll links but none seem to lead to actual numbers, just graphs.

[PoliticAverse]

13. Actual numbers are in the .pdf linked at the end of the page...

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/ljv2ohxmzj/econTabReport.pdf

[former9thward]

14. Thanks, that shows the 24% number on page 60 for anyone interested.

[ProfessorGAC]

28. Nice Catch To You Both

My fault. I missed that distinction.

[Glassunion]

8. In the actual poll results there is a distinction between Clinton Voters and Democrats

Under presidential vote, it came out to 17% for Clinton Voters, but under party ID it comes out to 24% for Democrats.

Direct Link to Results: https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/ljv2ohxmzj/econTabReport.pdf#page60

[Calculating]

9. Wouldn't shock me

I personally know two people (Bernie supporters) who still think Hillary has some kind of pedophile/satanic conspiracy stuff going on with that Epstein guy. This stuff was being pushed quite hard for a while.

-Epstein's private sex slave Island
-Bill and Hillary visited it (OMG they must take part in the perversion)
-OMG SATANISM! SPIRIT COOKING! OMG!

[Jim Beard]

10. Here is the years list of Snoope's fake news. Its a lot. I started reading the article

and there were so many, I started believing them. It is hard to read a bunch of untruths and keep accepting they are false.Thats backwards than what it should be.

https://www.cnet.com/news/2016-fake-news-stories-truth-fiction-hoaxes/

The year in fake news

[Ms. Toad]

11. If the question is accurately reported in the article,

I'm not suprised. The question, as phrased in the article, was relatively innocuos and the dem results more likely reflect ignorance of the fake news scandal than belief that it was true.

"Leaked emails from the Clinton campaign talked about pedophilia and human trafficking (Pizzagate)" https://today.yougov.com/news/2016/12/27/belief-conspiracies-largely-depends-political-iden/

If the poll quetion was accurately reported, the email converations could have been condemning it, planning to reveal it as something high ranking Republicans were involved in, etc. Nothing in the question wording suggests "coded messages" or participation in such activities by democrats.

ETA: I've visited a different link, with a slightly more explicit question - but it is still worded vaguely enough so that it would not have a clear meaning, with a negative connotation as to dems, to anyone not following the conspiracy theory.

[Maru Kitteh]

16. 1/2 of those would be from the JPR / FORMERLY Sanders wing of the party

PLEASE note I said FORMERLY Sanders, not "the Sanders wing."

I refer to the BoB'ers that broke off at or slightly before the convention. The total fvking NUT JOBS that decided that they were SO PROGRESSIVE, they were going to vote for Trump! (or Stein, same diff)

Those idiotic pine-baggers threw SBS under the bus long ago, to the point where that site now openly praises both Trump and Putin, and posts calling Sanders a sellout get 100+ reccomends. They have a thread calling Obama the 8th & 9th terms of Reagan's presidency, a POSUCS and "Royal Illuminati" that's full of comments like "he makes my skin crawl" and "epic ass-clown."

They are not progressive and they are not Democrats.



The others are "Democrats" like I'm the Queen of Sheba. Like Trump's toadie, Milwaukee sheriff Clark is a "Democrat."

[TheBlackAdder]

17. That comes off as a really dumb comment, in need of reflection and rewrite.

.


Just like there were Rigid HRC supporters who would never question her actions or those of her inner circle, the converse are the JPR loons who performed the same function for Sanders. Instead of questioning the person or people of the party, they also took everything as gospel too. Just because someone favors one candidate or another, we must question everything and stay true to ourselves.

Since HRC won, the SBS fringe was purged. Had SBS won, the same thing would have happened to the HRC fringe.

I've seen people here flip completely, because their chosen candidate took a different path. Instead of resisting the change, they went along with it, not because it's who they were, but they morphed into accepting without question their candidate. That's not a good way to be or live.

.

[uponit7771]

18. no it don't, we got are band of ignorant just not as invited and accepted in dem circles and

... I wouldn't doubt the hate... shit ... look at the all the post mortem post ignoring Comey, Voter suppression and Russia right now

[TheBlackAdder]

19. And, with all of that, the final reason HRC lost was she chose Tim Kaine instead of SBS as VP pick.

.


Before the flamers hit, I am a staunch Democrat & voted and promoted for her election during the General.

I remained as a poli-sci researcher neutral during the Primary, but still maintained an objective lens.


The Dems completely overlooked the sentiment of many towards HRC, the resentment of the DNC and political institutions.


There were a multitude of factors that led to the stars aligning the way they did.


While Sanders attracted more Indys, Cross-over Republicans, Millennials, and true progressives, HRC was more centered on traditional Democratic base support. As public perception changed though the primary, when people actually saw that there might be a valid alternative, HRC selectively co-opted Sanders' positions only when they were politically expedient to win a state. One state she'd denounce his positions, because they were Dem strongholds, then she'd co-opt him in coal country or areas of extreme liberalism to neutralize any difference between the two. Then, she'd switch back. This behavior fed into the GOP narrative that she'd do anything to win. This is political reality, if one were to step out of the Democratic Party lens for a moment.


But, without me writing a 10 page dissertation, I'll summarize it in a short paragraph.


Ronald Reagan and GHW Bush really fucking hated each other, to the point where it created a schism in the party. Instead of remaining divisive, they came together to defeat Carter and win three presidential elections. Clinton chose to kick dirt in the Sanders' supporters eyes by selecting Kaine, not learning from political history. She took the gamble that voters would go binary and not vote for Trump, because he is, well... Trump. That act prevented her from having a 60-40 win, something that would have survived any Comey or other last minute trick, by jettisoning those Indys and disillusioned voters. The belief that women would side with her, when the past 45 years, since ERA, shows a solid 45% of women vote GOP--due mainly from evangelical/orthodox support for paternalism. This trend denial is an astonishing contortion of political historical fact. This was a tactical failure on HRC's part, as the collective nation gasped and then said, "Who the fuck is Tim Kaine?"


Her camp was advised of these dynamics, prior to the selection of Kaine, and a conscious decision was made.

.

[uponit7771]

21. Comey, Voter suppression, Russia..., all else is guessing

[TheBlackAdder]

23. That's the problem when viewing though a non-neutral lens, a narrative you want to believe.

.


While those three played a factor, the DNC actions, and their implied suppression, the closed primaries that chased away so many future Democrats also played a factor, but the key was the jettisoning of the Independents and Cross-Over Republicans that an SBS VP pick would have included. Kaine only was a regional player, SBS was more of a national personality. An SBS VP pick would have brought forth an insurmountable lead, regardless of the tricks used by the GOP/Russia/Wikileaks/MSM.

The guessing is just a denial to look objectively at the situation.

My IS Intel Community doctor accurately predicted what was going to happen, just as accurately at Michael Moore. Yet, when this similar information was relayed to the HRC camp though may different methods and mediums, it went ignored until it was too late to address. Folks attacked Moore, instead of listening to him. There was a myopic view, which I even got caught up in for a while, until I snapped out of it and regained my objectivity. Many here have not regained an objective view, as they grasp at anything but HRC as the reasons why.

.

[CanSocDem]

27. Great analysis. (eom)

[otohara]

40. Why Would BS Even Consider Veep?

that would mean he'd have to align with the party he's trashed over the years and continues to do so.

She is always the one who is supposed to back down to please men - meanwhile Sanders has never apologized for any of his actions.

[TheBlackAdder]

41. You forget the 2008 post primary. Healing--bringing the party together would be one.

.


So many want to keep the hate going, keeping the division that the Republicans pray lasts forever.


.

[otohara]

43. You Mean The Party He Used... Then Left

His goal has always been to destroy the Democratic party and from what I can tell, he did a bang-up job along with his supporters.

He can't even bring himself to say Democratic party, Democrats in his Tweets or interviews unless it's more bashing.

His message is "we" - who is this "we" he speaks of?

I'm a member of the Democratic party - not #ourrevolution

[TheBlackAdder]

44. More of the same. The statement that it was his "goal" to "destroy" shows immersion in non-fact.

.


Had HRC just followed Reagan & Bush, followed history, we wouldn't be having this discussion.


.

[otohara]

46. His Words

He had “an enormously contentious relationship” with them, said Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.), then a state senator.

“Back in those days,” said Maurice Mahoney, the head of the Democratic Party in Burlington in the ’80s, “his goal was to destroy Democrats—certainly on the local level.”

“It was a Democratic town that he basically took from them,” said Bill Conroy, who wrote a dissertation on Sanders’ tenure as mayor.
Said Hamilton Davis, a longtime Vermont reporter and Sanders watcher: “They hated him, and he hated them—unreservedly.”

In ’86, he decided to run for governor, against Kunin, which bothered her—Sanders’ “daily diet consisted of vitriol,” she would write in her memoir—and worried many Vermont Democrats, who thought he might peel away enough votes to foil the reelection bid of the state’s first female governor. Democrats, Welch recalled, were “extremely upset.

“The main difference between the Democrats and the Republicans in this city,” he said in an interview in Burlington in July with a Cornell student writing a master’s thesis, “is that the Democrats are in insurance and the Republicans are in banking.”

In that summer’s issue of Vermont Affairs magazine, he called the Democratic Party “ideologically bankrupt,” then added: “They have no ideology. Their ideology is opportunism.”

“I am not a Democrat, period.” Sanders’ support for Michael Dukakis, the eventual nominee, was so tepid it almost didn’t even qualify. He dubbed Dukakis “the lesser of two evils” as opposed to George H.W. Bush.

In an op-ed in the New York Times in January 1989, he called the Democratic and Republican parties “tweedle-dee” and “tweedle-dum,” both adhering in his estimation to an “ideology of greed and vulgarity.”
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/bernie-sanders-2016-democrats-121181

Then his threat to primary our president

[TheBlackAdder]

47. Going back 25 years. Everyone changes their views over time. Grasp for more.

.


Dukakis was an abject failure who should have never eclipsed to the top of the ticket.


.

[otohara]

48. Don't Have To

He's been giving the same old speech for 40 years - why would he change his thoughts on Democrats now?


Why?

[Maru Kitteh]

20. Jeez BlackAdder, that's a pretty strange reaction to the truth.

It got so bad over there they had to put up a banner, warning people to knock it off with the Comet Ping-Pong Hillary is a Satanic priestess with a pedo ring posts or risk being banned.

I was pointing out that THESE are the kind of people who fell for Pizzagate - BECAUSE THEY DID.

Place was absolutely AWASH with crap like this:
"From the anon who brought you the Laura Silsby connection: I have uncovered a pedophile with links to Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, David Brock, George Soros, Marina Abramovic and the Podestas"
http://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/everyone-is-going-to-think-im-crazy/#post-321040

and

Guccifer, High priestess and spirit cooking. Blast from the recent past.

I will not leave this beautiful country without saying that the “Guccifer Project” was a failed project. My will / intention was to fully expose the Illuminati / the Council, and their crimes, but I failed!

“Hillary Rodham Diane Clinton is one of the high priests, a goddess of this ocult, satanic, shadow group. One must see their evil and profoundly corrupt nature to understand what I am talking about
http://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/guccifer-high-priestess-and-spirit-cooking-blast-from-the-recent-past/

It goes on an on and on, even though tons of it was already purged. Some of these people may have started out with SBS, but they ended up at the end of a long grey corridor, in a rubber room, throwing Funyuns at themselves.

[uponit7771]

22. +1, fuckin wow

[Cha]

26. Thanks Maru for laying out the FACTS!

[Maru Kitteh]

36. Right? I'm DONE pretending ANY of those loons have reedeming qualities. They don't.

[TheBlackAdder]

31. There are a few here, who if left to free range for HRC, would eventually behave the same way.

.


If it wasn't for the tighter moderation controls, this place would probably have devolved too.

Imagine if the fringe elements of the HRC camp were also placed in a petri dish to fester unabated.

The continued problem is that some people keep pointing to these fringe elements and equating them to the SBS supporter base, when there are fringe actors with every politician--people who take things well beyond the pale. It's easy to pick on those who were purged, when living on the winning side of a conflict.


===


Kudos to Skinner & Co. for keeping a lid on things. It's tough balancing free expression with temperance, because everyone wants their voices heard and anyone who stifles that is seen as a suppressant element. Their tight policies are what kept things bearable for all. Perhaps Skinner could provide stats on how many thousands of posts were purged for violating the TOS--before and after the SBS fringe supporter purge. The JPR folks just didn't purge most the droppings or rogue hamsters in their Habitrail set.


===


What's really troubling is that many of these same people have a difficult time accepting and analyzing what had happened. I'm in my fifties, and I've seen the Republicans primarily do nothing but cheat and whine to win, I've seen some Democrats too(though nowhere near the same levels), yet I try to remain outside to maintain a neutral perspective on things. Everyday, people here were/are talking about the GOP deceptions and chicanery. Then, they act surprised when the GOP's cheating actually wins. That was the variable that needed to be incorporated into the VP pick.

It wasn't a fair election, and it never was--so there should have been no comfort level. The lack of the 50 state solution, and the daily convincing of a win fed into a false belief and false comfort. There wasn't any cushion built into the campaign for unknown and last minute swift-boating, which recently did in Kerry. These last minute tactics weren't a new invention. As things got closer to election day, most were all waiting for the next shoe to drop...and most knew something was going to happen. There was tension in the air, so can those most be surprised when the suspicion was so prevalent?

.

[LanternWaste]

38. When we resort to a hypothetical as the foundation for our premise...

"There are a few here, who if left to free range for HRC, would eventually behave..."

When we resort to a hypothetical as the foundation for our premise, it does little but accurately illustrate the full extent of our bias.

[TheBlackAdder]

39. There is no hypothetical, as the need for strict moderation encompassed both primary camps.

[tblue37]

42. That is precisely what happened in 2008 with the PUMAs, after all. nt

[Uponthegears]

33. Out of the 24% of Democrats who accept "Pizzagate,"

three-fourths of them VOTED FOR HILLARY!!!!!!!!!!!!

That you can find ONE or even 100 JPR nutcases who were among the 24% doesn't change that FACT.

[citood]

34. While looney, these people are still very much 'political junkies'

That is why they had even heard of pizzagate.

I'd wager that less than 10% of the general population knows anything about it, other than the term being vaguely familiar to them.

[moda253]

29. I wrote about this yesterday on my FB feed

This goes for democrats as well as Trump voters....

I don't believe for a second there is any sizable amount of people that believe things like this. Sure there are actual idiots out there that do believe this garbage, but by and large it isn't these types of numbers. Supposedly near 50% of Trump voters believe this garbage is true right? And 24% of democratic voters too right?

Wrong.

Those numbers are largely people that want to show they believe this nonsense because truth and decency do not matter at all any more. All that matters is that there are things for people to parrot that will keep the hate burning for the political opponent.

And to be honest that is more scary than people just being fooled by some stupid story.

This is what happened in Germany people. How long have Democrats been called baby killers, accused of actively trying to destroy the country, and now apparently child sex criminals..... This is how it will happen. We will be dehumanized and marginalized into non-existence (if we are lucky). There is a mob mentality that is gaining more and more traction and it has been building for quite some time. You have statements that say things like liberalism is a mental disorder or a disease that are becoming common phrases.

And what do we do? Nothing. We make statements like "history will be on our side".... well History is near obsolete and is being perverted to show falsehoods and ridiculousness.... After all didn't you hear that 1 out of every 3 Democrats engage in child sex ring activities? If it isn't the truth today it will be tomorrow. Even if just for a few more people.

[Uponthegears]

30. You know what's funny, no, let me rephrase that, revealing?

There are more posts in this string claiming that the BoBers are the 24% of Democrats (although they use the word, if at all, only grudgingly) who believe in "Pizzagate" that there are people who claim that this absurd result is the product of the poll question being vaguely worded.

It is especially revealing given that 75% of the Democrats who "believed" in "Pizzagate" were HILLARY VOTERS and only 25% were Democrats who failed or refused to vote for Hillary.

Are Hillary supporters more prone to believing fake news . . . ABSOLUTELY NOT . . . are they more prone to looking for any reason to refight the primary . . . well . . .

[JHan]

32. this is the most depressing thing i've read.

[WhiteTara]

35. We don't have a corner on sharp crayons in the box

Though I was surprised at the percentage of buffoons in our midst.

[Maru Kitteh]

37. Daily. nt

[Generator]

45. Thanks Bernie!

Kidding (I think) Bernie did some damage to Clinton but not this. Anyway-America is over so enjoy eating and drinking while you can!

[LWolf]

49. She did it to herself.

And much of DU, and establishment Democrats, and Democrats obsessed by identity politics, helped her.

I didn't even know what "pizzagate" was until just now, when I googled it. What a fucked up debacle.