Finally checked out the JPR site

[Sugarcoated]

and, damn, loony effin tunes! It's a conspiracy cesspool. Maybe it's been posted before, but dayum, what nut jobs!

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. It didn't start out that way.

I was a Sanders supporter during the primaries. I signed up for JPR shortly after it was created because I was disheartened and depressed by all the crap being heaped on Sanders supporters on DU. For awhile it seemed like a pretty good refuge from all that. However, after it became uncontrovertibly obvious that Hillary had the nomination in the bag, it took a darker turn - and it got even worse after Bernie endorsed her (which he always was going to do). Like most Sanders supporters I was a bit disappointed but not at all surprised at the outcome. I always figured she'd eventually win but I was hoping Bernie could at least influence the platform in favor of the progressive movement. I think that's all he ever expected to do when he decided to run, and his ultimate popularity exceeded even his expectations. As far as I'm concerned Bernie absolutely succeeded, and when he endorsed Hillary I decided, even despite my misgivings, that if she's good enough for Bernie she's fine with me, and now the crucial thing is to defeat Trump.

That, however, was not the attitude at JPL, so I rarely even read it and stopped posting altogether. Bernie himself is now a sellout, and Hillary is the most horrible candidate ever. It's bizarre and I don't get it - there are DU posters (former and some current) whose names I recognize who are posting some of the nastiest and weirdest stuff about Hillary. I thought of saying something but I figured if I said anything even slightly positive about her they'd ban me as a sellout like Bernie. Go figure. It makes me sad, though. The original Jackpine Radical, the DUer after whom the site was named, was an ardent progressive, but he also seemed to be a gentle soul. I wonder what he would think of what's become of the site named for him?

[villager]

13. Man. This has been a lot of my experience. Have been feeling like a "Man Without a Country"

...as far as online posting sites.

DU is in the throes of centrist triumphalism, still lampooning everything that seems "loony left" (i.e., what used to pass for regular Democratic positions).

Yet JPR seems locked in some kind of rigid anti-Hillary frenzy, and not seeing the forest for the trees, as far as what organizing needs to be done in the years ahead.

When I realized that the rhetoric that this site used for Susan Sarandon was identical to what JPR was saying about Sarah Silverman, I realized I no longer have an internet political home.

I still post here, but the sheets are cold, as it were.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

14. Centrist triumphalism?

Wow is your perception colored. While snarky bullshit against Hillary still occasionally sneaks through here, heaven forfend that anyone dare throw the slightest shade any far leftist other than an outright kook Green.

If you want "centrist triumphalism" go to https://www.reddit.com/r/enough_sanders_spam and they'll give you a belly full.

DU is a forcible "let bygones be bygones - don't return any of the snark" site now. Probably for the best electorally, but damn if it doesn't require a ton of maturity.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[villager]

15. Ah yes, the Conservative Democrat weighs in.

Exactly.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

16. A perfect example of how far-leftist snark is still allowed

Knowing the unwritten rules around this site, I won't be returning it, of course.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[villager]

17. A perfect example of how rightwing belligerence is still allowed. nt

[ConservativeDemocrat]

48. "Belligerence" being defined as telling truth

...to those who hate hearing it.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[villager]

49. Well, I suppose everyone can customize definitions on the internet.

Yours being all too "bespoke."

[ConservativeDemocrat]

60. You're the one who is trying to misclassify being told simple truth...

...as some sort of "belligerence". Same thing for your projection. I merely translated your words back into English.

This conversation is getting boring though. Don't you have a new JPR post to write up?

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[villager]

64. And now you're projecting about the projection!

Poor C.D.

[LWolf]

20. Or, perhaps

it is the triumphant centrists at DU whose perception is colored.

[villager]

50. Yes, but those insistently rose-colored glasses stay stubbornly affixed. Alas. nt

[LWolf]

65. I'm not spending

much time online at any kind of site these days. I guess my glasses are smoke and tar-colored. They do slip all the time, and often get lost, thank goodness.

[villager]

66. You are doubtless better off...

...with the minimized time at political "discussion" sites

[Sugarcoated]

37. Maturity

key word. It's lacking in many.

[cali]

24. Well, I'm damn glad to you back here, villager

And I agree that DU's move toward and defense of centrism and the derision held by some here for what that term the loony left or the ultra-left or the radical left, is a sad thing.

I'm still staunchly on the left. I'm a Vermont/Bernie leftist.

The hate orgies wherever they are, are disturbing and disgust me.

[villager]

36. Well, thanks Cali. As for the "Two Minutes Hate" still practiced by some posters here...

...it doesn't really feel like any kind of "alternative politics" is being built, here at the "Underground."

[Vattel]

27. I share your feelings. Although I have never posted at JPR,

but I looks like it has drifted more and more towards the whacky and hateful. Hatred, authoritarian thinking, bullying, irrationality, junk social science, partisan blindness--all of these things appear with too much frequency at DU, but there are also a lot of good posters still around as well, including many that I usually disagree with. As long as I continue to learn from the good posters, I guess I will stay here.

[Fla Dem]

87. I certainly don't see DU as you do. Yes we may have some centrist Democrats here, but

the vast majority are liberal/progressive Democrats who, surprise, surprise, surprise support most if not all the ideas Bernie Sanders espoused during the primaries. I have been and remain a staunch HRC supporter. But I always said, if Bernie won the primary, I would support him 100%.

I don't know what you're seeing here on DU that might give you the impression we are still gloating over her primary win. Sure we probably did in the first week or so after the last primary. Chalk that up to the joy of having won a hard fought fight. And yes things did get nasty her for a few months, so there were some sore feelings. But it's behind us. We've licked our wounds and are looking forward. The HRC campaign seated a proportional number of Bernie supporters on the Platform committee and the Rules committee and 90% plus of Bernie's issues were placed in the DNC platform. Bernie had a prime time speaking spot at the convention. Bowing to the Bernie campaign, DWS was ousted as the DNC Chairperson. Bernie endorsed Hillary.

We are working in unity NOW to elect HRC as the next POTUS and to get as many down ticket Liberal/Progressives as we possibly can get elected.

If you are upset that we are not fond of pro Jill Stein posts, well can't help you there. She is the opposition, she is running against our candidate. We have no loyalty to her. That's not going to change.

But I'm glad you're still here as an active member. I'm sure you'll keep us on the straight and narrow.

[Odin2005]

18. I'm in the exact same boat as you.

[obamanut2012]

22. I think it is disgusting they named that site after him

Disgusting and respectful.

[SusanCalvin]

54. Thanks for reading it so I don't have to.

That does not sound good.

Signed,

Fellow Sanders supporter.

[The_Casual_Observer]

2. Horrible to imagine that those clowns used be regulars here.

[Sugarcoated]

4. Yes, I thought the same

and I also think it's crawling with cons

[immoderate]

5. Without some context, I can't tell what sort of "cons" you refer to.

Can you enlighten?

--imm

[Sugarcoated]

6. Conservatives

[immoderate]

7. Oh! Well, as long as it's not neo-cons.

--imm

[Sugarcoated]

8. I couldn't tell ya

But there are certainly people there who weren't Bernie voters and are pushing the Clinton conspiracies. I'd bet money there are Trump supporters posting there.

[GummyBearz]

26. ...

My immediate family is "crawling with cons". I still go to thanksgiving, christmas, birthdays, random in between visits, and have regular phone calls. Some how I'm still alive even with a big time 2A father. I guess the whole point is a healthy discussion/debate can only take place with people who have different opinions than you, which is a large part of what politics is all about.

[Sugarcoated]

33. A healthy discussion at JPR can't happen

I've heard if you disagree you get banned.

[GummyBearz]

43. Uh...

"I've heard if you disagree you get banned"

Whereas here it is explicit policy to ban those who disagree with the nominee. Throwing stones in glass houses is... fun for you?

[Sugarcoated]

44. I never said it was the case here.

Are you always this defensive?

[NanceGreggs]

51. Since when is it "explicit policy ...

... to ban those who disagree with the nominee"?

[Agschmid]

53. It not... This is just drama.

[emulatorloo]

75. Perpetual victim-hood.

"I am being oppressed by DU!"

[Agschmid]

76. Yup.

[emulatorloo]

79. See my post #77

That sound accurate?

[Squinch]

61. That's what you signed up for here. If you can't support the Democratic candidate, why

would you be on Democratic Underground, other than to troll?

The purpose of the site, which you agreed to, is to support Democratic candidates.

[GummyBearz]

69. Which I do. Voted dem in the primaries and will vote dem in the general

I also have a major pet peeve when it comes to hypocrisy, and tend to call it out.

[Squinch]

70. What hypocrisy?

[GummyBearz]

72. Hypocrisy from the post that started this all.

"A healthy discussion at JPR can't happen. I've heard if you disagree you get banned."


.... if you don't get the hypocrisy in that statement, no one can help

[emulatorloo]

77. Lots of healthy discussions can happen here. You can criticize HRC constructively

However, one can't post false Internet memes, Breitbart articles, stupid CT, or name call. Stick with the facts, rather than bullshit and hyperbole, no problem.

[GummyBearz]

78. I agree with most of that

Breitbart, name calling, etc have no business here. I dunno if you can constructively criticize the nominee though. That is walking a fine line of possibly being banned. After the primaries, it is pretty clear that everyone has their own definition of what constitutes constructive criticism.

[emulatorloo]

81. let's go thru a few things

talk about what you disagree with in either the Dem platform or in policy positions on HRC's website. Offer your alternative. Rational discussion. No hyperbole or melodrama.

Say how Clinton might do something differently in campaign to be more effective.

You may get pushback, but you won't get 'banned.'

Demonize her, make character attacks, your posts may be hidden by a jury. (Btw you can appeal a hide if you think it was incorrect)

I also need to note, regular old DU'ers cannot 'ban' anyone. Up to admins and IMHO they are rationale and fair. NObody is going to be banned for a rational fair critique.

Skinner did a long post laying this all out. Let me dig a link up for you, will clarify this.

On edit: unfortunately I can't find the thread that goes into more detail, (will keep looking) but I did find this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10135833

What criticism of Hillary Clinton will be permitted?

Unfortunately, there is not going to be a hard line between "fine" and "not fine."

But basically, I think it comes down to this:

If you are criticizing Hillary Clinton because you want to help her succeed, then you'll be fine. But if you are criticizing Hillary Clinton because you want to tear her down, then you won't be fine.

Now, I'm not a mind reader and I can't know for certain what everyone's intentions are. But I think that if the criticism is coming from a place of "wanting her to succeed" then that will be reflected in the tone and substance of the post. If the criticism is coming from a place of "wanting to tear her down" then that will be reflected in the tone and substance of the post. If you are here on DU then you are supposed to be supporting the Democratic nominee against the Republican nominee in the general election -- it shouldn't be very hard to write a post in a way that sounds like it.

I believe that it will be possible to discuss every substantive issue that DUers might want to discuss.

[Squinch]

82. JPR had proscribed, pre-approved, propagandized wording that HAD to be used if one

wanted to even acknowledge that Sanders might lose, months after it was clear that Sanders lost.

They run off anyone who says anything positive about the Democratic candidate.

They do these things while maintaining that they are a site where people "finally" can speak their minds.

Here, you cannot trash the Democratic candidate, and you can't encourage people to vote for another candidate. Period. And you knew about that and agreed to it up front.

You can criticize, you can say positive things about other candidates (though others may tell you you're full of shit), and you don't have to follow a script that has been pre-approved by the administrators to express ANY of your ideas.

I see the hypocrisy in JPR, but I guess I'm beyond help in your world because I don't see hypocrisy here.

[obamanut2012]

23. Some still are

Some are some of the most beloved DUers. It is bizarre.

[Squinch]

59. Not surprised at what a lot of them turned out to be when their masks were off, though.

The true colors always seeped through when they were here.

[The_Casual_Observer]

71. Some of them were here as long as I have.

All through the Bush years. I know that many were Clinton haters going back to Bill, same arguments as Christopher Hitchens.

But now, faced with the options these people have gone off the edge. It's very sad to see this.

[Fla Dem]

89. No, not a lot of them, maybe a majority.

I think they also picked up a lot of drifters and diruptors. From what I could determine they have no system to block or remove OTT posters or posts, so it's pretty much a free for all.

[NanceGreggs]

3. JPR!!!

Come for the poutrage - stay for the conspiracy theories!!!

They will literally swallow anything.

If anyone here wants to sell the Brooklyn Bridge, there's a whole site full of anxious buyers waitin' on you.

[KewlKat]

9. whats JPR?

[Sugarcoated]

10. Where some Bernie supporters went after the primary

Check out this

http://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/breaking-hillarys-handler-carries-auto-injector-for-anti-seizure-drug-diazepam/

[SunSeeker]

12. I really don't think we should link to it.

We shouldn't be giving them the clicks and people could catch a virus.

[OilemFirchen]

41. How odd.

Many of the posters reccing and participating in that thread have user IDs exactly the same as some active DU posters.

Obviously, they're different people. No one here would participate in the promotion of a litany of right wing bullshit in an attempt to tear down the Democratic presidential nominee.

It's a remarkable coincidence, though. What are the odds?

[Raine1967]

84. The site was started during the primaries after one DU member got PPR'd.

I want to make sure we have an accurate telling of the history.

[SunSeeker]

11. A discussion site. See post #1 above. nt

[cwydro]

19. A spin-off site from this one that some people here seem to be absolutely obsessed with.

This is at least the 5th thread about that failing site.

No idea why the obsession.

[Sugarcoated]

34. I'm not obsessed,

Just happened to check it out and I was shocked to see the discussion looked just like wingnut message boards.

[cwydro]

39. Numerous OPs about that site.

That's why I said that "some here" seem obsessed.

I never understand the fascination with other sites.

[Squinch]

62. I'll admit it. I have a probably unhealthy fascination with it. I just find it riveting to see

the personas they presented here, and then go over there and see the swill they are spewing.

They are the exact posters who were the most scolding here about our lack of purity, and then they go over there and take off their masks, and they turn out to be full blown right wing nut jobs. Who does that?

Fascinating.

[geek tragedy]

29. a Trump/Green Party website started by former DUers who hate Hillary Clinton to a psychotic level nt

[joshcryer]

30. A 500 post poster there appeared content in Trump's remarks...

...turned my stomach.

[geek tragedy]

32. this is who they've always been--the toxic personae here were actually the sanitized versions

DU has had to undergo several rounds of detox in the past--we used to have the alt-right and their websites cited as credible sources by the conspiracy loons before they cracked down hard on that stuff (this was under Bush, way back in the day)

[Donald Ian Rankin]

38. A wretched hive of scum and villainy. N.T.

[obamanut2012]

21. Many of the worst people on JPR now were horrible anti HRC people here during the primaries

They said many of the same things here. Some of them were people I had liked for years. I was fooled.

I'm not surprised they have taken their masks completely off now, and made JPR a hate site, because their masks were half off here during the primaries, when Admin allowed them to post the most vile HRC stuff.

[Act_of_Reparation]

25. Are we still talking about this?

Christ on a pogo stick, this place is worse than high school sometimes.

[Vattel]

28. +1

[Sugarcoated]

35. Huh?

I'm me, not we. If you don't like it ignore my thread.

[Act_of_Reparation]

42. You and everyone else still going on about primary feuds justifies plural personal pronouns.

Or are you honestly suggesting that I go through this thread and respond to each and every one individually?

If you don't like it ignore my thread.

If you don't like JPR, ignore them. If you don't like my responses, ignore me.

Got any more neutral defenses I can dispense with?

[Sugarcoated]

45. You must be a joy to be around

damn

I'm not here to argue, go take out your bad mood elsewhere.

[Act_of_Reparation]

46. I certainly am.

Thanks for noticing.

I'm not here to argue, go take out your bad mood elsewhere.

This, incidentally, is a discussion board, i.e. a medium to facilitate the process of exchanging ideas or opinions. If you don't like it when people take issue with the things you post, then perhaps it is you who ought consider relocating.

[Sugarcoated]

47. Nope

I'm good, thanks

[closeupready]

40. They are at the kids' table.

But yeah, +1 - waste of bandwidth. At the very least, this thread should be locked and put in the Lounge. It does NOT belong in GD.

[jamese777]

85. My advice

is to let sleeping JackPineRadicals lie (pun intended).

[Sunlei]

31. How much $ did that supposed pro-sanders website raise for Sanders? DU was up to over 70k last I

checked to donate. I've always said Sanders is a benefit to the D party, we needed his voice. He did everything he said he would to try to change the party platform. And he did it without using the anti-Clinton bashing that was so divisive to the D party.

I'm proud of them both, they BOTH let the primary voters decide. "Let the voters decide" was what they both said early in primary, and so it was.

[Gothmog]

52. I love it when the idiots on that site discuss voter fraud and voter suppression lawsuits

The idiots on that site will buy any conspiracy theory that may make any democrat or other sane person look bad. There is a bozo named Arenbak (sp) who is treated as a guru because he believes that exit polls are magical and show that Sanders really won the Democratic nomination.

[OilemFirchen]

57. Then there's this from the bottom of the cliff:

August 10, 2016 at 7:31 am

Until Bernie concedes, I’m not giving up.

[Squinch]

63. It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown!!!!!

[Gothmog]

67. What do they think happened in Philadelphia

[Tarheel_Dem]

55. It's weird how mention of that site has turned into a DU bashing upthread. I don't know why....

folks who post there are still allowed to participate here. I just don't get it.

[KMOD]

68. I just hope they leave their garbage there.

[reorg]

56. what are you talking about?

Perhaps you could be more specific.

[RazBerryBeret]

58. Well, hmmmm....

it IS called Jack Pine RADICALS... think about it.
Sorry, but that made me laugh a little.
I hop around. I enjoy other perspectives and opinions. I get bored when everyone says the same thing and everyone agrees with everyone. call me crazy, but I like to be challenged, otherwise I might as well just keep a journal.

[lumberjack_jeff]

73. Irony is that JPR participants can discuss anything except DU.

The inverse (a hypothetical land in which nothing can be discussed except JPR) would seem to hold little appeal.

Obviously YMMV.

[SCantiGOP]

80. Googled it, opening page

had 8 posts, and I recognized 4 of the names as being on my long-time Ignore list. Very, very glad they are posting elsewhere now.

[Rex]

86. Don't sugarcoat it for us, tell us how you really feel!

[Vattel]

88. DU sucks bit JPR is even worse.