Can anyone explain this to me?

And I can see an argument for it being called disruptive. What's weird is that a large percentage of GDP is disruptive meta. We could just as well call it GDDM as GDP. I am not sure why this thread is different from the others.

I can only shrug.

Things will settle down soon.

Any post mentioning Hillary or Sanders other than LBN needs to be in GDP. I saw the same thing happen in GD with a post that mentions Hillary and that was the explanation.

And given the threads in that forum, this was very mild and raised a point I've been wondering about for some time. That's why I don't understand how this was different.

Oh, well ...

Then the only other thing is maybe because the post doesn't exactly relate to the primary contest as much as it does Sanders supporters' reactions. Other than that, I dunno.

and when and how supporters will react and whether various candidates supporters are going to go along. I don't see how this point is out of place or disruptive, especially given the content and tone of some others I've seen.

But, as I said ... Oh, well ...

i wonder the same thing, for instance when bernie supporters bashed warren i said bernie was going to endorse and campaign for hillary, it wasn't an op tho

because Clinton supporters don't like them. Neener, you lost, ha ha ha.

Clinton needs those people and her supporters would do well to remember that.

Had a miracle on the level of the sun suddenly setting in the east occurred and Sanders had won, his supporters would be in the position of courting Clinton supporters because that's how politics works.

You should have taken the advice of the first poster.

There seems to still be a gross imbalance in GDP with Sanders supporters consistently posting over-the-top, often already repeatedly debunked smears against Hillary Clinton and sanctimonious swipes at her supporters while Clinton supporters are expected to treat them with kid gloves and any criticism of them or their candidate - or even just defense of our own - pushed off as "insensitive" or worse.

I merely made a point about what will be s clear inconsistency in approach when Sandets endorsed Clinton. People have been discussing this situation for days - I merely wondered how some people will square their unconditional support for Betnie with their belief that anyone who supports Clinton is a sellout. Raiding the question is not running anything in smf if it causes Sanders supporters to storm out in a huff, they weren't sticking around long anyway.

But I gave you a "Like" there!

I don't care to read about that stuff here in the African american group. I have made it clear numerous times I voted for Hillary Clinton but I am so over their attacks on us their alerting on us in protected groups. June 16 can't come fast enough