I'm just wondering what your motive is.

Thank you.

Thank you

Here's the link to my Journal, where every OP I've entered on DU is kept.:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/~DonViejo

Please review the Journal and provide us with a list of OP's you consider to be critical of the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton.

And a rather prominent one at that. Is he not? Why do you think things he says shouldn't be reported?

Isn't it. The poster was clearly saying it shouldn't be posted here.


PS. If you are looking to quibble over the difference between 'post' and 'report', I'm not really interested. Thanks!

Funny, I don't see anything like that.

Melman has decided what you actually said and meant.

You asked what the motive of the OP poster was in repeatedly sharing articles critical of HRC, but *actually* you were demanding that he stop!! And you also meant that no one should be reporting Dick Durbin's statements on Hillary.

Now, don't you think a thank you is in order?

Yes. You did in fact do just that.

Now you're rewording what you originally said that I said, and yet again you have it wrong.

No, in fact it isn't, and no, George didn't do what you claimed.

Time to put up or shut up, see the comment linked below:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142016884#post118

Please re-read my posts if that's unclear.

Are you referring to this?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=2017065

Or something else?

Because that's still not saying that these things shouldn't be posted, or that you shouldn't post them.

Care to clarify what exactly you're referring to with "tag teaming?"

Not sure why I should "shut up" when I have not made any "allegations" you claim concerning this OP.

He questioned the motives of the poster because he's happy about the post. Obviously.

Obviously.

An accurate appraisal of what went on in this thread. As you know.

I'm right. You know I'm right. And yet you can't let it go.

m right. You know I'm right. And yet you can't let it go.

I can't imagine what compels you to continue when you know I'm right.

It irritates some people when you decide to stay with the facts that don't support their POV.

But the fact is I'm right. Which you clearly know. And yet...

And you're entitled to that opinion.

I'mma stick with facts.



3...2...1...

It's a fact. I'm right. You know I'm right. But you still won't stop.

I hear the more something is repeated, the "truer" it becomes....

Tip: If a conversation bothers you, you are completely free to exit the conversation.

That's a fact.

All I did was ask a question. Then this whole ridiculous routine started. Not started by me though.


Like I said. Sad. Not at all surprising but sad all the same.

as you call it, says much about you.

Wong again. All it says is I don't feel like letting you have the last word. Because I'm right and you know it.

And your continued participation in one you call "ridiculous" continues to say much about you.

I'm not wrong. I have facts on my side. Like I said before, it bothers some people that I'm not one to simply comply with the loudest or most repeated claim.

Is this a theory of yours that being the person who posts last in a "routine" (as you call it) is "right?"

Interesting theory - and it does correspond to the "the more something is repeated, the more 'true' it becomes," claims of certain people in public life.

Your turn.

First in your post #44, and then in your post #101.

I said neither.

Just saying....

contained in this comment to George II's allegations:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142016884#post118

SO many that sometimes I wonder when he/she has time to eat.



And for that I am grateful.

I find really disruptive and negative toward Dems. So there’s that too. I’m certain the Hills edit of the comments would be manipulative.

I noticed a long time ago that almost all YAHOO comments on any given topic are all on the same side, whichever side that may be. ( I on't read the replies.)




OK, I just admitted that I look at YAHOO...

Hill is taking Dems lemonade and somehow Turing it into lemons every chance they get. My guess is, it’s for clicks.
The NYT seems to be doing the same thing a great deal- trolling liberals online w some of their worst reporting. Emotion and controversy translate into eyeballs. I’m not responding to it.

Interesting, isn't it.

The article from "The Hill" is a few short paragraphs and it's writer, Mallory Shelbourne, chose to cherry pick a few isolated quotes, some not even complete sentences.

The article didn't even include a link to the actual interview so unfortunately we have to rely on the interpretation (i.e., analysis) of Shelbourne. Or we can go off and search for the video ourselves to see what Durbin really said in context.

....a range of subjects

The article didn't "pretty much quote Senator Durbin completely", it only quoted a mere 31 words (yeah, I counted them) from an 11 minute interview.

Your comment "Or we can go off and search for the video ourselves to see what Durbin really said in context." lead me to believe that you had not looked it up.

The article on this post also paraphrase the senators remarks and I think capture his full comments quite well.

please see https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142016884#post118

In short, it's put up or shut up time

We will need to flip many Trump districts and offending the voters there will not get them to vote for us.

Yes, we all know the truth - except for offending many women saying that they vote the way their husbands do - but we do not need to say it in public IF we want to take control of Congress.

Too bad that on DU so many want "purity" or, I don't know, catharsis, instead of reaching our.

We need them. Period. It is not about different polices, had we had a Bush, or McCain or Romney; it is saving the country from disasters, both domestic and foreign policies.

It is not just Durbin - a respectable reliable Democratic senator that Trump called "little;" it is senators who are up for re-elections in states that Trump won: McCaskill of Missouri, Brown of Ohio, Heitkamp of North Dakota.

But, I suppose, November will be here soon enough.

" Joseph Durbin (born November 21, 1944) is an American politician serving as the senior United States Senator from Illinois since 1997. He has been the Assistant Democratic Leader, the second-highest position in the Democratic Party leadership in the Senate, since 2005, serving as Minority Whip from 2005 to 2007, Majority Whip from 2007 to 2015, and Minority Whip again since 2015."

How is postinng about his comments Democrat bashing ?

the "centrist" wing of the party?

What do you think discussion forums are for?

she doesn't need to say it. Just as "Hey, you're ugly" won't make you any friends, "Hey, you're stupid/racist/sexist/etc." isn't going to win you any votes. Reassuring voters that Clinton was wrong is an attempt to not drive them away and into the arms of the Rs.

Democrats, anyway. They've been brain poisoned by Pox News and hate radio.

There are lots of people in these sections we have a chance to win......such as in wi and mi. You don't won their votes by implying they are no different from the die-hard trump cultists.

Hillary simply doesn't help with speeches like that.

The locations she is addressing hate her guts and NOTHING she says will be a factor in changing the votes of the Republicans in those locations. End.

That didn't work out so well last time....

You are ignoring Bernie followers who even today are organizing anti Hillary protests, you are ignoring the Russian interference, the massive cyber attacks.you are ignoring stolen voter data, mis information, Cambridge analytica, Comey and Bannon false info dissemination. Hillary won the popular vote by millions and lost the EC in those states by 70K.

Bottom line is yes, we should leave deplorable Republicans to stew in their own juices.....and spend more valuable time speaking truth and letting fence sitters see Republicans for what they are. Republicans can only open their own eyes, when and if they are ready it may happen. But it's all in them to open their eyes and find truth.

Nothing Hillary says or doesn't say to them will make them vote Dem..NOTHING. So why castigate a private citizen for voicing their opinion.

Last edited Tue Mar 20, 2018, 09:37 AM - Edit history (3)

If you are talking about the Trump cult, I agree there is nothing we can do.

However, if we don't get more votes in WI, PA and MI....we lose again.

There are many people out there who weren't Trump fans but voted for him. Some held their noses. Others just wanted to give him a chance. Others usually vote Democratic, voted for Obama, but didn't like Hillary. Some didn't like Trump but thought he would lower their taxes.

We can get some of these voters back by running a strong campaign. By using our time to show why they should vote D this time, that the D Party is the party of the people and the Rs are the party of the rich, we can protect health care, etc etc etc.

This is what we should be doing, loud and strong, showing what we as a party can do different from the gridlock and chaos in Washington today. We don't need to pander to these voters, that is not what I am saying. We simply need to show them what we can do, what we are about, what our vision for the future is.

Grousing about the deplorables and such is self-defeating...and it is also a distraction away from our message. Instead of whining about the past, we need to project a positive message and attract voters with our optimism, our values, and our vision for the future.

to promote MAGA:

(my emphasis)

Link to tweet

You just don't like her, and that's your right.

You say she insulted people. She accurately describing the message that DT was sending to his base.

He got them to cheer for beating up any black protesters at his rallies. They cheered for someone who was saying racist things, and encouraging violence against black protesters.

They cheered racist comments on immigrants.

Is that insulting them, or accurately reporting what happened?

but she is liberated by not having to run for office again.

She isn't going to run again, so she can say whatever she believes and not worry about consequences.

have to say she's wrong.

I will run for office and I WI'LL SAY IT.

Make Republicans suffer for what they have done for 30 years.

They deserve worse.

D district? If not, you will lose.

Think Conor Lamb should have told Trump voters they are scum? In that case, we would have Rep. Saccone in the House.

A vote is a vote, doesn't matter if it's from a "deplorable" or from a person of fine character.

Further dividing us isn’t the answer, nor is calling people scum.

So, yes, they can't be saying things she is saying even if she is right.

Just like Obama did when he fired Shirley Sherrod, who turned out to also have been the victim of "selective editing" and the media's rush to report before getting the whole story....

No Dick those people are total shits.

Who want to take away our healthcare and watch us "liberals" die if we get sick.

And I was behind one of those scum w/the following bumper stickers:

NRA logo

Hill NO!

Clinton for Prison

Benghazi was Hillary's fault / Good Americans Died Because of that Bitch (rough quote)

The 30% of Americans who are Trump's base should never be the target of one dime's
worth of democratic effort to get their votes. They are lost and their minds have been polluted by
35+ years of lies from their pastors, Fox News, the NRA, coal and energy companies, Rush
and other hate talkers, lack of education, race and sexism, republican bullshit and just by being dumb
fucks and proud of being so too.

We need to make sure the rest of us aka the majority of Americans vote and have their votes
counted.

Think about it.

Tell us.

They are still chanting "lock her up" and Trump is still calling her Lying Hillary, so she can say whatever she wants.

How ever are we to pick which one to support? Thank goodness we on the DU have many who will tell us which one is the true Democrat, supporter of the core values of the party and the one to hold above all others regardless.

Can't wait to see the outcome.

THANKS, rgbecker, for the rational suggestion. (and needed sarcasm)

“But we’re moving on to the next chapter of American history,” Durbin said of the Democratic Party.
“It will be a different cast of characters completely,” he later added.

That "different cast of characters" whoever they are, needs to remember that.

You've got another thing coming.

Fuck them all. We outnumbered them then; we certainly outnumber them now.

They need to be buried under a Democratic avalanche, not exalted as potential new Dems. I don't want them under our tent.

Fuck them all.

We need to pick up some of those voters next time, at least in WI, MI, PA. Or at least do a better job at motivating those who did not vote at all.

If they make the connection themselves, that their vote for a perceived maverick was in fact a vote for a very real fascist, great, come on over, you woke up.

Otherwise? Fuck them all.

It was Russian interference with the election that led to those vote anomalies. If we don't get that fixed before November, we're looking at the very same set of results, whether or not we prostitute ourselves in search of a deplorable's vote.

I say that not to diminish what Russia did or our need to address it, but to point out that voters--including (and perhaps especially) the ones who Russia influenced--are (obviously) subject to persuasion. Can we not perhaps benefit from persuading them in a more positive direction? (And by who can benefit, I mean both Dems and the country as a whole.)

to think that if they tampered with the elections, results were affected.

We don't have evidence of that. (Yet?)

"I say that not to diminish what Russia did" By influencing voters they essentially did affect the vote. That was their purpose.

But no the trumptrash are racists and bigots.

Since people ARE suggestible and persuadable, I think it is an error to assume that Russia has the ability to persuade people in one direction, but that we don't have the ability to persuade people in the other direction.

How can someone say "write these people off, they can't be persuaded," if we lost them because they were persuaded?

The haters and racists and russia supporters will never come to the light. Those who voted for drumpf out of ignorance, like one of our ex-military officer friends, have seen the truth and already stated they regret their vote and will never vote for him again. If they haven't seen yet his lying cheating fraudulent and treasonous ways, they never will. So, we have already picked up some. However, we didn't lose because of them. We lost because of Russia, that is what needs to change the most. We can generate a huge blue wave, but if russia increases their vote stealing efforts will it even matter? We have to do both - fight russia as the top priority & GOTV. I will be volunteering at the local Dem office to help with the later and wish I knew more to do to fight russia. I've been calling and writing my legislators, encouraging action.

Does anyone have any other good suggestions as to what we as citizens can do to push this effort along?

...or fear, or bigotry, or the other horrible attributes we ascribe to Trump voters who have not (yet?) seen the light. They see him as flawed, and weren't enthusiastic about him even when they voted for him. Some might well have voted for a Dem if it weren't Hillary (they voted for Obama), while some, I admit, would probably never vote for a Dem at all, but they are still not hate-filled "deplorables." Perhaps because I know such people (especially in the first group_, I cannot agree with the assertion that anyone who hasn't changed yet is a lost cause.

in a human bean. He's abused women, is racist, mocks the disabled, is a corrupt businessman who has destroyed many, many lives. This is far, far, from being "flawed". I mean, nobody is perfect, everyone has flaws, but trump is just evil.

Is evilness was evident throughout the campaign. They all knew who they were voting for.

Saying that trumo is flawed, is like saying hitler was flawed.

Yes, but I also know that these people voted *against* him in the primaries. He may not have been their first or second or even third choice. But they still preferred him to Clinton. The best I can say is that at least none of them were from WI, MI, or PA.

follow the guidelines of the medical and public health policy profession that contraception and abortion should be available, affordable and accessible.

That they are willing to overlook all the corruption for one issue.

We need to remember that Hillary received close to 3 million more votes than Trump. When you factor in all the write-ins, 3rd party candidates, etc. something like 11 million more people voted against Trump than for him. An antiquated method of COUNTING those votes are what handed the presidency to this menace. This is the only office in the world that isn't decided by a straight up popular vote and it's just plain stupid.

by which I assume you mean the Electoral College, is the Constitutional requirement for determining the presidency. It isn't going to change. Not in any of our lifetimes. So, we need to win within those rules.

position themselves as the ones to save us from it. Works every time.

"A vast right-wing conspiracy". Although the Clintons said it in the 90s, that was truth in Nixon/Agnew's time and still the truth today.

With Republicans, in my recollection, it's always been about the wealthy's resentment of taxes. I can still see Bob Done regularly on TV bellyaching about taxes. It's always really been the party of and by the rich - nothing more and nothing less. They manage to drag hundreds of thousands of rubes into their bubble on emotional issues, just for the votes - with no intent of doing one damn thing for them, and yet manage to pick their pockets.

............