"Dean Haters"

Before General Discussion gets split into two forums, let's dispense with something. Let's dispense with "Dean Haters." Personally, I don't hate Howard Dean in any way, shape or form. If he gets the nomination, he will have me as a wild campaigner for him. He is not my first choice, but I don't hate him. Thinking he is not the best choice does not equal "hate." That's probably worth repeating.

Thinking he is not the best choice does not equal "hate."

Thinking he is not the best choice does not equal "hate."

Thinking he is not the best choice does not equal "hate."

Sadly, and often, whenever Dean gets criticized, there will be ululating lamentations about "Dean Haters" destroying the Democratic Party, as if said Party was created solely for the coming of Dean and will cease to exist without him. I don't buy that, any more than I buy the notion that a bunch of anonymous keyboard jockeys on an internet forum could somehow possibly destroy the Democratic Party because they argue alot.

Let's be clear. Anyone who does hate Dean, and I mean hate in the traditional sense, needs to get some help. Find a hobby, get some exercise, seek counseling or something. Conversely, anyone who sees criticism of Dean (even if they think it is unfair) and howls "Dean Hating" likewise needs some fresh air and a new perspective on things.

They seem to have borrowed a leaf out of Bush's book.

I am following them. No matter what is said, it just gets worse. I have had a feeling that this is now a Clark or Kerry board, but until today I did not know for sure.

We need the forums now, but I think we are hurting the party. This much of a divide, like the Stop Dean advocacy, is almost too much too overcome.

I will vote for the candidate, but you guys win. It is just too painful.

I know for sure what you, Will, think of me, and I have had the admins admonish me twice when I have done far less than others.

This is far more than pre-primary anger. I don't know what it is. I don't see how anyone with dignity can stand it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=917838

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=918350

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=918477

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=918587

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=918353

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=917602

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=909616

I entered 'Dean' into the GD search engine, parameters the last 24 hours, and got about five pages of stuff. Above was clipped in under a minute.

DU is still the best Progressive forum to exchange ideas. The Admins are still trying to get GD under control - hopefully soon they'll have it tamed. We need to maintain the Dean contingent here on DU. Take time off, but don't stay away, okay?

every other candidate? In fact, you posted to a thread today lauding someone's 'impeccable research skills' in a thread that was nothing more than a rehashed cheap shot. But now you've become a martyr in the cause of unity and understanding. Woe is me. Or you. Or someone.

Watch as he derides Dean supporters with name calling: "Deanites".
Watch his indignity towards a Dean supporter fed up with the type of antics practiced above.
The draw of the bait will surely bring more like him.

Not in my book.

Here's one:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=915762&mesg_id=916507

Can you copy and paste a deifinition of 'hate' so we'll be communicating on the same level?

Hate (Hate) (?), v. t.
{imp. & p. p. Hated; p. pr. & pr. & vb. n. Hating.}
{OE. haten, hatien, AS. hatian; akin to OS. hatan, hat¿n to be hostile to, D. haten to hate, OHG. hazz¿n, hazz¿n, G. hassen, Icel. & Sw. hata, Dan. hade, Goth. hatan, hatian. ¿¿¿. Cf. Hate, n., Heinous.}

1. To have a great aversion to, with a strong desire that evil should befall the person toward whom the feeling is directed; to dislike intensely; to detest; as, to hate one's enemies; to hate hypocrisy. "Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer." 1 John iii. 15.
2. To be very unwilling; followed by an infinitive, or a substantive clause with that; as, to hate to get into debt; to hate that anything should be wasted. "I hate that he should linger here." Tennyson.
3. (Script.) To love less, relatively. Luke xiv. 26.

Synonyms -- To Hate, Abhor, Detest, Abominate, Loathe. Hate is the generic word, and implies that one is inflamed with extreme dislike. We abhor what is deeply repugnant to our sensibilities or feelings. We detest what contradicts so utterly our principles and moral sentiments that we feel bound to lift up our voice against it. What we abominate does equal violence to our moral and religious sentiments. What we loathe is offensive to our own nature, and excites unmingled disgust. Our Savior is said to have hated the deeds of the Nicolaitanes; his language shows that he loathed the lukewarmness of the Laodiceans; he detested the hypocrisy of the scribes and Pharisees; he abhorred the suggestions of the tempter in the wilderness.

Hate (Hate), n.
{OE. hate, hete, AS. hete; akin to D. haat, G. hass, Icel. hatr, SW. hat, Dan. had, Goth. hatis. Cf. Hate, v.}

Strong aversion coupled with desire that evil should befall the person toward whom the feeling is directed; as exercised toward things, intense dislike; hatred; detestation; -- opposed to love. "For in a wink the false love turns to hate." Tennyson.
http://www.selfknowledge.com/43142.htm

Disgust, however, can be caused by far more things than hatred. Bad odors are disgusting, but I don't hate them. I have employees who disgust me at times but I don't hate them. When my truck causes me problems, I get disgusted, but I actually rather like my truck most of the time. I do, however, loathe people who desperately try to twist things around to score points on a message board.

By the way, given the breadth of those definitions, I'd bet that almost a third of the people here 'hate' Howard Dean, and in fact,
remember a poll that revealed the same thing. :shrug:

He "Hates" Dean.

What isn't namecalling? Sorry, I won't type out 'Dean supporters' 10 times a day or whatever -- it's idiotic.

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

n/t

as opposed to "Kerryites", a fave nickname around here.

:evilgrin:

Tho' I'm a Clark supporter, so we seem to have common ground.
It is more than pre-primary anger.

There's a lot of bullying and intimidation, and clear
orchestrated saturation spamming for candidate X.
And, not being a masochist, I doubt I'll be back after
the next couple of days. Once again, the bullies win.
They usually do. They're meaner'n crap.

This is the first day I've felt that DU was doing more harm
than good. I told the mods that. I've never before said
anything remotely like that to them.
But I mean it.

The left doesn't need another propaganda branch for the right.

I'd rather put my energy into working for my candidate.

and shouldn't even be compared as such. This place is a microscopically small microcosm of the entire party.

This place is NOT the party. Things said here are among a few hundred (at best) people. What happens or what is said here has virtually zero impact on the party nation-wide.

If you don't think so, go ask your Democrat neighbor when he gets home from work. Ask him, "say, you know, if these flame wars don't stop on DU, the entire party will be irreparably split, doncha think?" Then watch his bewildered look that implies "you have no life, do you?"

There is this proclivity to attach undue importance to a place like DU in the universal scope of things, simply because it is a place to have one's ideas heard. Some have confused this with having their ideas catered to or blindly accepted and that's where the problems start. They continue when the purpose of the board, discussion of issues salient to the Democratic party, is subverted to suit these needs for some of the participants to feel important. It also feeds into the needs of some for company and friendship. I don't begrudge that, but have to wonder about perspective. Sure, discussions can lead to folks getting in touch with each other and forming friendships, but this is not the purpose of a discussion board. It is for discussing things, not providing a social structure for lonely people who crave unconditional acceptance of themselves and their own personal truths.

I think all of this combines to make some folks think that this is somehow the inner-sanctum of the party (because it infers the importance of DU into the importance of the posters). That we are the steering committee or something. This kinda makes me laugh, but also makes me worry about the folks who place some all-consuming import on what happens here. It reminds me of High School, when every little blip was trumpeted as a Major Crisis that was going to destroy the world as we know it. Makes for all sorts of dramatic scenes, but takes a sharp turn from reality and starts down that ragged road to Crazytown.

Perspective is a good thing.

Looking for the choir like the republicans do? I can remember all the negative threads about Clark before the Gore endorsement, but I'm still here.

recently...which is gratifying.

StartWhomever...but DU should not be a platform for StopDean or Stop(fill in the blank) advocacy.

I say...stick around.

Everyone needs to be ABB first, their own candidate second. Jeebus, the whole fucking world is counting on us to get rid of Bush!!! Let's not let politics keep us from saving humanity... damn!

Amen brother.

And unfortunately there are a whole bunch of them who seem to post here on DU. And they, IMHO, seem obsessed with tearing Gov. Dean down, instead of promoting whatever candidate they say they support.

"Let's be clear. Anyone who does hate Dean, and I mean hate in the traditional sense, needs to get some help. Find a hobby, get some exercise, seek counseling or something."

:hi:

Though there are some that think any criticism of Dean is hating and there are some that obviously DO hate him and are on a mission! I am consistently stunned at the degree of hatred and I can't see it as anything else but that...

Err.. can I name names?

There's definatly people here who seem to have a personal hatred of Dean for some reason.

"Let's be clear. Anyone who does hate Dean, and I mean hate in the traditional sense, needs to get some help. Find a hobby, get some exercise, seek counseling or something."

Why the sudden coyness?

I was going to note that. Not to mention the words "asshole" and John "fuckitup" Kerry were used by him in the other thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=101560

So I don't know if he has disagreements about Kerry or just simply hates him. Personally, I think he needs to acquire a larger vocabulary so he could express himself in a more "civil" manner. :-)

I just think he's a being a jerk.

The "fuckitup" is a reference to an infamous comment made by Kerry, in response to being chastised for using the word asshole.

the line between hating and disagreeing becomes ambiguous. For future reference, maybe you should try to remove swearing from your posts or at least keep it to a minimum.

I am not trying to infringe on any of the rights you have here on this message board. Just giving you some advice. :-)

Save the swearing for Bush.

where Kerry was called "Judas Iskerryiot". Isn't it nice how some treat our veterans.

Kerry doesn't seem to have a problem with "adult" language, why all the fuss?

The fact is, any Democrat will be so vastly better than Bush* it ain't funny.

I hope your post isn't a sandcastle meeting a tidal wave.

I refuted the "Dean Hater" charge the first 40 or 50 times it was levelled at me, and it was exhausting. Futility took on new depths of meaning. It did no good, because to them, the damage was done. You don't even have to disagree with Dean - the failure to praise him sufficiently to their enormously high standards is enough to get you branded as a full-fledged card-carrying "Dean Hater".

Guess it can't hurt to say it one more time: I do not hate Howard Dean. I am a pacifist, and abhor the hatred of people. I can hate ideas, I can hate agendas, I can even hate the weather - but I do not hate people, and I Do Not Hate Howard Dean.

*watches own castle get flattened by the tsunami*

But I am glad you said it one more time.

As there is a tiny contingent of frothers who actually do seem to hate Dean, so there also is a small contingent of Dean supporters who cry hate at the "failure to praise him sufficiently to their enormously high standards."

The rest of the time, it's a cop-out in the heat of an argument. I hate that. :)

Yes, there are a few frothers - but too small a number to warrant all the handwringing and countless defensive parody posts that spam the first page or two after the latest flame-spat. The frothers DO need a hobby, counseling, and so on. Agreed. But they seem to come and go quickly, and are brief embarrassments to the honest opposition.

I have been called a Dean Hater for the latter 2 reasons - insufficient praise, and being on the receiving end of a cop-out.

Same problem I have with "meme" - it is offered in the absence of an argument. Bonus points when you are called "a Dean Hater citing Rove memes!" :-)

All this frothing, makes me thirsty for a mug... :beer:

...but I don't froth over the man personally. Where does that put me?

I don't hate Dean. I mean, why should I? There are people in this world worthy of "hate", but he ain't one of them.

However, I am pretty adamant that I do not want him to be the representative of the Democratic Party in the next election. I don't agree with much of his policy positions that differ from the other candidates, and I am not at all fond of his loose relationship with the truth, nor his gaffe producing mouth.

And I firmly believe we need someone with credible foreign policy experience and national security creds to represent our party in 2004.

But I am considered a Dean-hater because I don't want him to be the nominee. If he IS nominated, I will of course vote for him, because he IS better than Bush. But as I've said before, that's not a very high bar.

And Will's point is taken.

I've probably been guilty myself of labeling someone a "Dean hater" because they posted yet another anti-Dean article or questioned something in Dean's record. Sometimes the noise level gets so high and I get frustrated and defensive.

There are indeed a handful of regular posters who seem to truly "hate" Howard Dean. I've seen him accused of being responsible for the Iraq war, being as bad as or even worse than Bush, and for singlehandedly destroying the Democratic party. Someone once even posted that lives were probably being saved because he's not a doctor anymore. These posters are a small but very vocal minority.

There's a somewhat larger group of people who attack not only Dean but his supporters. Don't you think we get tired of being called uninformed, brainwashed, shallow and hypocritical? Despite our best efforts, we continue to be called out on threads as unwilling or unable to defend our candidate. It's next to impossible to keep up, but if we don't, it just proves their point.

Just as the behavior of a few annoying or immature Dean supporters colored us all as annoying or immature, so has the vitriol of a few Dean detractors cast its own pall over all non-Dean supporters.

Dean is the frontrunner now, and it is to be expected that there are more posts questioning his record and his positions. This is also compounded by Dean's history of speaking without filters and his sometimes left-sometimes centrist-sometimes conservative positions and record. He's not perfect, and I don't agree with him on every point, but I find myself wanting to defend every point just because of the condescending behavior of some of the people posting the questions.

The result of this is that most of the time the legitimate questions about Dean's record -- and every other candidate's record -- go unanswered or are drowned out by the sniping and accusations. Even when the questions are answered, the same question will come up a few hours later, as if it had never been discussed.

When I need a break, I visit the Blog, where it's all smiles and light and encouragement, minus a few really weird trolls.

happen to fly "Doctor Is In" avatars.

Having worked on 6 Presidential Campaigns-three on "National Staffs"
I ain't no Rotisserie League Politcal Player.

To "Hate" one must have a true negative passion towards the subject. Like the Atlanta Braves for instance, or the N.Y. Yankees.

Dean? Hate?:shrug: Nah!

And yet ANOTHER, "Nice Try",Will. You did the BoSox proud!

:hug:

"Haters" are jealous people who can't stand to see anyone else succeed.

There's two meanings for the word, and both apply. There are some very emotionally unstable people on here who do "Hate" Dean in the traditional sense. For the most part, I put those ones on ignore because I just think they're not right in the head.

Then there are the "Haters" who are so jealous of the excitement and positive energy in the Dean campaign that they can't refrain from interrupting Deanie love fest threads. All it takes is one of these "Haters" to defacate all over a positive Dean thread a couple of times before it becomes contagious and then all hell breaks loose. I've reacted to this shit numerous times and have watched it turn into a pretty viscious cycle.

The solution...if you don't want Dean supporters to piss you off then stay the hell off their happy feel-good celabratory threads and hold your snide remarks and don't keep posting the same goddamned flame bait disingenious and misleading crap threads about Dean every few hours just because you want to rile us up and get a response. Go talk about your own damn candidate for a change.

Hope this clears up the "Haters" issue.

As soon as Dean supporters stay off of OUR celebratory feel-good threads and don't rain on our parades. Don't play innocent with me, you know what I am talking about. There are QUITE a few Deanies that seem to have nothing better to do that slam Clark at every opportunity. WE will stop when you do.

And I'm telling you straight up that it is ENTIRELY reactionary. Hell, I don't even blame most of the supporters of the other candidates because they're in the same boat...it's a viscious circle.
It's sunk much lower towards Dean supporters though, because we have been called some very offensive names, which was never called for.

There have been A LOT of Dean supporters who were here when I first started posting. Most of them don't post anymore. I can tell that some of them are still reading because of the poll votes, but they clearly no longer feel welcome. I think that's pretty damn sad.

Dean supporters were cutting loose at first and now everyone is hitting back HARD because they ain't happy. What goes around comes around.

over in Politics and Campaigns. Dean supporters were reacting to that and after spending all their time defending against crap they got really defensive and more sensitive to criticism than they normally would be. Some Dean supporters were certainly annoyingly happy and positive, but pretty much minded their own business until a couple of Kerry supporters started problems. It's all escalated from there.

you're just running some justification up to test the wind, like you are karma incarnate.

And that old "We'll stop if you stop" routine??

Why?

Why not just STOP. Be better than the Dean supporters whom you distrust, be bigger than those on whom you focus.

When trash is spiraling out of control, why must we always wait for the other guy to step up and end it?

get slammed en masse even though the VAST MAJORITY DO NOT engage in flamebait threads or candidate bashing. Look at the posts on THIS THREAD -- including yours: "Dean supporters . . . " . We're all getting painted with the same broad brush. All of the candidate bashing (as opposed to policy/issue differences) is another death knell and brings Bush* closer to four more years.

I have to agree with several other DU Dean supporters. The majority of my time can be spent more productively elsewhere.

"The solution...if you don't want Dean supporters to piss you off
then stay the hell off their happy feel-good celabratory threads and
hold your snide remarks and don't keep posting the same goddamned
flame bait disingenious and misleading crap threads about Dean every
few hours just because you want to rile us up and get a response. Go
talk about your own damn candidate for a change."

Gee KaraokeKarlton, Clark supporters were happily discussing
his upcoming appearance on CNN. Then a Dean supporter, you,
got on our happy feel-good celebratory thread to promote Dean:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=914353#916917

You were the first Dean supporter to do so, you little trend
setter you.

Until then, we *were* talking about our own "damn candidate."

:loveya: hahahaha!!! Perfect.

it was...


kiss kiss

Get the facts straight, will ya?

And there was nothing wrong or inciteful about the post she's all worked up over. I almost never say anything negative about Clark because I sorta like the guy. I've said why I don't want him as the nominee, but I do so politely. The only candidate I've been harsh on is Kerry because I genuinely don't like him or some of his policies.

I am pretty generous with them too. Oh well.

I just checked the link to that thread whodicackle (Gloria, I think) was upset about. I thought I had made three posts on one Clark thread with the first one actually being quite nice. I can't find the nice one so there must have been a dupe of the same thread.

I don't want any kisses, I could use a stiff drink, though. :D

You are sitting here preaching from the pulpit about NOT jumping in on another group's thread, and you in fact pulled that BS. What you did was something like walking up to someone talking with some friends about how nice his car is and saying, "Well my car is better!" It was rude, and while it wasn't a flame, you didn't need to do that.

then you won't be tempted to respond to me anymore because if you keep preaching at me to stop preaching I'm probably going to say something you'll regret.

Go away.

Unlike some people, I don't put people on ignore because they disagree with me. And no, I'm not preaching. I am simply saying practice what you preach! And if you think Dean is the ONLY one who is taking it hard, you are dead WRONG. I don't know HOW many times I've had to tell someone off for saying Clark is a war criminal, he's going to build up the military industrial complex, and so many other GROUNDLESS charges that I want to scream. And last time I checked, quite a bit of criticism of Dean has been more of critique than the outright flaming of Clark that has been going on, yet when Dean is criticized, his people start running around screaming, "You're bashing Howard Dean! You're bashing Howard Dean! You hate him!" And you wonder why some people call you guys cultists :eyes:. Playing the martyr is not going to get an ounce of sympathy from me.

because I genuinely don't like him or his policies.

Why is it different for you? Why do you get to set the standards of what is bashing, and what is not?

Frankly, the posts that seem to bother you the most, based on the flurry of posts that issue forth from you when they are posted, are the ones that have factual links from progressive sources.

I don't deny you the right to post your stuff, as long as you stay within the rules of DU, so why would you do the same to others?

when I posted on that thread I did NOT make a negative post. You, did, however, get all indignant with me because I said that I would have watched Clark but Dean was on CSpan at the same time and I went so far as to say I hope he did well. AFTER you got all pissy over my non-offensive post, I got snarky. That's how I work. If you're nice to me, I'll be nice to you. You get all indignant and I'm going to be a smart assed bitch, plain and simple.

You quote KK saying:
stay the hell off their happy feel-good celabratory threads and
hold your snide remarks and don't keep posting the same goddamned
flame bait disingenious and misleading crap threads about Dean every
few hours just because you want to rile us up and get a response

Then act as if KK violated that very sentiment with an interruption on your Clark thread.

Easy enough to make a claim, but I went looking, and all KK said was "Hey, Dean is on TV also" and even added something like "hope Clark has a good interview"

DAMN KK, you are one viscious animal!

:loveya:

...this post just really amused me.

I think you hit the nail on the head with the "haters" being generally focused on Dean supporters. They're really hating on the Dean supporters rather than hating Dean himself.

They should proably be referred to as "Deanie hatas" rather than "Dean haters" and they can be responded to by saying, "Why you gotta be like that man, don't be Deanie hatin' on me."

:D

i personally am no fan of dean i think he is deceptive at times like when he said was the only cannidate against the war and dont like his policies but dont hate him

I don't care for Dean, my only rage is for the madman at the helm of the ship of state!

As I've tried to share with some other candidates, there is bigger game afoot in 2004 than which Democrat wins the nomination and then goes on to hopefully defeat George Bush.

Bigger things are: (5 retiring Democratic Senators from the South) + (the loss of more Democratic seats in the House through redistricting)=a much more major problem than who sits in the Oval Office from 2004-2008.

Having the Presidency would be nice, but I no longer believe that it is the be-all-end-all of the 2004 election cycle. Losing more ground in both the Senate and House would be a disaster of immense proportions that would render a Democratic President irrelevant for at least two of his four years in office.

In short, we've got bigger fish to fry than our nominee. We need to start worrying about the "Great Democratic Southern Bug Out of '03" instead of flaming one another and taking too much offense at criticism of our candidates.

....and I've only stated this a couple times on DU...today in LBN as a matter of fact...don't HATE Dean but since he is a Doctor I have a personal loathin' of epic perportions in that regard and he just does not appeal to me because of that fact alone...not that that matters in the least...I rarely venture into this viper pit to give any opinions..aren't ya sooo impressed I happened to wander in here now to post...wooooo?! :evilgrin:

Yeah, it is rare to see you in here! But glad you posted.

I hear ya... there is only one doctor in my life I ever admired, the one who did reconstructive surgery for me when I was 6 years old. Long story. But the man was a field surgeon in Vietnam and had the kind of compassion one expects of a doctor.

But most of 'em... I trust lawyers more. :-)

....they have all those jokes ass backwards...it's the docs that deserve to be in the bottom of the sea...along with all those guns! :evilgrin:

I've never read a post accusing someone of being a "Dean hater" but whatever.

It's hypocritical for supporters for any of the candidates to get on their high horse and pretend that it's only the Dean supporters who are causing trouble and resorting to name calling. Clark supporters do it, Kerry supporters do it, and yes, even Dean supporters...let's just agree that we're all being assholes and leave it at that.

I can handle the childish name calling, sweeping generalizations, and twisting/bending of the truth to make a ridiculous misleading point, but it's the hypocricy in saying that only one group does all the bad things that really drives me up the fucking wall.

give anyone the heebie-jeebies!

Listen, in Tibet a good ululating lamentator is never out of work. There's big demand especially around the holidays.

to not be funny. :)

It seems that here at the DU, there are a number of:
1) uncivilized people
2) immature people
3) drama queens
4) people who need to seriously rethink priorities (this is a political discussion board for crying out loud, just a board.)
5) people who have serious issues with being disagreed with.

If we can now accept these truths, we can then explore the further truth that they come in all shapes, sizes and platforms. Then perhaps we can begin to have more political discussions?

The nature of politics is debate. The nature of debate is that dissenting sides discuss the rationales of their position and find common ground until the issues are dealt with in a way that is equitable to all parties. Debate is not shouting matches, condescention and ditto-fests. It is a live, vital thing which needs to be pointed if anything is to be accomplished. What is does not need to be is personally assaulting, accusation hurling and thin skinned.

Those who have expressed sound thoughts regarding their candidates have my sincere respect, as well as those who have expressed their joy and anger at the party and its direction. All of these things are vital to the democratic process. If those who are ready to do nothing but point fingers and shout "repuke" or "_____hater" or play the pot-kettle game want to stay and talk with the grown-ups, they really should comport themselves with something aproximating decorum or establish a "training wheels" sort of discussion.

Speaking for myself, I love a spirited and intelligent debate, the more in-depth and factual the better. If there was a way to insure that there would actually be more of that here and substantial topics did not sink like a stone while the latest version of monkeys flinging their own feces was the rage of the day, it would be a step in the right direction. Either way, if this is what is construed as Dean-hating (which is an awfully popular complaint these days), then color this pacifist guilty. If my support of a worthy candidate and dismay at the machinations to subvert the democratic process by poisoning the vote through strong-arming, fear and guilt leads me to ask pointed questions and make pointed statements about my concerns isn't that a good thing in the end? The Dem party will need REAL unity, not blind acquiescence by fiat of the almighty dollar, media and posters at DU.

Here's to hoping we can talk frankly about the platform and issues now without fear of it being labeled a hate crime?

Dean's twofaced.

Dean's a habitual liar.

Dean will say anything to get elected.

Dean and Osama are bestest buddies.

Bush has a far better foreign policy than Dean.

Dean is unstable and scary.

Dean is way, way too left for the South.

Dean is the weakest Dem candidate since McGovern.

Dean is Mondale, McGovern and/or Dukakis.

Dean is a cult leader.

Dean LOVES secrecy even more the Bush.


*****


All of these Rovian smears are at least 99% full of shit, and they play RIGHT into the Repukes' hands.

Dems practicing deceitful scorched earth politics to stop Dean need to consider the potential long term effects of their actions. This coming election is too important. If Dems feel the need to use Rovian smears and slurs, they'd better save them for Bush rather than using them on other Dems -- especially a Dem who just might win the Presidential nomination despite the Rovian smears being used to stop him.

or Clark debate shrub..toe to toe..fact for fact.

boorriinngg

Same old stuff, over and over and over and over

then they should quit being so damned hateful.

because hes a good candidate. I hope that wasnt directed at me.

The supporters of no other candidate have had to endure a "Stop Dean" style organized attack.

With the relative exception of Joe Lieberman, I suppose, but I still haven't seen a "Stop Lieberman" thread at any time.

You can start a thread in GD entitled, "Hi! I'm a Green. Who wants to talk?" Then come back and tell me whether you've modified your hypothesis.

so, though your point is well taken, I don't see it as in the same class as Dems organizing a "StopDean" thread, website, and chatgroup.

might be the frequency of the non-hating yet oh-so-critical (often meme laden) posts. ;-)

Julie

... the wrong people, this avoidable and intractable situation is the result of allowing the first bashing post to stand.

Once one bash post is allowed, the targets of the bash feel (and are really) justitifed in lobbing a return fire. It only took a matter of weeks for the whole thing to degenerate, as anyone who has ever watched or ran a message board would predict - as inevitable as the situation in Iraq.

Now that all this bashing has been allowed to continue, the damage done is basically irreperable. Things will be better after the primaries, but given the vitriol on all sides of the argument, I'm sure there will be bitterness that lingers forever.

I'll never understand how a post that basically contains nothing but negative unsubstantiated opinions against a Dem is not classic disruption. It was, and it is.

that is, calling someone that disagrees with their candidate a (candidate)-hater.

The Dean folks learned real well from the Bushbots. However, it doesn't work for Bush and it sure won't work for the Deanie Boppers.

Congratulations. Your post appears to be one big projection being laced with juvenille name calling as it is. Thanks for helping make the point.

:toast:

Julie

There are plenty of intelligent, civil Dean supporters here at DU. And some others who are not civil. They are just "louder" than the others, so they get noticed more.

Notice that anytime there is some sort of a flame war going on about candidates, Dean is almost always involved somehow? Dean/Kerry, Dean/Clark, etc. Whoever the opposing candidate is, somehow it's always a battle with Dean people.

That could be because Dean is a frontrunner, so everyone is going after him. Which is legitimate, IMO. But I don't really think it is because he is a frontrunner. It's been happening since before his campaign took off. On the positive side, Dean has been lauded for his very organized, energetic, aggressive campaign. Exactly what has put him ahead. On the other hand, that aggressiveness has not always been civil. I believe the "reaction" defense belongs to the other candidates. And yes, I've seen them react in kind.

I've handled it by avoiding Dean threads, and "ignoring" the Dean trolls who patrol other candidates' posts for an opportunity to bring them down. Not the debaters or dissenters; just the sharks.

Dean is not my choice for the democratic nomination. I'm not going to vote for him in my state's primary. That doesn't mean I hate him, or his supporters. I don't hate anyone. Not even *. Hate is counter-productive.

What would be productive would be people able to air the reasons why they do or don't support a candidate, or his/her record, position on issues, etc., in a civil way, without being accused of hate.

that too many people have fallen for Trippi's "come join Uncle Johns Band" marketing ploy and that these same people apparently have no clue that the "I'm on the left" act ENDS the second he gets the nomination.

The horrible irony is that Dean is too unelectable exactly because of this strategy to win the nomination.

Not only will the Chimp will stomp him into the ground on national security , but Dean will lose much of his most vocal supporters on the left as soon as the post-nomination rightward shift begins.

Then the media and the rethugs will start on the Howard dean is reinventing himself schtick and then...well, it's too ugly to think about.

He'll get killed by the swing voters and he'll get killed by the left. Boy, that's my idea of a super candidate.

I read through this thread and I would like to make a suggestion to everyone.

Pretend you are an alien and know nothing about any of the candidates and have no preferences. Try to read through this thread without forming any opinions about the candidates, but only the posters. If you were an alien, where would you think you were - in an adult political forum or a grade school schoolyard?

For those of you who want to leave because you can't stand it anymore, stay the heck away from candidate threads or put posters who annoy you on ignore or don't join in the "you did so" - "I did not" discussions, but ignore them. I read the thread from an alien's viewpoint and found myself laughing uncontrollably part way through it.

Will, I only read this candidate thread because you posted it and I trust you to not be posting divisive crap. It seems that even common sense is "divisive crap."

I'm OK with criticism and questions. Looking for any and all articles to defame him no matter how backwards is wrong. Perhaps the thing that bothers me the most is this: the thought that we should do away with or ignore the primaries BECAUSE Dean can win them but he can't win the general. I'm down with ABB.

But I think there has to be a caveat here, as well. When the same criticisms are levelled in thread after thread repeatedly, day after day, despite evidence that shows most of the critiques to be wanting, one comes to the conclusion that there is little logic behind the critiques. Further, many of the critiques maintained an attitude that is little different than the response of "Dean Hater." The venom contained in some of the "critiques" closely emulates hate, even if it is not actually hate.

While "hate" is too strong a term, one must acknowledge the ugliness of many of the "critiques" that have appeared in GD. One must also acknowledge the "wear 'em down" feel that evolves from seeing the same attack thread repeated, sometimes several times in one day. At some point, trying to argue a point over and over and over again seems futile, and the repeated critiques, which fail to acknowledge the larger context or rebuttals offered begin to appear to be nothing more than labels themselves. I don't see much difference in that tactic than in labeling the tactic purveyors "Dean haters." Both acts are wrong, and I heartily acknowledge this, but since the "Dean hater" part of the equation is the title of the thread, I am a bit more defensive of that side of the equation.

That's all I've got to say. Ramble on.

against Dean.

Oh wait, now is the time to get the litany of 'Dean started it'

This is a hostile environment for Dean voters.

I don't think you have the faintest idea what a 'hostile environment' really is, or if you do, you've somehow forgotten.

That may be good natured, intra-party ribbing to you. Unfortunately, when it comes to people within the party, I don't expect such daily insults. Again, in your perception, it may be just part of the jocular nature of the primary season. If that's truly the case and is an accurate portrayal of reality, you can have it and I will crawl back into my cave.

I can get testy in the moment, but I always forget about such blasts. The "cultist" label is definitely ridiculous, as are the Limbaughesque phrases such as "Coward" Dean.

If you could only see how many times we're called cultists on this board, often for talking on non-Dean subjects, you'd be slower to jump on the Deanies. You try being basically accused of having no mind of your own, thread in and thread out, day in and day out, and then maybe you'll understand the reason we start so many positive Dean threads. Sometimes you have to fight darkness with light, ya know.

The "Stop Dean Movement" was also an all-time low. I'm disgraced that thread wasn't removed and the poster banned. Supporting and defending your candidate is one thing, opening up a door in DU for anyone on the Right to come in and pretend to fit in just because they can fake Dean hate isn't ok.

though I don't know if your a member. ;)

That's business.

For you in the Dean camp, putting up with it is the price of doing business, the price of being the front-runner, the price of politics. Wear a helmet.

But folks who egg on the divisiveness -- and, as has been said before, blames the victims more.

Sorry--this has become a habit and to quote the initial post--some folks need "some fresh air and a new perspective on things."

Look through the thread starters on these issues. It becomes clear.

I ain't leaving and taking my toys with me, but in the end--this bloodiness and the like will destroy the opposition to the regime.

I for one, won't be taking part in that.

Just because I don't think I want the man as the dem candidate does not mean I'm hateful. It just means I'm of a different opinion. I'm tired of being called a "dean hater" or "dean basher" just because I disagree with people.

It really, honestly, shocked me. Hell I don't even "Hate" Lieberman, or Zell Miller, for fuck's sake!

So the term "Dean Hater" is literally true for some our crazier DU friends.

It's pathological IMHO.

but on the other hand there are those who continually label "Dean supporters" with a broad brush as being disruptors when it is a small band of people in all campaigns who do this thing. We are continually accused of seeing no faults in Dean. We are continually accused of blindly following him and not understanding that he isn't some Liberal messiah. Some even like to liken us to the people in Jonestown who enmasse followed Jim Jones to death by drinking the poisonous Koolaide. Most of us do understand who he is and what his record is but we like him anyway and perhaps he best represents what we believe in: fiscal responsibility, opposition to war, a foreign policy which doesn't allienate the world, and just standing up to Bush. I would say there are more pro-Dean threads on DU (though Clark supporters have quite a few too) and many more anti-Dean threads on DU than for any other candidate--but that goes with the territory.

The worst of it is when we are always asked, "if Dean is not nominated will you support the democratic nominee?" and most of us are affirmative. In fact, I've seen more posters who don't care for Dean who have said they won't vote for Dean and even Anybody but Bush and Dean. So are there some Dean haters on DU, sure. Are they a huge following? No. But disruptors among Dean supporters are not common either.

We are accused of 'being possessed' called:

stepford deanies
deaniacs
deanholes

etc...

The 'sterio typing' goes both ways thanks TLM

Gee whiz, golly... When Dean voters are called brainwashed Kool Aid drinking cultists, it is all in good fun. And if you attempt to defend yourself, well, you had just better learn to have thicker skin.

Meanwhile, if I have a picture comparing Kerry to Herman Munster, I get no less than 5 DEAN voters sending me private messages asking me to please remove it. There seems to be one group of voters here who really may be experiencing campaigning for the first time. They may not realize 'friendliness' such as having your intellect and sanity questioned daily is par for the course.

I guess that is what happens when a campaign attracts so many new people to the process.

:toast:

When this Dean hater thing comes up, i can't help but be reminded of the RW rhetoric which posits that any criticism of idiot George is "Bush Hating".

It's intellectually vacant, and dishonest, to deflect any criticism of a favored candidate by claiming it to be "hate". It's dishonest when the Bushbots say it about Li'l Georgie, and it's dishonest here at DU apropos the candidates.
The Professor

reflection on the person making the criticism, no matter how warranted it was.

It's what you do when you can't counter the criticism with facts.

I'd be worried about supporting a candidate who has to resort to ANY tactic used by Bush in 2000.

now did it? :hi: Or is this 'constructive criticizm' I get so confused :crazy:

like the Duer who claimed Dean was a "piece of shit human being"... or the Duer who straight out claimed to hate Dean and state that he would vote for bush first.

But I agree with Will... those are fewer than the general criticisms/critiques posts... and are... well... imo slightly pathological - as is the case with those prone to be as nutty against other dem candidates.

I view it as ignorance. At this point it's not "if" Howard Dean gets the nomination but "when". Sorry if that sounds arrogant but I believe it to be true based on the predictive models. The sooner a candidate is acknowledged as the nominee, the sooner they can position themselves for the general election against Bush. Al Gore alluded to the importance of this during his endorsement. If you don't realize this until 2 or 3 months before the general election then it can only help Bush.

While the media covers it as a horserace, a primary in reality is a predictable stable process. There's multiple stages to a primary with the final being the votes which serve to accurately confirm and validate the polls. At this late stage of the primary I don't believe that criticism makes our eventual candidate stronger because it's too late to change momentum positively, and so our criticism should be focused on beating our objective, which is Bush. The best defense is a good offense, imo.

I'm not suggesting that you give up support of your candidate and you can hope for an aberration and a miracle, but do try to see the big picture. Consider the possibility that I may be right about the predictables, campaign organization, fund raising ability and polls, at this stage of the primary. You may not agree with me but perhaps you can understand the perspective now that "Dean Haters" are "Bush Helpers". If I'm right, then perhaps you can see why some might feel that DU is not beneficial to the Democratic Party at this time.

because all the votes have been cast and Dean is obviously the nominee :eyes:

no wonder people hate Dean.

Remember what will said ... Get help if your a "Dean Hater" !!!

but I can see why people might. Or is it the whole, "God, save me from your supporters" bumpersticker phenom?

I'll donate $100 to DU if Kerry wins the nomination.

Now are you willing to donate if Dean wins the nomination, since as you say, the votes aren't counted yet?

I might suggest doing some reading on primaries first, although DU could probably use your money.

And I've said it many times before. I will vote for him if necessary, but I don't have spare money to give to someone I don't believe in. I live on college loans while attending law school. So it takes a lot to garner my support and my money.

well before 2 or 3 months before the general election. However, not a single vote has been cast yet. We can all agree that at the moment, a month before the Iowa caucuses, Dean is the presumed front-runner. However, there are many, many folks who do not prefer Dean to be the candidate, and asking us to accept NOW that of course he will be, is what is causing much of the problem.

I also think the RNC, media want to cram *D down out throats as the W opponent of choice. The more *D screws up, the more they want him.

I pat you on the back Will.

and fits perfectly with the Spirit of Senseless Embellishment that those we call Dean Haters worship. Surely you can grant us the same rights of hyperbole that everyone else gets?