Can DU members show concern about Hillary's narrowing poll lead without being called a troll?

[Doodley]

We aren't talking about the possibility of a Republican getting into the White House. We are talking about a fascist, a narcissist, a bigot, a pathological liar, a thin-skinned bully who wants to always get even with those who stand up to him, a scam-artist, a man with plans that divide America, alienate our allies, put our security at risk and cause a worldwide recession.

Can DU members show concern about Hillary's narrowing poll lead without being called a troll or being accused or trolling, or being mocked? Do we have to have snarky and sometimes nasty comments attacking posters who are genuinely concerned that the Trump side is dominating the media day after day while the Hillary side is not effectively countering that or dealing with all the email crap, which should be a non-story anyway? Maybe some of the replies to this post will illustrate what I mean.

[hollowdweller]

2. No

I liked it better back in the Obama days when we'd all be worried about something and raising a ruckus and then Obama and his team would dial it back in and make the right move.

Seems like now on the DU we are more supposed to just cheer lead. I understand that in part due to the trolls trying to sew discord but makes it a bit less interesting to me.

[athena]

3. If you're so concerned,

what are you doing about it? Are you volunteering for the Clinton/Kaine campaign in your area? Are you helping register people? Are you making calls? Are you knocking on doors?

Let me guess: you are doing none of that. And yet you want those of us who are doing those things to believe that expressing "concern" about Hillary's campaign on an online forum is somehow a worthy and laudable effort for the cause.

[Purveyor]

8. Par for this course... eom

[NWCorona]

11. Definitely

[athena]

18. I love how it's "nasty" to ask that a person actually do something to help the Clinton campaign.

So much better to just sit in one's chair and complain, while calling others "nasty".

[athena]

17. How is it "nasty" to ask that a person's actions match their words?

Your reply really says all anyone needs to know: all the people complaining about their inability to express "concern" about Hillary's campaign online are not actually doing anything in real life to help her campaign.

Really, nothing more needs to be said about this topic. The replies to my post really show what this discussion is all about.

[Doodley]

25. How dare you lie about me or any other other poster?

You stated:

"all the people complaining about their inability to express "concern" about Hillary's campaign online are not actually doing anything in real life to help her campaign."

You don't have a clue what people are doing to fight in this election. How dare you attack other posters? Do not claim you are not being nasty by posting yet another nasty lie-filled post. You have displayed one objective - to denigrate others and to divide - the very definition of a troll.

[Agschmid]

68. Okay so what are you doing then?

[Doodley]

10. Thank you for providing an example of what I am talking about - a very nasty reply by you.

[athena]

20. So you admit you do NOT volunteer for the campaign.

Your reply proves exactly what I suspected: you want to complain about Hillary Clinton and her supporters online, but you refuse to lift a finger to help Hillary campaign win the election.

What is "nasty" is complaining about Hillary Clinton and her supporters while refusing to make any sort of effort and commitment on your own.

[Doodley]

27. Again you lied about a DU member. You claimed I admit I do not volunteer for the campaign. LIE!

[Demsrule86]

59. No one lied about you...what is this?

[Agschmid]

69. "This" is exactly what it looks like. And im not shocked, at all.

[Demsrule86]

76. Looked like bait to me. nt

[Demsrule86]

58. I didn't think it was nasty. nt

[Joe the Revelator]

16. This is awesome in how tone deaf it is.

[athena]

22. What is "tone deaf" is insisting on criticizing Hillary Clinton and

attacking her supporters but refusing to volunteer or otherwise do anything to help Hillary Clinton actually win the election.

Elections are won on the ground. They are not won by complaining and attacking others online while refusing to get out there and do something.

[Joe the Revelator]

24. Yes but this is a discussion board. Where discussions take place.

There is no way to prove what you, I, OP, Skinner, or anyone is actually doing on the ground. All we have here is the ability to discuss.

[athena]

26. It's significant that the poster did not answer my question

about whether s/he volunteers for the campaign. Instead, they called me "nasty". That tells me all I need to know about the nature of their "concern".

If a person is "concerned" about Hillary's chances of winning the election, they should be out there campaigning for her. If they are not, then their "concern" cannot be all that deep or genuine.

[Jakes Progress]

46. Dude. Just admit that you screwed up.

You jumped to conclusions and then doubled down without any backing for your attack. That is the very definition of nasty.

I am concerned about how many idiots are out there who will vote for trump. And if you want to attack me and say that I'm not doing anything for the election, you are just a blathering idiot.

The best thing you can do here is apologize and go on about your business. Or you could do the more cowardly thing and erase your posts so that you can avoid looking like they make you look.

Now if you know the poster you attacked personally. If you see them daily and know the they are not working for the party, then you can get my apology. If you don't know the poster personally and are not aware of their actions, then you are simply wrong.

This is the internet. You have no idea who you are talking about or to. You seem to claim that you are working 24/7 for Hillary, but we don't know that. No one as charged you with lying about it. Demanding that someone write on an anonymous forum about what they re doing for the election is simply stupid. I might just as well demand that you prove that you are not working for the trump campaign to post on DU and piss off Democrats.

Just apologize already.

[Demsrule86]

60. Sometime the 'concern' is from those who don't like

her and maybe don't even want her to win.

[uppityperson]

41. You are accusing people of things you have no proof of. Most of us are doing things that we don't

need to share with you in order to discuss things here.

[WillyBrandt]

43. Can you help clarify?

I donate money to HRC campaign regularly. And while I think Hillary is very likely to win, I am wary of the polls which do indeed look closer than a couple weeks before.

So can you clarify: I'm off the hook, right? You're just insulting the original poster from the pulpit, but no me? Or are we both nullities? Trying to get a sense of boundaries.

Thanks for the illumination.

[yurbud]

82. Is it possible that the problem is candidates tactics and policy positions rather than progressives

not being browbeaten enough?

[Lunabell]

4. Nope

I believe even constructive criticism or real concern about dropping poll numbers goes against forum rules.

[CajunBlazer]

7. I think you forgot to include....

the thingy

[Fla Dem]

54. No they don't. Where in the TOS does it say that?

Political

Support Democrats
Do not post support for Republicans or independent/third-party "spoiler" candidates. Do not state that you are not going to vote, or that you will write-in a candidate that is not on the ballot, or that you intend to vote for any candidate other than the official Democratic nominee in any general election where a Democrat is on the ballot. Do not post anything that smears Democrats generally, or that is intended to dissuade people from supporting the Democratic Party or its candidates. Don't argue there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats.

Why we have this rule: Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government, and as such we expect our members to support and vote for Democrats at election time. Rare exceptions are granted at the sole discretion of the DU Administrators. (Current exceptions: None.)

Don't bash Democratic public figures

Do not post disrespectful nicknames, insults, or highly inflammatory attacks against any Democratic public figures. Do not post anything that could be construed as bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for any Democratic general election candidate, and do not compare any Democratic general election candidate unfavorably to their general election opponent(s).

Why we have this rule: Our forum members support and admire a wide variety of Democratic politicians and public figures. Constructive criticism is always welcome, but our members don't expect to see Democrats viciously denigrated on this website. This rule also applies to Independents who align themselves with Democrats (eg: Bernie Sanders).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

[Lunabell]

56. Nice, but it doesn't work that way

[Fla Dem]

70. How does it work then? Need to back that up.

Just look at this thread. Lots of diverse opinions and the thread didn't blow up.

[Lunabell]

80. Personal experience

Oh, the posts were reinstated, but the jury system didn't work.

[Demsrule86]

61. And some of those posts were from those who have publicly stated they won't vote

for Hillary Clinton...how is that 'constructive'. It is a way to skirt the rules.

[AngryAmish]

6. No.

[molova]

9. As long as leave junk polls out

LA Times, Emerson, etc. then it is ok to express concern.

[CajunBlazer]

12. Well, get ready to call me a troll

Anyone who has read my posts knows I am a huge Hillary supporter. However, I reserve the right to get concerned, and express that concern about shrinking poll numbers on DU. We'll see who has the gumption to label me a troll.

I actually believe we are getting too complacent on this site and complacency is the first sign post on the road to defeat.

[bullimiami]

29. Id also feel better if the polls were going the other way.

We have a country with a lot of pretty stupid or gullible folk.

Scary.

[Andy823]

36. Yes there are a lot of stupid folk out there

And we also have a very dishonest media that want this to be "close" so they can keep up their ratings. Many polls being sited are online polls, which are useless, others are questionable to say the least. Polls with look better for Hillary the closer we get to the election.

[CajunBlazer]

40. I don't know what media you are talking about, but I have not had the same experience

I suspect the Trump supporters are saying the same thing, so that's a pretty good indication that most of the media has been pretty even handed.

I watch a lot of CNN, and I think they have been even handed for the most part. A candidate like Donald Trump presents a lot of problems for the media. They are trying to be evenhanded when we want them to consistently call the idiot a fraud because we know that is what he is.

I also am getting the impression from posts that I have seen on DU where many on this board complaining about MSNBC. In the past they expected their news to be pre-chewed and passed liberal filter before it was disseminated on the air. I am also getting the impression that many of the MSNBC viewers are upset because that poorly performing network is trying to appeal to a wider audience and in the process is alienating its most loyal viewers. I guess that if you are used to a liberal friendly media and and your favorite network becomes more neutral, it can appear that the entire media has become less friendly to your candidate.

[bullimiami]

49. I think our media is SHIT. There are facts. The facts should be the stories.

Im so damn sick of 'reporters' not 'reporting' the facts.

[demmiblue]

13. No, not really.

But I still stand by my response to you in another thread.

[Doodley]

15. Which was?

[GWC58]

19. Concerned but,

not worried. The bigoted racist has a narrow path to the W/H. Could he win? Sure, anythings possible. I just don't see it happening.

[Coyotl]

21. Only if you add a really good meme to your post.

Last edited Sun Sep 4, 2016, 01:17 PM - Edit history (1)

[Mz Pip]

23. I've been here since 2001

So I'm hardly a troll. Making an observation about the tightening of poll numbers shouldn't be considered trolling. It's the reality and none of us should be burying our heads in the sand and just accept that this election is in the bag for Hillary.

It's obvious the media wants a horse race so is going out of its way to minimize the Trump's rhetoric while calling every Clinton issue a scandal or controversy. That is taking it's toll.

This isn't over by any means. While I cheer at positive polls I am well aware that a lot can happen between now and Election Day and we must not be complacent.

[Demsrule86]

63. Actually it is over.

She has enough electoral college votes to win now...safe states. But I want to see a landslide. Republicans always have a tough road with the electoral college and Trump is worse than the others. Some (not saying you) who post these concerns...go out of their way to post bad news while ignoring good news...they have an agenda...whether it is anger from the bitter primary, maybe some GOP types or those who simply don't like Hillary, I couldn't tell you. But it does not appear to be real concern (it shows) and has a soupcon of 'I told you so'.

[Adsos Letter]

81. Well said, Mz Pip.

And spot on. Operating as if this election were a done deal for Hillary could cost us the election.

[Duckhunter935]

28. Nope

No criticism can be offered according to some. This is funny as Skinner allows it. I self censor which I think is sad.

[NCTraveler]

30. Give it a try.

[ismnotwasm]

31. Sure

People who are honestly concerned aren't trolls--It can start a lively discussion about polls, methodology, historical precedents, timing, etc. it's a good way to reach out for reassurance as well. We all want the Democratic nominee to win of course.

There are a few poster with a history of concern trolling--they are what they are.

[MFM008]

32. Look

This dumb ass holiday has so much symbolic meaning in an election.
Notice EVERYONE is flying under the radar from Elizabeth Warren to President Obama.
I would say this will change next week as the vacations are thrown off and school begins.
Remember Bill Clinton won twice so I'm sure the Clinton camp has a plan to deal with the maggot.

[Kathy M]

35. Yes , its a holiday weekend .

Turned on Fareed Zakaria this morning he was talking with President Obama . Hillary will be walking in a couple parades tomorrow , heard that towards the end of Joy 's show .

Time to go outside since it is beautiful Have a good one everyone

[Gothmog]

33. Thank you or your conern

Clinton is still doing very well but your concern is noted

[riderinthestorm]

34. No

[ismnotwasm]

38. Ah.

[Orrex]

37. Typically it's not the message; it's the tone.

If you're getting blowback for "expressing concern," then perhaps you might take another look at the way you're "expressing" that "concern."

Within this very thread, for instance, you've bit a bit fiery in your responses, so I'd have to guess that your tone might be a contributing factor.

[doc03]

39. I have been calling out these people that think Hillary can't lose for

weeks. Just saw a headline on Comcast touting stunning new polls that show Trump surging. but no he can't win
because there are not enough white voters, I say bullshit. I see little enthusiasm for Hillary and that spells low turn-out
and lots of people that have not voted for years or never are supporting Trump. I think the debates will decide this election.
Look at the far more qualified Republicans that ran and were totally destroyed by a total clown. Look at 538.com Nate Silver has Trump at 30% now with historical data figured in, I am concerned.

[Dreamweaver 5.0]

42. Its a double edged sword.

If you show concern you could be a troll.


If you show no concern and think HRC will win hands down you are considered naive.

I have been voting Democrat since Carter.


All I am concerned about is making sure Hillary becomes our next President.

I'm not interested in getting into what motives are behind a fellow DUr's post.

I let the younglings play spy vs spy.
Life's to short.

JMHO

[MohRokTah]

45. Your concern concerning this concern is concerning. eom

[treestar]

47. Hillary is way ahead

and negative people just can't stand it. This could be the biggest blowout ever. But let's don't enjoy it! Let's worry and concern and try to get everyone else uncertain and uncomfortable!

We want to be encouraged and downers make everything gloomy. That's why people don't like it.

Some people just aren't negative all the time and don't like it when negative people want to bring them down.

In 2008 and 2012 there were posts just like yours and all the posts of people who do nothing but criticize the campaign and worry and tell us how concerned they are and down our candidate and his/her actions as going to wreck it all, etc. So boring.

[MiniMe]

48. The only polls I have seen narrowing is nationwide polls

Nationwide polls tell you nothing about the outcome of the race, only by state or electoral votes will tell you the predicted results with any accuracy. It also depends on who is being polled.

To be honest, I don't answer my phone for anybody when I don't recognize the number or name, the robo-telemarketers are just out of control these days.

[LAS14]

50. I support people's right to express concern.

If we can't talk about the HRC campaign here, where can we? I'm not personally worried at this point (except, of course, about living in a country where 35 - 45% of the voting population would even consider voting for trump), but I never like to see people pile on to members who ask questions or express concerns. Just answer the question and respond to the concern, OK?

[Imperialism Inc.]

51. I don't really understand it either and, hell, I even agree that some people are doing so

just to troll. Still, surely there is some point at which it makes sense to start worrying. Trump's creeping odds on 538 make me uneasy even now. Are we supposed to be like the Fox News watching dipshits that were told and believed Romney was way ahead even when he wasn't? Are we not allowed to discuss the potential effects of certain campaign decisions? I don't get it. I'm of the school of thought that ignoring reality (like tightening polls) is a bad idea in the long run.

[chillfactor]

52. I for one....

do not believe the spread is as narrow as the media makes out...they want to portray the contest as close because it sells....rather then admitting that t-rump is getting his ass handed to him.

[Chemisse]

53. I am concerned and I won't apologize for it either.

It should not be close at all. It should be nothing short of a blowout.

I look at this every single day:

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

After the huge lead Clinton took on following the convention, I want to know why it is shifting back and tightening up, and why the Dems aren't out there actively supporting Hillary every single day.

And I don't have to be working for her campaign to have the right to be worried!!

[kstewart33]

75. Bingo.

I posted a thread yesterday stating my concerns and suggesting strategies for the Clinton campaign and the responses were predictable. And the predictable question was raised: what am I doing to help the campaign?

My response - one month of volunteering coming up in October, working together with a friend.

I wish DUers would stop going after those who post a different view.

As for evidence to support cause for concern: yesterday's Morning Consult poll: Hillary's national lead over Trump? 2 points.

[Chemisse]

78. It turns out that that is not a mainstream, reputable poll.

So thankfully, the situation is not THAT bad.

I was happy to see this morning that Clinton, Obama, Biden and others are going to be out this week campaigning. Possibly they have been waiting 'til Labor Day to gear up for the big push to November.

So that is pretty reassuring.

[brooklynite]

55. Show me where the poll narrowing is...

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-trump-vs-clinton

[RAFisher]

65. Is this is rhetorical question? Over the last month Clinton's line goes down and Trump's goes up.

HuffPost Pollster shows it pretty clearly.

[brooklynite]

66. Rescale the chart to strut on July 1 and get back to me.

[Demsrule86]

57. No

Hillary is doing fine...all this excessive concern is mostly from those who don't like her. I sometimes wonder if they really want a Clinton victory. That is hard to imagine. It is lthe same thing as the Greens are OK posts or Greens are no threat posts. Most
(not all) of those posts are really a way to attack Sec Clinton while skirting the rules.

[Fla Dem]

72. Not necessarily Demsrule.

Maybe I'm a worrier, but certainly have been in the HRC camp even during the '08 elections. But I do worry. Yes I see the electoral college count and she is way ahead with almost no path for Trump to win. And yesterday this poll came out from Pa, that even with Stein and Johnson thrown into the mix HRC is leading by 8 points. But, we have 2 months until the election. Trump has brought on some pretty sleazy characters into his campaign. I just want it to be November 8th.

[Demsrule86]

74. I said not all and that includes you...but when I see posters

that I know from past posts do not like Hillary Clinoton...and they constantly post email shit, or excessive concern crap then I consider motivation and don't take them seriously.

[B Calm]

62. No

[RAFisher]

64. Yes. People who just ignore the polls seem ignorant. However ignorance is bliss.

Clinton is winning and the polls are tightening. This site seems to be very anti-poll. I don't understand that sentiment at all.

[bigwillq]

67. No

[BobbyDrake]

71. Since the intent is to make other DUers depressed, no quarter will be offered.

There's a whole JPR website for the anti-HRC crowd; maybe you'd get a better response to repeatedly bringing up Clinton's negatives there?

[Adrahil]

73. Most "concern" threads are not useful, sincere or not.

Last edited Mon Sep 5, 2016, 12:38 PM - Edit history (1)

They are either trolls trying establish a narrative and lower morale, or they are sincere, but don't represnt a usefuel commentary, just servering to, you guessed it, lower morale.

If you ARE "concerned," analyze the problem as you see it and offer positive suggestions. Wringing your hands doesn't do any good. And BTW, things are fine. It's labor day, and Cheeto Jesus is about 5 pounts behind. That's a terrible position to be in on labor day.

[Demsrule86]

77. What a great post!

Those sort of threads are not useful and serve only to demoralize voters.

[betsuni]

79. When they sound just like Trump's campaign manager, no.

Conway says Clinton's expecting a landslide, thinking "Hey, I've got this one" so is complacent and wants to "run out the clock" by not giving press conferences, hiding from the press and "ignoring voters" by refusing to talk to them, but pals around swilling champagne with rich elites in "Hollywood and the Hamptons" raising money for who knows what. Pure bullshit.