This message was self-deleted by its author

[Algernon Moncrieff]

This message was self-deleted by its author (Algernon Moncrieff) on Sat Mar 7, 2015, 09:40 AM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Why did Lincoln fire his losing generals?

It was mean. After all, it was the Confederacy that was the root of the problem, Lincoln should have fired their generals instead.

(If we don't select new leaders, we'll get the same awful results.)

[Major Hogwash]

26. Ouch! That was sharp and to the point.

"The debates will be interesting", or "I'm looking forward to the debates" are both comments that it seems not many are saying at DU this time around.

We should all be looking forward to having rousing debates between ALL the candidates to see who can win the populace over.
But, claiming someone is inevitable, is just pathetic.

[DCBob]

41. I've read alot about Abraham Lincoln..

and Manny you are no Lincoln.

[MannyGoldstein]

43. Ouch.

That hurt.

[KG]

48. won the thread on the first post.

epic.

[hrmjustin]

66. Manny I think this more about us than the candidates.

I feel myself getting more short and snsrky with people.

[Exhibit A]

2. That would be nice. n/t

[MADem]

3. I'm with you. But no doubt you'll get pushback for making sense.

And from The Usual Suspects, too, no doubt.

Some folks can't abide it if there's no shit to fling.

[Number23]

5. I just came out of a thread where the whole thing was 2-3 posters calling people right wingers

for supporting... something. Or rather, the name calling was not over the posters supporting something so much as not agreeing with THEM. The whole thread. One insult after another. And then of course, massive over use of the guy because, I guess it was all supposed to be funny or clever or something.

It was so stupid and juvenile there is no way anyone could have found that little performance convincing or productive, which I don't believe was its intent at all. I've actually found myself lately agreeing with people that I NEVER thought I'd agree with. It's been pretty surprising. And it's had nothing to do with who can use the the most in the course of a single thread.

[MADem]

7. It really makes DU suck, and I think some of 'em know it.

And I think some of 'em (not all--there will always be "true believers" who think that their cause is improved by insulting people who don't think like they do) engage in that kind of conduct specifically to try to get a rise out of people, and get them to respond intemperately so they can then hit that alert button and play Wheel of Partisan Jury Fortune!

[Hekate]

10. I think you are so right

[Number23]

11. Yep! And it's going to get alot worse around here too

Because it is beyond obvious that the more some folks here realize how insignificant and impotent their name calling, labels and screaming are to the Dem party and the voting population as a whole, the more they start labelling, name calling and screaming at EVERYBODY.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

14. wheel of partisan jury fortune....

Haa! That's a good one. I'm gonna have to steal that.


So, looks like I missed the festivities in the mentioned thread. Oh, well. Wouldn't mind knowing who, though.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

79. Have a mirror.

When your first comment in a thread is calling people 'The Usual Suspects' and talking about how 'other people fling poo'...

You're already firing the first salvo of poo.

[wyldwolf]

70. I was there. And it was a test of our awesome jury system

Some of us have been comparing the results of juries. I and a few others alerted on the posters calling people 'right wingers.' The posts survived the juries EVERY SINGLE TIME. One of my posts was deleted because I said the person flinging the the insult 'right winger' must not have a social life. Go figure.

[Kalidurga]

4. A swell idea

The infighting is boring to me. It should be apparent that we have a right to disagree without flinging poo. Not that I have anything against poo flinging I just think it should be flung in the right direction.

For my part I will not be shrilly yelling at Hillary supporters. It is not necessary and it does not lend itself to a good debate.


ps can't believe I said swell, but I am going to let that be

[babylonsister]

6. Hahaha, you ain't seen nuthin' yet! Stand by and brace yourself. nt

[Algernon Moncrieff]

49. I remember 2008 (I had another screen name then)

I expect nothing less in 2016

[Bobbie Jo]

59. I don't know

Seems we've been in perpetual primary mode around here since 2008.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

84. As above, so below.

Many of the politicians have essentially been in perpetual primary mode, since then. Constant campaign stunts, rather than actual governing. McConnell and his buddies not even bothering to be secretive about it, simply all NO all the time, and it actually worked, which leaves Dems scrambling to find their own electoral footing, and not continuing to lose more ground every time an off year rolls around and not gaining enough back in Presidential years.

[Gothmog]

55. I remember some of these disagreements from 2008

[nikto]

8. It's not about Party, or personality ---- I have a special need to fling crap at...

Anything having to do with Milton Friedman's economic philosophy,
and anything I perceive as warmongering or war-profiteering.

Money in politics is my 3rd gripe.
Corporate personhood is 4th.

These hideous concepts all richly deserve the copious crap that needs to be thrown at them.

[cstanleytech]

16. Money in politics is actually just legalized bribery and the #1 problem thanks to SCOTUS.

[Scuba]

37. + Eighty Gazillion

[Hekate]

9. That is my earnest desire, Algernon

But we are in for a rough season.

[Fumesucker]

12. The whole concept of "teams" is foreign to some personalities..

Where other personalities can't seem to think of life in any way but being part of a team.

Watching the conflicts here on DU I think that's one of the biggest dividing lines, the team players versus those who are like Groucho and wouldn't belong to any organization that would have them as a member.

I think liberals as a whole have a higher percentage of non-team player type personalities than conservatives do, despite the constant rugged individualist rhetoric conservatives are so fond of.

One final point on "flinging crap at conservatives", if you haven't been to Discussionist and done it directly to their virtual faces then you really have no leg to stand on.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

52. That is true. There is the conformity factor in conservative policics.

...or at least the illusion of conformity -- you might be cheating on your wife or doing heavy gaming in Vegas -- but come out preaching family values.

I disagree with your final point. First, there are other, better ways to fling crap at conservatives: donating time or money to causes and candidates representing our values; debunking your conservative family member's Facebook post that circulated to hundreds of mostly apolitical types who will take the bait; or writing LTTEs. There is life outside of blogs run by Skinner.

I'm not saying we shouldn't have differences of opinion. However, most Hillary and Elizabeth supporters probably have broad agreement on 70-80% of issues. Maybe with differences on what issues matter most, but broad agreement nonetheless.

[NanceGreggs]

13. It's a great idea ...

... but it will never fly.

There are those here who have a vested interest in being divisive, pitting one Dem against the other while playing "let's you and him fight".

They are not interested in unity among Democrats; it does not serve their purpose. They are not interested in any Republican wrongdoing; it does not serve their agenda.

They post every anti-Dem article, statement, or soundbyte they can find - regardless of source, or the credibility of thereof. Any Democrat who is now, or ever was, held up by DUers as a shining example of upholding Party principles is promptly thrown under the bus. (Howard Dean and Warren Buffett being among this week's casualties.)

They encourage infighting. They promote the idea that the centrists hate the liberals, the moderates hate the progressives, the HRC supporters hate the Warren supporters, the Obama supporters are mindless cheerleaders, and the Sanders supporters are simply insane. They play whatever role necessary to keep Democrats at each other's throats.

And they are extremely effective. They know the buzz words that ignite flamewars: corporatist, water-carrier for the 1%, the looney left, centrist, progressive extremist, DINO, conservaDem, Hillary hater, Warren hater, Sanders hater.

The sad part is how many DUers willingly take the bait, how many are willing to see their fellow Party members as the enemy, how many are willing to be misled by RW talking points posted under the guise of "a concerned Democrat" merely pointing out how we (D)s no longer have common goals, how disunited we really are - if only we'd wake up, connect the dots, and realize how votes don't matter, how the PTB are running the show, how both parties are the same.

The "flinging of crap" at one another will continue unabated - because that's the way the Dems-Flinging-Crap- at-Each-Other Society who are allowed to post here want it.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

15. yeah....one problem with being smart (a Liberal/Progressive trait) ...

Is that intelligence can often come with a big payload of ego. If you let yourself go, you can really get yourself sucked into it.

[Fumesucker]

20. Divisive is the 2000 Dem VP nominee on the stage supporting McCain and Palin at 2008 RNC

Divisive is Bill and Hillary Clinton supporting McCain after Hillary's primary loss to Obama.

[NanceGreggs]

21. Divisive is ...

... what divisive does.


I think my point has been made.

[Fumesucker]

25. Yes, the divisiveness is me pointing out the actions of tippy-top level Democratic politicians..

Rather than you ragging on some poor schlubs whose only political voice is anonymously posting on a relatively obscure web forum.

[NanceGreggs]

30. I'm sure you had a point to make ...

... somewhere in there.

Just an assumption on my part.

[MannyGoldstein]

45. Your assumption is correct

You're now covered with a fiercly-adhesive 2-inch layer of FS's point.

[KittyWampus]

56. says the poster who used the death of Michael Brown to attack Obama via the Attorney General

many DU'ers were witness to that, saw it and were repulsed by it and commented on it. So it wasn't just my observation. That the only post you made on Brown's death was to attack Obama.

Posters who are unremittingly divisive are just that.

Funny how some need to change the subject.

[MannyGoldstein]

64. Believing that Holder should have gone after Brown's killers

with civil rights charges is the same as using Brown's death to attack Holder?

Only in a tiny and dim universe.

[Bobbie Jo]

81. That stunt was particularly smarmy.nt

[Bobbie Jo]

61. No

FS actually demonstrated her point, in spades.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

80. I am trying to see the connection between someone who left the party and changed sides and...

...what we are talking about here. I suppose now we'll get Richard Shelby or Ben Nighthorse Campbell blasts??

[RiverLover]

42. Great point!

Thank you fs.

[MannyGoldstein]

46. !!!

[betsuni]

23. This is perfectly said.

I guess some people don't have good divisive-dar -- sure is obvious to me.

[Thinkingabout]

58. Perhaps we could spend our time explaining our candidate and how great the candidate is, how well

They will serve our nation, their record, experience, etc rather than the hate bashing of the other candidates. Just as in a debate, it would be a time to see the candidates stand on the issues, what the candidates agenda will entail.

[DeSwiss]

17. Or......

...we could consider loftier pursuits than handling shit and flinging it at anyone. You know, like an adult would.

- Just a thought.

[lovemydog]

18. Times are too tough,

the stakes are too high and our enemies are too powerful for us to be hostile to each other. My ideal country is a majority of diverse democratic socialists who take our country back from warmongering robber barons. I think that's best done locally, offline. I know that the people who influenced me always treated me with respect.

[billhicks76]

19. The Problem Is Reality

This is the adult world. It's not fairy tales and unicorns so I suggest if you have a thin skin you don't belong in politics. People argue. Differences exist. Get over it. What would you do if someone like Bush Sr convicted a self-serving scheme to buy someone...someone who was either for sale or conservative at heart and then he groomed them to be a democrat early in their career. He would insert them to have both bases covered when the time came and he would still be pulling the strings with this fake democrat when they achieved higher office with financial help from conservative allies? Would you still tell people to not complain and back the so-called democrat in the name of being civil? This could occur easily. Look at all the protest movements. The authorities realized long ago they can't stop them so they try to insert informants and push them to rise to leadership positions so they can control both sides of the conversation. Reality may seem strange to some and that is counted on by others.

[dballance]

22. I believe the problem is paid trolls.

DU did not used to have so many nasty people.

I suspect there are a great number of paid trolls who post on DU now.

[MattSh]

24. I think paid trolls is the excuse people use...

when someone just can't stand that someone has an opinion different then they do. Or, heaven forbid, when someone blows through someone's nonsense with facts.

Some people are just so overly invested in their personal BS that anyone who argues different must be a troll. And if they use facts, they must be a paid troll.

[dballance]

27. Thanks for proving my point. /nt

[MattSh]

29. Aww, did I hurt somebody's feelings?

Geez... It wasn't directed at you, but you took that quite personally. For some unknown reason.

[99Forever]

68. Are you accusing this poster of being a paid troll?

If so, why don't you just say so?

Perhaps you don't think that others see thru passive/aggressive gameplaying.

So, precisely how did this poster "prove your point?"

[treestar]

89. Sometimes that may be

In some cases, it could be true though.

[anotojefiremnesuka]

36. Cool who is paying? How much? Is one paid per word or post?

I could always use some extra coin and if someone(s) are paying to post on the internets, I want to cash in!

You seem to have the inside track on getting paid to troll on the internet or you could be projecting too or the truth could be that many democrats are sick and tired of the conservatives and moderate's in the party fucking things up for everyone.

Me I am sick and tired of the conservatives and moderate's in the party fucking things up for everyone, yet I am not getting paid to post, wish I were.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

54. Forward me a link to the application after you're done, please.

It sounds like a great gig.

[KittyWampus]

57. Probably not paid trolls. Many do it for ego stroking attention, LOLZ or are outrage addicts.

[hrmjustin]

71. I want to know where I could get paid to podt here.

[wyldwolf]

72. I believe the problem is people assuming that anyone who disagrees with you must be paid to do so.

[TerrapinFlyer]

28. How about we start with a full day ban...

for anyone using the roltf emoticon....

[McCamy Taylor]

31. No, anything but that!

[wyldwolf]

73. How about an automatic post delete of anyone who calls a DUer a right winger or conservative?

Screw the juries.

[Agschmid]

95. Yes please...

[anotojefiremnesuka]

32. From my POV it IS being Flung at Conservatives it just so happens that the

Last edited Sat Mar 7, 2015, 07:57 AM - Edit history (2)

Conservatives in question just happen to be in the Democratic Party.

We could of had single payer or at a minimum a Government Option the Conservatives in the Democratic Party did not want us to have it.

[dreamnightwind]

33. Pretty much the way I see it too

I reject conservative policies and world-view wherever they exist, in the Republican Party of the Democratic Party.

[RiverLover]

34. + another! /nt

[m-lekktor]

35. exactly. too many conservatives are DEMS. nt

[Scuba]

38. + another

[KG]

47. heh.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

96. There are almost no real conservatives here at DU

There are those who are not progressives. However, most of these DUers are not supporting things like: ending legal abortion; enacting widespread, union-busting right-to-work laws; giving employers widespread protection from tort at the expense of workers and consumers; reintroducing troops to Iraq and possibly engaging in war with Iran; removing references to evolution from textbooks; rolling back marriage equality -- these are the kinds of things actual conservatives support. The fact that some DUers might disagree with you on TPP, single-payer vs. ACA, Hillary vs. Elizabeth doesn't make them evil; doesn't make them conservatives; and doesn't make them DINOs. It makes them people who likely agree with you on many issues that disagree with you on some issues.

[BainsBane]

39. It's a lost cause

There refuse to consider discussion or mobilization around political or social reform. The only thing that interests them, i have discovered the hard way, is defeating Hillary Clinton. When I raised the issue of working to pass a constitutional amendment for Public financing, they refused to talk about anything but their opposition to Clinton. They refuse to consider what is necessary to bring about substantive change. They just want to keep a single woman from becoming president and target ordinary Democratic voters. many women, people of color, and LGBT, as the enemy. They made clear they have no interest in changing the campaign finance system that entirely subverts democracy. All they want to do is keep Clinton from being elected. It's impossible to find common ground for organizing for political and social change with people who don't want it. This site is a place to emote, piss and moan. It's impossible to promote a positive agenda because the Clinton derangement syndrome colors everything to the point where they can talk or think about nothing else.

Part of me wishes they'd put the final nail in Clinton and move on, but then I know they will only move on to something every bit as narrowly focused and inconsequential (eg. another member of the political elite). When people only care about individual politicians and not underlying economic, political and social problems that produce the government they so despise, there is nothing that can be done. Any real activism has to be organized elsewhere. The place has become a waste land.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

86. Some response thoughts

When people only care about individual politicians and not underlying economic, political and social problems that produce the government they so despise, there is nothing that can be done. Any real activism has to be organized elsewhere. The place has become a waste land.

There have been times when I've deluded myself into thinking that activism can spring from this site, but I have to remind myself that it's an internet message board. While it's interesting at times, the best that it can do is to inspire folks to support causes IRL. This place is different than it was in 2006, when the common cause was the defeat of Bush and ending the war in Iraq.

The only thing that interests them, i have discovered the hard way, is defeating Hillary Clinton.

I mentioned 2006 and the Iraq war. Some DUers will not forgive Hillary for her Iraq war vote. Others feel that Hillary is a pawn of Wall Street, and will continue to support policies supporting the wealthiest Americans. In condemning this, these DUers equate Hillary with Republicans. Strangely, I rarely see this level of venom directed at Chuck Schumer.

They just want to keep a single woman from becoming president and target ordinary Democratic voters. many women, people of color, and LGBT, as the enemy.

You kind of lost me here. If you mean "a single woman" as in any woman, I'd have to disagree inasmuch as many of them support Elizabeth Warren. If you mean "a single woman" as in an unmarried woman, I think Hillary is still technically married to Bill.

[BainsBane]

94. I meant one person

Hillary Clinton. It wasn't a comment on martial status.

[Spider Jerusalem]

40. Yeah, it's coming up on primary season, so the answer to that is "probably not"

at least not if people don't stop making the primaries an issue while we're still months away. Calls for unity are probably a bad idea. Personally I'm glad we're on a site where we can have these discussions; I seem to recall that back in 2012 (whoops, wrong, I Googled, it was 2011!) people who were openly supporting Romney in the primaries were getting banned from Free Republic (until he won the nomination, that is). I certainly don't want to see anything like that happening here.

[DCBob]

44. It would be interesting to count the number of insults hurled at Democrats..

by the self-righteous left and compare that to the number hurled at Republicans. No doubt the Dem insult value would win.

[cyberswede]

65. "self-righteous left"

...isn't that an insult hurled at Democrats?

[LWolf]

82. Start here.

"Neo-liberal."

That's all I've got. It's not even an insult, just a descriptor.

It's also a line in the sand I won't cross.

So now you've got "self-righteous" for those who don't want to go any further down neo-liberal lane on your side, and "neo-liberal" on yours, which would make it even, except that neo-liberal isn't an insult, so it's 0 for the left and 1 for the right.

[Vinca]

50. That's a very good idea.

There's nothing more disturbing that a person trying to have a conversation about a point of dispute and having it turn into a pile-on worthy of a right wing site.

[Doctor_J]

51. can we fling it at conservative democrats?

Your subject line doesn't seem to cover that option

[Gothmog]

53. Come over to the Discussionist board

The conservatives on that board are really sad people who can not debate or defend their positions. I prefer to fight or disagree with conservatives than getting into fights with my fellow Democrats.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

60. How many Conservatives read DU?

The only things worth posting on DU are things which will change the opinions or actions of DUers, or provide them with new information.

I think a better request would be "Please extend the region of opinions in response to which you say "I disagree with you, but I don't think you're crazy/evil/bigotted/etc", rather than "I think you are crazy/evil/bigotted/etc"".

[Algernon Moncrieff]

99. I take your point

Conservatives don't read DU except as a source of humor (the same way we read FreeRepublic). However, DUers could ratchet down the crazy/evil/bigoted/etc talk, and focus more on topics about what conservatives are doing and how we can beat them. I realize this is wishful thinking in primary season, but we don't have announced candidates yet, and it's getting pretty nasty.

[TBF]

62. This is nothing -

you should have been here during the 2008 primary. I signed up when I was volunteering for Obama down here that spring. It gets better once we have a candidate for the general because then we all support that candidate (and you get booted if you obviously disrupt during that period of time).

[bigwillq]

63. I do that in real life.

When I am on DU, I like when we're all yelling at each other! Makes it a fun experience.

[sendero]

67. Does it have to be either/or?

Because I intend to keep flinging poo at conservatives and at fake liberals. Hope that is ok with you but if not, oh well.

It's amazing how humans fall into this trap of "if that one is bad, the other one must be good". It's shoddy thinking. Take Israel and the Palestinians. You think you have to "pick one"? Because they are pretty much equally odious. I choose neither.

Same as I will do if there is a conservative Republican running against a conservative Democrat. A pox on both their houses.

[TheKentuckian]

69. No, I oppose conservatives and can't do shit about them with a conservative dominated Democratic

party licensed to go as regressive as they desire as long as they have the appropriate circularized letter by their name.

Tom Vilsack doesn't "balance" Grassley he compliments his ass, that dude is owned by big Ag.

Maybe some Democrats ought to stop favoring and pushing conservatives and spitting liberal and left in the venom like fashion that a Limbaugh, a Prager, or a Medved do.

It seems to me that too many people's "perfect world" is the Reagan Revulsion without the "Moral Majority" churchy element and the Southern Strategy, I call it the same dystopia with a different casting director.

[hrmjustin]

74. At this point I am trashing a lot of threads.

Getting sick and tire of myself and others being called Dino, third-way, and other names. I got called an idiot here for supporting Hillwry here a few months back. And yes Warren and Sander supporters have been insulted as well here.

We have some aggressive posters here who need to calm down and cool off.

[Iggo]

75. Meta!

[wyldwolf]

76. I always find myself quoting The Magistrate (anyone seen him lately?)

Accepting that there is an imperfect fit between the Democratic Party and the furthest aims of left and progressive people, several things must be acknowledged.

First, it has to be acknowledged that left and progressive people really do not have solid ground to proclaim they and only they are true Democrats, or are the real base of the Democratic Party, and that people who are left of center or center-left or even centrists are not really Democrats.

Second, left and progressive people need to consider whether the tactic of attacking people who are perhaps a bit to the right of them, though generally well to the left of a national average, or of the average in the locale where they reside, as rightists who do not belong in the Democratic Party, is likely to expand and increase their influence in the Democratic Party, and advance the prospects of actually getting laws and regulations they would like to see adopted come to pass.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

91. No one has seen The Magistrate. Many are looking.

I agree with much of what you write. I'd point out that the progressive (i.e. further left of center than the rest) wing of the party tends to provide organizers (many skew younger, and are willing to do the drudge work of phone banking and knocking on doors) and provide thought leadership. They play a tremendous role in the House and Senate as talkers and on committees. However, in a GE, candidates need to skew closer to the center to be elected. There are election cycles that short circuit this rule: 1976 (post-Watergate/Ford pardon), 1980 (widespread anger over the Iranian hostages and high interest rates), and 2008 (widespread anger with the economic meltdown and the Iraq war). This next cycle won't be that. This next election will likely be more like a 2000: a successful Democratic President who is despised by a certain segment of the population; a rising/good economy (assuming it's still in decent shape in a year, which I suspect it will); and a conservative/Republican Congress. The vast middle (much of which is independent) will want to preserve their economic gains, and wants something done about ISIS (mind you -- they don't know what, in terms of involving our troops -- but they want them dead, yesterday). There will be noise from the right made about: how Christians are persecuted in America; whether we've gone too far on marriage; our porous border with Mexico; and our debt sending us straight to Hell. However, ISIS (or more broadly, security) and terror will be the issues. The wild cards that could play out include: a terror event; Russian expansionism; the SCOTUS decision on the ACA; and the to-be-expected late-2nd-term White House scandal that we always seem to get. Long winded story short: I don't see this as an election in which the vast American middle will want to install someone perceived as progressive (or ultra conservative for that matter). It's going to be Jeb or Christie (outside shot to Walker) on their side, and ???? for us. I hope we choose well.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

77. Nobody wants a Cruz, Paul, Bush or Christie.

That's why a lot of us wish you'd nominate someone we can ALL vote for.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

90. There's rarely, if ever, someone we can all support wholeheartedly

Part of what disturbs me is the infighting but part of what disturbs me is the "If (fill in the name of a candidate) doesn't get nominated, then I'm sitting this election out" attitude I've seen expressed. Sorry to sound like a cheerleader, but any Democratic nominee is going to be light years ahead of what we'll get with any Republican. No Democrat will put drapes over statues at DOJ to hide their nudity; have a "faith-based" Department of anything; or seriously discuss, in any way, how to take science out of science books.

[LWolf]

78. Whatever.

I don't want any of those Republicans for president either.

I also don't want any neo-liberals, whom I find to be just as detrimental to the nation as conservatives.

If calling a neo-liberal a neo-liberal is "flinging crap," so be it.

[mcar]

83. Wouldn't that be nice?

Sometimes we are our own worst enemies.

[Matrosov]

85. Some of the crap flingers are probably conservatives

[Algernon Moncrieff]

88. Save for trolls who MIRT kicks out in a few posts, there are few true conservatives here at DU

DU skews left of the Democratic party at large. On most political scale tests, I'm on the center side of the left; however, here I'm often labeled as a conservative (links to those tests, which are fun, are often posted here). Many here are too quick to attach negative labels to posters who may disagree on 1-2 key points, but hold similar opinions on a broad range of other issues.

[LadyHawkAZ]

87. There are people who would genuinely prefer no loaf to half a loaf

and would truly prefer to move backwards under Bush III than making slightly slower progress under a Democratic candidate who isn't "pure".

My suspicion is that they are political drama junkies. I've noted before that DU is very driven by corporate media in many ways, and right now corporate media is very anti-Obama, anti-Hillary and anti-Democrat. You can pretty much watch the front page of GD and see who's playing along with the script.

Hopefully admins will enforce the TOS a little better this election cycle and start tossing the more divisive trolls.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

92. Zero Sum Game

You are right; some would rather have nothing than win a partial victory.

[djean111]

93. We already know the Conservatives - both the GOP and those in the Democratic Party - are crap.

Doubties anyone here is going to vote GOP, anyway. Wasted effort.
You think people who vote GOP read DU to get their marching orders?

[Algernon Moncrieff]

97. There's a wide gap between even the most conservative of Democrats and the most liberal in the GOP.

My effort at pointing out that we're wasting a lot of venom on one another.

I don't think anyone gets their marching orders from a political message board. On the contrary, politically like minded people come to message boards to share ideas and vent.

[djean111]

101. This is, for all intents and purposes, the start of primary season.

So - like the GOP, there will be contentious stuff thrown around by supporters of various candidates.
Or is your wish somewhat like the "why have primaries, let's just declare Hillary the candidate, look how much money we will save, and we won't be giving the GOP any more ammunition" balloon that gets floated every once in a while?

[Algernon Moncrieff]

102. No - Primaries serve a valuable purpose

I would prefer all the states to vote on the same day; I think NH, IA, and SC have way too much power. But I think we should have discussion and vetting, no matter who the candidates are.

Now if Hillary had it wrapped up by Super Tuesday, would that bother me? No, it would not

[Cairycat]

98. I'd rather see Ernst balanced out by Grassley's seat going to

Bruce Braley, former IA-1 congressman, but agree with the rest. I lean much more toward Warren or Sanders than Clinton, but another R in the White House will be disastrous - and an R-majority Congress is even worse.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

100. Part of it was the election cycle, but Braley did not run a good campaign

Vilsack isn't perfect, but as an ex-Sec Ag and former Governor, I think he could garner broad support.

I have no problem with either one, really.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

103. I'm calling a penalty on myself and self-deleting

I suppose, technically, this is bitching about DU. So I'll lock it. Here is the OP.

Perhaps DUers stop flinging crap at one another, and fling it at conservatives instead?

It's an odd thought, and I realize we're all looking forward to another fun-filled primary season. I will confess to smacking-back at Warren supporters in response to insults hurled at Hillary supporters. It's bad behavior all-around. Having said that, I really don't want President Cruz, Paul, Bush, or Christie; I'd like to keep Barbara Mikulski's Senate seat; and in a perfect world, I'd like Tom Vilsack to get Chuck Grassley's seat -- if for no other reason than to balance out Joni Ernst.