Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Jamastiene

(38,187 posts)
41. What gets me is that some of the same people who did things like post
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 06:14 AM
Mar 2015

pictures of Hillary Clinton tied up and burning at the state are the same ones who are now telling anyone who may want a more liberal candidate that they are not real Democrats. I'm not talking about you, because you always post in a positive way.

But there have been some real misogynistic posts by others dating back to AT LEAST 2008 against her. I would much rather someone post that they are against her Iraq War vote or connections to The Family and the Koch Brothers without seeing some of that anti woman vitriol. If they say they are against her Iraq War vote, connections to some of the worst right wing groups around, and other positions that are not at least center, much less center left or left, and they can manage to do it without that horrible crap that happened back in 2008 and some of the other misogynist crap some posters use. I have no complaint if someone expresses they are against some of her actions and stances on the issues. That is the way it should be. I happen to be against some of her connections to far right groups and some of her policies that are too pro war for my taste, but, I would honestly hate to see the nastiness that came from a lot of the worst of the 2008 primary wars on DU come back again.

If she does run, I will wait and see who they put up against her in the primaries if anyone does run against her in the primaries. It may turn out none of who they offer up is any better on those issues. In that case, I will vote for her. If someone is to the left of her, consistently, I will probably vote for that person in the primaries. I was once one of her most ardent supporters, but there have been too many disturbing things brought up about her through the years and I'm getting to that age in life where I am burned out on politics. I'm sick of having to vote for blue dogs in my own home state. I just wish I could vote for someone who is more in line with my way of looking at things when it comes to the primaries at the national level. I'm not 100% sold on Warren (I have serious trust issues with her past Republican support), but that does not mean I would not vote for her. Hillary is not perfect, but I could vote for her in a pinch if no one to the left is against her in the primaries.

One thing I do know: I do not want to see another damn Bush anywhere NEAR the White House again. I'll vote for Clinton, Warren, a rattlesnake, a three legged dog, a spider, or pretty much anything or anyone else but a damn Republican and especially against another Bush, if it comes down to it and we didn't get some kind of liberal shift off the ground by then. If it turns out to be someone else entirely on the Democratic side, I will vote for them, assuming they don't stomp a kitten or a puppy to death or some such other outrageously horrid thing. I do have my limitations. I would be willing to bet we all do. Some have already reached that limit. If they can manage to express that without doing the stuff in your list AND keep from posting photos of her and making fun of her the way people did back in 2008, I got no beef with them expressing their opinion. If they need to do that type of misogynist crap, they aren't my kind of people. If they are against her because they are more to the left and they just simply say so, I don't see the problem. I really cannot think of anything else I have to say until we even know who is running.

For now, it is way too early to start this crap, really. Why are we trying to have imaginary primaries on DU NOW? It is an entire year and a half early. There is no way in Hell I want to see that much primary vitriol for a solid year and a half. I will end up having to take a solid 2 year break from DU if the type of crap that happened in 2008 starts up again.

Really. We don't even know who is or is not running yet. Why are we having primary wars on DU so early? I don't get it.

Everything negative that can be said, already has been said repeatedly on DU, about pretty much everyone who might or might not run. What enjoyment does anyone get out of arguing back and forth like that for THAT LONG?

Um, #2 = Hillary Clinton. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Feb 2015 #1
I think it's the "...but..." that's a problem. And I agree. PeaceNikki Feb 2015 #2
What's the problem with 'but'? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Feb 2015 #6
All of this! hifiguy Feb 2015 #8
See the forest as well as the trees---it makes finding solutions a lot easier. McCamy Taylor Feb 2015 #12
I agree - TBF Feb 2015 #30
It minimizes everything before it. PeaceNikki Feb 2015 #10
No, I don't. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Feb 2015 #14
mmm hmm. you disagree. noted. PeaceNikki Feb 2015 #15
I kind of agree with you, but when used on "women's issues" for a female candidate it does cui bono Feb 2015 #17
+1 nt F4lconF16 Feb 2015 #29
It isn't just Clinton. Sen. Nelson in Texas Senate (GOP) is very interested in "women's issues" McCamy Taylor Feb 2015 #4
DU Rec. Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2015 #3
A few things: vi5 Feb 2015 #5
IMHO every mention of Christie's weight deserves censure. It is a mean, rude attack. McCamy Taylor Feb 2015 #9
Disagree strongly. Obesity is well-documented as correlating with very high mortality. closeupready Feb 2015 #13
Evidently women need EXTRA protection Major Nikon Mar 2015 #43
K&R. I have nothing to add to your excellent OP. MineralMan Feb 2015 #7
Yes, exactly what you said. kiva Feb 2015 #11
#2 doesn't compute. progressoid Feb 2015 #16
"John Kerry has his wife's money" Really? nichomachus Feb 2015 #18
Well that's really nitpicking. Just substitute another example that works for you then. cui bono Feb 2015 #25
I think everyone should just express themselves freely, and not worry about dissentient Feb 2015 #19
Um.... no. cui bono Feb 2015 #22
Yes, then they can be banned if they say racist stuff. Better that, then they try and be sneaky dissentient Feb 2015 #23
But there are many people who aren't really racist or sexist but say things that are offensive cui bono Feb 2015 #24
Yes, I agree that free and open communication is best dissentient Feb 2015 #26
The N word is a good example of how that works. zeemike Feb 2015 #33
Agree. I don't need anyone making rules for me on this site except Skinner. HERVEPA Feb 2015 #27
I agree, good point! I think the ones in charge should declare it when they want new rules for the dissentient Feb 2015 #28
So I can post "cracker redneck troll" without any fear? McCamy Taylor Feb 2015 #37
Rec. Also just wanted to point out a typo in case you want to fix it... cui bono Feb 2015 #20
Who's doing that? Iggo Feb 2015 #21
No one, that I've seen Oilwellian Feb 2015 #31
I personally saw a variation of #3 on DU herding cats Feb 2015 #34
Check one of my OP's and scroll down. Unless the writer deleted it. "Good on women and children McCamy Taylor Feb 2015 #38
Honestly, in a duscussion of a candidate I don't think the "but" negates what was said before. cui bono Feb 2015 #39
Funny, the same argument could be made about mental illness and how stigma of it is promoted HereSince1628 Feb 2015 #32
do you mean more friendly to Hillary? because I have not seen any of these on du Doctor_J Feb 2015 #35
Where were you during the 2008 primaries? Jamastiene Mar 2015 #42
I've been here since 2001 and your statement is ridiculous Doctor_J Mar 2015 #44
Congratulation, you just trashed an ally. BeanMusical Mar 2015 #45
Modest suggestions? winter is coming Feb 2015 #36
You just keep plugging away, McCamy. KnR Hekate Mar 2015 #40
What gets me is that some of the same people who did things like post Jamastiene Mar 2015 #41
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A Few Modest Suggestions ...»Reply #41