'Hillary hate' or 'Hillary haters' to my trash list. Using the phrase seems to be a sure sign that the post is only meant to be used to slam anyone who doesn't prefer HRC as the Dem candidate.

It was alerted on and allowed to stand. So it not only exists, it was supported by several jurors.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6255478

And she would never have been appointed SOS if Obama hadn't felt he owed her something after wiping the floor with her in the primaries. Her senatorial record was underwhelming and her tenure as SOS consisted mostly of advocating neocon foreign policy and kissing up to Pentagon brass.

She hasn't "earned" squat. But she did sleep with the guy who got a BJ in the Oval Office.

But what is sloppily considered 'hatred' is far too broad. Anyone who says anything negative is considered a 'hater' by many onsite, to the point where it's used simply as a way to troll whatever percentage of the site isn't behind HRC, and feel her policies would be less helpful to the American people than other possible candidates.

The amount of hate against Hillary is telling.

DU goes through phases of silliness.

The Democratic Party goes through phases of silliness.

Once she declares the primary is over.

See you in April!

If you expect this board to not have voices expressing disapproval of some, of any, preordained inevitable candidate, then it may be for the best that you take a break or use the ignore feature to it's full capacity.

See you when you return. Take care.

Thus the loud shouting, to help ensure that she does not run unopposed, if she runs.

The corporate media machine has already made up our minds, but some aren't ready for that.

Posting Hillary hate on DU isn't the reason. It occurs every 4-8 years.

That's where I'm at. Like 2008, I haven't yet accepted the inevitable one.

I sometimes note that there's quite a few threads in GD about Hillary, Warren and Sanders but for the most part, I give them little thought and skip over them.

DU is quite a big place with lots of interesting groups and even GD has many discussions going on that have nothing to do with the upcoming primary and general election.

I think a lot of it is deliberate trolling with all the repeating of right wing memes.

If I wanted to read Drudge and Newsmax I'd go to those shitty sites.

Wish the admins would do a little clean up, but I guess they'll just have to lose page clicks. If everyone who is sick of this shit backs off, it'll just be the tools and trolls talking to one another, and what fun is that?

This is no longer a site for Democrats--it's a site where people criticize and berate Democrats, and I think it sucks.

Between the Hillary haters and the Putin fetishists, this place has taken a hard left turn into assholeville*.

*full credit to the wonderful Patton Oswalt for the delightful phrasing.

Sid

While it's terrible to hear that your rightward hopes for this site aren't being realized, I'm sure you'll find a way to soldier on.

post.

Your dreams for the right will be realized

Last edited Sat Feb 21, 2015, 10:49 PM - Edit history (1)

votes, such as the Iraq war "Yes" vote, is nothing but a "hater".

How can one support a politician who voted for a war based on lies that killed over a million people?

I honestly want to know the thought process of someone like that. How would one constructively criticize that?

Not a bad idea.

Trash thread is a wonderful feature.

Last edited Sat Feb 21, 2015, 11:12 PM - Edit history (1)

You know, the part where we watch debates and evaluate positions... and just vote for the odds on favorite.

I don't even really "support" her. I don't want an uncontested primary, I'd like to see other people enter the field (hell it would be good to have even 1 candidate, since we don't!). This has been a ridiculous week but there are quite a few other posts on DU I find interesting so I'll be here.

I trust her on women's issues and most social justice issues. How am I supposed to convince her that I think her economic stances (at least what we know of them) and the issues I trust her on do not work together? Am I supposed to ignore who she chooses to advice her? Am I just supposed to stop thinking and vote for the inevitable?

I do not quite understand what it is that you are expecting here. This is discussion board but we are not supposed to discuss?

I'll adopt your statement "I do not quite understand what it is that you are expecting here" in lieu of what I really think, which might have gotten me a hide.

I know you know the difference because I've never seen you engage in hate. But really, haven't you seen others?

Like the person who, in saying that he felt she wasn't qualified to be President, said: "She hasn't 'earned' squat. But she did sleep with the guy who got a BJ in the Oval Office."

A jury let that stand.

It also seems that it's the haters that also don't have a problem with that king of comment.

It's hate and nothing else, no doubt about that. Or that comment that Hillary is right of most Republicans. The list goes on & on.

Kind of reminds me of a clansman saying he's not racist. People can't see the hate because they are part of it.

Now the post you were talking about, even I would have voted to hide. I agree there is a clear difference on that one. Out of curiosity do you remember what the outcome was? 4-3?

And there were also several other posters in the thread defending the post.

There are some here who think it is "Hillary's turn" or that she has "earned it" after all these years. Which is completely ridiculous. No one is entitled to the nomination. That's not how it works.

I'm sorry but it isn't anyone's "turn." This stuff isn't supposed to be predetermined by party heads. That kind of thing is very specifically what George Washington warned about and why he hated political parties. He worried party elitists would one day pick the candidates and the people would just simply fall in line.

And as someone with a law degree (from Yale) who worked as a lawyer and eventually became Senator and Secretary of State (not to mention her unpaid terms as First Lady, in which she was more involved in policy than any First Lady since Eleanor Roosevelt) she has a background as strong as many men who have become Presidents.

... in violent agreement.

I'm tired of folks too lazy to look at the facts. I'm tired of people selling themselves and everyone else that isn't a billionaire out.

You have a PM MoonRiver.

The HATERS of HRC who post on DU and you HATE the alert results of HATEFUL words(your interpretation) of democrats you think HATE America.

Maybe there is a little to much HATE in your life.

The mean posts reflect the anger some have for being told who won the coming election in 2016. I think we're as tired of that just as you are of the mean posts. And we don't believe the she won the election next year just as you don't believe the mean posts about her.