2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBeing Pro-Bernie Does Not Mean I Am Anti-Hillary
http://samuel-warde.com/2016/01/pro-bernie-not-anti-hillary/Should Hillary Clinton capture the nomination, I will vote for her, and anyone who doesnt is flirting with a (God help us all!) Trump presidency. However, I have solid reasons for preferring Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton. Whenever I write about them, I am accused of being negative. How is comparing the stances and the history of the two candidates negative?
How is it negative to point out that Hillary Clinton once proclaimed that she believed marriage is between a man and a woman? She said it. She has since changed her stance, but she said it. I prefer the candidate who has always worked for equality, whether it be race, gender, ethnicity or sexual preference; and Sanders has consistently been on the forefront, no matter what kind of spin you want to put on it.
Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraq war and has since said it was a mistake. Bernie Sanders voted against that ill-conceived conflict and predicted exactly what would happen if we invaded that country; and everything he said and worse has come true.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Just ask Gabby Giffords, Sybrina Fulton, Planned Parenthood and pretty much any union that has endorsed Hillary.
Sorry.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)unapatriciated
(5,390 posts)to say only one camp is engaging in these types of attacks is not what I see on a daily basis on line.
I was attacked via pms (sender was not allowed to post in forums) just for stating an observation in my area for the support of Sanders. I didn't attack Clinton nor did I smear her in any way. Yet the poster (whom I have never interacted with on DU) who was on a time out found it necessary to call me out via pms. My support for Sanders has nothing to do with personalities and everything to do with policies.
When I answered a thread (regarding removed pms) that implied Sanders supporters were once a sending nasty pms. Stating what happened to me on that day. One of their answers was "cool story bro" instead of saying those who do this on both sides are wrong.
My take-away is that both camps engage in these type of tactics but only one is held accountable.
Kinda one sided and short sighted. Their actions will not keep me away nor prevent me from voting for our nominee....but it could keep others from voting on both sides and that is a shame.
uponit7771
(90,301 posts)unapatriciated
(5,390 posts)I have seen both sides engage in these tactics in on-line forums and yes there seems to more from Clinton supporters and surrogates. But only one side is not willing to accept that their supporters are doing any let alone the majority of these types of attacks.
Like most people I can only come to this conclusion by personal experiences thus I agree with the op.
uponit7771
(90,301 posts)in regards to his responses from the left to the critique of Sanders magical asterisks
Blanks
(4,835 posts)Its not much of a stretch to assume that a lot of the Sanders supporters are Rush Limbaugh listeners.
After all, Sanders isn't a democrat. Why should his supporters bother being civil toward democrats?
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)but there are quite a few who are simply anti-Hillary and jumped on the Bernie bandwagon because he was there. Would have jumped on any - if Bernie had not run, MOM would have all of them.
unapatriciated
(5,390 posts)You are saying many of us just hate Hilary and are incapable of making rational decision when it come to elections.
Snarkoleptic
(5,996 posts)To the point of the article, I've donated to Bernie and will do so again, but as they say "Fall in love in the primary, fall in line in the general."