Can a Dean supporter define for me the term "Dean basher"??

I seriously don't know. I think if someone launches personal attacks against Dean (i.e. tease his kids, make fun of his wife, etc.), then he/she is a Dean basher.

I don't want an exact definition. A "relative" definition of a Dean basher or a connotation of the term will do.

edit: spelling

Note: I am only asking Dean supporters, not Clark, Gephardt, Kucinich, Kerry, or Edwards supporters. I don't want this to turn into another hate thread.

or Karl Rove, despite the fact that he's there dream candidate

I'm Left, I'm Loud, and I'm ARMED. How about you?

How about educated? Is that allowed in your 'new left'?

...is someone who spends more time mucking in the dirt to attack Dean than they do promoting their own candidate.

For example, please note the post above...only an avatar of their own candidate, but a sig line bashing Dean and a complaint on how they've been labeled a Dean hater. Clearly spending more time against Dean than pro-Clark in this case.

Is someone who dislikes Dean so much that they are able to accuse him of being a Gingritch supporter and a McGovernite in the same breath, or who bashes his supporters for blindly supporting him when most have heard everything negative about him and accept him for who he is.

Seems to be a favorite of at least one poster here.

Thank you very much, though.

You do crack me up Mr. Bunter (seriously do!) - thanks! :hi:

Calling one of Dean's lies a lie is bashing. Questioning any part of the Dean campaign is bashing. Defending your candidate is bashing. Pointing out the rude behavior of Deanites is bashing. Anything not outlined above might be bashing; it's best to check with a member of the Empowerment Police if you have any doubts at all. As I'm sure the Dr. himself would say, better to be safe than sorry.

you basher you...

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

My definition of a dean basher is someone who will post out of context or purposfully misleading articles on dean and despite being shown how it was misquoted/taken out of context will continue to rehash the same thing over and over and over.

I think there are a lot of people labeled as bashers too quickly when posting legitimate concerns unfortunately theres a core group of bashers that have repeatedly posted garbage so many times that people have lost all patience fpor anything that looks even a little confrontational.

Bashing is not limited to Dean though it spreads accross all camps.

People have put thier hearts into thier chosen candidates and will go to great lengths to make thier candidates look better including lying or spining the oposition.

DU hasnt always been so contentious there are just a lot of pasionate people rooting for thier candidates right now. After the primaries when we have a nominee the dem bashing will be stoped and we will hopefully return to the more civil version of DU that was dedicated to fighting the republican machine instead of all the infighting we have at the moment.

DU was a beutifull thing to behold in the run up to the war before the presidential race began it will become that again after the primaries,

If the bikering bugs you I would sugest sticking to LBN lots of good stuff in there and a lot more unity to boot.

huh...who would have thunk it?

they will either look ridiculous or be forced to stop using it so often.

Your presence on this thread defines it quite well.

BB doesn't do anything to help Clark...in fact his actions have the opposite effect I bet.

always there. Like clockwork, like roaches, bouncing to and fro with either Dean is "too liberal for middle America" or "Dean's a Gingrich Democrat" or "Dean's unelectable".

If the post sounds like Ed Gillespie is at the keyboard, then they are a Dean basher. Anything to divide. Anything to cast doubt. Anything to make you think your support of Dean is a waste of time. Anything to make you second guess your support.

Anything but realizing that Dean draws Bush blood damn near every day.

that makes you a basher.

to start

is one who has such hatred for either Candidate X or their supporters that they forget each side is made of individuals.

Nicknames like "Deanies" or "Clarkies" are cute, in an internet age kinda way, but "Cultists" is not and is a term of bashing.

I'm not really bothered by candidate bashing. It's the bashing of one group or another as a whole that is totally unappealing to me.

I never thought I'd be refered to as being a cultist on DU for supporting a Democratic candidate.

I define a "Dean basher" as someone who is making negative *personal* attacks against Dean. Bringing up flaws in Dean's policies / ideas is NOT bashing.

Information is a good thing--blind support in the face of damaging information is not.

that starting threads deliberately to provoke more useless commentary would be a definition of the term "basher." :eyes:

ROTFL

Nice Algorem, very nice :)

See, we can agree on SOMETHING

I think comes down to how you deal with facts. If you find yourself misrepresenting facts, or twisting facts to reach a conclusion, it's bashing. Calling Dean a "draft-dodger," for example, is a verifiable misrepresentation of fact.

If you have to take facts and twist, shimmy and place them in another context, something just isn't right. Dean doesn't do a lot of that. I can't honestly say the same thing, based on my impressions, with regard to some of the other candidates.

But I would still like us all to just get along! :grouphug:

over and over and over again, starts thread after thread of flame bait, tries to pick apart anything he says or does for the express purpose of bringing him down. That's a Dean basher.

You can also find them by how little they say that is positive about their own choice of candidate(s). One of the characteristics of the Dean Basher is that they are defined negatively (only by what they are against).

For the ease of conversation, I refer to them with a collective term - ADJHS (Anti Dean Junior High School). It is both accurate, short and easy to type.

to Dean supporters -- as if Dean supporters are the only ones complaining of bashing.

Second, I think the term has become totally bastardized. Totally. It now seems to apply to any criticism at all in most people's useage. Hell, I've seen facts about a candidate -- in one memorable thread Clark's own words!!!! -- be called bashing by some.

Eloriel

Whatever names the Deaniacs want to call people, it doesn't matter a whit. That is playground stuff. It won't stop most people from continuing to speak out about Dean.

eom

Anyone that at anytime shows Dean in a negative light. Be it thru articles, opinions or clips from tv interviews.

Then the typical MO is to spam a thread until it gets so far off topic and is weighted down with trash that the mods lock it.

sounds like you've had some experience, AmericanDem.

but Clark supporters do it also,as do Kerry supporters.I hope to see you voice your concern when they do the same thing against Dean.

naturally someone who "bashes" Dean out of spite. If they were motivated to bring people on board another candidacy, they would be persuasive, not attack-dogs.

The Republicans seem to be enjoying this. I saw one today on another forum talking trash:

"I have seen many (primaries), but nothing quite like this one. A party that can't stand it's own front-runner? Classic!

They are making Bush's job of working for re-election so much easier.

I can't wait until Sharpton and Braun are eliminated and they then accuse and sue the DNC and most all Democrats to be all racists. What a circus!

O.K., go ahead and put your head back in the sand."

his name is mentioned in. If you read Dean threads, you'll start to see a few familiar names popping up over, and over, and over and over and over and over and over again.

Usually repeating the same arguements they've made in previous threads, with the same counter arguements, over and over and over and over and over and over again.