Don't hold a group of supporters responsible for each member

[quinnox]

I'm seeing a lot of negativity and "revenge thread" attacks by people saying "Well, since this Kerry supporter posted this, I'm going to post this" This is childish. Come on, we are all adults here I hope. The Kerry supporters are all individual people with their own opinions, and each is responsible for their own threads. This isn't a borg collective, no one is going to tell a fellow Kerry supporter what he can or can't post. Take it up with the poster responsible, and don't blame a larger group that has nothing to do with it.

That's my rant.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

1. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.

[AWD]

2. Amen

After posting some negative stuff, I made a promise about a month ago to stop Dem candidate bashing, and I've held my promise.

I think all the bashing of Dem candidates should stop...granted, there are people here who can't support a candidate without bashing all others, but they're on my ignore list anyway.

Good post, quinnox.

[quinnox]

5. Thanks

I might have to just stop browsing this forum, if this nonsense goes on much longer. I mean, I don't mind a good debate, but lately it has been playground stuff here.

[DannyRed]

3. As I posted in another thread...

Discipline is important.

The activities of a supporter reflect upon the candidate - from the trite and inconsequential, all the way up to the legal and illegal.

Each campaign needs to remind its supporters and advocates that when they wear the button, wave the sign, or post on a particular thread with an electronic banner, they are planting an association in the minds of the people watching, talking with, or reading.

One person can influence 100, and if that influence is positive, then the candidate wins supporters. If that influence is negative, then the candidate (and the issues that candidate is pushing) lose.

Excellent examples abound from the civil rights movement, the hippy movement, and so on.

Look at the conflict between the MLK types and the Malcom X types and the Black Panther types, and look at the influene that conflict (and its underlying roots) had on the civil rights movement.

Discipline is important, especially in high stakes games like politics.

[arcos]

4. Another DU'er,

(dsc I think) said that supporters of a candidate should denounce such tactics from others on their side. I think this is a great idea to try to limit the bashing a little. There are several months left until the primaries, and this is only getting worse.

[diamondsoul]

6. I've tried to do that in other places.

It's not very effective, though. The situation did get diffused as far as the majority but it hasn't even slowed down the person I was disgusted by in the first place.

That kind of thing just makes me even more angry and frustrated. It's like spending days making a very fragile clay pot and watching someone smash it with a hammer before it can be glazed and fired. I even asked HOW does this kind of behavior HELP Kucinich get votes? They just went off on another rampage. :argh:

[DannyRed]

7. Joe Trippi's

message to (supposed?) Dean supporters who were trolling on Kerry's website is an excellent example of what should be done to guide one's supporters and instill discipline.

the BEST party discipline, of course, comes from below, and is self-instilled and self-guided....but it also needs to be reaffirmed and reiterated from the top.

I do not mean that candidates or their supporters should not criticize or question the other candidates, but, as long as certain basic values and goals are shared, those criticisms should be properly and carefully crafted to BOTH challenge AND support a potential ally and pool of allies.

For example:

"I am a Dean supporter, and one reason I am is because of his criticism of and opposition to the misguided and stupid war in Iraq. I respect John Kerry's positions and history on a lot of issues, but I feel very strongly (and negatively) about his vote in favor of giving Bush what I see as a carte blanche on the Iraq resolution in Congress. Can a Kerry supporter explain to me, or direct me to a resource that will educate me as to why he cast that vote, how he feels about that vote now, and what he would do the same or differently if faced with a similar vote or similar circumstances in the future?"

As opposed to:

"Kerry is a waffling wimp who voted for Bush's stupid little war, even though he criticized Bush and the push to war before the vote. How can anyone respect or support such a hypocrite. The best that can be said about Kerry on this subject is that he got tricked by the Bushies, and do we want such a gullible wimp as president?"

The root, the basic issue is the same, but the couching is very different. That difference is very important.

[dsc]

8. How many times have Dean supporters

had to read threads about how we bully people, threaten people, lie about candidates and on and on and on. Time and again these threads get posted. The fact is if you are going to post that stuff about us then you need to tell your own posters to cut the crap. BTW I often do this. Just today I pointed out that we shouldn't use a counter punch article to attack Clark in a thread posted by a Dean supporter.

There are currently something like 5 or 6 threads about Dean by one Kerry supporter on the front page. Last I checked not a one of them has any criticism by a Kerry supporter of the sources or methods of that poster. This is despite one being a counter point article, one being a NY Post article and one being a utterly unrelated to Dean case. Not one supporter of Kerry said boo. Yet many rightly castigated me for my Kerry threads. So my question is do you not like unfair attacks or is it only unfair attacks against Kerry? You can't be the keepers of some of your brothers and not others.

[DannyRed]

9. Ultimately

Threads of the sort you are pointing out will

1) Turn off potential supporters of the candidate who is linked to the poster making the baseless accusations and attacking unjustly (in a most unattractive and annoying fashion)

2) Anger the supporters of the candidate being attacked

3) Divide groups that should actually be allies - at the moment allies with a different vision and a different plan, but ultimately and at root allies in terms of broad vision, goals, and aims.

in short, the examples of extremely poor party and political discipline being highlighted by some posters are doubly, or perhaps triply damaging to the individual, to the candidate he or she supports, and to the party as a whole.

[dsc]

10. I posted those threads for a very specific reason

which I clearly stated in the second one but admittedly didn't immediately in the first. I won't do it again but my point is that we shouldn't be using such bad sources of info.

[DannyRed]

12. I know

I actually was not talking about the thread you posted.

But that is a good example of how misinterpretation can be almost as damaging as deliberate misuse of information.

You were trying to make a point by example, and I understand why and how, but, unfortunately, that is difficult to do without having people misunderstand.

Kind of like if you have a small child (which I do) who pulls hair.

If you get mad, and pull HER hair, and say "how do you like it" all that will happen is that she will be angry, hurt, and confused.

In reality, she does not really know that pulling hair is painful, because she is still a child and has not yet developed the tools we call empathy and projection. She cannot learn by examples of that sort yet.

The same goes for these threads, and that is why we need to learn and to teach discipline.

[quinnox]

11. I'll tell you what I did

There used to be a very nasty Dean supporter on this forum, who posted inflammatory articles about Kerry all the time, really low slimy innuendos and mud stuff, I put her on ignore and the problem was solved. I didn't blame other Dean folks for her actions. Later, I found out she was banned for some reason, I guess she went way over the line.

As I said, each person here has free will and can post anything they wish, no one is going to police these things. There will always be supporters for every candidate that go over the top, but it isn't correct to blame others for their actions.

[DannyRed]

13. We must

police ourselves and each other if we wish to win, to unite, and to glue together the herd of cats we call "progressives, democrats, moderates, centrists" and so on.

[dsc]

14. Then you have no right at all

to criticize the tactics of any Dean supporter. Either you believe civility applies to all or you don't.

[DannyRed]

16. Indeed.

If one feels that "anything goes" then one has no right to complain about the nastiness that results - whether that nastiness is first-hand, second-hand, specific, or general.

And, if one feel that "anything goes", then one must resign themselves to losing a lot of elections.

[quinnox]

18. I wasn't talking about civility

I am talking about starting revenge threads. I think this is silly and childish. I suggested a solution from my experience for troublesome posters.

I am just asking for a little more substance in the debate on this forum, and less posturing and hyperbole. Maybe it will be unheeded, and nothing changes, but I felt it necessary to say it.

[acerbic]

17. Huh? Banned?

Later, I found out she was banned for some reason, I guess she went way over the line.

What the heck could she have said about Kerry to get banned?!?!? The critters that call Dean "Dr. Mengele" and accuse him of killing people are happily sliming all over the place without a care in the world...

[blm]

30. That they would vote for Bush.

Another attacked all Dems who weren't progun, repeating NRA lies.

Another attacked Skinner personally.

Sorry, acerbic, but the attacks on Kerry, Gephardt and Lieberman this past year have all been much more plentiful and vicious than anything you have seen in regard to Dean.

[acerbic]

35. Aha, so the attacks against Kerry weren't the reason for banning

Another attacked all Dems who weren't progun, repeating NRA lies.
Another attacked Skinner personally.

That's what I thought: there can be no lie and slander attack against Democrats freepish and vicious enough that it would lead to banning, if the target happens to be a candidate, as "Nicholas_J", "VoteClark" and ""genius"" prove every few minutes. Happy times for freepers...

[dsc]

15. I checked a few of them again

and still nothing critical from a Kerry supporter in three of those threads (i only checked three). Again it seems that Kerry supporters aren't outraged about incivil threads but incivil threads about Kerry.

[DannyRed]

19. You must remember

That it is difficult to view the actions of an ally as negative, especially when those actions express an opinion that you may share, even if you don't agree with the mode or the medium.

I view attacks on Lieberman with general agreement - I do not like nor do I support Lieberman in any way shape or form....so it is difficult for me to critique an aggressive broadside against him.

I think you probably feel the same way - if someone writes a post that absolutely trashes Joe Lieberman, how likely are you to pop your head in and say:

"hey, guy, I agree in general, but you gotta tone it down, Lieberman is a HELL of a lot more progressive than Bush, or Cheney, or even Chaffee or McCain."

(which is true)

It is not likely that you (or I) would be likely to do that, because we generally agree with posts bashing Lieberman...

But we must force ourselves to do exactly that.

[dsc]

23. I have defended Lieberman on several occasions

against bizarre tales people like to tell.

[DrFunkenstein]

25. Funny You Should Mention That

I defended Lieberman just a few hours ago against a few Dean zealots bent on purging the Party of all impurities. Not that it reflects Dean or the majority of his supporters, natch!

But seriously, you can see how easily people fall into that little Nazi kick. Not anti-Semitism or anything, but the whole ideological purity schtick. All that Germanic Enlightenment crap that helped create the climate for Nazism. I wonder if some Dean supporters view him as The Annointed One, in that crazy fascist sense that drives alot of sci-fi movies. Match that with their zeal for being part of The Movement, and it starts getting creepy.

Don't get me wrong. I'm just thinking aloud about an undercurrent that seems to occur in a certain sect of Dean's support. I find most Dean supporters here to be totally rational and justifiably excited by energy Dean has created.

I suppose the flip side is those that see Dean as the anti-Christ. But that's a whole other story.

[chimpymustgo]

29. We should all take a step back and think about our shared goal.

Dr. Funk, your points are all well taken.

[clar]

26. Good point

lots of good points in this thread. We need to practice unity as well as civility. Maybe we need an all candidate defense force.

[sandnsea]

20. Honey, he's got 24 hours, then mama spank

I promise!

[DannyRed]

21. Oooooooh

me too me too me too...

What is Kerry's "position" on S&M?

[sandnsea]

22. oh you nasty nasty boy

I'm just not *that* kind of mama! lol

[DrFunkenstein]

24. Ok, I Guess This Is Spilling Over

I think we all know who we are talking about here. I have spoken with him several times about his negativity and the effects it has on the Kerry campaign. He is obviously a very knowledgable and intelligent person, but after awhile I just started skipping past his very, very, very long messages. If nothing else, I don't have the attention span.

I don't post comments for 2 reasons. One, my past comments have had no effect whatsoever. Two, I generally don't read his posts, so I don't know how incivil they are, so I don't feel outrage. I really don't understand why everyone has not made use of the "ignore" function by now. Masochism or persecution complex? I just don't know.

I've used the ignore button for a really nasty Dean supporter because I felt it would be unfair to Dean to listen to the prick. The atmosphere changed immediately and completely.

Which is to say that I highly recommend that option. I find it hard to feel sympathy for your outrage, when it is so easy to remove the source.

[indigo32]

27. I think you're right DrFunkenstein

ignore is really the way to go. Even if only temporarily.

[sandnsea]

33. I just ignore bashing threads altogether

It's pretty easy to recognize them, if nobody responded, they'd die a quick death and there would be no pay-off in posting them in the first place. It's hard to understand why some don't get that.

[blm]

28. If N J had written the headline

then it would be over the top. He used the headline in the article, which is what many folks here do. Many a thread against Kerry used that same type of headline, and many of us supporters suffered the indignation of seeing it.

Cry, if you must. I chose to refute the points in the articles or reveal the agenda of the writer or news outlet.

[tameszu]

31. I, and I'm sure others, appreciated your post

It's always nice to see people who applying a little common sense and reciprocity when discussing a topic as heated as oppositional politics.

[Mairead]

32. My perception is that there are 'a number' of

nominal Dean supporters (I sometimes have to wonder whether they're really plants, though whose they'd be I can't imagine) whom I can only characterise as immature, hostile, and vocal.

As many know, I recently posted an article from Vermont PIRG about Dean and campaign finance. They were critical of him for syphoning off money from the public-financing fund. I didn't see the whole thing at first, so I asked how that had all worked out. I was personally attacked--called a 'repug'--and vilified for posting the article and asking the question. And one of the posters claimed that VPIRG 'hates' Dean. Why is that?

Not long ago, someone (I can't now remember who) started a thread asking from each supporter of a candidate 3 criticisms of that candidate. I noticed that a lot of Dean's supporters posted praise, but few posted criticisms. Why is that?

When support for a candidate centers on non-specific opinions that cannot be tested before the fact ('electable') or are false ('only one to stand up to Bush'), no criticism is forthcoming from inside the camp, and any criticism from outside is denounced loudly by the claque as 'bashing' --there's something wrong with the situation.

Every voter should be an adult, and should be seeking to discover which candidate to support, not seeking for reasons to support the decision they've already taken. We should all be looking for the candidate with the greatest merit, not the one with the biggest army or the fewest scruples or the nicest smile or the best hair or some other factor that has no bearing on whether s/he is prepared to turn the damn'd country AROUND.

I think Nicholas is doing a needed job that benefits us. I support him in it. I would be overjoyed if he had the energy to research all the candidates similarly. We need that kind of information, and we should acknowledge that.

[Ripley]

34. How do you define adult?

There are lots of posters here who admit they aren't old enough to vote. And maybe it's been awhile since I was in college, but a lot of terminology being used sounds pretty high school as well.