2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumI'm going to be blunt. If one adopts a course of action that elects a fascist, they're not liberal.
This dead-ender mentality from the Bernie or Bust people, who are disregarding the advice of the leader who they put so much faith behind, will elect Trump if it is continued. The Republicans are basically united. We don't have the luxury of not being united.
tallahasseedem
(6,716 posts)but, it could very well happen now.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)would they have enough strength to be threatening. And Zynx is correct.
Liberals are THE anti-fascists.
Fascism is intrinsically right wing AND to a lesser degree left-wing extremist.
Not all on the left are liberals, as we see.
MynameisBlarney
(2,979 posts)Librul fashizums!
Response to Zynx (Original post)
Post removed
Zynx
(21,328 posts)Response to Zynx (Reply #4)
Post removed
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)There isn't a single person who is sane who believes that.
Jack Bone
(2,023 posts)she was, and is..simply the benefactor.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)that Clinton did not win a majority of primary votes.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)remember the facebook screen shots posted to DU (multiple times) showing the "voter" touching the screen for a certain candidate and the machine registering a different candidate?
We won't let the fact that the county that the "voter" had his vote "flipped" doesn't use touch screen machines, deter the narrative.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)And it did not flip the votes to Hillary but to a lesser known candidate.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I just recall the gleeful "definitive proof" posts on DU showing the guy having his vote "flipped". It was posted early one morning ... immediately hit the Trending page, and hit the Greatest Thread page by noon.
Then, someone noticed an indication of the county of the alleged "flipped vote" and posted a link to the states' (or county) election page, showing the county did not use touch screens.
That tamped down the recs ... until the post was re-posted the next day.
Fla Dem
(23,656 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)noticed the County Seal for the County she lived in (or was familiar with). The internet can be a dangerous place for those that really want to believe something ... because they WILL find "proof" of that thing.
John Poet
(2,510 posts)came well before anyone had a chance to vote-- all while they vehemently denied it was going on. With the new email leak, their pants are all fully down.
Bernie's supporters were RIGHT about that much. At this point it's impossible to say whether that would have made the difference, but it certainly helped Hillary's margin.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)the primary contest, when Sanders had more money to spend than Clinton.
Florida, Ohio, North Carolina all voted a month after Sanders had his breakthrough win in NH.
The demographic trends in the voting were virtually identical at the end of the campaign as they were in the beginning.
Soxfan58
(3,479 posts)Charles Bukowski
(1,132 posts)she stole an election she won by decisively 3.7 million votes. Don't play coy.
The primaries were never really close--this wasn't the nailbiter 2008 was. Why can't the hardcore Bernie fanatics accept this?
SummerSnow
(12,608 posts)Bernie supporters cannot believe this. Sanders even know this
emulatorloo
(44,120 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)Maven
(10,533 posts)no matter how much you stomp your feet and cry like a 2 year old to get what you want.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)Maven
(10,533 posts)genna
(1,945 posts)Instead of dealing with the underlying emotion and draining the upset by addressing the issue, just say you are a 2 year old and I expect you to side with my point of view with no discussion/persuasion/resolution.
We know where we are going if this mantra continues.
DemonGoddess
(4,640 posts)"don't nominate Hillary" bullshit. She won, she's the nominee, as she will be after the roll call as well.
glennward
(989 posts)With whom as a running mate, I might ask?
David__77
(23,372 posts)I also think that it's highly speculative thinking, as Clinton has the support of a majority of convention delegates.
MichiganVote
(21,086 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Regardless of whether you supported a winning candidate or a losing candidate, do not prolong the agony of the last Democratic presidential primary by continuing to pick fights, place blame, tear down former primary candidates, bait former supporters, or do anything else to pour salt on old wounds.
Why we have this rule: Most of our members want this to be forward-looking, friendly community that is focused on creating a better future for our country. Continuing to rehash old fights that have already been resolved is divisive and counter-productive.
This is pretty clear.
It is delusional to suggest that anyone but Clinton will be, or should be, the Democratic nominee at this point.
StraightRazor
(260 posts)I love that it's Bernie's fault that Hillary can't get his supporters to back her.
Maybe the problem isn't Bernie after all, maybe it's Hillary. She lost to Obama in 2008 so it stands to reason that there are quite a few Democrats who simply don't think she is the best choice for our country.
But those people are automatically 'trying' to get Trump elected and aren't Liberal. Right.
Response to StraightRazor (Reply #24)
geek tragedy This message was self-deleted by its author.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Justice
(7,187 posts)PoliticalMalcontent
(449 posts)If we had a open primaries more independents would be allowed to pick candidates, leading to more electable candidates in general.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Sanders--just to be clear--is not a leftwing Trump. He's a responsible Senator who cares deeply about the country.
But taking one look at the crazies in Philly--inside and outside the convention site--and it's clear that there is an appetite on the loony left for a leftwing Trump. the people who now think Sanders is a sellout.
PoliticalMalcontent
(449 posts)It seems to me that hyper-partisanship is a symptom of party affiliation. In the middle, those independents cover such a wide range on the political spectrum. The problem with politics today, in my opinion, is that everyone in the middle seems to get told their opinions don't matter. You've got to conform to the two party system, or wait until general elections to cast your vote. I believe very deeply that is unfair at it's very core.
Back to independents though. While you've got plenty of radicals, you've got plenty of moderates to act as a counter-balance against extremes on either side.
My thinking on that could be flawed, but I've seen the craziness of the two-party system, and I see how ugly it is. Politicians take advantage of the system. They pit roughly two ideologies against each other and try to keep other political groups (and the ideas the come with them) from joining the crowd.
My thought process is that perhaps making primaries open would be one way to protect citizens against the near monopoly of the two-party system, or at least keep demagogues out.
Like, would the tea-party have gained as much traction as it did if primaries were open?
This is not meant to be a sharp, stinging criticism. Just some thoughts. Have a great day.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Dem2
(8,168 posts)If a "Democrat" lets a fascist win to make a point, then maybe that person is a fascist and not a Democrat?
Peigan68
(137 posts)NO F**KING WAY!!!!
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Smile, relax. Remember, your candidate won.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)defeating Trump without Hillary supporters. Don't act you wouldn't need them.
we can do it
(12,184 posts)Response to Post removed (Reply #2)
Post removed
Democat
(11,617 posts)That's over. DU is for electing Clinton now.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)We are not going overturn the choice of the voters just because you would've preferred a different outcome.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)And so is everybody who votes for her!
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)That's an odd justification predicated on the post hoc ergo prompter hoc fallacy. If one adopts a liberal platform, adheres to that liberal platform, and whose conviction are liberal, then they are, by its very definition, liberal.
Regardless of how critical unity may be during an election cycle, unity is not in fact, part and parcel of a liberal philosophy.
You call it blunt. As a Clinton supporter from day one, I call it irrational bias.
Zynx
(21,328 posts)If they value liberalism, truly value liberalism, contributing to its defeat and possible eradication at the hands of a fascist seems to be an odd thing to do. I would submit that they don't actually value it.
socialist_n_TN
(11,481 posts)liberals will have a LONG time to wait until it reaches them. He'll go after the trade unions, the socialists and the communists first. WELL before he'll go after you liberals. In fact, he'll convince MOST liberals to support him by appealing to their patriotism and support of capitalism from the "Godless Communists" he's protecting the country from.
He won't even go after the ethnic minorities before he goes after the commies. We're always first to fall, so y'all have got plenty of time to make your peace with him.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)I see him mention Mexicans, Muslims and Asians as the source of our problems, in that order.
If you are a white guy or gal he will be coming after you last.
Funny, you invoke Hitler. He came after the Jews first. It was a lot easier to change your party affiliation than your religion. In the current instance my Mexican and Muslim brothers and sisters can not easily change who they are either.
socialist_n_TN
(11,481 posts)He USED anti-Semitism to gain support and power, but the FIRST people he arrested were the trade unionists, communists, and the socialists. In fact, the Reichstag fire which happened a few months after his inauguration was blamed on "communists" and then used as an excuse to destroy the organized resistance in the working class by suspending democratic rights and arresting communists, socialists, and trade unionists.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)Herr Trump.
All responsible leftists must hope for the best, but plan for the worst. I know I am.
anneboleyn
(5,611 posts)frequently on websites, and as someone who studied Latin, it drives me nuts.
jonno99
(2,620 posts)AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)coco77
(1,327 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)Give it a rest and get over it already.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)Of course she is.
Seriously just stop.
Zynx
(21,328 posts)AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)As a Reagan Democrat!
Zynx
(21,328 posts)coco77
(1,327 posts)They have been hating her for decades,every since the baking cookie remark,so to RepubliCONS think all Dems are liberal.
Zynx
(21,328 posts)They vary in their intensity from one to the next, but they are almost all liberals. Obama's a liberal, Biden's a liberal, Hillary's a liberal, etc.
coco77
(1,327 posts)I will be sent to the jury room because many don't like to hear the facts we can't discuss things like we could in the past. I'm done.
Zynx
(21,328 posts)What are the criteria?
coco77
(1,327 posts)Du jail so I'm done. Opinion can't be expressed without being called a troll or being told you are against Democrats because you don't agree about some issues. I will say this Hillary is not one.
emulatorloo
(44,120 posts)and that you are being victimized.
If you want to peddle the false meme that "Hillary is a Republican" you are going to get pushback. Compare her ratings by liberal groups w genuine Republicans and you'll see the meme is bullshit. Note that Bernie and HRC voted the same way the majority of times when they were in the Senate. Note that Bernie and Hillary are aligned in their policy positions.
She's no more a Republican than Bernie is a republican. Is she more conservative than I am on some issues. Yes. Is she a Republican by any objective criteria. Fuck no.
Zynx
(21,328 posts)By pretty much any conventional definition or liberal, Hillary Clinton is one. She believes in equality and not just equality of opportunity. She believes in equality, as close is as practicable, of result as well. Her record overwhelmingly reflects that.
Renew Deal
(81,856 posts)zenabby
(364 posts)It's not liberal party, it's democratic party. She does not have to confirm to every single person's version of what liberal means.
genna
(1,945 posts)You are doing a word salad on what it means to be a democrat.
Ted Kennedy was a Democrat and is politcs/policies did not line up with Bill Clinton. I doubt anyone would throw him out of the party because he was a liberal Democrat.
Unity means accepting differences and realizing that the base is shifting what being a Democrat means not because their guy lost but because the younger voters will determine the future of the party.
Renew Deal
(81,856 posts)Panich52
(5,829 posts)HRC has always been lib on number of social issues and has evinced willingness to listen & respond positively. Case point: TPP; she's now proclaiming opposition to it & convinced Kaine to follow suit.
And she's a flaming socialist compared to GOP's fascist nominee.
redstatebluegirl
(12,265 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Last edited Mon Jul 25, 2016, 03:30 PM - Edit history (1)
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Indeed.
Good thing "Bernoe ot bust" doesn't mean anything.
Otherwise, only those actually helping Trump are actually helping Trump.
merrily
(45,251 posts)We haven't seen this level of discord in years. A UNITED Republican party would have seen GWB, Romney, and McCain at the Convention. They were NOWHERE to be seen. The RNC was described as the darkest, most dour nominating event, ever.
PasadenaTrudy
(3,998 posts)I'm not stupid!
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)I call them 'emoprogs' for a reason
Response to Zynx (Original post)
Post removed
Response to Post removed (Reply #44)
geek tragedy This message was self-deleted by its author.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Say hi to Susan Sarandon and the crowd at infowars for us!
Demobrat
(8,976 posts)Clinton supporters call me names and try to get me banned.
On edit: See above.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)nominee and help Donald Trump get elected.
De facto allies of Donald Trump have no place here.
What do you expect when you violate several site rules in the process of trying to help defeat the Democratic nominee?
We know the difference between friends and foes.
Feel free to go to a Green Party or alt-right forum where your views are more welcome. Donald Trump is looking for your vote and it sounds like he got it.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)Hillary is not in any way a "cheater" so quit peddling those smears.
Wounded Bear
(58,648 posts)doesn't help our cause.
Renew Deal
(81,856 posts)The party will go on.
Response to Zynx (Original post)
Post removed
Demobrat
(8,976 posts)or you're not a liberal. Guess you didn't get the memo.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)Careful. I said something similar and was dinged.
we can do it
(12,184 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)get the red out
(13,462 posts)But I will run to the polls to vote for Hillary in the GE. I can't imagine what might happen to this country if she isn't elected.
Blue Idaho
(5,049 posts)Lost in much of this is Bernies request that his followers work to elect Sec. Clinton and Gov. Kane. He knows what is at stake and he's on her side. You know what's at stake and so do I. We all need to work to stop Trump.
Let's go elect a Democrat.
PoliticalMalcontent
(449 posts)It's so interesting how fear has played such a big part of politics over the years. I'm not sure how it was in the past... Hitler rose to power using fear tactics and scapegoating... But it seems to be a really broken system when it's not so much about voting for what you believe in but rather voting because the other guy scares the bejesus out of you. I suppose there's always some shade of fear in elections (I.E. 'Obama is a Muslim', Palin being a heartbeat from the presidency, 'They're gonna take your guns!', terrorism, etc.). Seems REALLY ramped-up this time around though.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)They want a cage match.
63splitwindow
(2,657 posts)Wounded Bear
(58,648 posts)Sickening, really.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Yes. They want it to seem the Dems are as scattered as the GOP. CNN has played over and over and over and over that clip of Sanders' supporters expressing their frustration at having to vote for Hillary as if it were some kind of declaration that all those Dems are actually gonna vote FOR Trump.
Ridiculous.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)anoNY42
(670 posts)some folks out there could easily point out that nominating Hillary is itself an action that might help "elect[] a fascist". Looking at Hillary's popularity numbers, some people could conclude that her nomination made it more likely we would get a President Trump.
I am not saying those people would be right, and I am not saying that Hillary deserves her poor popularity numbers....
whatthehey
(3,660 posts)And many of his more ermmm...implacable supporters never were and never will be Democrats. What we are seeing now is some unfortunately public blowback from a few immature deadenders living out a fantasy. It will pass before any non-junkies pay much attention.
Many Bernie or Bust folks are young white males who have fewer stakes in the election and can afford to be idealistic at the cost of real pain and suffering of the millions of people who were not so lucky to have been born privileged. I have supported Bernie Sanders since before he decided to run for President and I STILL support him because I believe in his goals and vision. If Hillary is the person who carries many of those goals forward, then so be it. It's still progress. People who would vote for someone like Trump who will move NONE of those goals forward, and cause great harm to the people in this country, the country itself, and our allies vs. a person who will at least try to move SOME of those goals forward are neither liberal nor progressive. Hillary may not be the perfect candidate, but she's what we've got. Let's work together with it.
we can do it
(12,184 posts)Response to Zynx (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)That'll get 'em on your side.... if they can stay awake thru another "you'd BETTER vote like I tell you" post.
Pharaoh
(8,209 posts)Before the voting started we would not be in this situation right now.
Gman
(24,780 posts)They simply used him for their own nihilistic ends.
drm604
(16,230 posts)Hillary is the nominee and I'm satisfied with that. I am getting really fed up with some of my fellow Bernie supporters. I can kinda sorta understand 20-somethings - youthful idealism and all that - but the 40 and 50 plus group have no excuse. They should recognize reality and act accordingly.
Marr
(20,317 posts)Sanders attracted a lot of people who were sick of rigged games and establishment politics. It's a bit absurd to expect them to anxiously support someone as establishment as Hillary Clinton, when something like this DWS scandal has been revealed.
It was their revulsion with exactly this sort of thing that motivated them to get involved in the first place. This is what they were telling you all through the primary season. But here we are. You can't really blame them now.
we can do it
(12,184 posts)keithbvadu2
(36,788 posts)My way or the highway.
The same single minded attitude of the tea party types.
No compromise. No shades of gray.
PoliticalMalcontent
(449 posts)You know what would be great? If people would stop worrying about telling people who to vote for. 99.99% of people here are going to vote for Clinton, probably, but all of this arm twisting is really unflattering.
Nobody likes being told what to do, much less being beat over the head with it day after day.
I know you have your opinion on what makes a good liberal, but I view it as a false equivalency. If someone votes for a liberal, then they ARE a liberal, regardless of whether they vote within the constructs of a two-party system or not.
That being said, thanks for your opinion, I'm just extremely tired of these type of threads.
Yes, Trump is a terrible narracistic shit of a human being who shouldn't be anywhere near the presidency and the fact that he is says a lot about society. That being said, it is astounding to me how people here put on the rose-tinted glasses and ignore any of the flaws that Clinton has shown. Most people outside of the democratic party don't particularly like her, but they'll vote for her, because look at the other option.
In closing, I'd like to reiterate my strong desire to see the death of all dumb arm-twisting threads on a website where everyone is voting for Clinton (despite her flaws) anyway.
Zen Democrat
(5,901 posts)Are you helping or hurting?
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)Response to Zynx (Original post)
Post removed
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)Stop with that trash.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)votes.
The further the Hillary camp goes down the anti-progressive route, the harder it is for me to convince people to vote for her.
You are handing trump the election, in my view, this could be considered fascist as well.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)That's just more bullshit smears.
Zynx
(21,328 posts)Bernie lost fair and square. And your post has been alerted. You should stop fighting the damn primary. Give it up for God's sake.
If one cheats, it runs the risk of Trump being elected.
John Poet
(2,510 posts)because it would even more aptly apply to them, if we end up losing this election to Trump partly because of their corrupt shenanigans....
"If one adopts a course of action that elects a fascist, they're not liberal."
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)Can we do that?
John Poet
(2,510 posts)that it is not happening at all?
In my view, that's "corrupt". There' aren't any "lies" on my side of it,
but there were plenty coming from the DNC,
when they claimed to be always acting "neutrally".
Maybe you'd prefer I use a different word, like "dirty" or "dishonest".
OK, DWS and many members of the DNC,
were "dirty" and "dishonest".
That work better for you?
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)There was nothing "corrupt" or "dirty" or "dishonest" about it.
Bucky
(54,003 posts)C'mon, these folks gotta blow off some steam. The country's angry and The Donald's stoking the fires. Give the process a little more patience. I figure by Wednesday we'll see what real unity looks like. And it won't look like conformity; it'll look like shared purpose.