Have the Russian troll farms hit DU again?
I say "again" but I don't really know if they were responsible for shutting down DU on election night?
But, from the number of divisive threads, someone might think that?
It seems to me to be an inordinate amount of argumentative threads, which also lead to division in the ranks, in my opinion.
"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." attributed to Thomas Jefferson
= new reply since forum marked as read
We're not important...we're just stupid. 
Thanks for being a voice of reason.
And I agree - it's time to shake off all that and focus on the real enemy.
Onward!
You've got over 56,000 posts. That just doesn't make sense to me at all.
I have, however, seen some divisive stuff from a few people with 1,000 posts or fewer.
Lots of threads trashing Bernie, which I don't much like. He's barnstorming in red states with Tom Perez, who I think is going to do great as the next chair of the DNC. My point is we have to focus on taking seats back at local, state and national levels.
When I look at these threads, it sometimes seems to me as if they are being manipulated, or shaped by trolls. I mean, if you're Putin, a divided Democratic party is great, particularly since they have their sock puppet in the White House as we speak.
And, heck, if you're the Mercers, or the Koch brothers, or Sheldon Adelson or any number of other freakish, 'on the crazy side' billionaires, a divided Democratic party is also great. Because these people are the ones picking our treasury clean like a bunch of crows.
All of our money, our precious tax money that we pay into our government is now being routed toward military contracts, and the infrastructure languishes, and programs that help us are being cut. Now, Trump wants to cut taxes even more for the rich, which is merely another way to rob the treasury.
Kinda depressing. But also kind of hopeful...because think about THIS: if the big money wants to troll this site, then at the very least, they are fearful of us. They attribute importance to us.
How about that! 
...a very interesting and informative site...
yep, pretty tough to give an answer rooted in observables
but then there is this:
I have no clue what you are talking about. 
about Sen Sanders' selective support for a DINO who has actively legislated against us, to "Russian troll farms"...
"without choice, there can be no revolution." 
Sam
its source could be easily found. But it just isn't there.
but it was never ever published anywhere so it could be found in an internet search....
As for the statement, "Many of the achievements that have been made for women’s rights in the 20th century have been under attack by the Republican party — denying women control over their own bodies" - so to Sen Sanders, it's okay for DEMOCRATS to deny women control over their own bodies... just not Republicans? 
(Incidentally, the quote you cited in your OP isn't there, or anywhere else on the internet, for that matter. Pretty sure Sen Sanders never said that.)
Let me set you straight here:
I was a supporter and admirer of Sen Sanders for many years.
I was at first thrilled when he entered the Democratic primary for this past electoral cycle.
It is my observation that he was used by the Operation Chaos 2016 cabal, who I characterize as the BernieBros who were never progressives or actual supporters of Sen Sanders.
And it is also my observation that he let his ego win over his principles, and refused to eschew the BernieBro "disruptors who disrupted poorly" (to use an old DU meme).
He's actively trying to get SOME Democrats (as in: NOT Jon Ossoff) into office.
And furthermore, this is not Sen Sanders' first public display of callousness towards women's rights and causes. Frankly, at this point he's beginning to remind me of the dudes from my 60s activist days, who were cool with chicks in the movement, so long as they ran the mimeograph machines, prepared the meals, and put out with the Free Love.
When the primaries started in the 2016 electoral cycle, I initially planned to cast my vote for Sen Sanders. I did not support Sec'y Clinton in the 2008 cycle, and at first I held the same opinion in the 2016 cycle - that if she won the nomination, I would hold my nose and vote for her in the general. But as their respective campaigns evolved (for better or worse) in the 2016 cycle, by the time the Cali primary came around, I proudly and passionately cast my vote for Sec'y Clinton.
If Sen Sanders is so damned dead set to remain an independent, then he never should have run in the Democratic primary and should have run an independent Presidential campaign.
Yeah, well, so have I.
And unlike Sen Sanders, I've never, in those 50+ years, clearly and unambiguously stated that the sacred civil, human and Constitutional rights of innocent female US citizens are, and I quote, "just one issue". As a person and citizen directly impacted by those sacred rights, I am well aware that those rights are the essential foundation of the very humanity of HALF THE COUNTRY.
I've also never cavalierly suggested that women should take one for the team, and cozy up to gestational slavery advocates because "we just can't exclude them".
