Supporters have more flexibility to be blunt in the primary.

Clinton is the status quo, the PTB are behind her, plenty of criticism is needed, because relevant criticism from the left won't be coming from the media.

sigh

support for Sanders for years.

Many here sure seem relatively new to these EXTREME feelings about these two people.

But as an old school liberal I operate from the position of least harm, it is a necessary concept for survival.

You see you work 24/7 to get real liberals, progressives, in office while simultaneously voting for the least harm so your work is that much less difficult.

Bernie wins, I hope, but if he doesnt, boy will I work my ASS off for Hillary

But I see a bunch of things like this post, criticizing people on DU that support Sanders.


Throwing stones....

And why should people curtail their free speech because someone else has made a political calculation?

that the Koch Bro are funding these negative ads. I know one they are not helping Bernie at all. Even after Bernie has asked these supporters to quit with negative ads against HRC, they continue on. Makes you wonder if Rumor Control is on to something!

I don't think all of Senator Sanders' supporters have his best interests at heart. Some do, but some seem to be making a bit of opportunistic hay while the sun shines.

It's just the internet, though. The world doesn't care what people say here.


At the end of the day, someone calling a Clinton supporter all sorts of names isn't going to win a single vote for Senator Sanders, so what it really is, is a venting exercise. It's the equivalent of screeching at full volume: "You don't think the way I do--I hate you, I hate you, I hate you!"

No hearts or minds are changed by that kind of nonsense.

... It means his supporters see an inherent weakness in their candidate that they feel means he cannot win without negative attacks on Hillary.

If she and/or her supporters can't handle the softballs being thrown around DU then she/they are not ready for what the RW slime machine has ready to roll out.

Being CRITICAL of her war vote is not an attack.

Begin CRITICAL of her not taking a stand on FastTrack is not an attack.

Being CRITICAL of her support of Wall Street is not an attack.

with snark, fine.

What happens around here is usually, not always, far from legit criticism.

on a board where everyone is pretty much anonymous can be harsher than it should be.

Still, these are softballs compared to what the RW will spend hundreds of millions of dollars plastering the airwaves with for months.

Boat attacks which turned out to be incorrect, is not the same as the attacks here on DU of which I have disagreed with a candidates stand on the issues by stating what the issue was and where I find the candidates is and my opinion of the issue. Lots of the attacks on DU is the same old same old talking points many times the same ones I hear on RW talk shows.

things are phrased when criticizing him?

This really seems to only be coming from one group here.

I do not see it in keeping with Bernie, they are not helping him to get his point across, just the opposite.

the dirtiest or lowest when it comes to attacking Hillary, that it is OK?

You know what the correct response to my thread would be from EVERYONE?

Damn Randy, when you put it like that, i guess you are right.

Any other response is nonsense, and you know it

I'm curious to know if this is an "Armistice for thee but not for me" situation.

I think you're spot on thinking "Armistice for thee but not for me."

SIGH

But here's the thing, we are not campaigning. Disagreeing with a candidate and pointing out why we may not trust them based on their history and why we don't agree with their stand on issues saying why we don't like a candidate is not an attack or a negative ad. This is a discussion board and this is a primary so we discuss. For you to point your finger at Bernie supporters and say they are the problem is rather hypocritical and quite frankly unfair to your 'fellow Bernie supporters' . Just saying.

This is about followers of Bernie who do not act the way he does.

It is really only important for this reason:

If he loses, and she wins, how much work is needed to be done to repair the damage done so as to make sure one of the clown car terrorists arent elected.

Yes I call them terrorists because every single thing they would do or try to do would harm many.

For that matter If she loses, and he wins, what then? We are Democrats, we will get behind the nominee, that's what we do. Would you like to see Hillary's supporters make the same plea? There have been a few nasty OPs about Bernie.

matter what, if you are not one of those then I apologize

I have seen people who get pissed off that they are being told she is inevitable and that no one else should even bother.

I hope that people can tone down the insults and offensive postings during the primary and then come together afterwards without having too much animosity left from the primary.

just forget about it and work on just supporting Bernie and then Hillary if necessary.

I just get mad sometimes.

Oh well.

I agree with you that the inevitable shtick is wearing thin, NOBODY is inevitable, just go back to 2008 and ask Hillary

He is not my father. Neither are you. And there have been plenty of very negatve attacks on bernie and his supporters here by Clinton supporters. I opposed Clinton long before i came to support Bernie. I oppose her based on issues and character.

So what

Is that a reason to do it also?

never mind

etc.

And i have no doubt that the Clinton campaign will go after him in much the same ugly way they went after Obama. We've already seen a harbinger of that with Gutierrez. I'm not saying he was directed to go after bernie, but it sure had a familiar feel to it.

In fact, I don't think I've seen a single post critical of Hillary.

Bernie, on the other hand, gets savaged by DUers.

If you see, he pivoted right back to the issue of our democracy being owned by billionaires.
This is about ISSUES, not personalities.

He said it was fair criticism and he told the media that if they want to talk about then they should talk about the Koch brothers just as much.

He spent the majority of his answer attacking the Kochs, actually.

but opportunistic right wingers.

"Chuck a rock ... the dog that yelps, be the dog done got hit."

to tell me with a straight face they are the same, Jeb and Hillary

JDPriestly issued a OP based on that...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024379279

And our recently banned NYC_SKP's thoughts on Hillary Clinton's remarks regarding Social Security

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024385340

but opportunistic right wingers.





See how easy that accusation is to make without any proof.

GOP has a long history. See--"All The Presidents Men"

See how easy that was?

There are other candidates with supporters on DU. Why single out only one group?

Kind makes one wonder about motivation.

but will talk about issues that we disagree on.
This is how Bernie does it, this is how I have been doing it.
It's not always easy, but I am learning. In some instances it's downright tough.
But like Bernie, we have to pivot back to the issues, and not concentrate on labels, or name calling.
This negative campaigning is what people are fed up with. If we can make a difference, and mirror our candidate, we shall win!

She seems to be liberal in sort of a benign way, but she's a conduit for corporate control of the commons.

Anyone who believes this, EXCEPT for the one running against her, ought to call her out in the strongest terms.

Bernie must retain his equanimity. We must be his loud voices.

Just remember that.

Most critics of Clinton don't fall into that category.

This is an attempt to make people wary of the level of criticism in order to quiet that criticism.

Just use ignore, it's simple and effective. Use trash thread at the minimum. It's really only 5 people on either side.

Need some links so these vile acts can be condemned. How are we to determine if they're legitimate discussions of a candidate or disgusting smears if we aren't given something to review? Speaking of which, if they're so awful why haven't the juries hidden them yet?



BTW, why don't you hold Hillary supporters to the same standards? Seems a bit hypocritical not to.

answer for them.

This board is full of attacks on Hillary, some are credible, some are not, many are pretty vicious.


BTW, this is DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND

there should be ZERO attacks on HIllary


But then I am a Democratic Socialist who thinks Hillary is not liberal enough on economic matters

First off, if you want to influence just Bernie supporters, try posting it in the Bernie group. Your message will be better received there. Posting something directed at a specific side in general discussion will just bring a pile on from the other side, regardless of who you're talking to. Requests to tone down have been taken quite well there.

Now onto your message.



This is DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND

there should be ZERO attacks on any of our candidates. It doesn't matter which one it is. We're either here to have a civil conversation about politics or we're not. It can't be done if only one side decides to play nice. Again, there's a difference between smears (which are unfounded) and policy/record discussion. One should be off limit, the other shouldn't.



I would still like links to a few of these attacks you find over the top if you don't mind. So I can decide for myself if they're smears or policy/record discussions.

I am wrong though I tend to think of it as too passive particularly for being way behind in brand recognition and facing a much better funded opponent.

I guess it is 3am and I don't give a fuck about being negative on the Corporatist, Global Interventionists...uhm...what's her name...uhm...Hillary Clinton who hasn't been real clear about protecting American workers, civil liberties, peace, or corporate dominion...I mean I'm sure she cares but we aren't really hearing it...uhm...I'm sure she will clarify during the process but I'm not sure she cares about working class Americans.


I'm for Bernie for policy not tone or mild manneredness and am a supporter not a disciple.
I'm not interested in joining his diocese or whatever you are implying.

Why don't you try supporting Bernie rather than scolding his supporters to handle Clinton with kidd gloves whole pretending the Clintonites are angels from heaven.

And I don't see myself running any negative ads this campaign, either.

So, yeah. Good to go!

I am working for the Bernie Sanders campaign and donating, and like him I will say as little as possible about Hillary.

You see here is why that is important, barring an upset by Bernie

you will have to decide if you want Women dying in alleys, Gays being treated like 2nd class citizens

or not

i have already decided what i want

... who's getting my time and money.

the better for our Country.

positions from Hillary's positions, I tell them with contrasting examples.

People genuinely want to know why Bernie is the better candidate.

There, happy?

I haven't seen that from Bernie supporters in any thread i'm reading or posting in.

just sayin'

on ignore.

and it is a most excellent and powerful device. It is my hope that as the election progresses his methods might lift the dialog every so slightly out of the mire and muck, among his rivals as well as the electorate in general.

Criticizing a candidate based on record on issues is not a "negative ad."

Bernie has done so.

Why not stop dumping on Sanders supporters and admit that Sanders beats HRC on the issues, and THAT'S what you find so negative?

just sayin

We just point out the truth and they think it's hell.

count as criticism?


So no mention of Hillary unless it's glowing?

He should be critical of his opponent's policies.

taunting and snobbish...

personal.

Many can learn from his personal example.