2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe primary-season framing of "Hillary Supporters" vs "Bernie Supporters" is a thing of the past
In the wake of some of the events here at the Democratic convention yesterday, things got a little testy on DU as well. This should come as no surprise -- we are talking about topics that people feel passionately about, and sometimes we all get a little excited. But I think things got a little more contentious than they should have been. I think the reason is because people were posting some pretty inflammatory things about groups of people, but they weren't being careful to clearly identify whom they were talking about.
Over the course of the Democratic primaries, many people got in the habit of referring to "Hillary supporters" and "Bernie supporters" as these broad groups of people that were either heroes or villains and who share common positive or negative traits within each group. This was both intellectually lazy and highly offensive, and to be honest a group of people who purport to be liberal really should have known better than to lump people into groups like this. But the point is that it happened and it became a habit for many people. Unfortunately, some people are having a difficult time breaking this habit even though the primaries are OVER.
Now that the primaries are over, these two phrases -- "Hillary supporters" and "Bernie supporters" -- are not useful or correct to label the two sides of the divide that we have seen here in Philadelphia. The problem is that they do not clearly describe whom we are talking about.
During primary season, the meaning of the phrases was pretty straightforward:
"Hillary supporters" = People who wanted Hillary Clinton to be the Democratic Nominee for president.
"Bernie supporters" = People who wanted Bernie Sanders to be the Democratic Nominee for president.
But now that the primaries are over, there are no longer two mutually exclusive groups of people who can be labeled as "Hillary supporters" and "Bernie supporters."
During general election season, these phrases take on a completely new meaning:
"Hillary supporters" = Everyone who wants Hillary Clinton to defeat Donald Trump in the general election and become president of the United States. **This group now includes people who supported Hillary Clinton during the primaries and people who supported Bernie Sanders in the primaries.** It can even include people who dislike Hillary Clinton but are going to vote for her in November because Donald Trump is worse.
"Bernie supporters" = Pretty much everyone who likes Bernie Sanders. This includes people who are going to vote for Hillary Clinton on November, and people who are not going to vote for her. It can even include people who supported Hillary Clinton in the Democratic Primaries but like Bernie too.
So if you post a message here on DU referring to simply "Hillary supporters" or "Bernie supporters" you are probably going to get into trouble. Because you have a particular meaning in your mind when you post it, but other people reading your post are going to think you are referring to a different group. For example:
Imagine you are someone who will be voting for Hillary Clinton in November (and if you are posting on DU you are supposed to be), and you are watching the convention on TV and you see a bunch of people disrupting the convention by booing loudly whenever someone mentions Hillary Clinton. This makes you angry (as it should). So you log on to Democratic Underground and you post this:
"I am so sick and tired of those fucking Bernie supporters! They can all go to Hell!!!1"
You have failed. But what's worse is that you have now driven a stake into the heart of this community. Your lazy inability to make clear whom you were referring to has caused this community to become polarized when it did not need to be. We have lots and lots of people who consider themselves Bernie supporters who are going to vote for Hillary Clinton in the fall and who do not condone the behavior of a small number of people who are disrupting the Democratic convention. But they feel like you just called them a crude name and said they should go to Hell (and they have reason to feel that way). So one of them decides to post a tit-for-tat response that is just as lazy and awful as what you wrote.
So we all need to be much more careful about what we mean when we are posting. And if you read something that pisses you off, you need to keep in mind that the person who posted it is probably lazy and stupid and didn't realize that the thought they were thinking in their head does not really match the words they put in their post. Don't take the bait.
In an effort to help people who aren't very good at this, here are some suggested phrases that you can use in your posts to clearly identify whom you are referring to and avoid any confusion:
- "People who are voting for Hillary in November"
- "People who supported Hillary during the primaries"
- "People who supported Bernie during the primaries"
- "People who supported Bernie during the primaries and who are voting for Hillary in November"
- "Those assholes in the convention hall who keep disrupting the speakers"
- "Bitter, vindictive dead-enders who call themselves progressives but aren't voting for Hillary in November"
On a similar note, I would advise using caution with phrases referencing Bernie-or-Bust people. I think there is an unfortunate tendency among posters and readers to (intentionally or unintentionally) conflate Bernie-or-Bust people with everyone who supported Bernie during the primaries. So you might think you are fine to post something like "Fuck those Bernie-or-Busters," but keep in mind that some people are going to (fairly or unfairly) jump to the conclusion that you are trying to smear everyone who supported Bernie Sanders during the primaries. The simple fact that the phrase includes the word "Bernie" probably has a sub-conscious biasing effect that will cause people to be upset even if they know you are not specifically referring to them. The bottom line is that you risk being misunderstood. Much better to make the effort to clarify exactly whom you are talking about.
Wounded Bear
(58,440 posts)Hell, I was a "Bernie supporter." Now I'm a "Hillary supporter." I try to not offend with labels like that. The important thing now is that we be anti-Trump and that we support Dems up and down the ticket.
We need unity and civility, as much as we can muster.
TheBlackAdder
(28,076 posts)Wounded Bear
(58,440 posts)Being Pro-Hillary and anti-Trump is divisive?
TheBlackAdder
(28,076 posts).
More Bernie supporters will probably come around to vote for HRC in 2016 than the original
40% of Anti-Obama PUMAs professed around the 2008's DNC convention who came around.
They'll come back to the fold. No sense doing battle with them and stretching out the animus.
.
Wounded Bear
(58,440 posts)Those who have supported Bernie (remember, I said I was one of them) will do what they do. Yes, I believe the vast majority will come around and support Hillary as the Dem candidate, and I certainly welcome them to do so, in their own time.
Doing battle? Hardly. I'm a Democrat, I believe in democracy. Therefore I allow anybody to vote their conscience.
I feel more like you are trying to alienate me for some reason. IMHO it is time for celebration.
/end of my contribution to this discussion.
Uponthegears
(1,499 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)And there are DU'ers excusing and apologizing for their behavior.
Edit- furthermore, many of these obnoxious, over-entitled Sanders delegates were encouraged in their bad behavior throughout Sanders' campaign by Senator Sanders himself.
Skinner
(63,645 posts)Remember that the vast majority of Sanders delegates are not bitter, vindictive dead-enders. They are are people who care about this country and will vote for Hillary Clinton in November.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)They said anyone who was a "Bernie Supporter" was secretly trolling for Trump and a racist. Of course I got irked. I pointed out I hadn't seen those kind of trolls since the old NSA debates years ago. Somehow I got flagged. I love this country and I love DU. It's my favorite website. I'm 100% for Hillary now. I also have more to lose than the complainers here if Trump wins which is another story. I'm extremely afraid if Trump wins. Then I got lectured about not having fear. My biggest fear now would be being banned which almost happened and boggled my mind. I can't tell what's what on here right now. My solution is I'm taking a break. I like DU too much to lose commenting privileges especially over caring about my future too much. It's sad. Hopefully people start working hard to get Clinton elected instead of wasting their energy smugly attacking their peers.
John Poet
(2,510 posts)The admins here are much more reasonable than most of the people who seem to be serving on juries, and I have had several hides reversed by appealing to the admins.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)I didnt win the appeal. Thats fine it's just one comment. I just dont know when its not hanging over me anymore like the sword of damocles because they arent clear...it said ive been flagged 4 or 5 times in "recent' times whatever that means. I was cleared on the last one but it didnt matter if the next one still borderlines revoking. And I havent said anything bad except stop arguing and get to work so we dont lose. I implied dont ask Bernies peeps to do all the heavy lifting for Hillary by ourselves and lets stand united as the primary is over but whats wrong with that? Its a call to drop the nonsense and get going. They need Bernie fans like myself to say that so those on his side to realize its time to come together and oust Trump's lead as one united party. Dont blame me for what anyone is doing at the convention. Im not even there and work all day and dont even watch any of it till late at night.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)The best thing to do is not give them what they want, because that's what drives them bonkers.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)More will be no doubt. They ARE us, and insults that carelessly splash them (90%!) insult us.
And at that, only SOME of the rest are dead-enders. Others are just slow to decide.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Time to UNIFY and defeat Trump!
Native
(5,935 posts)I think I spend more time doing that than actually reading posts. It's ridiculous.
Avalux
(35,015 posts)Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)Avalux
(35,015 posts)If you're still looking for division I'm not biting. Have a wonderful day.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)bonemachine
(757 posts)and not support the party's nominee?
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)The answer is unequivocally the same.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)They aren't just random disruptors/protestors. They are specifically there on behalf of Bernie Sanders, and, in many cases, have altered Hillary Clinton signs in order to express their support for Bernie and disdain for Hillary.
Obviously, they represent only a small fraction of Bernie Sanders supporters, but they are his delegates.
And, as you said, by explicitly stating that they will never vote for Hillary, these particular Bernie Sanders delegates are now on the opposite side of the cause all of us at DU are supposed to be working towards (i.e. getting Hillary elected President).
The fact that they are Bernie Sanders delegates is not inconsequential.
Skinner
(63,645 posts)Just be careful when you talk about them.
Remember that the vast majority of Sanders delegates are not bitter, vindictive dead-enders. They are are people who care about this country and will vote for Hillary Clinton in November.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)You can understand some anger and frustration directed towards those Bernie Sanders delegates who are disrupting the convention and booing any positive mention of Hillary.
Skinner
(63,645 posts)I called them assholes in my OP.
Saviolo
(3,270 posts)The vast majority (anywhere between 80% and 90%) of Bernie supporters have pivoted to Hillary. The extremely vocal remnants are a very small minority that the media is picking up in order to build the narrative of a conflict to sell ad space.
Skinner even said in his photo recap of day one that it was a tiny delegation that probably would receive a lot of media attention, and he was 100% correct about that. Don't let the media dictate the narrative, and focus on the vast majority that have pivoted, support the nominee, and will be voting D in November.
Blue Idaho
(4,988 posts)Have indicated that they will be leaving the party to vote for a Green Party or other third party candidate shortly after the roll call vote concludes and Sec. Clinton becomes our nominee. In which case it's not even correct to call them Democrats.
They're just assholes.
csziggy
(34,120 posts)I was upset last night at their disrespect. Not only did they boo the opposing candidate, they booed their own candidate as he was asking for unity. They booed during the prayer and they booed people who are not part of what they claim to be fighting against.
Tonight they got to vote and to express themselves and now they seem satisfied. Sen. Sanders choice to have the roll call even after he endorsed Secretary Clinton was a good choice. It gave his followers the chance to vent every bit of their enthusiasm and their frustration at having lost.
Hopefully now we can all work together to elect the first female president of the United States.
Fozzledick
(3,859 posts)I continue to support Bernie - for chairman of the Senate appropriations committee and leader of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.
And I have no reservations about voting a straight Democratic ticket come November.
You can call me a "Bro" if you like, but I've never been a "Buster", and neither have most Bernie supporters. I think they're just being ridiculous, and there's nothing more that needs to be said about it.
Behind the Aegis
(53,833 posts)Response to Skinner (Original post)
Post removed
cyberpunk
(78 posts)I've seen at least two swings today, and I have 0 faith in the capabilities of others to hold back right about now.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)Having been on the Bernie side of this emotional coin for many months here, I would like to convey the sentiment that the disparagement of his supporters here continues to be bitterly vitriolic and hurtful. There are a ton of digs every day that are bantered around like some kind of schoolyard epithets.
Extremely exclusionary, pointed hostility remains, the venom is still very much spewing out, despite your obviously well-considered efforts and the new rules. I am not at all an angry person but I get reactive and it continues to be difficult to even read through the post headings, they're so ugly. I think maybe long-time Hillary supporters don't see or feel this, but there appears to be much gleeful enjoyment in name calling and bashing Bernie issue-supporters, both outright and subtle.
The mass exodus to JPR wasn't just by Bernie supporters who refuse to vote for Hillary, but by many who are voting for her but just didn't want to suffer through the anti-Bernie venom here any more. I haven't joined, but I've spent some time reading posts, and my impression is that a good many of the posters are working on persuading others to vote for Clinton. Yet that site is often the subject of animated, mean spirited group disparagement here. Such as this thread today http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512303269 Since folks on that site are passionate about Bernie, whoever they're voting for, wholesale vitriol against it feels tantamount to insulting all Bernie supporters, including those who have gotten on board with Hillary. I don't know if you feel similar loathing about JPR, Skinner, but to those of us strong Bernie supporters during the primaries this feels like an attack against our fellow democrats (since Bernie ran as a Dem and caucused with Dems for so long, and his positions appeal to the aspirational Dems in all of us "supporters" .
The other main category of continuing jarringly divisive comment is about whether Bernie was treated evenhandedly by the DNC. The official apologies/acknowledgements that we've just gotten only refer to the tip of the iceberg, as many of us see it. There are lawsuits and other efforts underway about some of the other issues and there may be more leaks that demonstrate how far this went. This is a core issue for many of his former supporters and the ridicule around its reality is another source of deep emotional division here. The reason people were going nuts at the convention yesterday is because this is such a huge issue to us. I understand that Clinton supporters feel that the primaries were fair. There is another view with some substantive support, and many DUers hold that view.
So I don't know if you care or not about those of us who still have Bernie in our blood and are still here because we're on board with Clinton, or if you'd actually prefer that DU become only a site for died in the wool Hillary supporters, but I think these sort of digs and slams belong in the prohibited category, and if you were to spell that out, an awful lot of us who otherwise feel part of the DU community would be able to start healing back into the fold.
Thanks for considering...
GreenPartyVoter
(72,377 posts)Last edited Tue Jul 26, 2016, 09:28 PM - Edit history (1)
everyone could see my sigline. Maybe they wouldn't keep sniping at me if they knew that I was a Dem voting against Trump?
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)stuffmatters
(2,574 posts)Just like to add that the lazy and shallow MSM just keeps harping against the so called "Bernie or Bust." They're lumping any opposition displayed at the convention into this category, which they've spent months vilifying. There are plenty of
protests going on outside and some inside the convention hall. Many groups and passionate citizens are exercising their
right to protest controversial issues...being against the corporate coup d'etat that is the TPP springs to mind. If they boo
a legislator who voted for fast track, that's not anti Hillary, it's anti TPP.
Yes all the antagonism towards "other" democrats has to stop. It's an overhyped mythology at this point of the (again shallow, lazy and deflecting to nothing burgers) MSM that Bernie supporters are stubbornly not voting or supporting Hillary, It's their go to chew toy/junk fill to fall back upon instead of actually discussing issues ordinary people have spent their time and money to come and express ...like for example their anti TPP reasons or marijuana legalization or fracking's relationship to earthquakes or black lives matter or...the list is endless.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)What?!?!?!
No. That site is anti Hillary. They hate her. They call her the foulest names--along with her supporters. Being angry is one thing, what they do there is not just anger.
Their guidelines
seaglass
(8,170 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)The place is a cesspit.
Spazito
(49,765 posts)I'm shocked to see it being touted here at all, it is completely antithetical to the goals and objectives of DU and DUers, imo.
still_one
(91,965 posts)Hillary hate site in the most vile way
JudyM
(29,122 posts)They should call them Clinton haters and not lump JPR members into their bullseye, for reasons stated.
NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)... some very selective reading if you think it's anything BUT an HRC/Democratic hate site.
It's not like anyone could miss the literally hundreds of posts calling HRC and other Dems criminals who stole the election from Bernie. "Clinton haters" doesn't come close to describing the vitriol spewed at many, MANY individual Democrats, and the Party as a whole.
For weeks, JPR has been urging BS delegates to be as disruptive as possible at the Convention - a slap in the face to every Democrat, not just those who supported HRC.
Saying that all JPR members shouldn't be "lumped together" and subjected to disdain is like saying not everyone who posts on a KKK site should be taken to be a racist. Everyone who posts there KNOWS what is being said there on a daily basis. Do you expect anyone to believe that members who don't agree with what's being spewed 24/7 are staying for the barbecuing tips and the hot sauce recipes?
Who's zoomin' who, JudyM? We have SEEN the site. We KNOW what gets posted there. We KNOW what the site is all about. Defending it is beyond reprehensible.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)Especially given that a banned racist administers the site.
Loki
(3,825 posts)There is no debate or discussion unless you want to bash, hate on, call foul, mysoginistic names of our first woman Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and, anyone who thinks that is ok is not someone who believes in the Democratc Party and our principals or values.
JSup
(740 posts)...during the primaries (and now) I squirm every time I see these posts you're referring to; it's like going out to eat with your uncle and he farts real loud.
still_one
(91,965 posts)Cha
(295,929 posts)still_one
(91,965 posts)JSup
(740 posts)...that was from January and I said some snarky things earlier this year too. But the 'war' is over and anyone saying things like that now just wants it to continue.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)because it is all so harsh.
NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)... you seem to be unaware that people can see that site for themselves, and can readily see that your portrayal of it is completely opposite to what our own eyes tell us.
JPR is an HRC hate site, and has been from the outset. It is also an anti-Dem site, where posters are encouraging each other to leave the Democratic Party en masse.
They have accused Hillary of having "stolen" the election, and of actually having people murdered who pose a threat to her political ambitions. They have accused Democrats of removing BS supporters from voter rolls, of having rigged the primaries by discarding and/or not counting votes for Bernie, and of having engaged in all kinds of nefarious conspiracies in order to ensure that Bernie could NOT win the primary election.
The minute Bernie endorsed HRC, there was post after post on JPR about how he "had to do it" because he'd been told by HRC and/or other Democrats that he, his family, and even his grandchildren would face bodily harm if he refused to do so. They've also claimed that HRC had Bernie's secret service protection removed for the purpose of being able to "get at him" if he refused to cooperate.
"The official apologies/acknowledgements that we've just gotten only refer to the tip of the iceberg, as many of us see it."
And therein lies one of the many problems with JPR. It is a petri dish for conspiracy theories where, with little or NO facts, members are determined to find something - anything, no matter how utterly ridiculous - that they can blow up into being some vast conspiracy that the DNC and Democrats participated in, thereby casting Hillary's nomination as the illegitimate outcome of coordinated criminal behaviour.
To appeal to Skinner that JPR should be protected from "digs and slams" is ridiculous on its face. If people want to call Hillary a "lying bitch, a murderer, a warmongering cunt", they are open to the same ridicule and push-back as any other posters on anti-Democratic sites. That's how DU rolls - always has, and hopefully always will.
I predict that in the weeks to come as the "Bern" fades, many JPR posters will want to return to DU. I would caution them that few here - whether former Bernie supporters or long-term HRC supporters - will forget what they've seen posted by them on JPR.
We Hillary supporters welcome those who now stand with us behind HRC - in the same way most BS supporters would have welcomed us as fellow Bernie supporters had he won the nomination.
But those on JPR - who have accused not only Hillary, but MANY Dems and the Party as a whole - of being bought-off criminals who steal elections, threaten the lives of their political opponents, and engage in illegal activities in order to thwart the will of voters will probably not be greeted with open arms when they return.
You reap what you sow. And sowing discord and divisiveness, and spewing out-and-out lies about Democrats and our Party, will undoubtedly not end well at DU for those who did so.
betsuni
(25,136 posts)LowerManhattanite
(2,377 posts)...That place is a cesspool, as were the PUMA sites that sprung up post-our present nominee's primary loss to The President in '08. An absolutely crazed admin from JPR who a few days ago proudly posted his newfound Trump allegiance had the gall to pop back over here and chide someone for supporting Hillary. Of course, he was sly enough about it to not violate the TOS (bless his heart), but the fact remains that defending that site as something remotely "Democratic" and open is myopic at best, disingenuous at the middle and something-I-won't-say-here-but-you-can-imagine-how-bad-it-is at worst.
Allowing links from there/to there and treating its willful bad actors as misguided children who don't mean to muck up DU does us a disservice. Their mission statement mentioned above says it all.
Skinner has laid out a peaceful way forward. These folks are talking about Hillary threatening Bernie's loved ones with death to somehow silence and twist him. We can see that one path is saneand the other is lunacy. Let's embrace sanity.
Thank you, Skinner.
Cha
(295,929 posts)brer cat
(24,402 posts)That site is filled with vile hateful anti-Hillary posts. There should be nothing but condemnation for those who chose to wallow in that cesspool.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,683 posts)My sentiments/thoughts exactly!
Maru Kitteh
(28,303 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)Fuck the Pinebaggerz.
No better than Freepers.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)long time ago. I've checked it a few times, the only thing they like more than conspiracy theories is Donald Trump.
It's good for a laugh, same as checking Free Republic.
angrychair
(8,594 posts)The JPR site aside, since that website is not relevant to DU or its TOS. There is a lot of selective memory going on here.
I was here for 2008 and PUMA. I was also here during this primary season. The lot of you (I don't think I have to say who, you all know who you are) are not victims in all of this. You gave as good as you got and even did it on another website not that different than JPR.
I'm not completely blameless either. I did a much better job than most in keeping civil but I had my moments too.
I find this reframing of history amusing. There are very few dainty flowers on this website. Few here are without sin.
MADem
(135,425 posts)It looked like a hate site to me. Let the people who like that stuff stay there--everyone needs to vent but I don't like seeing racist and sexist and homophobic comments over here.
Hekate
(90,202 posts)fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)GreenPartyVoter
(72,377 posts)jalan48
(13,798 posts)I think passions run high this time of year and painting everyone in a particular group with a broad brush is counter productive and only serves to further inflame the situation.
DemonGoddess
(4,640 posts)I do make sure that when I reference the few assholes, that I make sure that I point out it's the few assholes. Not everyone else who has come in support of our Democratic Party and nominee.
You know, my eldest was a Bernie supporter in the primaries. He's a Hillary supporter now. Not just because she'll be the nominee, but because he's taken a step back, and actually did some research. But then again, I expect that my eldest and many others that I know, or know of, are reasonable people. That, right there, is the difference.
tallahasseedem
(6,716 posts)unfortunately, the reality is that we are watching Bernie supporters systematically working against the Democratic ticket through protesting outside of the convention, inside the convention hall (booing and jeering almost every speaker including Elizabeth Warren, Corey Booker, and Elijah Cummings), and disrupting conversations being had on this board and others. We can't even have a conversation about the excitement over Tim Kaine without a Bernie supporter coming in and shitting all over it. You say you want us to be careful, but not much is being done to ensure that those of us supporting the Democratic ticket can do so without constantly being bombarded by upset Bernie supporters.
What do you plan on doing about ensuring that this remains a safe place for Democrats who want to talk about the ticket and other issues without having their thread taken hostage by disgruntled Bernie supporters who sole reason for being there is to cause chaos? When the Freeps and conservative trolls rolled through, they were taken care of immediately.
Will the TOS be changed to reflect the problems we are having now?
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)A few quibbles, but basically I agree. The disruptors at the convention aren't a small minority. It is deafening booing every single time they mention Hillary's name. I live in the UK - BBC and The Guardian both led with "contentious Democratic convention" stories. It's hurting us, and hurting our ability to beat Trump.
I mean, OBVIOUSLY #notallBerniesupporters. Obviously. But the disruptors who are doing this...well, I won't say it because I might get a hide.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)'the sound' is not what speakers are hearing, not what other attendees are hearing and it is in fact a chosen selection of the mass ambient sound of such an arena. There are thousands and thousands of people. If you hear any individual voice other than a speaker during a speech, that's a matter of intentional delivery of that voice to your ears. I could make out individual voices and one voice in particular out of tens of thousands, over a speaker with a microphone. That's not an accident. Ask Howard Dean about this.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)BlueMTexpat
(15,349 posts)better tonight ... and I really do have to go to bed now because it's past 2 am here ... if there is any more crap from some people, I will likely be using these two phrases quite a lot.
- "Bitter, vindictive dead-enders who call themselves progressives but aren't voting for Hillary in November"
Thanks to Skinner for the suggested phrasing because that sums up my reaction to them.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)Around 100 Bernie delegates walked out tonight after the roll call apparently. And the rest of us are UNIFIED to win in November!!
BlueMTexpat
(15,349 posts)very likely not - and never have been - Dems in any meaningful way.
They are most likely a**holes and we are ALL better off without them, IMO.
highprincipleswork
(3,111 posts)DFW
(54,056 posts)I posted this after a small, intimate fundraiser with Howard Dean and Al Gore in 2008:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3369762
Ring a bell, anyone?
Blue Idaho
(4,988 posts)"Imagine you are someone who will be voting for Hillary Clinton in November (and if you are posting on DU you are supposed to be)"
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... is now frowned upon? Or is that a freedom-of-association kind of thing where group hosts are given a lot of leeway for who gets banned and who doesn't?
David__77
(23,220 posts)I also think it would be nice if people refrained from speaking of "Bernie Bros."
wildeyed
(11,240 posts)And I like the idea of calling bitter, vindictive "progressives" who will not support Hillary during the GE "Dead-Enders" instead of the other things. That makes it very clear that present company is not included in the designation.
Bill USA
(6,436 posts)their own party and be done with the Democratic Party. Is that too hard to do? I mean Bernie was an Independent for a few decades until about a year ago.
BobbyDrake
(2,542 posts)Those who REALLY want to start an alternate party do so. The Working Families Party in NY and the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party in MN are two modern and active examples of such hard work in action.
But even as alternate parties, both of those understand how democracy, elections, and majorities function and therefor align with the larger national Democratic Party on major issues so as to achieve progress where possible.
emulatorloo
(43,982 posts)onecaliberal
(32,489 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Now, you guys go and have some fun.
avaistheone1
(14,626 posts)MerryBlooms
(11,728 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)It took forever to get to this point. Thank goodness!
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)the 2008 primary. Cruel witchhunts against people who supported someone else are not productive.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)mcar
(42,210 posts)And congratulate Sen Sanders on his class and grace tonight.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)...then they may be a BoBer themselves or identify with the BoB movement. I have no sympathy for people like this because they are either OPENLY HOSTILE or they are DISLOYAL.
I know where this is coming from, however. The Clinton campaign doesn't want to rock the boat. So rather than be hostile towards the Piners we have to "play nice" even though they'll stab us in the back the first chance they get.
If they were a larger movement I might be remotely concerned. I will, however, pivot to calling them Piners so there won't be any confusion. Though I have consistently called then faux Sanders supporters or "supporters."
TDale313
(7,820 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)Dem2
(8,166 posts)I noticed this as well and decided to try to avoid such threads going forward.
Rex
(65,616 posts)I don't know why that is such a hard rule to follow. People were getting back at each other, for all the HRC bashing in the beginning and now BS bashing toward the end.
Now we are unified, so there is no need for the coke vs pepsi threads imo.
Red Knight
(704 posts)As a "Bernie Supporter" I appreciate that.
I am one of those supporters who will be voting for Hillary--and since I live in the battleground state of Pennsylvania I consider that to be very important. But nothing will ever diminish the love I feel for Bernie and his political revolution movement. While I will absolutely vote for Hillary in this election, I will also hold her to promises made.
Donald Trump is the most dangerous candidate for the White House I've ever seen. I will not lay my head down on election night believing in any way I helped him to get to the office of the President of this country. Even if my vote is essentially an anti-Trump vote , I am optimistic by nature and hope that Hillary will be true to the vision that both candidates agreed on. And yes--I know that I can't have everything.
I will continue to keep Bernie's face on my posts because he reflected my beliefs like no other candidate in my lifetime. And if I see anyone blaming him or insulting him I will be quick to defend him.
But MOST of the "Bernie Supporters" will be voting for Hillary. Poll after poll confirms that. By November when emotions have settled I see that number growing as people take a closer look at Trump.
The last thing that Hillary needs is an ongoing battle.
The last thing this country needs is Donald Trump as President.
I will follow Bernie's lead. I trusted him and his feelings and continue to do so. If Bernie is with her--that's good enough for me.
I appreciate this post.
demmiblue
(36,751 posts)still_one
(91,965 posts)PatSeg
(46,804 posts)I stayed away from Democratic Underground for the most part during the primaries. Too ugly for my taste. Now that we have a nominee, I don't want to see redundant anti Bernie supporter threads. How many ways can people say the same thing? Meanwhile, it is making a lot of good Democrats very uncomfortable.
I would rather focus on Hillary versus Trump.