General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSo, a guy who knows I lean on the progressive side, walks up to me
and starts spewing that Nader, backed by progressives, lost the 2000 election for the Democrats, that progressives have never done anything to advance the cause of Democrats, that they're always whining and wanting ponies and stuff and ended with asking me if Hillary Clinton wins the nomination, would I vote for her.
At first I was a little taken aback and, being the reactionary that I have a tendency to be, ALMOST started to fire back and correct his misinformation but then I stopped. Why was this gentleman being so in-your-face aggressive? Can't he make his point without the aggression? And then, let's say, he calls a group of people over, many of whom he knows, informs them of how disloyal I am to The Party and the group then begins to cajole me and needle me and try to get me to react. Maybe to even run me off for good. And then it came to me. He's TRYING to get me to over-react. He's trying to get me to say something in the heat of the moment that can then be selectively and adequately spinned to make it sound like I'm the aggressor. So, I chose not to play his game and, instead, commented on what a lovely day it was and I hope we see rain soon.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)I will try to learn from your wisdom!
GeorgeGist
(25,397 posts)I threw him in with the trash.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Probably best to ignore him in the future.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Could pass for a good internet troll also.
Excellent...summation. So glad you're back!
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)If the latter, why go anywhere near him if you are not interested in engaging?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)maddiemom
(5,106 posts)Most of his rant was bullshit, but I still feel that, while Nader had a right to run, HIS "spewing on there being no difference between Bush and Gore opened a meme picked up by many progressives (including my own daughter, voting for the first time and for Nader) have later regretted. Having been active in local Democratic politics for years, I don't see the many progressives I know making the same mistake again. Most of us love Bernie, but no one will stay home and not vote for Hillary this time around. Her Wall Street connections aside, take a look at all the Repug candidates. There are so many other areas in which there is no comparison. One of the things that I love most about Bernie is his being unwilling to divide progressives for his own ego. Liberal dislike for supporting the "lessor evil" is all well and good, but elects people like Dubya. Does anyone really believe Gore would have given us Iraq or ignored the "Osama determine to strike..." memo. In fact the Clinton administration tried to warn of this. Gore's biggest mistake was blowing off Clinton. But hey, the Democratic strength, as opposed to Republicans, is learning from mistakes. Baby Steps!
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Cause it sure as shooting sounds like far too many flame-bait postings on DU.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)told here on DU.
They just make no sense most of the time.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)happen here all the time.
randys1
(16,286 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)I can't go out of my apartment without at least a half dozen people regaling me about the hotly contested 1876 election and how it ended in the Corrupt Bargain.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Your thread winning comment made me actually L-O-L!!!
And I don't do that easily!!!
cui bono
(19,926 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)I literally have one eye closed, though.
As well as in response to all the "When Bernie loses the nomination, will you vote for Hillary" posts and all the other flamebait threads that the desperate have been putting up the last few days. It was supposed to be satire but I think I need to hone my satire skills a little better before trying the next one. And I will.
merrily
(45,251 posts)No matter when that guy came up to you, though, the demands for loyalty oaths started many months ago, long before Hillary even declared, long before she even had opponents.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)started about 45 seconds after the Administrators put this site up.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Posts critical of Hillary, maybe of either Clinton--I've forgotten--were met with:
"If Hillary wins the nomination, will you vote for her in the general?"
Mind you, this was when everyone was saying no one would even bother to challenge her in the primary (yet another bit of "conventional wisdom" from establishment politicians and pundits that was pure bs that they were desperate to make us believe).
JEB
(4,748 posts)Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)Had never heard this song. Thanks for posting!
onehandle
(51,122 posts)He walked up to me and said stuff.
Small world, huh?
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)I'll wait while you go find the exact quote.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)That makes your story even better.
You should edit and emphasize that.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)No, I think it's perfect just the way it is.
7962
(11,841 posts)Unless he knows you and you dont know HIM!
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)Blanks
(4,835 posts)MuseRider
(34,319 posts)Just happened to me on the Internet.
I thought it was desperate but just laughed because hey....I can live with every decision I have made and my votes are mine and nobody's business.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)and strangely familiar.
We'll all be better off when we figure out how not to play that kind of game.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)have been worth the price of admission. LOL!
merrily
(45,251 posts)
[after playing out all possible outcomes for Global Thermonuclear War]
Joshua: Greetings, Professor Falken.
Stephen Falken: Hello, Joshua.
Joshua: A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?
War Games (1983)
Baitball Blogger
(47,663 posts)This situation is why I avoid groups with strong agendas. It just gets too nasty, too fast.
I think the 2000 Election results is now known experience and I'm sure, should the situation repeat itself, people will take it into consideration when they make their choices.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Baitball Blogger
(47,663 posts)Ralph Nadar was an independent. Bernie Sanders is an independent. I see the same political quandary about to repeat itself, unless Sanders becomes a Democrat and allows the face off to occur at the Primary level.
Of course, this website is set up to support Democratic candidates, so I am sure that everyone knows that everything will change once the Primaries are over, one way or the other.
I am a no party affiliate with strong Democratic leanings, which is why I generally support whoever makes it through the Primaries. I cannot tell you how hard I took the 2000 election. By that time I had seen some dirty things occur at a community level, and when I saw what happened at the National level with the election, I realized just how dire our situation was.
I just watch with interest until the National election. Sanders is saying everything I want to hear from a candidate, but I will vote for Hillary if I don't feel he can win.
Anyway, GD is the wrong place for this discussion.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Baitball Blogger
(47,663 posts)And it sounds like he is going about this in a responsible way.
merrily
(45,251 posts)declaring. He did that when he said he'd run in the Democratic primary. And it was big news.
In case you want to catch up on the legal issues:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/128018753
About a minute and a half after he said it, the DNC sent out an email raising money off his announcement, too.
Baitball Blogger
(47,663 posts)I assumed there would be paper work involved.
In Florida they even called me to make sure if I meant No Party when I checked off Independent.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Surprisingly, Massachusetts is not. You must choose a party or register "unenrolled." A law allowing more than one day for voting was enacted only recently. Yet, a state like Florida has had several days for quite a while.
Voting is the most important thing in our system and it's a "gotcha" in many ways.
Baitball Blogger
(47,663 posts)Our Primaries are partisan, which is to say I can't even vote in them. And we are required to show I.D. in our precinct as long as I have lived here.
I can tell you that this place is so insular that I have had experiences with some of the precinct volunteers that have made me feel uneasy. Top on the list is a man who dumped my ballot in the manual slot because he said the machine wasn't reading it (That was the Bush v Gore election). And it almost happened again with a good ole gal who was acting too casual when she took my ballot and opened up the sleeve to glance at it before she tried to put it through the machine. When it didn't go in she looked at me with a look like, "Well, what do we do now?"
I grabbed my ballot and told her that she wasn't supposed to look at it, then I loosened up the ballot so it wouldn't stick to the sleeve and after three quick tries, the machine finally took it.
I knew about loosening up the ballot because I had volunteered in another precinct in the election before and the people worked well together. The guy who was responsible for putting the ballots in the machine showed me how the ballot needed to be loose in the sleeve to allow the machine to take it without resistance.
I called the Supervisor of Elections and gave him an earful after that experience with the good ole gal. It's not a problem any more. They redesigned the sleeve since then and everything works fine.
Joe Nation
(998 posts)I see this behavior constantly. They are usually trying to defend their own position by getting others to rally around them because they know how unpopular their views are outside of their own little bubble. The greatest thing you can do is give them nothing to push back against. It frustrates the hell out of them. When people are raging, they just want to pick an argument. If you don't argue, they walk away unfulfilled even if you say nothing. They eventually get curious about why you believe what you believe and actually start asking you questions. Then you have them.
Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)The less attention paid to those the OP describes, the better. I'm reminded of what one should do when a child throws a tantrum. The more attention you pay to their tantrums, the more obnoxious they become.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)seriously, excellent point here!
Populist_Prole
(5,364 posts)I do just what you say: Don't give them a thing to push back against. I'll do this either by "fogging" the differences of opinion ( emphasizing any commonalities ) or just a "meh, OK" attitude.
So true about the bubble thing too; They sure are desperate to "mainstream" their positions.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)HFRN
(1,469 posts)Captain Stern
(2,211 posts)Probably best not to drink with that guy too.
G_j
(40,427 posts)he was attempting to waste your time, as progressives often are activists also, and time spent arguing about dead horses is time not spent addressing REAL issues.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)He was trying to trap me and I think it's important for progressives to recognize when that is happening and how NOT to react to it else one might get run outta town, so to speak.
It's not worth it.
merrily
(45,251 posts)When the sheriff says, "Don't let the sun set on you in this town," don't you pretty much know that's not a town you wanted to stay in anyway?
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)other towns are not any better. I recently experienced that and that's what I learned.
merrily
(45,251 posts)PufPuf23
(9,233 posts)Need more people in the Democratic party especially in leadership like you.
Snobblevitch
(1,958 posts)Did he get enoigh in any single state that caused Gore to lose the electoral votes in any of the states?
onehandle
(51,122 posts)Will Ralph Nader become Al Gore's worst nightmare?
Of more immediate interest, at least to Al Gore, are Nader's respectable poll numbers: 7 to 10 percent in California as of June, 6 percent nationally. If California tips Green enough, Bush could win the state and the whole damn election.
Which, Nader confided to Outside in June, wouldn't be so bad. When asked if someone put a gun to his head and told him to vote for either Gore or Bush, which he would choose, Nader answered without hesitation: "Bush."
http://www.outsideonline.com/1837851/ralph-nader-2000-campaign-interview
Nader flew back and forth between California and Florida, finally spending the most of the last few weeks in Florida, and fulfilling his goal of a Bush Presidency.
Mission Accomplished! Eight years of Bush. Thirty years of a right-wing SCOTUS. Citizens United. Massive illegal redistricting. Gun insanity. Permanent state of war. Etc, etc, etc...
Snobblevitch
(1,958 posts)Then again, he never did live there too much while growing up or while in office.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Those were not leftist Democrats, I'm guessing.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Jill Stein is not comparable.
Snobblevitch
(1,958 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)You did not mention Stein. Since I thought you were talking about this election, I mentioned her.
Snobblevitch
(1,958 posts)in my post made it clear that the reference was to the 2000 election, the same election that was referred to in the OP.
merrily
(45,251 posts)implicitly drawing a parallel of some kind to this election.
If that was not so, you could simply have said so in response to Reply 43, since that was the very question Reply 43 asked you.
merrily
(45,251 posts)the Green nomination for POTUS. Comment stands, though. I just don't want to leave disinfo on the thread about the Green nomination: neither of them has it yet.
JHB
(37,348 posts)...support Sanders if he should win the nomination.
It doesn't matter how remote he thinks Bernie's chances are; IF it turns out he's mistaken and Sanders wins, will he support the Democratic nominee?
It's a fair question.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)He's written the narrative and to respond to him puts him on an equal footing when he really isn't which is why he's trying so desperately to bait me and run me out of town, metaphorically speaking of course.
merrily
(45,251 posts)I've only encountered it here and refused to answer every time, much as decent people did during the McCarthy hearing (though not Reagan or his boss, Jack Warner, who took it on themselves to aid and abet that creepy RW fucker).
Coming from a Democrat IRL, it would be even creepier than it is at DU.
?w=1000
olddots
(10,237 posts)and then someone complained about me complaining .It was all so agressively passive or passively agressive.
I hear you ,we once had Bush to comisserate about then we fought about the 2004 primaries ,2008 ,2012 .We argued about arguing about progressives verses liberals verses reacionaries and what the word luberty means.Thru it all I love this place although I still hate Led Zeppelin .
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)And a pox on your household for blaspheming Led Zeppelin.
CrawlingChaos
(1,893 posts)...and I feel entitled to it!
I love this thread
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)ba dum bum
Cleita
(75,480 posts)Duppers
(28,220 posts)raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)Taking the high road is always the best approach in those situations. Glad to hear you did.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)when they're online. It's so, what's the word, anonymous, so there's rarely consequences to their bullying. And that's especially true in a location wherein the Mayor and 2 City Council members are fast friends with the bully -- they tend to, well, overlook stuff.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)It seems to be aimed at discrediting Bernie as a third party candidate in an attempt to confuse the issue. Next time just retort that the Supreme Court lost the election for Gore not Nader. Then have your facts to back it up; that if they hadn't stopped a recount in Florida, the electoral votes would have gone to Gore and Gore got the majority of the popular vote. Nader had nothing to do with it.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)It's been going full steam for a long time.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)Gird your loins for the coming attacks.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Bernie said he was going to explore a run. I don't remember how long ago that was.
If you question in any way or point out that Bernie is running as Democrat, the reply is that they are afraid he will lose primary, and then run in the general as an Indie. (Of course, that fear, if there's any truth to it, should lead them to make sure Bernie wins the primary. Oops.)
The fact that he promised not to run as a spoiler to help Republicans won't cause any deviation from the talking point, either.
snagglepuss
(12,704 posts)to put into practice when one's buttons are pushed. Kudos on your response as it makes him look like a fanatic.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Outside of a McGovern rally done by grade school kids I saw some poor schmuck get cornered by three bullies who asked if he supported Nixon. Then they demanded that he say he supports Nixon. When he gave in and said it they shouted to the crowd, "Hey!!! We've got a Nixon supporter here!!!" trying to get the rest of the crowd to turn on him.
Bubzer
(4,211 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)Bubzer
(4,211 posts)But its implied in how some are responding.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Go Bernie and your liberal, fringe, left - leaning agenda!
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)as someone woefully unable to think critically, and woefully able to shut down the analytical portions of the brain and simply regurgitate talking points.
merrily
(45,251 posts)because McGovern was too liberal.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12778825
Carter lost to Reagan only because Carter was too liberal, er, I mean, never mind about that election behind the curtain.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=edit&forum=1277&thread=8873
Mondale lost to incumbent President Reagan only because Mondale was too centrist liberal.
Policies
Mondale worked hard to build up the center of the party on economic and social issues. Unlike his own father, a fervent liberal, he was not a crusader for the New Deal. Instead he realized the Democratic base (especially ethnic blue collar workers) was gradually moving to the right and he worked to keep their support.[13] Mondale showed little or no interest in foreign policy until about 1974, when he realized that some knowledge was necessary if he had loftier aspirations than the Senate. He developed a centrist position, avoiding alignment with either the party's hawks (such as Henry M. Jackson) or its doves (such as George McGovern).[14] He took a liberal position on civil rights issues, which proved acceptable in Minnesota, a state with "a minuscule black population".[15] Mondale was a chief sponsor of the federal Fair Housing Act, which prohibits discrimination in housing and created HUD's Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity as the primary enforcer of the law.[16]
During the Johnson presidency Mondale supported the Vietnam War, but after Richard Nixon became President in 1969, he began to oppose it and participated in legislation aimed at restricting Nixon's ability to prolong the war. Mondale is pro-choice on the issue of abortion. [3][17]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Mondale
And centrist Gore lost to Bush only because Nader ran. Nothing more complicated than that.
Always, always, always, it's the left that is responsible for all bad things in this country. It was true in the 1930s, the 1950s, 1970s and the 1990s and it's truer now than ever before. And, in 2020, it will be even truer of that Presidential election.
Gawd. How many times do you liberals have to have these things repeated to you?
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)really aren't Liberals or Progressives at all...
merrily
(45,251 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)instead of concentrating on serious business.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Srsly.
elleng
(135,372 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)Thank you, thank you.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)I've had people that I've known for years now tell me Free Trade is a wonderful invention that will save the planet. Amazing how they agree with libertarians and Reaganites...I could have sworn they were more progressive then that.
However their lack of replies to said questions about why they support neoliberalism were met with complete silence. So I took that to mean that I was correct in that they knew the difference between regulated and unregulated caplitalism and desire the second one.
Just a small group of people, the rest are much easier to talk to since they want to discuss issues and ideas.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)it's like the old joke that the closer the candidates the more vitriolic the campaign--the typical Latin American duopoly runs on incidents from 50 or 80 years ago, (mutually-true) accusations that the other guy was a death-squad-running cartel underboss, and "activists" that arrive in Mercedes-Benzes and new SUVs; the banana company then offers free rail and truck transport to the polls or the "Reencounter With the Fatherland" where the "shock troops of democracy" listen to a demagogue, get some box-lunch beef (the only meat in four years), a cup of guaro, and 5 dollars American (not to vote for any party, just to reward their participation in this blow against the totalitarian menace), then they go out and vote for the party that their ancestors have voted for since the 1880 election
it's a perfect machine: the conservative elites get the laws they want, sometimes a riot produces a Labor Code, and otherwise democracy ends at the big table with the fishbowl on it
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)olddots
(10,237 posts)Libertarians counteract their feelings of powerlessness by believing they are entitled to do anything they please because they are so fucking smart and Luberty is a town in Texas isn't it ?
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)... to avoid these problems and let third parties like the Greens help get out the vote and give more second place votes for Democrats that would solidify their wins, and provide more feedback from vote totals on initial counts before instant runoff "runoffs" to help elected candidates know what those who voted for them and what *more* of the voting populace want them to do that had them higher in their voting hierarchy.
We don't have proportional representation or instant runoff voting like countries such as Australia do, and we have a system dominated by two parties where all other parties are shunned by it by design, as it allows the corporate lobbyists to buy both sides and not allow any voices in to do work more for the people that the lobbyists might not like instead of the other way around.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)Cleita
(75,480 posts)on the ballot? Along with ending gerrymandering, this would put the nation back on the track of honest elections that reflect the will of the people.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Each state runs their own elections. So each state can implement IRV independently. You don't need a coordinated national effort, you need a big effort in your state.
druidity33
(6,537 posts)didn't get enough signatures to get it on the ballot. Maybe next time?
craigmatic
(4,510 posts)Or at least that's how it should be.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)... which is also the way a democracy should be too.
Democrats recently haven't been so much doing that since they have had this DLC cancer infecting them.
craigmatic
(4,510 posts)could hope for under that scenario is a protest vote when the dominant party becomes corrupt. If you really look at it the only 2 elections the DLC actually won were 1992 and 1996. To be perfectly honest, they didn't really win in either year because Perot split the republicans. So they actually have a shitty electoral record on top of their shitty policies. Traditional dems have been winning since FDR and could've done just as well in those years too.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)I wonder where we'd be today on so-called "free trade" and where our economy would have been since that time. This TPA, TPP, TISA, etc. would all have never happened probably, and Silicon Valley would probably still be the high tech capitol of the world too.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)the dogs some more shade. I patch the holes with fishing line and some plastic window screen.
It has these net walls, so now I sit in the evening and watch a couple pesky bugs trying to get to me. But they can't.
The walls aren't all that substantial, and they have a lot of holes, but just that little bit of protection keeps me from getting annoyed and over-reacting with sprays or other "solutions" that would ultimately be harmful to me and the neighbors.
Just a little screening...
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)They're just like pushy kids, always push push pushing their parents over-react buttons. Look at them like they're screaming for an ice cream cone in a packed check out line.
valerief
(53,235 posts)Romeo.lima333
(1,127 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)The Wizard
(12,811 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)Besides, taking money from Republicans leaves less for them to donate to Republican candidates.
CrawlingChaos
(1,893 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)to be thrilled about right now.
So grateful to have a candidate I can support without ever having to defend.
DRoseDARs
(6,810 posts)...the 2000 Presidential Election was out-and-out stolen by both voter roll purges of eligible voters wrongly purged, electronic voting systems developed by Bush donors, and a Supreme Court that shrugged its shoulders and kicked it back to a Bush-friendly Florida State Supreme Court...
...no, Nader was not a relevant factor.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)It was the US Supreme Court that stopped the recount and handed Florida to Bush. Many lawyers believe the stepped out of their jurisdiction too. When various news agencies went in after the fact and finished the recount that the SCOTUS stopped, it turned out Gore had won Florida.
nikto
(3,284 posts)Tipperary
(6,930 posts)Background or something? Was this while you were at work? At Starbucks? At a 5K race?
Where did this happen?
I am imagining myself in line at the bagel shop and this happening. I really can not comprehend it at all. At work would be even worse.
But I think this is not a true story, but instead a metaphor for what you feel about what is happening on the DU.
Just my opinion.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)would understand that my OP was allegory.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)Well then. I thought so.
I understood it as such. (I said metaphor, but yes, I got it). I thought that you stated it well.
seaglass
(8,175 posts)Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)which is against DU rules. Been on this Board for 15 years and never had a time out. I'm aiming to keep it that way. Progressives know that gaggle of DUers that I'm talking about.
seaglass
(8,175 posts)believe you were telling a true story as opposed to those who accepted that your story literally happened.
I accept that I'm not a member of the "DU progressive cool kids club" so forgive me for not seeing any other glaring differences in this thread.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Babel_17
(5,400 posts)Hahaha, yeah, because Progressives don't care about winning, and weren't passionately engaged in stopping Bush. That was their problem, the Progressives didn't care enough about winning.
P.S. Nader got a lot of votes from people who would never vote for Gore.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/06/1260721/-The-Nader-Myth
Arguably, he nearly cost Bush the election.
KyleMcShades
(40 posts)are the "violent" ones while they reject violence, when in reality the opposite is true. Libertarians are the ones who want to use guns to force their beliefs and tyrannical system on everyone.
It was smart of you to realize what they we're trying to do. They like to record it too and show it on youtube as propaganda to "prove" liberals are violent and aggressive.
Of course, its only human nature to get angry when someone is being a jerk to you, and bringing you down. More liberals need to realize this strategy and learn to keep their cool, even if they deserve to get mad.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)Kind of like Plato's Allegory Of The Cave... Plato really didn't see the reaction of cavedwellers reaction to their own shadows.
KyleMcShades
(40 posts)Didn't notice that.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,013 posts)Admiral Loinpresser
(3,859 posts)yurbud
(39,405 posts)Who the hell else would do this?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Let's be thankful that we have so many good candidates. I might be rooting for someone else if it weren't for the glorious fact that BERNIE is running.
He is the best of a good to not all that bad lot, but he is just so far above the others that I am thrilled that he is running.
Some who now back other candidates will, eventually, come around and decide to back Bernie. The people who back other candidates are good people. They just disagree with us Bernie supporters --- for the moment. Who knows what the future brings?
Some of them may turn out to be the biggest Bernie supporters of all. Life is always changing.
marym625
(17,997 posts)And a great lesson for here.
I think that will be my stock reply to snark. "Isn't it a lovely day? I hope we get some rain soon."
anniebelle
(906 posts)First of all, Nader did not run on the Democratic ticket. He screwed the Democrats by introducing a 3rd Party into that election! Secondly, it wasn't the progressives that lost that election ~ the black robes stole it ~ ended Democracy that very day. I have voted for Democrats all of my 70+ years. I will vote for the candidate that wins our primary. I remember all too well, Democrats voting for Reagan ~ even had that catchy little name "Reagan Democrats". Stand up for your candidate, but when the primary's over, remember the horrendous consequences of having ANY republican in the White House.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)I hope we get some rain.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Bazinga!!
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)You should learn from him.
Regards,
TWM
olegramps
(8,200 posts)davidpdx
(22,000 posts)The nicest I could have been is to ask him if his dog got ran over by a car then watch him scratch his head as I walk away.
Autumn
(45,942 posts)Take for instance a message board, people do that on those too. Friends like that are toxic and your lovely day comment is just the perfect response. There is never a reason to go on with conversations like that. It just feeds their ego.