Sun May 1, 2016, 12:49 PM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
Seems to me that most of you don't get it
To my beloved Berners, a lot of you don't get it! From the gloom and doom woe is me tone of what I'm seeing, man get with the program, eh?
To Camp Weathervane judging by your gloating and passive aggressive don't gloat, oh, hell it was pretty fucking clear from the start of Bernie's campaign that all y'all don't get it. It's actually pretty fucking simple. That is, the it that your not getting: Bernie's campaign is about putting a progressive in the white house, and a progressive majority in the Congress We intend to put Bernie in the white house in this election. That's a yuuuge task. We are running a hard and enthusiastic campaign. We might not get it accomplished this election, but there is still a path. So what if we don't? Bernie has never even insinuated that we will should stop. Win or lose the nomination, or the Presidency, where has he said that will be enough? We. Will. Not. Stop. You best get used to it. Ain't going nowhere. The worst case in this cycle is there are a few progressives that will do well and get into Congress. People will notice their success. Do you think that anyone in the DNC, DLC of yore, or upper echelon wanted to be responding to calls for single payer before Bernie ran? I don't remember it. I remember that Social Security was on the table no so long ago. It's now once again the third rail of American politic and someone who is not Bernie was recently talking about the need to strengthen it. We the people have had a taste of what a moral leader that has some foresight could be, and damn that shit is tasty! We have defined the issues in this election cycle. You have to respect that. The big guns do, which is why they are fighting us tooth and nail. The message for everyone to absorb once you chill the fuck out and think about things, is that we are the future of the Democratic party and if the party fails us, we have hit the critical mass to take our ball and form our own party which doesn't play Calvinball with nominees. We who recognize that we are the future know that we are one, maybe if we're lucky, two generations away from that habitability tipping point. There is only one candidate who takes it seriously. That by itself is worth making him large and in charge because we have to act yesterday on this. So you are left with a choice. You can embrace us wholly and get on board turning our country back into the heartland where we care for each other or you can tell us to fuck off and be crushed in the future. Remember we were told that the arc of history is long, but it bends towards justice. I have no doubt that we will accomplish our goal of having a level field, where we invest in people first. Where bombs are the final resort. I have no doubt we will prevail. Now it's on the California where we can improve our position in this primary tremendously. I for one am feeling good.
|
154 replies, 22774 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
hootinholler | May 2016 | OP |
onecaliberal | May 2016 | #1 | |
NurseJackie | May 2016 | #2 | |
KPN | May 2016 | #6 | |
Post removed | May 2016 | #15 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #45 | |
Dem2 | May 2016 | #56 | |
earthshine | May 2016 | #68 | |
lostnfound | May 2016 | #102 | |
bkkyosemite | May 2016 | #109 | |
CobaltBlue | May 2016 | #112 | |
uponit7771 | May 2016 | #120 | |
Spacedog1973 | May 2016 | #3 | |
sadoldgirl | May 2016 | #26 | |
Spacedog1973 | May 2016 | #46 | |
senz | May 2016 | #57 | |
Spacedog1973 | May 2016 | #70 | |
senz | May 2016 | #83 | |
cui bono | May 2016 | #98 | |
uponit7771 | May 2016 | #122 | |
TM99 | May 2016 | #127 | |
rhett o rick | May 2016 | #30 | |
Spacedog1973 | May 2016 | #42 | |
TM99 | May 2016 | #128 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #48 | |
SwampG8r | May 2016 | #84 | |
Aerows | May 2016 | #90 | |
Kalidurga | May 2016 | #124 | |
Rebkeh | May 2016 | #65 | |
Urchin | May 2016 | #67 | |
Aerows | May 2016 | #88 | |
Rebkeh | May 2016 | #100 | |
libdem4life | May 2016 | #153 | |
CobaltBlue | May 2016 | #116 | |
uponit7771 | May 2016 | #121 | |
felix_numinous | May 2016 | #4 | |
Autumn | May 2016 | #5 | |
passiveporcupine | May 2016 | #94 | |
KPN | May 2016 | #7 | |
alcibiades_mystery | May 2016 | #8 | |
realmirage | May 2016 | #13 | |
SidDithers | May 2016 | #20 | |
Live and Learn | May 2016 | #24 | |
randome | May 2016 | #35 | |
Live and Learn | May 2016 | #37 | |
Fumesucker | May 2016 | #134 | |
2banon | May 2016 | #58 | |
senz | May 2016 | #59 | |
uponit7771 | May 2016 | #123 | |
rjsquirrel | May 2016 | #9 | |
timmymoff | May 2016 | #17 | |
Live and Learn | May 2016 | #25 | |
rjsquirrel | May 2016 | #31 | |
timmymoff | May 2016 | #32 | |
rjsquirrel | May 2016 | #33 | |
timmymoff | May 2016 | #36 | |
rjsquirrel | May 2016 | #44 | |
timmymoff | May 2016 | #47 | |
Maru Kitteh | May 2016 | #137 | |
senz | May 2016 | #61 | |
Land of Enchantment | May 2016 | #10 | |
J_J_ | May 2016 | #11 | |
CK_John | May 2016 | #12 | |
CentralCoaster | May 2016 | #14 | |
realmirage | May 2016 | #16 | |
HassleCat | May 2016 | #18 | |
disillusioned73 | May 2016 | #142 | |
bvar22 | May 2016 | #19 | |
Demsrule86 | May 2016 | #21 | |
KPN | May 2016 | #76 | |
NuclearDem | May 2016 | #22 | |
griffi94 | May 2016 | #41 | |
Cassiopeia | May 2016 | #23 | |
Kip Humphrey | May 2016 | #29 | |
mythology | May 2016 | #50 | |
passiveporcupine | May 2016 | #95 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #43 | |
disillusioned73 | May 2016 | #143 | |
Maedhros | May 2016 | #151 | |
disillusioned73 | May 2016 | #152 | |
Live and Learn | May 2016 | #27 | |
BootinUp | May 2016 | #28 | |
Gregorian | May 2016 | #34 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #51 | |
stillwaiting | May 2016 | #154 | |
apnu | May 2016 | #38 | |
ancianita | May 2016 | #39 | |
brooklynite | May 2016 | #40 | |
Doctor_J | May 2016 | #49 | |
brooklynite | May 2016 | #62 | |
NuclearDem | May 2016 | #66 | |
JonLeibowitz | May 2016 | #110 | |
Squinch | May 2016 | #52 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #54 | |
Autumn | May 2016 | #72 | |
NanceGreggs | May 2016 | #125 | |
George II | May 2016 | #81 | |
Post removed | May 2016 | #85 | |
SwampG8r | May 2016 | #87 | |
Squinch | May 2016 | #89 | |
Aerows | May 2016 | #92 | |
SwampG8r | May 2016 | #101 | |
QC | May 2016 | #133 | |
Aerows | May 2016 | #136 | |
ismnotwasm | May 2016 | #91 | |
betsuni | May 2016 | #93 | |
Bobbie Jo | May 2016 | #96 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #97 | |
ismnotwasm | May 2016 | #99 | |
Bobbie Jo | May 2016 | #103 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #104 | |
Bobbie Jo | May 2016 | #105 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #106 | |
Bobbie Jo | May 2016 | #107 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #108 | |
Bobbie Jo | May 2016 | #111 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #113 | |
Bobbie Jo | May 2016 | #115 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #139 | |
ucrdem | May 2016 | #114 | |
murielm99 | May 2016 | #132 | |
workinclasszero | May 2016 | #149 | |
Uncle Joe | May 2016 | #53 | |
senz | May 2016 | #55 | |
H2O Man | May 2016 | #60 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #64 | |
joshcryer | May 2016 | #63 | |
silvershadow | May 2016 | #69 | |
DemonGoddess | May 2016 | #71 | |
Autumn | May 2016 | #74 | |
DemonGoddess | May 2016 | #75 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #79 | |
fun n serious | May 2016 | #73 | |
Tarc | May 2016 | #77 | |
Mike Nelson | May 2016 | #78 | |
betsuni | May 2016 | #80 | |
George II | May 2016 | #82 | |
maryallen | May 2016 | #86 | |
MrMickeysMom | May 2016 | #117 | |
pacalo | May 2016 | #118 | |
uponit7771 | May 2016 | #119 | |
tonyt53 | May 2016 | #126 | |
TM99 | May 2016 | #129 | |
RandySF | May 2016 | #130 | |
Waiting For Everyman | May 2016 | #131 | |
Sheepshank | May 2016 | #135 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #138 | |
betsuni | May 2016 | #140 | |
Sheepshank | May 2016 | #145 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #147 | |
Sheepshank | May 2016 | #148 | |
moriah | May 2016 | #141 | |
hootinholler | May 2016 | #146 | |
moriah | May 2016 | #150 | |
disillusioned73 | May 2016 | #144 |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:03 PM
onecaliberal (30,599 posts)
1. K&R
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:04 PM
NurseJackie (42,862 posts)
2. This is why y'all are losing. Absolute certainty to the exclusion of all other possibilities ...
... and ideas; along with condescending dismissal of anyone who disagrees or has a different opinion; demanding respect when none is offered in return; hypersensitivity; over-aggressiveness; smearing the party; dismissing entire regions; attacking civil rights icons; and bad math.
Not all y'all, but it's loudest ones who get the attention and it makes people be like ... ![]() |
Response to NurseJackie (Reply #2)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:06 PM
KPN (15,207 posts)
6. My you have a warped perception.
Smoke a joint, chill out.
|
Response to NurseJackie (Reply #2)
Post removed
Response to NurseJackie (Reply #2)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:48 PM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
45. LOL
Project much?
|
Response to NurseJackie (Reply #2)
Sun May 1, 2016, 02:29 PM
Dem2 (8,164 posts)
56. It's always the loudest ones on both sides
The internet isn't about those having an average day, it's about those who woke up pissed off that day.
|
Response to NurseJackie (Reply #2)
Sun May 1, 2016, 03:27 PM
earthshine (1,642 posts)
68. I have never seen a post by you that was in any way constructive.
Your post doesn't even address the OP.
You are someone who doesn't get it. |
Response to NurseJackie (Reply #2)
Sun May 1, 2016, 09:28 PM
lostnfound (15,903 posts)
102. Alternatively 35 years of rightwing-billionaire-funded ideological think tanks
That have convinced the masses to think they aren't entitled to a decent lifestyle or good government.
The bankrupt unemployed poor neighbor telling me "I like rich people cuz they give us all the jobs". |
Response to NurseJackie (Reply #2)
Sun May 1, 2016, 10:15 PM
bkkyosemite (5,792 posts)
109. NurseJackie you are one of the loud ones...going to check my blood pressure now.
Response to NurseJackie (Reply #2)
Sun May 1, 2016, 10:30 PM
CobaltBlue (1,122 posts)
112. Hello, Nurse Jackie!
Thank you for giving Democratic Underground its best Republican posts!
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:04 PM
Spacedog1973 (221 posts)
3. So what you are saying is
Incremental change is good. Well, about time you came around to getting on board with the Democratic party's values.
Lets be clear though, Barnie is not getting in the Whitehouse, not this election and certainly not the next. There is no 'critical mass' to form an individual party because your movement is ragtag and bobtail: Its made of the privileged who often can't be bothered to register and vote and think activism is facebook likes and spamming right wing links on forums. Real activism is borne out of necessity, not want. Any American movement of any worth especially liberal MUST centre around POC and minorities. They are an increasing percentage of the electorate. Your movement can't be a white one and is stillborn without real diversity, not the diversity made from double counting and fake stats. Think of how to get these people on board before you tell anyone of your 'demands' and projected worth. Until then, the post is so much salt and grandstanding. |
Response to Spacedog1973 (Reply #3)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:31 PM
sadoldgirl (3,431 posts)
26. While I don't disagree about the importance
of the PoC in the party, I think that it is the Dems'
elite that have forgotten the small farmers, the rural population and most importantly the blue collar workers. Many of the HRC supporters are doing quite nicely with the status quo, but the poor and lower middle class does not. And that crosses gender as well as racial issues. |
Response to sadoldgirl (Reply #26)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:49 PM
Spacedog1973 (221 posts)
46. I agree
That there are areas of the Democratic party that they can improve upon. However, some areas are diametrically opposed. So rural white states, may have issues with the Dems representing strongly issues that POC hold dear. The Dems then have to play a numbers game - the Rural whites can vote either way, GOP or Dem. POC are their strongest supporters and they need them. When rural voters are more loyal as a group toward the Dem party, then they can expect I think a better and more robust level of support in return.
|
Response to Spacedog1973 (Reply #46)
Sun May 1, 2016, 02:37 PM
senz (11,945 posts)
57. Bernie is the ONLY candidate who has worked for racial justice.
Simple fact. He has worked for racial justice his entire life.
|
Response to senz (Reply #57)
Sun May 1, 2016, 05:39 PM
Spacedog1973 (221 posts)
70. He is not the ONLY candidate.
As a young lawyer working for the Children’s Defense Fund, Hillary went to South Carolina to work to stop the incarceration of teenagers in adult prisons, and she investigated school segregation in Alabama at so-called “private academies.”
In Arkansas, she started a legal aid clinic to ensure that poor people had access to real legal representation; she helped start a program to help low income parents prepare their kids for school success, which is now in more than 20 states; and she helped to found the Arkansas Single Parent Scholarship Fund, which helped nearly 40,000 single parents with their education. As first lady, she continued her advocacy for children and families, helping to pass the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), which now covers more than 8 million kids, helping reform the foster care and adoption system, and advocating for the expansion of Medicaid to cover foster kids until they are 21. She pushed for the expansion of Head Start and for breaking barriers for working parents like quality child care and equal pay for women. As a U.S. senator, she worked to improve pre-K programs and provide parenting help for at-risk families, which is now part of the Affordable Care Act, and she pushed to expand CHIP to cover more kids. She co-sponsored legislation to end racial profiling and implement sentencing reforms to address crack-cocaine disparities. She also fought to restore voting rights for individuals involved in the criminal justice system, expand programs that help people re-enter society when they have served their time, and worked to expand assistance for at-risk kids including intervention and treatment. She also introduced comprehensive legislation to protect voting rights; supported increased funding for HIV/AIDS programs, spotlighting the disproportionate impact on African American women; and worked with then Senator Obama to fight against lead poisoning, holding the first hearing on environmental justice and disparate impacts on the African American community. -In case its not clear; most of these people in extreme poverty situations were/are minority populations. |
Response to Spacedog1973 (Reply #70)
Sun May 1, 2016, 07:09 PM
senz (11,945 posts)
83. Well since you apparently work for the HRC campaign, perhaps you could
provide a link?
|
Response to Spacedog1973 (Reply #70)
Sun May 1, 2016, 09:14 PM
cui bono (19,926 posts)
98. Marian Wright Edelman of the Children's Defense Fund doesn't think too highly of Hillary.
How Hillary Clinton Betrayed the Children's Defense Fund for Political Gain
As we have noted in a previous editor's blog (along with the page numbers), Hillary brags in her memoirs that she was the one who lured the infamous Dick Morris back as an adviser to Bill (and Hillary) during the White House years in the mid-90s, as Bill Clinton was trying to find a way to counter the Newt Gingrich assault and the never-ending Republican attempts to investigate and impeach him. As a result of Morris's "triangulating" advice, the Clintons embraced some cold-hearted measures, including what became called euphemistically "welfare reform." In fact, the progressive and children's advocate community considered it a Draconian measure that would punish poor children if their moms didn't find work. The Clintons, both of them, supported it, and Bill Clinton signed it into law. Among those who ardently and eloquently opposed the Clinton "welfare reform" bill was Marian Wright Edelman. Her husband, Peter Edelman, quit his high-level job at the Department of Health and Human Services in protest when Bill Clinton signed the bill. He was deeply upset about what the legislation would do to helpless children. In a July 2007 interview with Amy Goodman, Marian Wright Edelman had this to say about the "welfare reform bill" and Hillary Clinton: AMY GOODMAN: Marian Wright Edelman, we just heard Hillary Rodham Clinton. She used to be the head of the board of the Children’s Defense Fund, of the organization that you founded. But you were extremely critical of the Clintons. I mean, when President Clinton signed off on the, well, so-called welfare reform bill, you said, “His signature on this pernicious bill makes a mockery of his pledge not to hurt children.” So what are your hopes right now for these Democrats? And what are your thoughts about Hillary Rodham Clinton? MARIAN WRIGHT EDELMAN: Well, you know, Hillary Clinton is an old friend, but they are not friends in politics. We have to build a constituency, and you don’t—and we profoundly disagreed with the forms of the welfare reform bill, and we said so. We were for welfare reform, I am for welfare reform, but we need good jobs, we need adequate work incentives, we need minimum wage to be decent wage and livable wage, we need health care, we need transportation, we need to invest preventively in all of our children to prevent them ever having to be on welfare. And yet, you know, many years after that, when many people are pronouncing welfare reform a great success, you know, we’ve got growing child poverty, we have more children in poverty and in extreme poverty over the last six years than we had earlier in the year. When an economy is down, and the real test of welfare reform is what happens to the poor when the economy is not booming. Well, the poor are suffering, the gap between rich and poor widening. We have what I consider one of—a growing national catastrophe of what we call the cradle-to-prison pipeline. A black boy today has a one-in-three chance of going to prison in his lifetime, a black girl a one-in-seventeen chance. A Latino boy who’s born in 2001 has a one-in-six chance of going to prison. We are seeing more and more children go into our child welfare systems, go dropping out of school, going into juvenile justice detention facilities. Many children are sitting up—15,000, according to a recent congressional GAO study—are sitting up in juvenile institutions solely because their parents could not get mental health and health care in their community. This is an abomination. That is a staggering indictment, from the woman Hillary Clinton regularly mentions as her mentor, of a gap between Hillary Clinton's words and her record. It reflects upon a political decision that she and Bill made to leave many children behind in order to ensure a second term. (The "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act," as it was cynically called, was signed in August of 1996, just about three months before the '96 presidential election.) http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/how-hillary-clinton-betrayed-the-childrens-defense-fund-for-political-gain Hillary Clinton often boasts about helping children, but she betrayed them as First Lady
During the debate, Clinton touted her years at the Children's Defense Fund. Here's the truth she didn't talk about Later in the debate — amid her hawkish rhetoric — Clinton twice more mentioned her work with CDF, wielding it as an example of her purportedly progressive policies. The problem with Clinton’s claims, however, is that she betrayed children as First Lady. Under the guise of welfare reform, the Clinton administration worked with Republicans to gut social services, ignoring their own senior officials’ warnings that, by doing so, they would be plunging over a million children into poverty. Bill Clinton ran in 1992 on the campaign promise to “end welfare as we know it.” In 1996, he — with the wholehearted support of Hillary — succeeded, passing the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act (PRWORA). PRWORA was based on legislation first proposed by Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. The act was opposed by the left-wing of the Democratic Party, but the Clinton administration joined hands with Republicans and conservative Democrats to push it through. As part of PRWORA, the Clinton administration axed the Aid to Families with Dependent Children federal assistance program, which had been created 61 years before by the Social Security Act, in the New Deal. They replaced it with the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, which was drastically weaker and — as the name stresses — temporary. Hillary, as First Lady, advocated strongly for the restructuring of welfare. Her former co-workers at CDF, on the other hand, were infuriated. CDF founder and President Marian Wright Edelman declared that President Clinton’s “signature on this pernicious bill makes a mockery of his pledge not to hurt children.” “Hillary Clinton is an old friend, but they are not friends in politics,” the CDF president told Democracy Now in a 2007 interview. At the time, CDF “profoundly disagreed with the forms of the welfare reform bill, and we said so,” Marian Wright Edelman explained. http://www.salon.com/2015/10/15/the_worst_thing_hillary_clinton_has_ever_done/ . |
Response to Spacedog1973 (Reply #70)
Sun May 1, 2016, 11:14 PM
TM99 (8,352 posts)
127. Shit, all you are doing here
is cutting a pasting from Brock's Correct the Record. In other words, you are either plagiarizing because you fail to cite your source, or you work for CTR as part of their million $ trolling campaign.
|
Response to Spacedog1973 (Reply #3)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:32 PM
rhett o rick (55,981 posts)
30. LOL. And you have 136 posts? Don't tell me, you've been lurking for years just waiting
for this opportunity. Well I am putting all you "new" Clinton fans on ignore. Full Ignore, Bob-Bye
![]() |
Response to rhett o rick (Reply #30)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:46 PM
Spacedog1973 (221 posts)
42. The post-number fairy
Has sprinkled his magic dust on me, so that he can have sweeter dreams. Goodbye. Goodbye. Sleep well
|
Response to Spacedog1973 (Reply #42)
Sun May 1, 2016, 11:14 PM
TM99 (8,352 posts)
128. Well you did reply with
a cut/paste job from CTR?
|
Response to Spacedog1973 (Reply #3)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:57 PM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
48. No
Not at all what I'm saying, but thanks for sharing your opinion.
As to incremental change, it is not good, nor bad, but it is inevitable. It is how things in fact change. That doesn't mean to roll over in negotiations. I personally believe that Barnie (sic) will be the President. I also recognize that it may not happen and we just might end up with Trump. Any American movement of any worth especially liberal MUST centre around POC and minorities. They are an increasing percentage of the electorate. Your movement can't be a white one and is stillborn without real diversity, not the diversity made from double counting and fake stats. Think of how to get these people on board before you tell anyone of your 'demands' and projected worth.
WOW I guess it don't mean a thing, nevermind. I feel suitably humbled and chastised for forgetting to bring race into the equations. My apologies. |
Response to hootinholler (Reply #48)
Sun May 1, 2016, 07:25 PM
SwampG8r (10,287 posts)
84. Centre
European giveaway
|
Response to SwampG8r (Reply #84)
Sun May 1, 2016, 07:40 PM
Aerows (39,961 posts)
90. Or Aussie/Kiwi
Check for extra u's and missing z's then you will realise what is going on
![]() |
Response to SwampG8r (Reply #84)
Sun May 1, 2016, 11:04 PM
Kalidurga (14,177 posts)
124. LOL I spell like that sometimes
I read a lot of English literature starting when I was 8 years old.
|
Response to Spacedog1973 (Reply #3)
Sun May 1, 2016, 03:07 PM
Rebkeh (2,450 posts)
65. No, that's not quite right
It's not that we're against incremental change in that sense, it's more about structural change, slow and quick, big and small. Why limit ourselves? It's about changing the system's infrastructure itself rather than making a few adjustments from within it.
It's like the difference between a trim to update a style and a haircut for a fresher style. Especially since the old style is past its expiration date. It's long past time to change it up. The only people that are invested in, or benefit from, the 'trim' are people who have "made it," regardless of race. Most of these people are older. But the democratic party is supposed to be for everyone, especially the struggling, is it not? |
Response to Spacedog1973 (Reply #3)
Sun May 1, 2016, 03:26 PM
Urchin (248 posts)
67. You sure know how to win friends
and influence people.
So, thanks for helping me be even more certain that Bernie or nobody gets my vote. |
Response to Spacedog1973 (Reply #3)
Sun May 1, 2016, 07:32 PM
Aerows (39,961 posts)
88. Question:
Who do you think will suffer most under a Donald Trump presidency?
When you hear people disgruntled with Hillary Clinton that are life long Democrats and are from all walks of life, a wise person would reflect. "Why do so many Democrats dislike her? Why do so many Democrats mistrust her?" Because the real problem is going to come in the GE. If so many Democrats do not consider her trustworthy, what do you honestly believe Independents think? Independents are crucial to any candidate's success. Wait until the Republicans start rocking on the Clinton Foundation/Arms deals for donations, Bill Clinton giving paid speeches in the same countries that Hillary is dealing with as SoS and reaping CGI donations. There is an avalanche coming. It is absolutely out of touch with reality to think that it will not be hammered on day and night, and you can bet some ugly bones are going to fly out of that particular cemetery. If she loses the GE due to her myriad issues, while all of us will certainly be negatively impacted, who will fare the worst under a Trump presidency? |
Response to Aerows (Reply #88)
Sun May 1, 2016, 09:25 PM
Rebkeh (2,450 posts)
100. For those scared of a Trump presidency....
Vote for Bernie.
![]() I am tired of this inaccurate framing and false narrative, as if the choices are only her or Trump. I am a woman, a black woman at that, middle aged with disabilities and health problems - think I don't get it? Do you think I don't understand what a Trump presidency means? I do. I still prefer to take my chances with Bernie. |
Response to Rebkeh (Reply #100)
libdem4life This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to Spacedog1973 (Reply #3)
Sun May 1, 2016, 10:46 PM
CobaltBlue (1,122 posts)
116. I have a question for Spacedog1973…
Hello, spacedog1973!
I have a question: Will you also be giving all Democratic Underground forum members relationship counseling? |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:06 PM
felix_numinous (5,198 posts)
4. K&R
Well said, Hootinholler
![]() |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:06 PM
Autumn (43,409 posts)
5. Nothing more needs to be said. Thank you.
![]() |
Response to Autumn (Reply #5)
Sun May 1, 2016, 08:17 PM
passiveporcupine (8,175 posts)
94. I agree,
Hoot was crystal clear and it is the message we all need to keep in our hearts. Don't be disheartened. We are on the way.
![]() |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:07 PM
KPN (15,207 posts)
7. Go Bernie! Go America!
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:11 PM
alcibiades_mystery (36,437 posts)
8. You're losing, and losing badly, and part of the reason you're losing is
that you think people who disagree with you simply "don't get it."
For that reason, I'm enjoying watching you lose, and will continue to enjoy it over the next few weeks. |
Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #8)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:17 PM
realmirage (2,117 posts)
13. You nailed it
Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #8)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:22 PM
SidDithers (44,228 posts)
20. +1...
![]() Sid |
Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #8)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:30 PM
Live and Learn (12,769 posts)
24. People that enjoy watching people lose really don't get it. nt
Response to Live and Learn (Reply #24)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:37 PM
randome (34,845 posts)
35. I think it's at least understandable though, since no expense is too high to denigrate Clinton.
Mocking and hatred and casting aspersions only breeds more of the same.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.” Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr] |
Response to randome (Reply #35)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:39 PM
Live and Learn (12,769 posts)
37. I have found that I have extremely little in common with some here. nt
Response to randome (Reply #35)
Mon May 2, 2016, 01:17 AM
Fumesucker (45,851 posts)
134. Have you checked out the HRC group?
Mocking, hatred and casting aspersions is practically their raison d'être.
|
Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #8)
Sun May 1, 2016, 02:39 PM
2banon (7,321 posts)
58. you losers
way to prove the OP's point, you just don't get it.
|
Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #8)
Sun May 1, 2016, 02:42 PM
senz (11,945 posts)
59. A Hill Bro? We don't need hatefulness in this thead.
And in case you don't know it, taking pleasure in imagining the pain you hope others are feeling has a name: sadism.
One should work on that. ![]() |
Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #8)
Sun May 1, 2016, 10:57 PM
uponit7771 (89,579 posts)
123. +1
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
rjsquirrel This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #9)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:20 PM
timmymoff (1,947 posts)
17. Whenever i find myself on the side of the majority
I need to rethink my opinion. Mark Twain paraphrase.
|
Response to timmymoff (Reply #17)
rjsquirrel This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #31)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:35 PM
timmymoff (1,947 posts)
32. We don't have a democracy we have an Oligarchy
and one candidate more than anyone else supports the continuation of such.
|
Response to timmymoff (Reply #32)
rjsquirrel This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #33)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:37 PM
timmymoff (1,947 posts)
36. Three million votes directly for the oilgarchy
what's a shame is people putting an election as a team sport. I stand by my former statements.
|
Response to timmymoff (Reply #36)
rjsquirrel This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #44)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:50 PM
timmymoff (1,947 posts)
47. I'm not calling anyone stupid
you are. I am stating we have one group willing to overlook things that if done by a republican would be an outrage. Yes, it's that simple.
|
Response to timmymoff (Reply #47)
Mon May 2, 2016, 04:08 AM
Maru Kitteh (27,340 posts)
137. You said 3 million votes directly for the oligarchy. So do you think working poor and middle class
voters who vote for the oligarchy are smart? Or do you think that the vast majority of those 3 million voters "directly for the oligarchy" are stupid?
|
Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #9)
Sun May 1, 2016, 02:46 PM
senz (11,945 posts)
61. The MSM sides with the establishment and hides the truth.
It might take a while, but we will get around the MSM and the people will reclaim their birthright.
Sorry you don't like that. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:13 PM
Land of Enchantment (1,217 posts)
10. Now there you go again giving us hope. Everyones says we are domed.
Seriously, yours was the best thread I have seen in a week and I thank you for your well reasoned perspectives. I am so ready to grab that ball too as in 8 years I will be well into my 70's. I have waited forever for all the progressive ideas and policies to be wrapped up in one individual and have a gut feeling he will end up winning this.
[Imgur]( ![]() |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:13 PM
J_J_ (1,213 posts)
11. AT last people are finally waking up to election fraud
and it aint just the Republicans.
Kinda hard to have a democracy when they are stealing elections. Once we demand fair elections, where the ballot totals are actually counted, not the machine tabulations...everything else should fall into place. I have a good feeling too. I am very proud of the upcoming generation, not afraid to see the truth, standing up and fighting for the benefit of all Americans. The 'screw you I got mine' crowd is on it's way out big time! |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:16 PM
CK_John (10,005 posts)
12. 2020/2024 will have a whole new cast of characters and problems.
Coastal flooding and millions of whites fleeing to Canada.
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:18 PM
CentralCoaster (1,163 posts)
14. No quarter. Not this time. It ends now, 2016.
No more.
K/R |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:19 PM
realmirage (2,117 posts)
16. Oh we get it
That's why we voted for Hillary.
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:21 PM
HassleCat (6,409 posts)
18. We will end the third way.
Probably not right now. We started a little too late, against a candidate who has a firm grip on the party levers. But this is the beginning of the end. People see the possibilities. I think Clinton will spend four years doing nothing, and fail to deliver anything progressive, leading to a strong primary challenger for 2020. Yes, I am predicting Clinton will get primaried for 2020, and there is a strong possibility she will get bumped off, ending the third way.
|
Response to HassleCat (Reply #18)
Mon May 2, 2016, 09:15 AM
disillusioned73 (2,872 posts)
142. We can hope..
![]() |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:22 PM
bvar22 (39,909 posts)
19. DURec.
--bvar22 mainstream-Center FDR/LBJ Working Class DEMOCRAT, now labeled a "far leftist" in what passes for the Democratic Party today. I haven't changed. I am delighted by what we have accomplished this year, and expect The Movement to grow even larger and fight harder next year. WE are the CHANGE. The Centrist Usurpers are already dead. They just don't know it yet. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:23 PM
Demsrule86 (67,146 posts)
21. Honestly
If you have all the answers...why aren't you winning? California is the end for Bernie...he knows this. Bernie will not be the nominee and unless you want everything he advocated smashed to pieces by an incoming Trump presidency...get on board with electing the Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Is Bernie really more important than defending gay and trans people, women and their right to choose, Obamacare, hungry kids, the environment or the economy?
|
Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #21)
Sun May 1, 2016, 06:25 PM
KPN (15,207 posts)
76. The environment or the economy? Honestly ...
why did you include them in your list? Hillary will just Fuck them up further.
You don't get do you? Those ARE the crucial issues, and Hillary's just the same old same old lackey for multi-nationals and megabucks when it comes to those two. The rest doesn't matter by comparison. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:23 PM
NuclearDem (16,184 posts)
22. It's over.
California's not going to save Bernie. The superdelegates aren't going to switch. There won't be a contested convention.
This is just getting sad. |
Response to NuclearDem (Reply #22)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:46 PM
griffi94 (3,679 posts)
41. It was already sad
This is why I tuned out listening to Bernies fans
when they started trying to make the case for voting for him. The delusion that Bernie is going to be our nominee is made up of the same wishful thinking that makes conservatives think that Reaganomics will work....this time....they just need one more chance. Like you said Bernie is done. He can stay in and collect some more pledged delegates and then lose on the first ballot. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:24 PM
Cassiopeia (2,603 posts)
23. Your results are in.
On Sun May 1, 2016, 01:11 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
Seems to me that most of you don't get it http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511875860 REASON FOR ALERT This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. ALERTER'S COMMENTS Gratuitous rudeness: "To Camp Weathervane" is an insult directed at DU Clinton supporters. Inappropriate. Please hide, thank you. You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun May 1, 2016, 01:16 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT. Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE Explanation: No explanation given Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE Explanation: No idea why this was even alerted. Nothing wrong with this post. Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE Explanation: No explanation given Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE Explanation: What a senseless alert. Leave it. Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT Explanation: Why are you here? Feel free to go create Socialist underground if you'd like. Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE Explanation: OP could have made a better word choice, but I don't think this rises to the level of a hide. Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE Explanation: Granted its mildly insulting but this is the Democratic Underground and we are not lockstep Republicans so this person is entitled to their opinion just like you are. This post should be read a second time by juror number 5. |
Response to Cassiopeia (Reply #23)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:32 PM
Kip Humphrey (4,753 posts)
29. To all Hillarians: "Camp Weathervane" refers to the Hillary campaign, not the Hillary DU group.
Don't flatter yourselves.
|
Response to Kip Humphrey (Reply #29)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:58 PM
mythology (9,527 posts)
50. That might be easier to believe if instead of typing Hillarians you typed Clinton supporters
And Clinton supporters calling Sanders supporters Bernie Bros is just as childish.
|
Response to mythology (Reply #50)
Sun May 1, 2016, 08:42 PM
passiveporcupine (8,175 posts)
95. But it hasn't stopped has it?
and I don't see people getting hides for it. It's all over the place.
|
Response to Cassiopeia (Reply #23)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:46 PM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
43. Thanks for posting!
To the alerter, I can surely show you some gratuitous rudeness if you like, just ask.
I thought the assertion of passive aggression would be called out, not Camp Weathervane. |
Response to Cassiopeia (Reply #23)
Mon May 2, 2016, 09:17 AM
disillusioned73 (2,872 posts)
143. LOL
"Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT Explanation: Why are you here? Feel free to go create Socialist underground if you'd like" ![]() |
Response to disillusioned73 (Reply #143)
Mon May 2, 2016, 03:56 PM
Maedhros (10,007 posts)
151. Naked tribalism for the win! [n/t]
Response to Maedhros (Reply #151)
disillusioned73 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:31 PM
Live and Learn (12,769 posts)
27. K&R Excellent post. nt
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:31 PM
BootinUp (44,948 posts)
28. Crystal. Its Saint Bernie or Bust!
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:36 PM
Gregorian (23,867 posts)
34. This is about climate change.
And that's why losing, as someone above calls it, isn't even part of the dialog. This isn't about getting a president in office as much as turning the planet around.
Bernie is winning. Maybe not by the standards of the establishment. But by the measure of building a movement, we have already done it. We're already creating a new media. We've already had Bernie Sanders on TYT, and we've already had Grayson and Jolly debate. But what's really happening goes far beyond this charade of an election. We not only plan to have a million supporters at the convention, but it's what's after the election that is on the schedule. We're putting down ticked Dems in office. We just beat Tweety's wife. You see, this election is trivial. In comparison to methane bubbling up out of rivers, and 400ppm CO2 concentration in the atmosphere, and 1.5C temp. rise already, this election is unimportant. What you are about to see are millions of young people whose future is not just in peril, but literally dying. And they aren't going to stand by. They aren't going to ask for help. They are going to demand action. And they are going to take action. That's what's going here. I've never been more optimistic in my life! I've lived what these young people are now going through, for fifty years. I'm with them. |
Response to Gregorian (Reply #34)
Sun May 1, 2016, 02:11 PM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
51. Man what more proof do I need
Have you seen the replies to this?
|
Response to Gregorian (Reply #34)
Mon May 2, 2016, 04:04 PM
stillwaiting (3,795 posts)
154. Well, young people and not-so-young that want change better organize to reform how we vote.
Systemic election, campaign-finance, and voting reforms MUST be enacted or the people's voice will never be represented.
I strongly believe this. HAVA installed a system that the corporatists' can use to get the results that they want. I see no reason why they wouldn't game the system. They have clearly demonstrated how much (little) they care about Main Street's plight over the past few decades. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:41 PM
apnu (8,672 posts)
38. Or, use the weathervane to our advantage.
Since Hillary and the Democratic leadership are known to spin, provide the prevailing wind to keep them pointing left.
This isn't over if Bernie fails, and nobody here has to leave. Stay and be the wind that controls the weathervane. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:42 PM
ancianita (33,608 posts)
39. I get it. Ain't stoppin'. ON TO CALIFORNIA!
![]() |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:43 PM
brooklynite (89,607 posts)
40. "A progressive majority in the Congress"
All three of them?
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 01:57 PM
Doctor_J (36,392 posts)
49. Besides those voting for her because of her gender, Clinton voters are extremely conservative
by most definitions. They would have voted for Reagan over Carter, and are horrified at the thought of the war machine being cut off, of unions and a living wage, of Americans being entitled to healthcare without paying billions in profits, and generally of living without multinational corporations deciding what they eat, drink, watch, hear, read, wear, and vote for. They are bothered not the least that Charles Koch, Rupert Murdoch, and Henry Kissinger support her. They don't favor Clinton despite her corporate ties, but because of them. in a recent thread, none of them could refute my assertion that the country will continue to speed to the right if she is president. So progress will mean overcoming them as well as Fox Nation.
|
Response to Doctor_J (Reply #49)
Sun May 1, 2016, 02:47 PM
brooklynite (89,607 posts)
62. "Clinton voters are extremely conservative"
Is that your final answer?
|
Response to Doctor_J (Reply #49)
Sun May 1, 2016, 03:16 PM
NuclearDem (16,184 posts)
66. "Clinton voters are extremely conservative"
![]() Oh, good one. Compared to who, exactly? |
Response to NuclearDem (Reply #66)
Sun May 1, 2016, 10:15 PM
JonLeibowitz (6,282 posts)
110. Those who vote O'Malley or Sanders.
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 02:13 PM
Squinch (49,293 posts)
52. Seems to me that you should have been PPR'd a long time ago:
Your words:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1107&pid=30492 On second thought I take that big FUCK YOU back. I wouldn't fuck you even with someone else's dog's cock. You have proven yourself to be utterly and irretrievably morally repugnant. You have stooped to depths that are lower than whale shit in the fucking Marianas trench. There's a lot of pressure down there for anyone with a shred of fucking decency but once your balls are shriveled to the obvious pinhead size it affects the brain and there's little left than to attempt to smear the shit on the walls when it didn't stick whilst you were flinging it.
|
Response to Squinch (Reply #52)
Sun May 1, 2016, 02:19 PM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
54. Seems to me that the person who started that thread
Should have been PPR'd along with several others who were shown favor.
But that's like my opinion man. Would you like me to cuss you out also? |
Response to hootinholler (Reply #54)
Sun May 1, 2016, 06:03 PM
Autumn (43,409 posts)
72. The hurt runs deep.
![]() ![]() |
Response to hootinholler (Reply #54)
Sun May 1, 2016, 11:07 PM
NanceGreggs (27,812 posts)
125. Seems to me ...
... that your opinion as to the person who started that thread has nothing to do with excusing your despicable response.
Your reply was disgusting, inexcusable by any measure, and stands as a perfect example of how low this site has sunk. NOTE TO SKINNER: We all KNOW you were advised by many DUers that Hootinholler's post was alerted on, and that your much-touted "jurors" allowed it to remain. Again, YOU are responsible for allowing "jurors" to determine "community standards". Do you REALLY think that one poster telling another that they "wouldn't fuck you even with someone else's dog's cock" is a suitable community standard to be followed? |
Response to Squinch (Reply #52)
Sun May 1, 2016, 06:59 PM
George II (67,782 posts)
81. Yeah, he sure has a way with words.
Response to George II (Reply #81)
Post removed
Response to Squinch (Reply #52)
Sun May 1, 2016, 07:30 PM
SwampG8r (10,287 posts)
87. Ppr should go to the op for linking to.rw.hate sites
Stormfront for gods sake
|
Response to SwampG8r (Reply #87)
Sun May 1, 2016, 07:36 PM
Squinch (49,293 posts)
89. Charmer. Through and through.
Response to SwampG8r (Reply #87)
Sun May 1, 2016, 08:00 PM
Aerows (39,961 posts)
92. I've seen accusations that
some different people linked to stormfront, but I confess, I didn't see the posts in question. Who did?
|
Response to Aerows (Reply #92)
Sun May 1, 2016, 09:27 PM
SwampG8r (10,287 posts)
101. The link in this subthread
Embedded li ks in the referred op.more than once
He dresses them up.to be a few words of the op blue linked back to nasty places Then he used the " but this is what the rw will say " excuse Eta juzt che ked the link upthread wrong thread but right author A.search of his efforts.should turn the stormfront up |
Response to Aerows (Reply #92)
Mon May 2, 2016, 01:09 AM
QC (26,371 posts)
133. The username rhymes with stainy pee. n/t
Response to QC (Reply #133)
Mon May 2, 2016, 02:00 AM
Aerows (39,961 posts)
136. Ah!
Thank you!
I've had that one on ignore for a long time. |
Response to Squinch (Reply #52)
Sun May 1, 2016, 07:45 PM
ismnotwasm (41,516 posts)
91. Eww
He's THAT dude? The dog sex dude? Gross.
|
Response to Squinch (Reply #52)
Sun May 1, 2016, 08:04 PM
betsuni (23,634 posts)
93. Ugh, that one. I should know not to be eating anything whilst reading GDP.
Lots of nauseating material here. Don't know why I forget. It's actually pretty fucking simple.
|
Response to Squinch (Reply #52)
Sun May 1, 2016, 08:51 PM
Bobbie Jo (14,341 posts)
96. Unbelievable
that the guy who wrote that disturbing diatribe is still here to post another day.
Thanks for posting, people need to see just what they're buddying up with here. Vile. ![]() |
Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #96)
Sun May 1, 2016, 09:04 PM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
97. It's really unbelievable that the guy who started a website
For Hillary Supporters to coordinate and launch attacks on DUers was not PPR'd.
But that's all part of the drama, eh? Vile doesn't even approach what you all from there have done. |
Response to hootinholler (Reply #97)
Sun May 1, 2016, 09:33 PM
Bobbie Jo (14,341 posts)
103. Don't even.
Yeah, I would try to divert from that mess too.
Look over here!!! Ugh. ![]() |
Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #103)
Sun May 1, 2016, 09:47 PM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
104. Now you're accusing me of doing what squinch did here?
![]() Here, enjoy. ![]() Oh there was far worse. |
Response to hootinholler (Reply #104)
Sun May 1, 2016, 09:50 PM
Bobbie Jo (14,341 posts)
105. Now look over here!
Gag me.
|
Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #105)
Sun May 1, 2016, 09:59 PM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
106. Thanks for the kicks.
![]() |
Response to hootinholler (Reply #106)
Sun May 1, 2016, 10:02 PM
Bobbie Jo (14,341 posts)
107. Here's another
Hope everyone takes a good look.
|
Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #107)
Sun May 1, 2016, 10:06 PM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
108. Hey everyone!!
When you go have a good look, be sure to look at the linked thread too. In fact go read the entire post.
|
Response to hootinholler (Reply #108)
Sun May 1, 2016, 10:27 PM
Bobbie Jo (14,341 posts)
111. If you think it somehow nullifies your words
it doesn't.
Kick |
Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #111)
Sun May 1, 2016, 10:34 PM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
113. Words are funny things
I generally choose them carefully so that they are pertinent to a given context.
Why would I want them nullified? |
Response to hootinholler (Reply #113)
Sun May 1, 2016, 10:42 PM
Bobbie Jo (14,341 posts)
115. By all means, own it.
That you're proud of that bizarre diatribe is disturbing to say the least.
Have the last word, I need a shower... |
Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #115)
Mon May 2, 2016, 05:43 AM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
139. You need a shower?
I was wondering about that smell.
|
Response to Squinch (Reply #52)
Sun May 1, 2016, 10:38 PM
ucrdem (15,502 posts)
114. In the HRC forum no less.
That's really deplorable. The decent thing to do would have been to self-delete five months ago.
|
Response to Squinch (Reply #52)
Sun May 1, 2016, 11:56 PM
murielm99 (30,240 posts)
132. +1 Squinch.
How could we forget this nastiness?
|
Response to Squinch (Reply #52)
Mon May 2, 2016, 02:35 PM
workinclasszero (28,270 posts)
149. Sickening quote
Obviously a hater with years of experience.
![]() |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 02:13 PM
Uncle Joe (56,383 posts)
53. Kicked and recommended.
Thanks for the thread, hootinholler.
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 02:29 PM
senz (11,945 posts)
55. Most Republicans and Hill supporters do not want progressiveness in America.
There is a progressive thread weaving its way through this country, and it is made up of political progressives and the working class who are waking up to how badly they have been screwed by conservatives, by which I mean Republicans and Third Way/DLCers.
That is the opposition, and currently they hold all the "official" power and all the wealth. But they'd better watch out, because the people are getting ready to rise up and reclaim democracy in America. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 02:43 PM
H2O Man (72,216 posts)
60. recommended.
Well said. Thank you.
|
Response to H2O Man (Reply #60)
Sun May 1, 2016, 02:49 PM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
64. It's always a pleasure
To have you respond to something I've written.
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 02:47 PM
joshcryer (62,228 posts)
63. What you've described is quite hollow.
And you will not earn allies with such condescension, saying you are the future of the party, but you will splitter the party if you're not.
![]() Be honest, this whole practice has been about being anti Clinton than anything else. When Sanders puts his backing behind Clinton, your comments will apply to him as well. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 05:29 PM
silvershadow (10,336 posts)
69. Thanks for the post! Glad to see we are still together after the The Great Brock
Beatdown here on DU. I got juried into submission and a 4 day stint in MIRT jail. When I got sprung, this place looked like a morgue. Glad we are all back together. Peace, Love, and Bernie Sanders to all!
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 06:00 PM
DemonGoddess (4,640 posts)
71. soooo....you espouse violence?
I have no doubt that we will accomplish our goal of having a level field, where we invest in people first. Where bombs are the final resort. I have no doubt we will prevail |
Response to DemonGoddess (Reply #71)
Sun May 1, 2016, 06:09 PM
Autumn (43,409 posts)
74. That means people should come before wars and wars should be a last resort.
Reading is fundamental. Strange how your mind went right there.
|
Response to Autumn (Reply #74)
Sun May 1, 2016, 06:15 PM
DemonGoddess (4,640 posts)
75. yes, reading is fundamental
It's interesting how you don't see that he/she espouses violence. That's exactly what that comment is.
|
Response to DemonGoddess (Reply #71)
Sun May 1, 2016, 06:45 PM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
79. Obtuse much?
If that's your take away from that, kindly fuck off.
I know what the fuck war is about, and it ain't fucking freedumb. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 06:06 PM
fun n serious (4,451 posts)
73. It's already near gone..
look at FB, twitter, Snap chat and others.. It's just a drip now.
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 06:28 PM
Tarc (10,437 posts)
77. The problem is, he's failing on both ends
Sanders has zero chance at the nomination now, and most of the candidates he's endorsing are fat-left newcomers who are trying to Tea Party incumbent Democrats in the primaries.
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 06:43 PM
Mike Nelson (9,593 posts)
78. A fine goal...
...with the latter half becoming more worthy which each passing primary. "Bernie's campaign is about putting a progressive in the white house, and a progressive majority in the Congress."
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 06:55 PM
betsuni (23,634 posts)
80. So take our country back to "where we care for each other or ... be crushed in the future."
CRUSHED.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 07:07 PM
George II (67,782 posts)
82. Well sir, if....
"Bernie's campaign is about putting a progressive in the white house, and a progressive majority in the Congress" his campaign was a double fail.
First, Clinton will be a progressive but Sanders sure didn't have anything to do with that, the American electorate will be the ones that put her in the White House (again) Second, Sanders has done zero, nada, zippo, bupkis to achieve a progressive majority in the Congress. Hopefully that will happen, but it will be through the effort of the Hillary Victory Fund, which has contributed tens of millions of dollars to Democrats up and down the ticket over and above herself. SHE is a true, good, progressive Democrat who understands that without other Democrats in the House and the Senate, as a Democratic President she'd have a difficult time accomplishing her progressive agenda. So, insult, badger, cajole, bully Democrats in the name Bernie Sanders, but when there is a Democratic President and more Democratic representation (hopefully with majorities) in both houses of Congress, it will done with virtually no help from Sanders. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 07:27 PM
maryallen (2,172 posts)
86. Bravo!
Well said!
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 10:47 PM
MrMickeysMom (20,453 posts)
117. The Democratic party will have to change, largely due to "the people" having it up to here...
You made most points, but I honestly do not know who "here" doesn't get it. I know that most people PERIOD don't use a historical perspective to reinforce what we must do in this country to bring about social, economic and political change, starting with the follow through from this year, one of transition.
I get so sad when weighing the possibility that there won't BE a future of anyone's political party if there the environmental fall out of our ways makes this planet unlivable. THAT tops everything, but the political will of the people will always be to fight amongst themselves first. I feel good about this election. I haven't given up. When some of the usual suspects here "don't get it" lately, I trash the thread or ignore these mouth breathers. Frankly, they distract from the process. They'll eventually have to "get it". |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 10:52 PM
pacalo (24,721 posts)
118. Thank you, hootinholler!
![]() |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 10:54 PM
uponit7771 (89,579 posts)
119. Sanders "we'll see" disagrees with this notion that its about a progressive congress
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 11:12 PM
tonyt53 (5,737 posts)
126. Single payer?
HRC fought that fight over 20 years ago. And that "crushing us in the future", got news for ya, there are a lot more of use than there are of you. Political newcomer, aren't ya?
|
Response to tonyt53 (Reply #126)
Sun May 1, 2016, 11:17 PM
TM99 (8,352 posts)
129. No Hillary did not.
She was never for single payer. She was for a type of insurance mandate not all that dissimilar to what the ACA is and RomneyCare in MA.
Actually, there are a lot more of us progressive leftist independents than there are registered Democrats. ![]() |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Sun May 1, 2016, 11:38 PM
Waiting For Everyman (9,385 posts)
131. Excellent post, hoot! You are so right.
Cosigning it with nothing to add, so I'll reply this way...
|
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Mon May 2, 2016, 01:31 AM
Sheepshank (12,504 posts)
135. You've got a lot of nerve, telling people more of what you think
You've already said more than enough. In fact, I think it's time you vocalized a very public apology. I can't for thie life of me figure out why even your bestest Bernie bros voted to leave your "dog fucking" post. Remember that post you left in the Hillary Group? Here let me remind you.
On second thought I take that big FUCK YOU back. I wouldn't fuck you even with someone else's dog's cock. You have proven yourself to be utterly and irretrievably morally repugnant. You have stooped to depths that are lower than whale shit in the fucking Marianas trench. There's a lot of pressure down there for anyone with a shred of fucking decency but once your balls are shriveled to the obvious pinhead size it affects the brain and there's little left than to attempt to smear the shit on the walls when it didn't stick whilst you were flinging it. |
Response to Sheepshank (Reply #135)
Mon May 2, 2016, 05:33 AM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
138. Points for originality!
How can I fucking forget it? You shit slingers bring it up every time I post anything that is half popular.
Why didn't you post the link to the thread? Oh, that's right people might see that it was a small part of a righteous push back against a baseless charge. Just because your hero does shit doesn't mean the rest of the world operates that way. I'm beginning to think you are jealous that you were not the subject. |
Response to hootinholler (Reply #138)
Mon May 2, 2016, 05:47 AM
betsuni (23,634 posts)
140. Points for originality!: "You're just jealous!!111!!!"
![]() |
Response to hootinholler (Reply #138)
Mon May 2, 2016, 10:18 AM
Sheepshank (12,504 posts)
145. Yes, I will take opportunities to remind everyone the kind of poster you really are.
no apologies from me on that count.
The Bernie crowd has set the bar pretty high on bringing up posts that the poster would rather have sink, don't you think? And you have the balls to say I am a shit slinger, after that disgusting post? As for the link? Go for it...no one is stopping you from adding it to your push back. Fuck that shit...go for it, I dare you to let everyone see why and how your entire post came about. Perhaps everyone should get to read your entire rant and not just the snippet I wrote. You always have the option of posting a very visible, public, heartfelt apology. |
Response to Sheepshank (Reply #145)
Mon May 2, 2016, 10:44 AM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
147. When Billy boy apologizes to us for what he has done
Then I will consider mending that fence.
For anyone who is interested, the thread is linked above. |
Response to hootinholler (Reply #147)
Mon May 2, 2016, 11:53 AM
Sheepshank (12,504 posts)
148. your screed was disproportionately over the top
justify all you want.
as for the link...is there a reason you want readers to scroll through well over 100 posts to find it? Not even a reference to the post number? Sure, you're all about full disclosure. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Mon May 2, 2016, 05:54 AM
moriah (8,311 posts)
141. From the person who truly tried to encourage civility, who you mock here...
Here's a giant panda.
Everyone loves pandas, right? And FYI, if you want to keep up with the broad-brush personal attacks against Hillary supporters ("Camp Weathervane" ![]() |
Response to moriah (Reply #141)
Mon May 2, 2016, 10:32 AM
hootinholler (26,449 posts)
146. Are you pandering to me?
I didn't call you out by name because your post isn't the only example of passive aggressive let's be nice to the poor hurting Berners and is likely the least offensive.
If you were sincere, then I apologize that you are offended by my opinion. If you are sincere, then I'm sure you can see how your post could be taken as a passive aggressive dig. |
Response to hootinholler (Reply #146)
Mon May 2, 2016, 03:50 PM
moriah (8,311 posts)
150. I will panda to you all day if you like. ;)
Last edited Mon May 2, 2016, 05:11 PM - Edit history (1) I would also like to see more civility on all sides, so yes I called you out on your broad-brush attack against Clinton supporters.
I didn't alert, though I did on someone suggesting Bernie supporters were racist -- again, broad-brush personal attack. But you already have two other hides. Edited to add a smiley to show no hard feelings. |
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Mon May 2, 2016, 09:28 AM
disillusioned73 (2,872 posts)
144. k&r..
![]() Good stuff.. & your right - it is the beginning of the end... I may change to Independent temporarily while the party is taken back by our yutes.. cause it's obvious us old folgies can't do it ourselves at this point.. ![]() |