HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » "The Democratic Stoc...

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:18 AM

"The Democratic Stockholm Syndrome"

Last edited Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:01 AM - Edit history (2)

by Peter Bloom

The Democratic Stockholm Syndrome
4/20/2016
Published by Common Dreams

New Yorkers voted overwhelmingly for those holding their progress captive



After weeks of hard and increasingly heated campaigning, Hillary Clinton scored a decisive victory over Bernie Sanders in last night’s New York Democratic primary. Despite losing a majority of the state’s counties, she won in huge margins in New York City and the popular vote overall. The triumph was a potential serious blow to Sanders’ progressive momentum and a just as dramatic boom to her now seemingly inevitable march to the nomination.

......snip.......

Yet the fate of Sanders’ candidacy pales in comparison to the future success of the political revolution he is trying to create and ferment. What does losing the Empire state mean to the progressive movement he is helping to inspire? What does it say about its own long march to changing the country and the world?

A key takeaway from the Primary is that regardless of where the movement goes from here – it must recognize the affective hold that establishment Parties and candidates still have on voters, even those committed to and desiring of real change.

............A crucial narrative driving the Sanders’ candidacy is that he and his movement are the real standard-bearers for 21st century progressive values. While this may be substantively true, it misses how and why so many see Centrist Democrats like Clinton as their advocate even when they are so willing to betray them when in power. They represent a now established fantasy of incremental rearguard progress that seeks to inspire not by its idealistic ambition but its clear eyed “realism”.

.....snip......

While supporters justify an establishment politics of “working within the system” as rational and pragmatic, its appeal largely resides as a progressive fantasy. Even after three decades worth of evidence of the profound limitations of such a strategy – it remains emotionally resonant. Hollow victories such as the compromised legislation of Dodd-Frank and Obamacare are celebrated as landmark progressive achievements. Centrist candidates are hailed for their courage in standing up to an “intractable” Republican enemy – doing what little they could to make things better in a political war that has already been lost.

It plays into a belief that all that is needed is to elect more Democrats. That they have the best interest of the country at heart even if they regularly feed from the same corrupt cesspool as their Conservative rivals. That to dream big means to consign the nation to a century of failed idealism rather than hard won compromise.


.........However, there is something else at play as well. She is heralded for her promises to continue the “progressive” legacy set by Obama. Suddenly the President who has pushed for Drone Wars, further Wall Street bailouts and the TPP is a paragon of modern progressivism. The New York triumph of his all but publicly endorsed predecessor Hillary Clinton is a paean of love to the very establishment that many of their voters are demanding to be changed.

For progressives to achieve mass success they must do all they can to break up this abusive relationship.

To not accept the myth that Clinton represents “incremental change” or that she is committed to fighting climate change or that you can trumpet gun control at home and the international arms industry abroad.

This does not mean abandoning the fight to ensure that a more retrogressive Republican alternative does not take power. The reign of a Trump or Cruz would be similar but worse than that of Clinton. Nevertheless, it also means not minimizing the passion felt for the establishment. It may be misplaced but it is real and when mobilized can be potent.

Instead, it demands that even in defeat we continue the struggle to deprogram the victims of the New Democrats. To point out consistently that change only happens from the bottom up.

That one cannot claim to be a progressive and support anti-democratic oligarchic regimes around the world.


That what Democrats and Republicans alike legitimize as national security is really just a bloated corporate security force subsidized by the American taxpayer.


That you may “be with her” but when the moment it is politically expedient she certainly will not “be with you.”



The path the nomination for Bernie Sanders undeniably narrowed yesterday.

The path to revolution and genuine progress depends on breaking America free from its Democratic Stockholm Syndrome.


http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/04/20/democratic-stockholm-syndrome

********************

EDIT TO ADD

Obviously, the meaning of "Stockholm Syndrome" has been misrepresented on DU & some clarity is called for.

Stockholm syndrome
n.

A psychological syndrome in which a person being held captive begins to identify with and grow sympathetic to his or her captor, simultaneously becoming unsympathetic towards the police or other authorities.

[After Stockholm, where a hostage in a 1973 bank robbery became romantically attached to one of her captors.]

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/stockholm+syndrome


It has NOTHING to do with RACE.



311 replies, 14454 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 311 replies Author Time Post
Reply "The Democratic Stockholm Syndrome" (Original post)
RiverLover Apr 2016 OP
KittyWampus Apr 2016 #1
RiverLover Apr 2016 #4
brush Apr 2016 #6
RiverLover Apr 2016 #12
VulgarPoet Apr 2016 #22
brush Apr 2016 #26
Post removed Apr 2016 #33
brush Apr 2016 #35
Hiraeth Apr 2016 #41
LanternWaste Apr 2016 #297
Hiraeth Apr 2016 #298
George II Apr 2016 #77
tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #87
nolawarlock Apr 2016 #194
Hiraeth Apr 2016 #38
A Little Weird Apr 2016 #269
Hiraeth Apr 2016 #270
virtualobserver Apr 2016 #108
brush Apr 2016 #111
virtualobserver Apr 2016 #117
brush Apr 2016 #120
virtualobserver Apr 2016 #129
brush Apr 2016 #133
wildeyed Apr 2016 #252
brush Apr 2016 #255
wildeyed Apr 2016 #257
brush Apr 2016 #259
wildeyed Apr 2016 #260
brush Apr 2016 #262
wildeyed Apr 2016 #263
brush Apr 2016 #304
pangaia Apr 2016 #303
frylock Apr 2016 #212
brush Apr 2016 #219
frylock Apr 2016 #220
brush Apr 2016 #221
frylock Apr 2016 #223
brush Apr 2016 #225
frylock Apr 2016 #229
brush Apr 2016 #232
frylock Apr 2016 #234
brush Apr 2016 #247
frylock Apr 2016 #248
RiverLover Apr 2016 #27
brush Apr 2016 #29
RiverLover Apr 2016 #31
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #288
Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #39
RiverLover Apr 2016 #60
Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #64
fun n serious Apr 2016 #146
George II Apr 2016 #11
RiverLover Apr 2016 #16
brush Apr 2016 #34
tabasco Apr 2016 #199
brush Apr 2016 #30
George II Apr 2016 #44
brush Apr 2016 #46
George II Apr 2016 #79
boston bean Apr 2016 #20
haikugal Apr 2016 #121
boston bean Apr 2016 #123
LineLineLineLineLineReply .
haikugal Apr 2016 #127
jack_krass Apr 2016 #89
tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #91
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #209
frylock Apr 2016 #214
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #277
RiverLover Apr 2016 #279
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #281
frylock Apr 2016 #282
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #283
frylock Apr 2016 #284
COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #285
betsuni Apr 2016 #2
JSup Apr 2016 #57
frylock Apr 2016 #215
brush Apr 2016 #3
Agschmid Apr 2016 #7
SidDithers Apr 2016 #8
Hiraeth Apr 2016 #43
JoePhilly Apr 2016 #56
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #93
SidDithers Apr 2016 #5
sufrommich Apr 2016 #13
RiverLover Apr 2016 #19
polly7 Apr 2016 #58
RiverLover Apr 2016 #75
brush Apr 2016 #107
RiverLover Apr 2016 #112
brush Apr 2016 #115
polly7 Apr 2016 #118
brush Apr 2016 #125
polly7 Apr 2016 #130
northernsouthern Apr 2016 #196
RiverLover Apr 2016 #124
frylock Apr 2016 #217
northernsouthern Apr 2016 #186
brush Apr 2016 #190
northernsouthern Apr 2016 #191
frylock Apr 2016 #218
Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #305
tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #97
Hassin Bin Sober Apr 2016 #189
northernsouthern Apr 2016 #198
frylock Apr 2016 #222
Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #307
frylock Apr 2016 #308
Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #309
frylock Apr 2016 #216
Tarc Apr 2016 #9
brush Apr 2016 #32
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #88
tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #100
Tarc Apr 2016 #141
polly7 Apr 2016 #144
Tarc Apr 2016 #147
polly7 Apr 2016 #148
Tarc Apr 2016 #149
polly7 Apr 2016 #150
Tarc Apr 2016 #151
polly7 Apr 2016 #152
LexVegas Apr 2016 #10
RiverLover Apr 2016 #14
LexVegas Apr 2016 #17
tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #113
VulgarPoet Apr 2016 #23
artislife Apr 2016 #242
SidDithers Apr 2016 #15
RiverLover Apr 2016 #21
SidDithers Apr 2016 #25
RiverLover Apr 2016 #28
tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #116
SidDithers Apr 2016 #153
mcar Apr 2016 #213
sheshe2 Apr 2016 #271
stonecutter357 Apr 2016 #202
boston bean Apr 2016 #18
Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #24
JTFrog Apr 2016 #162
geek tragedy Apr 2016 #36
rbrnmw Apr 2016 #53
tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #119
Godhumor Apr 2016 #37
MillennialDem Apr 2016 #42
Godhumor Apr 2016 #51
MillennialDem Apr 2016 #55
VulgarPoet Apr 2016 #52
Lizzie Poppet Apr 2016 #50
Godhumor Apr 2016 #54
Lizzie Poppet Apr 2016 #62
fleur-de-lisa Apr 2016 #66
Lizzie Poppet Apr 2016 #67
northernsouthern Apr 2016 #96
Godhumor Apr 2016 #109
northernsouthern Apr 2016 #139
brush Apr 2016 #99
tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #136
Hiraeth Apr 2016 #40
Doctor_J Apr 2016 #45
antigop Apr 2016 #49
Lizzie Poppet Apr 2016 #65
desmiller Apr 2016 #227
k8conant Apr 2016 #278
desmiller Apr 2016 #287
RiverLover Apr 2016 #61
HereSince1628 Apr 2016 #47
Lizzie Poppet Apr 2016 #48
RiverLover Apr 2016 #63
CrowCityDem Apr 2016 #59
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2016 #68
RiverLover Apr 2016 #73
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2016 #82
Arugula Latte Apr 2016 #230
RiverLover Apr 2016 #273
NCTraveler Apr 2016 #69
hrmjustin Apr 2016 #70
HooptieWagon Apr 2016 #71
JTFrog Apr 2016 #72
auntpurl Apr 2016 #74
RiverLover Apr 2016 #78
auntpurl Apr 2016 #80
RiverLover Apr 2016 #83
auntpurl Apr 2016 #86
RiverLover Apr 2016 #92
auntpurl Apr 2016 #94
RiverLover Apr 2016 #98
Starry Messenger Apr 2016 #76
onecaliberal Apr 2016 #81
RiverLover Apr 2016 #103
CentralCoaster Apr 2016 #105
RiverLover Apr 2016 #137
onecaliberal Apr 2016 #142
Autumn Apr 2016 #84
RiverLover Apr 2016 #104
Autumn Apr 2016 #122
Maedhros Apr 2016 #134
Autumn Apr 2016 #135
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #85
Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #106
Hiraeth Apr 2016 #114
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #132
stonecutter357 Apr 2016 #203
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #210
ismnotwasm Apr 2016 #145
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #155
ismnotwasm Apr 2016 #156
azurnoir Apr 2016 #208
wildeyed Apr 2016 #224
azurnoir Apr 2016 #238
wildeyed Apr 2016 #240
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #250
wildeyed Apr 2016 #256
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #258
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #226
azurnoir Apr 2016 #237
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #244
azurnoir Apr 2016 #245
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #251
frylock Apr 2016 #228
azurnoir Apr 2016 #239
frylock Apr 2016 #243
northernsouthern Apr 2016 #90
MisterP Apr 2016 #154
polly7 Apr 2016 #95
randome Apr 2016 #128
polly7 Apr 2016 #131
randome Apr 2016 #172
sadoldgirl Apr 2016 #101
La Lioness Priyanka Apr 2016 #102
KPN Apr 2016 #110
RiverLover Apr 2016 #140
haikugal Apr 2016 #126
RiverLover Apr 2016 #138
LineLineLineReply .
haikugal Apr 2016 #158
LineReply .
ismnotwasm Apr 2016 #143
greatauntoftriplets Apr 2016 #157
NuclearDem Apr 2016 #159
RiverLover Apr 2016 #166
NuclearDem Apr 2016 #169
RiverLover Apr 2016 #173
imagine2015 Apr 2016 #160
Sheepshank Apr 2016 #161
RiverLover Apr 2016 #163
Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #164
RiverLover Apr 2016 #168
Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #175
Autumn Apr 2016 #268
Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #290
Autumn Apr 2016 #291
Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #293
Autumn Apr 2016 #294
Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #295
Autumn Apr 2016 #296
Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #301
Autumn Apr 2016 #302
ismnotwasm Apr 2016 #167
frylock Apr 2016 #233
Sheepshank Apr 2016 #171
RiverLover Apr 2016 #174
Sheepshank Apr 2016 #176
ismnotwasm Apr 2016 #177
RiverLover Apr 2016 #181
ismnotwasm Apr 2016 #188
pat_k Apr 2016 #165
RiverLover Apr 2016 #170
Sheepshank Apr 2016 #178
Renew Deal Apr 2016 #179
RiverLover Apr 2016 #183
Renew Deal Apr 2016 #195
Phlem Apr 2016 #185
Renew Deal Apr 2016 #193
Phlem Apr 2016 #197
Renew Deal Apr 2016 #200
Phlem Apr 2016 #201
Renew Deal Apr 2016 #204
Phlem Apr 2016 #206
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #205
frylock Apr 2016 #236
polichick Apr 2016 #180
RiverLover Apr 2016 #182
Phlem Apr 2016 #184
nolawarlock Apr 2016 #187
quantumjunkie Apr 2016 #192
bbgrunt Apr 2016 #207
RiverLover Apr 2016 #266
stonecutter357 Apr 2016 #211
MrWendel Apr 2016 #231
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #254
wildeyed Apr 2016 #265
MrWendel Apr 2016 #311
Capt. Obvious Apr 2016 #235
artislife Apr 2016 #241
wildeyed Apr 2016 #246
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #253
wildeyed Apr 2016 #264
William769 Apr 2016 #249
quantass Apr 2016 #261
RiverLover Apr 2016 #267
Duppers Apr 2016 #272
RiverLover Apr 2016 #274
2banon Apr 2016 #275
RiverLover Apr 2016 #276
2banon Apr 2016 #280
RiverLover Apr 2016 #286
eridani Apr 2016 #289
Autumn Apr 2016 #292
PB57 Apr 2016 #299
JTFrog Apr 2016 #300
LineNew Reply .
stonecutter357 Apr 2016 #306
johnp3907 Apr 2016 #310

Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:21 AM

1. "fermenting a revolution". LOLZ!

 


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:29 AM

4. You love endless war, wall street gambling with no risk on the taxpayers' backs, fossil fuels killin

sustainable life on the planet, monopolies, privatization of everything, public schools crumbling, unions snuffed out, American jobs outsourced or offshored, medical bankruptcies through the roof, outrageous cost of higher education, cut social services, corporations paying Zero Taxes.

Fine.

But at least have the decency to articulate why you are all gung-ho for those things rather than hiding behind your emoticon.

It might lead people to believe you're justified in backing the bullshit, rather than being a republican hack.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #4)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:32 AM

6. Spell check is your friend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #6)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:37 AM

12. ? which word did I mess up?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #6)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:45 AM

22. Pedantry is the last refuge of the bereft of argument and the witless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VulgarPoet (Reply #22)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:49 AM

26. Maybe, but I know the difference between "foment" and "ferment".

Plus, we've had enough of these insulting "Stockholm Syndrome" posts here on DU.

Seems you don't know that history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #26)


Response to Post removed (Reply #33)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:15 AM

35. Careful there, buddy. The last Stockholm Syndrome poster got banned from his insults towards AAs

Last edited Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:13 AM - Edit history (1)

If you don't know the history here with that phrase, research it.

And do you even know what race baiting means?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #35)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:32 AM

41. and the bannings will probably continue until morale improves.

funny thing about it, internet is YUUUUUUUUGE

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hiraeth (Reply #41)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:13 AM

297. Or until posters stop breaking Terms of Service.

Or until posters stop breaking Terms of Service (however, I fully understand that bit of relevant non-fiction has little to no place in your narrative of DU's oppression and persecution-- it too being rather "YUUUUUUUUGE".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #297)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:20 AM

298. I think the definition of ToS depends on the Admin. I leave it to their discretion.

This is their sandbox.

I do not feel oppressed or persecuted.

Do you not agree that one can surf the internet forever?

Rhetorical question.

No reply necessary because I am in the mood today to liberally use my ignore option and you just bought a ticket.

Bye.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #35)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:45 AM

77. If one can't put fort a cogent argument, they resort to claiming "race baiting", even though you...

....never mentioned race at all. You must have been "thinking it"!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #35)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:02 AM

87. I know the history on DU and I will agree the term...

Was misused and could have been construed as racist in that isolated case. But that occurrence does not forever make the term "Stockholm Syndrome" a "racist" one. In this case it refers to a group of Democrats (nothing to do with race) and is correctly applied.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tex-wyo-dem (Reply #87)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:37 PM

194. And this is a passive-aggressive way to resurrect it ...

You knew the history of this term here and you used it on purpose to make the implication without coming right out and saying it.

I've said time and again, Trump hasn't just moved the needle of racism, he's moved the entire spectrum. Some of you Sanders supporters have said things and made implications of things that I haven't seen in thirty years.

When WillyH (and yes, I'm calling him that on purpose in reference to 41's hideous exploitation of racial fears) was banned, I saw how many people came to his defense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #33)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:28 AM

38. they don't and never did

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hiraeth (Reply #38)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:32 PM

269. Jason Isbell fan here

That's a great album!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to A Little Weird (Reply #269)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:49 PM

270. For real

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #26)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:30 AM

108. you are apparently ignorant of the definition of "ferment"

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virtualobserver (Reply #108)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:33 AM

111. It's primary definition is a noun (look it up). The poster used it as a verb.

"Foment" should have been used in that context.

So who is the ignorant one?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #111)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:41 AM

117. both words are fine in that context...if you "look it up".

 

but for those who need to put others down in order to make themselves feel superior, a dictionary won't help.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virtualobserver (Reply #117)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:44 AM

120. I looked it up. He should have use "foment" in that context as "ferment" is primarily used as a noun

Why do ya think everyone is laughing at the usage?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #120)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:49 AM

129. "primarily" is not a synonym for "exclusively".....

 

look it up

Ridicule always reflects poorly on the person engaged in it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virtualobserver (Reply #129)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:00 PM

133. Yeah, yeah. The poster dug in his heels though when his poor choice was pointed out

And I was not the first one to do so.

To come here to this site with a screed about "Stockholm Syndrome", with the ugly history that phrase has on this site, and to declare that Bernie is trying to "ferment a revolution" when everybody knows the common usage is "foment a revolution" . . . well, he kinda asked for it.

I'm through with it now though. There are posts up now asking Clinton supporters to be kind to Sanders supporters so I will try from now on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #120)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 06:55 PM

252. It like the difference between nauseous and nauseated.

The insensitivity of this OP makes me feel nauseous. (adjective)

VS.

I am nauseated by this divisive and mean spirited OP. (verb)

But misuse is so common these days, it is hardly worth arguing. No one can tell the difference.

For instance, hardly anyone would notice the misuse in the phrase "The racial insensitivity of posting an OP with "Stockholm Syndrome" in the title after painful discussions on this site in the recent past makes me feel nauseated." They are pretty much interchangeable now.

I'm with you. I ferment wine, kombachu and sourdough starter. I foment revolution. I would have claimed autocorrect or tired if I made that mistake rather than argue it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wildeyed (Reply #252)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:03 PM

255. I'm with you. Ferment is for wine and sourdough, foment is for revolution.

Do you actually ferment sourdough starter? I lived in San Francisco back in the day and the big bread bakeries there claimed their starters dated from the 1800s.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #255)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:15 PM

257. Yes, it is a FERMENTED.

(OMG, I FOMENTED a new batch of sourdough starter last week. Nooooooo )

I make a batch now and then, keep it going for a few months until I lose interest, usually during football season. All the mixing and kneading gives me something to mess with during the breaks.

You can keep the fermented starter in the fridge in a closed jar and only feed it once a week or so if you bake occasionally. Or if you bake every day or two, leave it on out, just cover the top of the container with some cheese cloth to keep the dust out. And yes, you can keep a batch going indefinitely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wildeyed (Reply #257)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:18 PM

259. What do you feed it with?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #259)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:28 PM

260. Flour, usually.

but you can use sugar or milk in a pinch. I think it is 1 part water to 3/4 flour mixed into the original starter. Or the reverse. something like that.... If there is too much water, or it sits too long, it separates a bit. I just mix it up and correct the ratio. If the jar is too full, I throw some out. If I am baking a bunch, I get a bigger jar and mix more.

It's not rocket science. If you make a mistake, it is almost always easy to fix. Sourdough starter is VERY forgiving. If the liquid is a bad color, or it smells icky, then you have to throw it out. But that has never happened to me, and I am not diligent in my care at all.

I made a recipe similar to this a bunch over the winter. OMG, the French toast from that loaf was AMAZING!

http://www.food.com/recipe/sourdough-cinnamon-swirl-bread-30602

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wildeyed (Reply #260)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:35 PM

262. Thanks for the info. I'm not a baker but I'm tempted to try it now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #262)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:38 PM

263. It's fun.

Bread machines are easy, too. You can mix up a loaf, go out for the day and come home to fresh, hot bread, Nom!

Good luck if you try it. And don't forget to ferment!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to virtualobserver (Reply #117)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:47 AM

304. Nobody says "ferment a revolution".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #111)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:42 AM

303. So what. Who cares.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #26)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:17 PM

212. fer·ment

verb
verb: ferment; 3rd person present: ferments; past tense: fermented; past participle: fermented; gerund or present participle: fermenting
fərˈment/

1.
(of a substance) undergo fermentation.
"the drink had fermented, turning some of the juice into alcohol"
synonyms: undergo fermentation, brew; More
effervesce, fizz, foam, froth
"the beer continues to ferment"
cause the fermentation of (a substance).
2.
incite or stir up (trouble or disorder).
"the politicians and warlords who are fermenting this chaos"
synonyms: cause, bring about, give rise to, generate, engender, spawn, instigate, provoke, incite, excite, stir up, whip up, foment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #212)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:30 PM

219. "Foment a revolution" or "ferment a revolution"?

Most of us know the common, accepted usage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #219)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:31 PM

220. You got schooled.

You're welcome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #220)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:32 PM

221. I think you did.

Nobody says "ferment a revolution" but let's stop making a big deal out of a misuse of a word.

I'm moving on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #221)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:40 PM

223. Take it up with Merriam-Webster

Full Definition of ferment

intransitive verb

1
: to undergo fermentation

2
: to be in a state of agitation or intense activity
transitive verb

1
: to cause to undergo fermentation

2
: to work up (as into a state of agitation) : foment

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ferment

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #223)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:44 PM

225. Foment a revolution or ferment a revolution?

If you don't know the first phrase is the commonly accepted usage, I wonder about you too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #225)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:51 PM

229. You tried to make this about the definition of one word.

That shit blew up in the face you're attempting to save. Fucking own it and move on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #229)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:02 PM

232. I think not. All you have to do is google



Ferment

See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
Also called organized ferment. any of a group of living organisms, as yeasts, molds, and certain bacteria, that cause fermentation.
2.
Also called unorganized ferment. an enzyme.
3.
fermentation.
4.
agitation; unrest; excitement; commotion; tumult:
The new painters worked in a creative ferment. The capital lived in a political ferment.

verb
5.
to act upon as a ferment.
6.
to cause to undergo fermentation.
7.
to inflame; foment:



It's use as a verb, such as in ferment wine, is way down the list and most know that the first usages cited in dictionaries are the more common, accepted usages.

The guy used it wrong, admit it. You foment a revolution, you ferment wine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #232)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:06 PM

234. So in your world, words have only one definition?

Just fucking let it go and move on with your life ffs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #234)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 06:38 PM

247. Let's say we both let it go. I gave you several definitions of ferment, both noun and verb

I'm bored with this now so — truce?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #247)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 06:39 PM

248. I'm good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VulgarPoet (Reply #22)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:49 AM

27. No kidding.

It definitely helps explain how conservative DINOs have taken over the party.

Mindless sheep to slaughter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #27)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:52 AM

29. Don't know much about the history of that phrase around here, huh?

Do some research on that and see if it's wise to continue the insults.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #29)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:55 AM

31. Stockholm Syndrome is a phrase that only applies to PoC now, according to DU?

Get out of the bubble, people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #31)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 12:44 AM

288. Good luck. They will use anything to advance their world view. Banning is the most efficient for

 

them. They manufacture faux outrages to call out the posse and gang attack. It's not racist to say that so-and-so might suffer from Stockholm Syndrome. Only if one says that about the AA community here in DU. Then it becomes a tool to gang attack and ban.
The behavior certainly isn't "politically liberal" it's right wing hatred.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #27)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:29 AM

39. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Throw away lines and bumper sticker-speak.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #39)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:58 AM

60. "That makes no sense whatsoever."

Thanks for making my point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #60)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:03 AM

64. Do wut?

I know I'll regret this question, but how on earth did I make your point?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #4)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:39 PM

146. Hillary is NOT doing any of things...

 

Who told you she was? Bernie?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:37 AM

11. Are you trying to foment an argument?



I think some on DU here need to try to understand the origin of "Stockholm Syndrome" before they try to attribute it to everything people say or do that they don't agree with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #11)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:42 AM

16. Ferment. . A state of agitation or of turbulent change or development.

Some people need to put their thinking caps on this am.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #16)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:04 AM

34. Isn't "foment" the verb you were looking for? "Ferment" is primarily a noun. Even this . . .

definition post you just put up shows that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #34)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:43 PM

199. I agree that foment would have been better,

 

but I disagree that "ferment" is used primarily as a noun.

"The ingredients ferment to make beer."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #11)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:54 AM

30. Why do you think people don't know theorigin? The origin in hostage situations is pretty well known.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #30)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:35 AM

44. Why? Because it's misused so often around here. Seems every time someone has a different...

..opinion about something they're suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #44)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:37 AM

46. It was more than that though. It was used to imply that people were too stupid . . .

to know what was good for themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #46)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:47 AM

79. That too, implying (sometimes MORE that just implying) that you're not smart enough to...

...know what's "right".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:43 AM

20. I didn't read it, does it really say that! LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #20)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:46 AM

121. What a crass thing to say. Your showing your....well you know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to haikugal (Reply #121)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:47 AM

123. What??? LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #123)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:49 AM

127. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:04 AM

89. I prefer my revolutions distilled

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #1)


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 03:57 PM

209. He needs a Thesaurus - but his father told him

that those all died out shortly after Jesus rode them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #209)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:21 PM

214. Maybe get one yourself.

Full Definition of ferment

intransitive verb

1
: to undergo fermentation

2
: to be in a state of agitation or intense activity
transitive verb

1
: to cause to undergo fermentation

2
: to work up (as into a state of agitation) : foment

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ferment

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #214)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:26 PM

277. Keep beating that dead horse. Why not recognize the truth-

that the writer used the wrong word?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #277)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:35 PM

279. Actually, you are the one who is incorrect here. They can be & are used interchangeably.

fer•ment (n. ˈfɜr mɛnt; v. fərˈmɛnt)

n.
1. any of a group of living organisms, as yeasts, molds, and certain bacteria, that cause fermentation.
2. an enzyme that catalyzes the anaerobic breakdown of molecules that yield energy.
3. fermentation (def. 2).
4. agitation or excitement; commotion: artistic ferment; political ferment.
v.t.
5. to act upon as a ferment.
6. to cause to undergo fermentation.
7. to inflame or excite; foment.
v.i.
8. to be fermented; undergo fermentation.
9. to seethe with agitation or excitement.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ferment

I can see why so many miss the other fact here: That the Democratic Party as a Party for the Left & for People no longer exists & has become a softer less evil but still evil version of the republican party. They do talk nicer to us when running for office, but otherwise the entire party is DINO. (With some exceptions, like maybe 5 senators & our wonderful House Progressives.)

But some people just dig in & refuse to see what is right in front of their eyes & even begin to change their world view to fit the paradigm. Stockholm syndrome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #279)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:38 PM

281. Beat..beat...beat....this horse is going to get up, i swear. Beat... beat...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #277)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:42 PM

282. Why not just admit that you need to smack up your vocab game?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #282)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:44 PM

283. No. When in doubt I generally don't go to the very last possible

use of a word as my choice. Particularly when if you were to ask 100 people what word they would use in that instance, 100 of them would say "foment", not "ferment". But thanks for playing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #283)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:46 PM

284. Here's the deal. You fucked up.

You tried to make a big deal out of the use this word, and it blew up in your face. To compound matters, you just can't fucking let it go. In any case, I'm done here. Feel free to get in the last word, because this is evidently very, very important to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #284)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:47 PM

285. Bye.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:24 AM

2. The revolution he is trying to create and ferment -- LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to betsuni (Reply #2)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:51 AM

57. I'll have...

...wine with my revolution, please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to betsuni (Reply #2)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:25 PM

215. fer·ment

verb
verb: ferment; 3rd person present: ferments; past tense: fermented; past participle: fermented; gerund or present participle: fermenting
fərˈment/

1.
(of a substance) undergo fermentation.
"the drink had fermented, turning some of the juice into alcohol"
synonyms: undergo fermentation, brew; More
effervesce, fizz, foam, froth
"the beer continues to ferment"
cause the fermentation of (a substance).
2.
incite or stir up (trouble or disorder).
"the politicians and warlords who are fermenting this chaos"
synonyms: cause, bring about, give rise to, generate, engender, spawn, instigate, provoke, incite, excite, stir up, whip up, foment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:29 AM

3. Haven't we had enough of these Stockholm Syndrome insults?

There's a history here with that phrase.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #3)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:32 AM

7. I certainly thought so... But I guess "no".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #3)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:34 AM

8. +1...

Deliberately offensive, IMO.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #3)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:33 AM

43. if you CHOOSE to be insulted, by all means, have at it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #3)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:49 AM

56. Which is probably why were seeing this nonsense again.

Bernie supporters are so much smarter than the rest of us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #56)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:12 AM

93. Well ... they are proving they are not psychically damaged by supporting ...

 

the candidate with no record of Congressional accomplishments in any of the areas he, now, promises ... in fact, all of the issues he says he will address, either came about or got worse during his time in congress.

Oh, wait ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:31 AM

5. How can any writer, who doesn't know the difference between ferment and foment, be taken seriously?



Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #5)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:38 AM

13. The writer is a "lecturer in the Department of People

and Organisations at the Open University."



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #5)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:43 AM

19. Low verbal IQ eh? Its common, don't feel bad.

Ferment. . A state of agitation or of turbulent change or development.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ferment

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #19)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:51 AM

58. https://www.google.ca/#q=ferment+definition

fer·ment
verb
fərˈment/

1.
(of a substance) undergo fermentation.
"the drink had fermented, turning some of the juice into alcohol"
synonyms: undergo fermentation, brew; More

2.
incite or stir up (trouble or disorder).
"the politicians and warlords who are fermenting this chaos"

synonyms: cause, bring about, give rise to, generate, engender, spawn, instigate, provoke, incite, excite, stir up, whip up, foment; literarybeget, enkindle
"an environment that ferments disorder"


noun
ˈfərˌmənt/

1.
agitation and excitement among a group of people, typically concerning major change and leading to trouble or violence.
"Germany at this time was in a state of religious ferment"
synonyms: fever, furor, frenzy, tumult, storm, rumpus; More

2.
archaic
a fermenting agent or enzyme.



http://www.dictionary.com/browse/ferment

verb (used with object)

5.
to act upon as a ferment.

6.
to cause to undergo fermentation.

7.
to inflame; foment:
to ferment prejudiced crowds to riot.

8.
to cause agitation or excitement in:
Reading fermented his active imagination.


Seems the writer knows a bit more than the experts here. That took .50 seconds to see on the top of a whole page of definitions with the exact same results. I've seen it used as a verb in that exact way all my life. Just anything to distract from your OP and the truth of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #58)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:39 AM

75. Right? In trying to show how smart they are, they proved beyond a shadow of a doubt

the opposite.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #75)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:30 AM

107. Check it again. Ferment's primary definition is a noun. Foment is the verb that should have . . .

been used. So who showed what?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #107)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:36 AM

112. "ferment" is a verb too. hello? Read above or below for the definition.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/ferment

noun
1.
Also called organized ferment. any of a group of living organisms, as yeasts, molds, and certain bacteria, that cause fermentation.
2.
Also called unorganized ferment. an enzyme.
3.
fermentation.
4.
agitation; unrest; excitement; commotion; tumult:
The new painters worked in a creative ferment. The capital lived in a political ferment.

verb (used with object)
5.
to act upon as a ferment.
6.
to cause to undergo fermentation.
7.
to inflame; foment:

to ferment prejudiced crowds to riot.
8.
to cause agitation or excitement in:
Reading fermented his active imagination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #112)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:40 AM

115. As I said, it's primary use is as a noun.

It's verb usage is way down the list of usages.

Just admit it, you screwed up. You should have used "foment", which is why everyone is laughing so quite whining.

Or should I say "quit wining"? (heehee)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #115)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:43 AM

118. I've never used it as a noun in my life, there are much better terms.

No-one's laughing, except at your attempt to derail a thread you don't approve of.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #118)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:48 AM

125. Oh, people are laughing all right. He should have use "foment".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #125)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:53 AM

130. In your opinion. In mine, he used the exact right term and most

people do understand the meaning of it. Maybe you should write something notable and use "foment", like "I am fomenting disruption in this thread because I'd like it to go away - people shouldn't be allowed to think outside the boxes they're supposed to be content within" - something like that. Something stockholm syndromy-like.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #118)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:38 PM

196. I love the fact

 

The person is claiming the numbering system indicates which words you can't use. Basically it can only be a noun or a verb ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #115)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:48 AM

124. OMG. You're just digging in further into your own crap. He used ferment correctly.

Just like his whole point in the article is spot on correct.

Ferment & foment can be & are used interchangeably as shown by the friggin dictionary! Educate yourself, and then maybe put some focus on how the Democratic party has morphed into another republican party with a different name.

7.
to inflame; foment:



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #115)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:28 PM

217. Well, you learned something new today, didn't you?

You're welcome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #107)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:15 PM

186. Lollololololololol!

 

Ferment's primary definition is a noun.


What the heck does that mean? Only one meaning per word? That is so not how English works. Are you often confused by double entendres? :p They include multiple definitions on purpose and archaic or obscure usages are usually marked thusly.

?w=1080

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to northernsouthern (Reply #186)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:30 PM

190. Laughing at yourself — I like it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #190)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:35 PM

191. Exactly

 

I am because I am funny as a "democratic" primary. (clean but so politically dirty double entendre)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #75)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:30 PM

218. I r smart!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #75)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:51 AM

305. Um...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #58)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:18 AM

97. +1!

Thank you! Nothing better than vocabulary police with egg on their face.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tex-wyo-dem (Reply #97)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:23 PM

189. Yep. At this point, all they have is doubling down on their own silliness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hassin Bin Sober (Reply #189)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:39 PM

198. They need this guy in their camp.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tex-wyo-dem (Reply #97)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:35 PM

222. Right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #222)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 01:11 PM

307. Um...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1808876

You better school this guy while you're at it.

On another note - the critics of my grammar are quite right. It is foment. I used ferment inappropriately.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #307)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 01:19 PM

308. Oh, goody! Ferment-gate lives on!

How is Bernie flying to Ferment errrrr.. Foment?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #308)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 01:49 PM

309. Too funny

Last edited Sat Apr 23, 2016, 02:06 PM - Edit history (1)

The only bright spot in this abysmal thread.


I love it when a swarm of flaming jerks get their ass handed to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #5)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:27 PM

216. I know, right?! Derpa derpa derp.

Full Definition of ferment

intransitive verb

1
: to undergo fermentation

2
: to be in a state of agitation or intense activity
transitive verb

1
: to cause to undergo fermentation

2
: to work up (as into a state of agitation) : foment

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ferment

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:34 AM

9. Fermented revolution?

Can I have mine with a side of sauerkraut?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #9)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:58 AM

32. Make mine a red, I prefer that over the whites.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #32)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:04 AM

88. LOL ... Nicely played ...

 

Why do you hate white people!!!!

You are a racist!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #9)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:21 AM

100. See response #58 above nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tex-wyo-dem (Reply #100)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:26 PM

141. Yes, congrats on dipping down to the uncommon, 2nd defnition

Where do I mail your gold star?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #141)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:37 PM

144. No, it was the first definition in the very first link.

Just type in "ferment" "definition" into google - you'll see. I copied and pasted - changed nothing. The second used it as a noun first, there seem to be no set rules on what it should be used as. No need to be rude over something so trivial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #144)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:39 PM

147. You've spent a lot of time telling people to "see post 58!" for an alleged triviality

Perhaps you need to re-read what you posted;

fer·ment
verb
fərˈment/

1.
(of a substance) undergo fermentation.
"the drink had fermented, turning some of the juice into alcohol"
synonyms: undergo fermentation, brew; More

2.
incite or stir up (trouble or disorder).
"the politicians and warlords who are fermenting this chaos"

synonyms: cause, bring about, give rise to, generate, engender, spawn, instigate, provoke, incite, excite, stir up, whip up, foment; literarybeget, enkindle
"an environment that ferments disorder"


As I said, #2.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #147)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:41 PM

148. I've never even posted that.

You seem confused. Perhaps you need to re-read something or other. (Not that I care).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #148)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:43 PM

149. Ah, I assumed you were the first poster replying back again, never looked at the username

Otherwise, why would you care what I said to another user?

Butt out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #149)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:44 PM

150. You were talking with that other poster about MY post.

You butt out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #150)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:45 PM

151. Hard to tell one complaining Sanders supporter from another these days

You were both wrong, how's that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #151)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:46 PM

152. LMAO. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:36 AM

10. Racist shit. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LexVegas (Reply #10)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:39 AM

14. How in the hell is this racist? You know what is racist & sexist & harms those causes?

Using it for Everything when you don't have a valid argument.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #14)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:43 AM

17. What are you trying to ferment here? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LexVegas (Reply #17)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:38 AM

113. See reply #58 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #14)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:46 AM

23. Because somehow in the HRC camp, they've gotten Stormfront and Tumblr to peacefully coexist

and that's fucking up scores of innocent dictionaries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VulgarPoet (Reply #23)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:55 PM

242. That h supporter is not deep enough to understand

 

read a couple of their posts and you will get the brain on simmer whiff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LexVegas (Reply #10)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:41 AM

15. +1...

it was racist when it got that troll WillyT banned, and it's just as racist now, coming from Peter Bloom.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #15)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:44 AM

21. It has nothing to do with skin color.

You are being racist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #21)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:47 AM

25. Sure it doesn't...



Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #25)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:51 AM

28. Wow.

No deductive reasoning here at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #15)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:41 AM

116. Is everything now racist or sexist to Hill supporters? Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tex-wyo-dem (Reply #116)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:55 PM

153. No, just the stuff that's racist and sexist..nt

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #153)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:17 PM

213. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #153)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:26 PM

271. ;)

Spot on, Sid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #15)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:54 PM

202. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:47 AM

24. Oh brother

Not this again.

Damn, folks...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #24)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:30 PM

162. +1 n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:24 AM

36. it's not necessary to be a low information narcissist to write for Common Dreams, but it sure helps.

 

"ferment a revolution?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #36)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:46 AM

53. A revolutionary wine or is it whine?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #36)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:44 AM

119. See response #58 and educate yourself nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:26 AM

37. It has EVERYTHING to do with race and gender. EVERYTHING.

And it is not hard to understand why.

Hillary's margin of victory is driven by minority and women voters. To say NY was lost because Hillary voters have Stockholm Syndrome means that non-white and female voters, who supported her by overwhelming margins, are being told that don't know what is best for them or their future. On the other hand, the one group where the majority supported Bernie, white men, they're leading the revolution! They know what is best for the country!

Context is everything. This OP is about as tone-deaf as you can get.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Godhumor (Reply #37)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:32 AM

42. You're forgetting the other major group Bernie wins - YOUNG PEOPLE. You Hillary supporters are

 

telling US what is best for us.


I'm a white trans woman if we want to play around in demagoguery.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MillennialDem (Reply #42)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:45 AM

51. Pretty sure I never implied you had Stockholm Syndrome for supporting Sanders n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Godhumor (Reply #51)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:48 AM

55. And I never said Hillary supporters had Stockholm Syndrome. I said you're telling us

 

what is best for us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MillennialDem (Reply #42)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:46 AM

52. Demagoguery is all they know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Godhumor (Reply #37)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:45 AM

50. It has fuck-all to do with race and gender.

 

It has everything to do with the self-destructive foolishness of voting for a candidate who doesn't give a single, solitary fuck about non-oligarchs, save for pandering her way into their votes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #50)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:47 AM

54. Again, implication is the demographic groups that are leading Clinton to the nomination

Don't know what is best for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Godhumor (Reply #54)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:01 AM

62. The implication would only apply to a small cross-section of said groups.

 

That is to say, the members of those groups who voted for Hillary (and are not 0.1%'ers). While it opens up a bit in open primary states, basically we're talking a minority of the people who showed up to vote (under 20% of those eligible in NY), who are a minority (c. 30%) of the electorate. Subtract out the majority of young members of those groups (who tend to vote for Bernie) and you have a damn small cross-section of these demographic groups.

Do I have any problem saying that those voters are voting against their own best interests? Nope.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #50)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:05 AM

66. Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

On Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:00 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

It has fuck-all to do with race and gender.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1800357

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Over the top.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:04 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Ridiculous alert. Can't win an argument so you choose to alert? Grow up! This shit is getting old.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Nothing at all hideable about that post. Poor alert.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Grow a thicker skin TBH fam.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fleur-de-lisa (Reply #66)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:06 AM

67. Thanks for the heads up!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Godhumor (Reply #37)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:15 AM

96. This makes sense

 

A post so laughable that it is from a god of humor.

Hillary's margin of victory is driven by minority and women voters. To say NY was lost because Hillary voters have Stockholm Syndrome means that non-white and female voters, who supported her by overwhelming margins, are being told that don't know what is best for them or their future. On the other hand, the one group where the majority supported Bernie, white men, they're leading the revolution! They know what is best for the country!


A post about racism that is racist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to northernsouthern (Reply #96)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:31 AM

109. I get that demographic divides are difficult to understand and accept

But, on the plus side, your bolding skills have developed well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Godhumor (Reply #109)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:17 PM

139. Thanks for the compliment.

 

Your skills at obfuscation of posts and bending them to fit a racist narrative has somewhat improved, but not too much (just being honest because I respect you). :p

What is funny according to the demographics men are far more likely to support a woman in NY? Men went 50/5 and women went 67/33? So you owe men an apology. As well as white which was also 50/50...so go ahead apologize for the racist vote against the only Jewish man in the race. (by your logic) But what is funny is that people that like it as it is and think Hillary will do better against Trump (polls have showed consistantly that is wrong) seem to vote for Hillary, which is the very definition of the syndrome. Also Hillary loses trustworthyness by large numbers and even her own people think Bernie ran a more fair campaign that Hillary. The biggest thing is that 64% people decided who to support by 58% for Hillary to 42% for Bernie well over a month ago.

Also you forget that New York voted against a black man by even larger numbers last time...so way to go NY, a city so nice, they voted down race twice.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/04/19/us/elections/new-york-primary-democratic-exit-polls.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Godhumor (Reply #37)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:20 AM

99. Very well said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Godhumor (Reply #37)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:08 PM

136. Last I looked, plenty of white men voted for Hillary..

So making this a racists/sexist "tone deaf" arguement is riduculous and not becoming of you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:30 AM

40. Thanks for trying to educate some folks. Good luck with it. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:36 AM

45. It would seem to be a textbook case

 

You have those who claim that we have to vote D to protect reproductive rights voting for the candidate who has said she's willing to curb them. You have vocal critics of the Iraq War voting for the woman who voted for it, and then got us involved in 3 more while SoS. You have people who believe that a woman who takes in literally millions from dark money PACs will, if she becomes president, work hard to get rid of dark money PACs. You have people who claim to care deeply about the plight of single mothers, especially black single mothers, supporting one of the authors of the "end of welfare as we know it". Over the last 25 years she's flip-flopped on nearly every issue important to progressives and liberals, yet the swooning minions "trust her".

Certainly there is something psychologically atypical at play here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #45)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:43 AM

49. face it... a lot of them just want a female prez. It's that simple. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #49)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:04 AM

65. Absolutely.

 

Personally, our mutual possession of vaginas doesn't motivate me to vote for Hillary in the slightest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigop (Reply #49)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:48 PM

227. ^^^This. and that reason alone can have disastrous consequences. Hillary is not the right woman

for the presidency. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to desmiller (Reply #227)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:27 PM

278. and neither was Carly Fiorina!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to k8conant (Reply #278)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:59 PM

287. Definitely not Carly Fiorina. My mother called her "Horse face."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #45)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:59 AM

61. Those are some excellent observations. Its insanity run amok. /nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:38 AM

47. Been say'n this for a long time. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:43 AM

48. 47 replies...I can see 8. LOL

 

This one really stirred up Camp Weathervane, didn't it?

I'm unsure that "Stockholm syndrome" applies to all that many Hillary voters...but I have no problem admitting I think any non-1%er who votes for her when there's a far, far better option available is an utter fool.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #48)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:02 AM

63. Yep.

Voting against their own best interests, for people who are essentially republicans at heart & are posing as Democrats.

Fools are falling for it, and then justifying their conservative capitulations to themselves, which is the scariest thing about all of this.
(stockholm syndrome)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:56 AM

59. There it is again...

 

the argument that a minority of the party has somehow proven that it, and not the majority, is the only voice that should matter going forward.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:07 AM

68. Here's one thing Obama has on Clinton: Trickle Down economics

 

Obama came to office at the nadir of an economic collapse Democrats conveniently pinned on Bush despite the fact that we bought the 401K Casino economy Republicans sold America.

In one sense, the 401K Casino economy is like a student loan: for kids to get them, their parents, who are already in debt, have to co-sign. And thanks to Democrats like Joe Biden, you cannot escape student loan debt through bankruptcy. That makes them generational. 401Ks work in much the same way in that there's no getting out. Republicans and New Democrats were ingenious in setting up a system that funnels money from the middle class to the 10%.

We've refused to accept responsibility for Bill Clinton, who pretty much resided over the consolidation of everything from media to financial institutions, the creation of Wall Street black markets, and brought us race to the bottom trade deals.

I think 90% of us hoped Obama was going to be the change candidate. Instead, we got another New Democrat.

Where Obama had the luxury of a Trickle Down, 401K inflating bailout, Hillary won't. Her "incrimental" platform will keep her married to the Casino sham with no public appetite for another Wall Street bailout.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WhaTHellsgoingonhere (Reply #68)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:37 AM

73. Great post.

I completely had my head in the sand & as a young person at the time, totally missed all of the republican crap he did back then. I just mindlessly followed the media version of him.

Now I see people doing that with Hillary. Good people busy with their lives & no time to look at what is really happening.

Its tragic. I blame the republicans who have taken over the party, and even more so, the corporate, propagandized media.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #73)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:51 AM

82. I was young and naive, too. I look back now and consider myself an

 

Auto Pilot Democrat. The Reagan Era is over! Democrats are in charge. It's all good. Idiot me. A lot of Hillary supporters are as naive today as I was throughout the Clinton 42 years.

Just think, today's naive young people actually espouse Democratic Progressive values and principles. And in return, they are ruthlessly and relentlessly shamed by Hillary, her wayward supporters, and Rachel Maddow et al.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #73)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:55 PM

230. But it was much harder back then to put two and two together. We had no Internet.

 

I look back and am amazed how naive I was before the 2000 selection. That woke me up and led me to this emerging new thing called the Internet. It lets us compare notes and find out the agendas behind politicians' actions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arugula Latte (Reply #230)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:03 PM

273. Very true.

We're lucky in this age, the age of the internet. Another reason I'm nervous about a republican in the WH (this includes Hillary). As long as the PTB make money from the internet, more than they lose from internet freedom, hopefully we'll be ok.

Maybe. I can definitely see them changing things up on US quite a bit for the very reason we're grateful for the internet. I hope I'm wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:08 AM

69. The stockholm argument is for simpletons and to give certian people feelings.....

 

of self-importance.

It is almost always an argument put forth by the privileged class.


I personally ensure I am registered as NPA except during primary times. The Florida Democratic Party often pisses me off to no end. It drove me crazy when this place allowed for the open support of Crist over Meeks.

No democrat is guaranteed my vote.

I am the exact opposite of anything resembling the argument put forth here and am a huge Clinton supporter.

In a bout of irony, the target audience for this article are the LIV's. The exact opposite of the brilliant point some think is being made.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:12 AM

70. I can't wait till skinner calls it!

 




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:14 AM

71. Damn. 100% spot on. Nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:24 AM

72. This is the kind of shit that makes people hope a purge is on the horizon.

 

Seriously. It wasn't enough to see a long time DUer get the fucking boot for this kind of shit?

This is the same asshole writing articles like "Off With Their Heads" and then citing Hillary as the Head of the Democratic party?

You can scream in all caps that it has nothing to do with race but it definitely reeks of privilege and arrogance. And you all sure have tried to skirt that line the entire primary season.

Sick. Sick. Sick.









Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:38 AM

74. Oh good, more Obama bashing.

And then this "The reign of a Trump or Cruz would be similar but worse than that of Clinton" disqualifies this article from being based in reality at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to auntpurl (Reply #74)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:45 AM

78. Nearly 90 Percent Of People Killed In Recent Drone Strikes Were Not The Target

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/civilian-deaths-drone-strikes_us_561fafe2e4b028dd7ea6c4ff

The TPP: More Job Offshoring and Lower Wages
http://www.citizen.org/documents/tpp-wages-jobs.pdf

This is NOT progressive, just 2 examples, there are more. He himself says he's more like a moderate republican. The term progressive should not be twisted in such a way as being applied to Obama. Unless you only look at how he ran in his campaigns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #78)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:47 AM

80. I AM a moderate.

So are millions of other Democrats. Not being a progressive is not disqualifying for me.

Obama is a social progressive, and so is Hillary (and so am I). He's fiscally moderate/conservative, and so is Hillary (and so am I). He believes in a strong foreign policy, and so does Hillary (and so do I). I am not unusual; it's just that DU skews MUCH further left than the majority of Democratic voters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to auntpurl (Reply #80)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:54 AM

83. So I guess you don't mind thousands of people just living their lives like you & I being murdered

for no reason other than being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

If this is Democratic, count me out. Its terrorism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #83)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:01 AM

86. That's a characterisation, not a fact.

The ME is extremely complicated. I live in the UK; I see the results of IS every day with the migrant crisis. Should we just let IS take over the world, one square mile at a time? They literally want to kill every single one of us, and are happy to die themselves. There's no diplomacy with this group. What should we do? Just stay out of it?

This article helped me understand a bit better what's going on over there:

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

How do we handle this? Is it not our responsibility? Do we just stay out? What happens to all the people who will be murdered if we stay out?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to auntpurl (Reply #86)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:09 AM

92. Its a fact:

Civilian casualties from US drone strikes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_from_US_drone_strikes

And yes, I say we get out of the ME completely. We're only making more people hate the US & creating more people who rightly want to do US harm, & we aren't helping the people who live there. If I lived there & my family was killed by drone while eating dinner together or at a wedding or visiting a loved one in the hospital, I would hate the US. With prejudice. Look at how we destroyed Libya. If I lived in Libya and my water supply was destroyed by the west, I would hate the west too.

Maybe there is no simple answer, but we are not being the good guys. And corporations like Halliburton & Raytheon are making enormous profits. That in itself isn't bad, but they're doing it by pushing a narrative that the US has to be there when we're only making things worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #92)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:13 AM

94. Unilateral intervention is (nearly) always bad

But if we have a coalition of allies, all working toward the same goal of eradicating a global threat, I am fine with intervention. We are a superpower, it's part of the job description.

Anyway, we disagree on that. My original point was that being a moderate doesn't make me a unicorn. There are a lot of people who believe as I do, and most of us wholeheartedly support Obama and are looking forward to Hillary building on his progress and adding some of her own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to auntpurl (Reply #94)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:20 AM

98. Our being there, killing people, is creating the global threat.

You're being suckered by the propaganda.

I'm going to agree to disagree here. I have this argument often enough with my repub family members.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:43 AM

76. Bilge.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:48 AM

81. Millions didn't even get to vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onecaliberal (Reply #81)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:25 AM

103. It seems many are becoming desensitized to this. I'm glad you aren't one of them

& are speaking out.

Its enough the Democratic process has been hijacked by Moneyed Interests, but then when the people are trying to exercise their right to vote, its being stolen.

Its all quite pathetic. USA!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #103)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:27 AM

105. Disinterest in fairness is an indicator of the condition, a symptom of it, in fact.

 

Great OP!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CentralCoaster (Reply #105)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:12 PM

137. Thanks, CentralCoaster!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #103)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:30 PM

142. Many people died in the struggle for voting rights, I will never forget that, anyone who thinks it's

fine to keep folks from voting should lose their own right; then perhaps they would change their tune.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:57 AM

84. Recommended. That is indeed the correct definition of Stockholm syndrome.

First time I ever heard it used was with Patty Herst when she was kidnapped and held by the SLA. Patty Herst is a white woman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #84)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:27 AM

104. Me too. Patty Hearst.

I'm surprised the syndrome wasn't renamed as the Hearst Syndrome, it was so textbook.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #104)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:47 AM

122. Leaving the democratic party months ago was the single most freeing moment of my life.

I switched back so I could caucus for Bernie and literally couldn't wait to switch back to Unaffiliated. I will never go back to that party. I am content.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #122)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:05 PM

134. Once one is no longer emotionally tied to the Party, one can objectively assess it's behavior.

 

That assessment is not pretty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #134)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:06 PM

135. It's downright ugly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:00 AM

85. Leaving the race and gender issues out of this (for the moment) ...

 

Isn't that just so precious that 24 (and counting) DU:progressives cheer the creation of a new class of "others": psychically damaged working class people?!?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #85)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:30 AM

106. +1

Pure arrogance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #85)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:39 AM

114. oh gawd, why did I take you off ignore. buh-bye again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hiraeth (Reply #114)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:57 AM

132. Thank you ... putting back on Ignore will certainly improve the caliber of replies I receive.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hiraeth (Reply #114)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:58 PM

203. test!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stonecutter357 (Reply #203)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:05 PM

210. LOL ...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #85)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:38 PM

145. Yup

I am furious. We all know how disingenuous this OP really is. It good to point that out though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #145)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:01 PM

155. Now, the number is up to 43 ...

 

How can so many "progressives" NOT see the sophistry of labeling a, or a class of people, psychically damages ... because they support a different candidate than they.

But I'm sure someone will be along to explain it to me. On the bright side, most of those that would try, have me on Ignore!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #155)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:08 PM

156. The underlying arrogance is difficult to watch

The dismissal of racism as something this broad rush OP "isn't about" is disturbing.

What if I said, what I truly believe, just as we cannot magically escape sexism, we cannot magically "make" something like this not about race. It's not possible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #85)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 03:41 PM

208. Hardly we've been saying the same about working class/poor folks who vote Republican for years

no one ever had much problem with that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #208)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:44 PM

224. Me!

It is counterproductive because it drives them farther away from our views and hardens opposition.

Start by finding common ground, points where you DO agree, not by accusing people of stupidity or mental illness and you will find that you are more successful in persuading them to support your candidate or issue. It might take patience, but in the long run, this is proven to be a more successful tactic. And also note that some are not persuadable. Better to just let those go. Nothing is gained by antagonizing them.


Here are some hints on the art of political persuasion:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/5/23/1211036/-Top-Five-Rules-of-Political-Persuasion

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wildeyed (Reply #224)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:26 PM

238. It drives them away-them who?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #238)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:47 PM

240. Anyone you are trying to convince.

Telling conservatives that they are voting against their self interest drives them away. You said "we've been saying the same about working class/poor folks who vote Republican" and no one had a problem with that. I did and do. Because it is counterproductive for the reasons I posted already.

It is also counterproductive to tell Democrats who prefer Clinton that they have mental illness. *If* you care about persuading us to your candidate or cause. But I guess that ship has pretty much sailed already, so the article is sour grapes? Who knows. Not me. I didn't read the article because fuck-all if I want to listen to some internet jackass pontificate about how my political choice in a primary election is indicative of mental infirmity. pffftttt....



BUT, posting that article here at the DU, with that title and the history that phrase has? That is just nasty and divisive. I know it was not you who did that. Just adding the comment here to see if I can avoid making a second post in this thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wildeyed (Reply #240)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 06:52 PM

250. I do too ...

 

You said "we've been saying the same about working class/poor folks who vote Republican" and no one had a problem with that. I did and do. Because it is counterproductive for the reasons I posted already.


But mostly because its arrogant and ignorant to attempt to tell someone what is/isn't in their interest, even after they have given you ample evidence of what THEY have determined are THEIR interests.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #250)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:07 PM

256. Absolutely!

It IS arrogant and rude to do that. But not sure that most people here care about that part. So I am starting with the fact that, in addition to being bad manners, it is completely counterproductive, a TOTAL waste of time.

I come here to learn things, have discussions with likeminded people and sometimes for vigorous debate (which I enjoy). But I am NOT actively campaigning. On a site like this, almost everyone has decided. Trying to push them, particularly after they say stop, just makes them dig into their opposition. If I want to get votes for my candidate, I phone bank, canvass or register voters. Those are productive uses of my time. But here? Nope.

But I dunno, right out of the gate, a very dedicated cadre of Sanders online supporters decided that no one could say anything negative, ever, about their guy (not just here, either). And in the process, did a BUNCH of damage to the campaign. Maybe they can learn and do better next time? I dunno. But I am trying to persuade them to give it a try

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to azurnoir (Reply #208)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:46 PM

226. Bull shit! ...

 

we (including myself) have been telling "Kansas" (the stand in for white, poor, working class) that they are voting against their interests by voting republican.

(BTW, I stopped doing it when I recognized how arrogant and ignorant it was for me to tell a group, that I am not a part of, what their interests are/are not. Hell, "Kansans" told us very clearly where their interests lie ... Their voting told us that: maintaining the racial/gender/Heterosexist status quo (or taking it back to the "good ole days", where Blacks and Womens and Gays knew their place) was more important to them, than putting more $$$ in their pocket.)

But, telling someone they are voting against their interests is very different from calling them Stockholm Syndrome Sufferers ... the former indicates they are making a "bad" or, even, "stupid" choice, that can be fixed with more information or better "right" thinking; while, the latter can't been (completely) fixed with more information or "right" thinking" because the subject is psychically damaged.

Oh ... And it hasn't escaped me that the original Stockholm Syndrome sufferer invective(s) was directed at Black folks (and the LGBTQ ... NWB) and its current incarnation is directed at "the working class", i.e., the poor, a group that we are constantly reminded as being disproportionately Black; whereas, the "fixable" problem, was/is directed at ... well ... "Kansas."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #226)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:24 PM

237. Stockholm Syndrome is accurately described in the OP and you admit it's aimed at the working class

so how is that racist poor and working class cuts across every racial line in the US

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #237)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:57 PM

244. In the context, and with history of DU, and the voting patterns in this primary ...

 

Oh ... And it hasn't escaped me that the original Stockholm Syndrome sufferer invective(s) was directed at Black folks (and the LGBTQ ... NWB) and its current incarnation is directed at "the working class", i.e., the poor, a group that we are constantly reminded as being disproportionately Black; whereas, the "fixable" problem, was/is directed at ... well ... "Kansas."


very easily.

I racist comment doesn't become race-neutral because one includes a few whites.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #244)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:58 PM

245. This is a different poster and an entirely different OP

just because the first one was racist doesn't make this one so

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #245)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 06:54 PM

251. Okay.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #208)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:49 PM

228. Yeah, odd, that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #228)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:26 PM

239. Just a sign of the times

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #239)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:56 PM

243. They'll go back to disparaging the South in the GE.

Then we'll hear all about low info voters who go against their own best interest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:05 AM

90. Hmmm.

 

I think someone was telling me about this post. They said it was racist and I said if the statement was only aimed at minorities then it would have the tinge of "we know best", which is not good. But as there was no link to it I went on to say I could not tell and that we are all under the syndrome (I even linked the definition), that they have us captive. It is nice to see I am not crazy. It has nothing to do with race, but a system that preys on the most down trodden by the very system. I still think the south is more of a PTSD vote (I am only peaking for the people I know as I grew up there and ALL of my family is from there). We have been hurt so hard by the right-wing there we are afraid to try anymore and if we think about a revolution all we see is Reagan and GW.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to northernsouthern (Reply #90)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:58 PM

154. they're just blowing chaff because both Clintons make statements that'd sink Sanders permanently

it's hard to say the opposition to her's racist if she's the only candidate BLM keeps having to protest

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:14 AM

95. The definition is EXACTLY correct and applies to every gender, race and class of people.

Stockholm syndrome
n.

A psychological syndrome in which a person being held captive begins to identify with and grow sympathetic to his or her captor, simultaneously becoming unsympathetic towards the police or other authorities.


Go to any shelter and talk with people who've lived in long-term DV situations - you'll hear story after story where the abuse is minimized and the abuser even defended. Many of those women still have love for their partner and just do not understand how damaged they've been and how much has been taken from them - because they were so beaten down physically and/or emotionally they didn't see anything but trying to keep their lives from getting worse. Gaslighting/crazymaking, and causing one to literally see nothing better to hope for. Until it does get worse.

And this happens to people of all race, gender and class .... abuse can be in any form - physical, emotional, economical, and on and on. Very often the people who choose to use it know exactly what they're doing and will give just enough to keep the sick game going. We ALL know what stockholm syndrome is. Anyone that claims not to, denies the reality or seriousness of it, how damaging it is .. or tries to make it about any one demographic or situation is being very dishonest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #95)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:49 AM

128. Anyone who claims to know what hundreds of millions of voters feel is full of him/herself.

 

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #128)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:54 AM

131. No-one claimed that. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #131)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:55 PM

172. The article does just that. 'America' needs to break free of Stockholm Syndrome.

 

Some hacks have become quite fond of tossing that term around and applying it to anyone they don't like.

And what does "every gender, race and class of people" mean -they're all suffering from SS or they're capable of suffering from it? I have more confidence in people than that. I have more confidence in you.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:24 AM

101. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:25 AM

102. democracy, when it goes against you, don't you just hate it?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:31 AM

110. Oh it will be broken. Give it some time.

Sometimes things have to get worse before they get better. Whether Hillary or a Repug, things will be worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KPN (Reply #110)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:18 PM

140. Most likely. Its a damn shame though. /nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:48 AM

126. Some of us know what it means and this is a good post. Thank you. K&R! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to haikugal (Reply #126)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:15 PM

138. And Thank God for that.

haikugal. Thank you, too!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #138)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:10 PM

158. .

Keep up the good fight!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:34 PM

143. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:10 PM

157. Oy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:22 PM

159. "It has NOTHING to do with RACE."

 

Yeah, I'm sure it doesn't.

Skinner, this is still happening on your site.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuclearDem (Reply #159)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:46 PM

166. Bullshit. The OP is about how the DEMOCRATIC PARTY is being held hostage

by Rightwingers pulling rightwing crap & labeling it (D), like "trade" deals that offshore American jobs, deregulation of industries, offshore oil drilling, unending war for profit, etc.

Is the entire party PoC?

This whole line of attack is meant to be DISTRACTION. Nothing else. Its fermenting a false argument, if you will, to obscure a real problem within the party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #166)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:50 PM

169. It was a waste of time trying to explain this to WillyT

 

and I can tell it's going to be a waste of time trying to explain it to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuclearDem (Reply #169)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:56 PM

173. The article doesn't mention blacks at all, because its referring to the entire political party.

There is REAL racism out there that needs to be banished & these false flags are only harming that cause. You diminish the fight against racism by this crying wolf.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:24 PM

160. K & R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:28 PM

161. Your comment at the end of the article is completely clueless

 

you have deliberately chosen to misinterpret, or pretend to forget how Stockholm Syndrome was specifically applied to the AA community.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #161)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:36 PM

163. Stockholm syndrome is not about race. Its about hostages & how those hostages deal with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

Stockholm syndrome, or capture-bonding, is a psychological phenomenon first described in 1973 in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending and identifying with the captors. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims, who essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors for an act of kindness.[1][2] The FBI's Hostage Barricade Database System shows that roughly eight percent of victims show evidence of Stockholm syndrome.[3]

Stockholm syndrome can be seen as a form of traumatic bonding, which does not necessarily require a hostage scenario, but which describes "strong emotional ties that develop between two persons where one person intermittently harasses, beats, threatens, abuses, or intimidates the other."[4] One commonly used hypothesis to explain the effect of Stockholm syndrome is based on Freudian theory. It suggests that the bonding is the individual's response to trauma in becoming a victim. Identifying with the aggressor is one way that the ego defends itself. When a victim believes the same values as the aggressor, they cease to be perceived as a threat.[5]

Stockholm syndrome is sometimes erroneously referred to as Helsinki syndrome.[6][7]

Stockholm syndrome is named after the Norrmalmstorg robbery of Kreditbanken at Norrmalmstorg in Stockholm, Sweden. During the crime, several bank employees were held hostage in a bank vault from August 23 to 28, 1973, while their captors negotiated with police. During this standoff, the victims became emotionally attached to their captors, rejected assistance from government officials at one point, and even defended their captors after they were freed from their six-day ordeal.[8]

The term was coined by the criminologist and psychiatrist Nils Bejerot, consultant psychiatrist to the police when it happened. He called it "Norrmalmstorgssyndromet" (Swedish), directly translated as The Norrmalmstorg Syndrome, but then later became known abroad as the Stockholm syndrome.[9] It was originally defined by psychiatrist Frank Ochberg to aid the management of hostage situations.[10]

In Nazi Germany in the 1930s some Jews were allegedly shouting "Down with Us"[18] and supported Hitler's policies.[19] The syndrome is encouraged in crime situations because it can increase the hostages' chances for survival, but those experiencing it are usually not very cooperative during rescue or prosecution.

Several symptoms of Stockholm Syndrome have been identified in the following: positive feelings toward the controller, negative feelings toward the rescuers, supportive behavior by the victim helping the abuser, and lack of desire by the victim to be rescued.[20][21]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #163)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:42 PM

164. Keep it up...

Last edited Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:24 AM - Edit history (1)

Brilliant tactic, really.


eta: it's really disgusting to watch these people lining up to congratulate one another for yet another successful dog whistle.

Another proud berniebro moment. Is it any wonder he's losing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #164)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:49 PM

168. What you're posting is unhinged from reality. The (D) party has gone rogue Right Wing.

That's the problem.

NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #168)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:59 PM

175. "unhinged from reality," what??

No matter how many times you try and SCREAM at people here, the fact remains that this POV reeks of arrogance on so many levels.

Not the least of which is the way it was used RIGHT HERE.

Keep it up, it's effing brilliant I tell ya.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #168)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:30 PM

268. They know this OP has nothing to do with race.

But a damn good outrage is hard to ignore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #268)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:39 AM

290. Yet

We all know that it most certainly does here. A round of high fives for EVERYONE!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #290)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:43 AM

291. Thanks for the high five, but there's nothing I can do to help you with your comprehension problems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #291)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:52 AM

293. Didn't request your help.

It is what it is.

Keep it up, time is short.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #293)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:54 AM

294. Not as short as you want it to be. Too bad. I'm sure Skinner doesn't want to knock

out a good chunk of his board yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #294)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:04 AM

295. True enough, I'll manage.

In the meantime, keep up the good work with these winners.

High fives all around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #295)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:11 AM

296. It is very much a winner OP there are many democrats who suffer from Democratic Stockholm Syndrome

I know, I was one. Leaving the democratic party was the most liberating experience of my life.

Stockholm syndrome, or capture-bonding, is a psychological phenomenon first described in 1973 in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending and identifying with the captors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

I am no longer bonded with the democratic party, and it feels good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #296)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:34 AM

301. The OP is yet another embarrassment in a long line

of arrogant attacks. Quadrupling down at this point isn't helping your candidate one whit.

Congrats on your epiphany, or whatever it is. Do what you need to do, but cheering this crap on only serves to insult and alienate these people even further.

The phrase has meaning here, everyone knows it. To pretend it's anything else at this point is disingenuous at best.

Have the last word, I've said what I wanted to say here.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #301)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:41 AM

302. The meaning "given" to that phrase here on DU means nothing. You can't change the meaning

of a phrase because someone misused it. Words and phrases have meaning, they may change over time but outrage on a message board will not change their meanings.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #163)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:46 PM

167. Yeah.

We know what this is about. Deflecting definitions aren't going to change a thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #167)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:05 PM

233. Deflecting definitions?

How many PoC were in that bank vault?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #163)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:55 PM

171. delfection of how Stockholm Syndrom was applied here on DU to the AA Community, won't work

 

the original author was so shamed at the OP's (yes there were more than one) they were finally deleted...and you bring it back up...shame on you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #171)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:58 PM

174. My post has nothing to do with that situation.

If the term "stockholm syndrome" has a different meaning here than in the rest of the world, it should be in the ToS never to use it here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #174)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:02 PM

176. yes it did...you attempt to pretend the past didn't happen

 

you intended to wipe out how the terms was previously used but stating it had been misapplied.

It was despicable in it's racism then, and your deflection, and re-writing and telling us how in essence it was not used to label the AA's community, is just about as bad. Maybe worse. I find re-writing of facts to be heinous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #174)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:02 PM

177. You honestly believe this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #177)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:07 PM

181. The Democrats for the past 25-30 years have been acting republican, and we have to go

along with it because the actual republicans have moved to crazyland in response.

We're being held hostage.

That's what this OP article is about. Its the truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #181)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:19 PM

188. Well that answers my question

Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:44 PM

165. " established fantasy of incremental rearguard progress...."

A key "weapon" in the fantasy of incremental rearguard progress is "preemptive surrender."

It constantly mystifies. How can surrendering whenever a fight appears to be brewing on the horizon be "realism"?

The only thing it absolutely guarantees is failure.

When did so many Democrats decide that guaranteed failure was far better than making an effort?

What happened to the ideal of the "little engine that could"?

The so-called Democratic leadership is just littered with "little engines that couldn't."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pat_k (Reply #165)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:51 PM

170. The Party of "Yes We Can" turned "No We Can't" very quickly with Hillary.

GO neoliberals! woo

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #170)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:04 PM

178. We can be realists, we can work within that construct

 

I cannot play with fairies and unicorns and be told it will come true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:05 PM

179. You lost

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #179)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:09 PM

183. No not really. The Democratic Party loses with Third Way Dems leading us with RW policies

& forcing us to go along because the repubs are more evil.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #183)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:37 PM

195. The voters have spoken

It's a difference of opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #179)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:13 PM

185. Your call sign is "Renew Deal" and your supporting Hillary?

That is some seriously fucked up shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Phlem (Reply #185)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:36 PM

193. We will all be supporting Hillary soon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #193)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:38 PM

197. Nice story bro.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Phlem (Reply #197)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:44 PM

200. Good to know which side you're one

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #200)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:49 PM

201. That would be the non corrupt side.

The non conservative side.

The NOT PRO CORPORATE side.

The side of the working man.

Not the side of shipping more fucking jobs out of the country.

etc...........


You didn't get that from my Bernie sig? Not seeing the big picture? Not surprised.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Phlem (Reply #201)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:59 PM

204. That's the problem

You can't be on that side and post what you posted. The 2000 Nader voters weren't some virtuous patriots that stood up for the little man. They were suckers that got fooled into destruction of the economy, civil rights, infrastructure, and several countries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #204)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 03:02 PM

206. By Your Definition!?

please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #193)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 03:02 PM

205. No ...

 

We SHOULD all be supporting Hillary soon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #193)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:08 PM

236. Gooble-gobble.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:06 PM

180. The blind followers spoken of divert attention from the message...

to word choice or anything else, rather than try to get their minds around why they continue to follow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polichick (Reply #180)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:08 PM

182. No kidding. /nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:11 PM

184. "It has NOTHING to do with RACE."

or Gender.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:17 PM

187. Talk about a passive aggressive way ...

... to resurrect the racist Stockholm Syndrome thread. Is that you, WillyH? And yes, I spelled it that way on purpose because you're clearly trying to stir racial hatred the same 41 did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:36 PM

192. K&R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 03:31 PM

207. good article. I suppose the book "What's the matter with Kansas" is also

taboo in some circles here. Stockholm syndrome is what happens when someone starts identifying with their oppressor(s). It is more than mere ignorance. It is a primal self-defensive reaction that results in exactly the opposite of self-defense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bbgrunt (Reply #207)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:24 PM

266. You describe it so well. Thanks.

And we could go so far as to take many of the posts on this thread & others here & use them as examples of Dems held hostage identifying with their oppressors & getting defensive. You said something I can't refute, so so you are racist! You used a word in a way not commonly used, you don't know English!

Elsewhere....High college costs when it used to be quite affordable? Awesome! Killing innocents with drones? Hey its war, things happen. Unauthorized war? Did someone say something? Corporations & candidates setting up shell companies to avoid paying their taxes? No problem! No one likes paying taxes...

Primal, sad, something...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:11 PM

211. umadbro?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:02 PM

231. The Bernies....

sure seem to love telling people they have Staockholm Syndrome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrWendel (Reply #231)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:00 PM

254. That's because the ones doing it KNOW ...

 

the can't use the other word ... well ... the knew until recently.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #254)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:36 PM

265. It's a dog whistle, for sure.

They are fermenting SOMETHING and it stinks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #254)

Sat Apr 23, 2016, 01:48 PM

311. Yeah stay tuned....

that might change. 7 stages of grief and all that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:07 PM

235. Has someone posted the jury results yet?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:53 PM

241. I feel like this campaign season has deprogrammed me

 

I am not the die hard Dem I was coming in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 06:16 PM

246. I call bullshit.

Anyone who understands the history that phrase has at this site and decides to post it anyway is being racially insensitive and divisive.

You KNOW that is a sensitive phrase, one that MANY black DUers take offense at and yet you decide to post it anyway.

No one cares what you meant, it only matter how it make people feel.

It is not even a good article.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wildeyed (Reply #246)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 06:58 PM

253. Just another

 

rendition of the "What? Who me? I had no idea!", that DUers like to play.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #253)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:43 PM

264. I wish there was a way

to make the computer blow-up when someone tries to post an OP with that word in the title. You post "BLAHBLAHBLAH Stockholm Syndrome, but that doesn't make me racist!!!1!!! And get the blue screen of death. BOOM. I'll go to over to ATA and see if the admins can hook that up

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 06:43 PM

249. To fucking bad. Get over it. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:30 PM

261. Terrific article

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to quantass (Reply #261)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:26 PM

267. The author really nailed it. Thanks quantass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:30 PM

272. Wow. Was just talking about this phenomenon with my son.

There's much truth here.

For to say thanks for this article and thread.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duppers (Reply #272)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:07 PM

274. That's so great. I hope many people start talking it up to family & friends & coworkers.

Corporate media sure isn't talking about it. Its up to US.

Thanks for sharing, Duppers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:08 PM

275. Excellent Article RiverLover, thanks for sharing this.

 

And my hat off to ya for the Courage to post in hostile territory, particularly among a tribe of Neo Liberals given to despicable arrogance, extreme hubris and worst of all, intellectual dishonesty which I hold with a significant degree of contempt and loathing.

Bravo, mon ami! Bravo!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 2banon (Reply #275)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:16 PM

276. Mon plaisir, mon ami!! Ce n'était rien ;)

Hats off to you, 2banon! You call it like it is with articulated swagger & grace all rolled into one. Boom! I envy that.



Well said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #276)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:37 PM

280. Au contraire , mon ami . il était très important et sur ​​ce point,

 

d'aller au cœur de ce qui fait souffrir ce parti . Je vous remercie! vous me flattez , et je suis charmé , mais il vous est avec le courage et fanfaronnades !

tu gères!

et la lutte continue, mon ami.. le bras dans le bras ensemble.

Viva la révolution!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 2banon (Reply #280)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:54 PM

286. "le bras dans le bras ensemble" - Arm & Arm we stand together!

Love that.

Keeps us strong in the fight against the neoliberal BS. In this together!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:53 AM

289. The term "Stockholm Syndrome" is based on an assumption that is flat out wrong

Namely that most voters know candidates' positions on a range of issues and vote accordingly. They don't, and they don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:49 AM

292. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:28 AM

299. Quick Explanation

Dear All,

I am the author of this post - it is republished from an article I wrote for Common Dreams. I was completely unaware of any of the connotations that were previously associated with the Stockholm Syndrome posted on this site. Further, my goal in the article was not to dismiss or discount anyone for supporting one candidate over another. Rather, my only aim in the piece was to start a conversation regarding the possibilities of creating a more unified progressive movement and politics. I do feel that - quite understandably - a large amount of genuine progressive energy and resources are invested in leaders and Parties that do not substantively promote such values either domestically or internationally. In this regard, the piece was largely meant as a critique of Sanders supporters for not effectively articulating why this Centrist strategy may no longer be the best and most effective way to advocate for social reform and change.
I am sorry though if unintentionally it reinforced any discriminatory assumptions or perspectives - which again was the complete opposite of its intention.

On another note - the critics of my grammar are quite right. It is foment. I used ferment inappropriately.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:32 AM

300. Kick.

 

In rememberance of WillyT and his well deserved PPR.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Fri Apr 22, 2016, 03:46 PM

310. Load o' crap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread