A house divided cannot stand.

[LeatherSofa]

The last time that I remember a Democratic primary being this contentious was 1980 when Ted Kennedy challenged the incumbent Jimmy Carter. It was hard fought and passionate. Thankfully, there is no hostage crisis constantly beleaguering either candidate throughout the entire primary season.

Nonetheless, the result of the 80 election was the election of Ronald Reagan and a historical conservative trend in the American political landscape. Most would probably agree that it was a crippling loss for Americans labor, the middle class, and anyone struggling to attain a better life. It was a historic victory for corporations, Wall Street, and those whose wealth and power would only grow larger than ever before.

Could this 2016 election with its' deep divisions of passionate fervor for candidates Clinton and Sanders lead to another devastating defeat? Darn right it could. How bad could it be? Considering the opponents in the Repub field, I would guess the sky's the limit.

Would it be unfair to ask all of you to think of the consequences? Would you remind yourself of past history and how important a united party is to a general election? Despite all the mud slinging so prevalent now in American politics, there will be actual voting in the near future. No individual on a political forum will decide the outcome. This is only a small sampling of the general electorate. The voters in their state primaries will ultimately decide on the nominee. Let's not burn bridges between us before the voters even cast the first ballot in the very first primary.

[restorefreedom]

1. there is an important difference between the candidates here.

Hillarys campaign is lying and smearing bernie.

bernies campaign is NOT lying and smearing her.

so to end the housefire, it is incumbent on the one holding the flamethrower and the can of gas to stop.

oh and welcome to du...you picked ahelluva time to join...hang on tight, it gets bumpy from here

[Thinkingabout]

4. That is terrible, the OP is about a divided house, not smearing the other candidates.

[restorefreedom]

7. when claire mccaskill, a democrat,

tosses communist rhetoric around to smear bernie, exactly how does that help unify the party?

we can't come together when some are lying and redbaiting. and that unfortunately is one of the reasons the house is divided.

[Thinkingabout]

10. Or Hillary compared to Dick Cheney, how did that unify the party?

[restorefreedom]

14. i will be the first to say it wasn't his best moment imo

i mean, cheney isn't even the same species....there is no one like him




i really wish everyone could just get bsck to the issues...,there are plenty of them

[Hortensis]

53. This forum is weird and extremely UNrepresentative

of the electorate. The current demographics are highly skewed, to the point that the name Democratic Underground gives a very inaccurate picture, and the contentiousness quota is through the roof as a result.

"Out there" is very different. Out there, when people talk about a house divided they mean between liberal and conservative, left and right, Democrat and Republican.

In any case, to imagine that what happens here will be reflected in the election would be to misunderstand the situation greatly.

[restorefreedom]

63. all i know is my own little world

and in it, i only hear two names. bernie and trump. no one else is even registering. i don't think tptb know or want to know the depths and breadth of the contempt against them.

[Hortensis]

64. :) Well at least Cheney's been exiled

to the emotional netherworld. As a matter of fact, the entire right wing seems to have been.

Seriously, that extremely bumpy ride is going to produce a long series of rude awakenings. Or will it?

I've been wondering if some people here haven't been doomed to feel bitterly disappointed and betrayed election after election, candidate after candidate, party after party, decade after decade, with 2016 only the latest cycle.

[Andy823]

78. Interesting point

I also feel that some here can never be happy about the outcome of our elections. Soon after Obama was elected some here started in on him not doing all he could, or in some case they claimed he was a "do nothing" president. The group grew and more and more doom and bloomers joined in. They then started in on other democrats in office using the same tactics, then they simply went after the whole democratic party. Of course those same people then decided on the "anybody but Hillary" tactic to once again keep dividing those here on DU, and sadly it has worked for them, this place is insane these day with all the trashing of the "other candidate" posts.

Now I know some of these poster are most likely right wing trolls. I have seen so many new members this last year that come here and on day one they start trashing the "other candidate". I remember when they would have been gone the same day, but now they get hundreds of recs because trashing the other candidate is the new thing to do here on DU, and the old time bashers welcome the newbies into their fold.

I honestly believe that with in 6 months of Bernie being elected, if that were to happen, these same people who have a been here for years bashing the president, the party, and any other democrat that they don't like, will turn on Bernie in a heartbeat. Of course if Hillary were to win, or as I hope O'Malley, there would be no doubt they would start in on them from day one.

[Hortensis]

81. Thanks very much for the DU history, Andy.

I occasionally dropped in before last summer, but not enough to develop an understanding of the context within which these behaviors have been unfolding. I'm afraid you're 100% right in your last paragraph. That is sadly inevitable.

Eric Hoffer, the political philosopher, seems to have had a which-came-first question about this, though. "There is probably an element of malice in our readiness to overestimate people - we are, as it were, laying up for ourselves the pleasure of later cutting them down to size." Interesting observation, but likely more and less true for some True Believers than others.

I've noticed a few new names arriving and stirring up the easily agitated. I was just on a jury for a thread that used extreme racial slurring in supposed support for Bernie. I wondered if a GD-P regular could have created a duplicate membership in order to slip the leash or if it was an outside agitator at work. It was a first post and very clearly one or the other.

Based on other elections, would you expect the forum to settle down a bit and take a more proper direction after the primary? If Hillary wins? If Bernie wins?

Eric Hoffer

[Andy823]

92. I think things will settle down

Once the nominee is chosen, no matter who that might be the rules here on DU are pretty clear.

"In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side."

I am sure some will test the limits of these rules, but for the most part I think that a lot of those who come here simply to divide the boards will stop posting. The majority will follow the rules and get behind whoever the nominee will be.

[Hortensis]

94. Thank goodness for the TOS. I'd forgotten that.

Something to look forward to.

[Fumesucker]

66. Yeah, when I first came here Dubya had a 90% approval rating

DU is very weird and unrepresentative of the electorate for sure.

[Hortensis]

68. Even the GOP didn't give W 90%. Bizarre!

[Fumesucker]

70. No, the GOP gave the War Pretzeldent about 500%

[Hortensis]

85. Oh, you're right, for a few days anyway.

What do you want to bet GOP leaders are praying for nice big terrorist attack to save them? Another 9/11 would be good timing.

[workinclasszero]

48. Well that is ok because....Bernie

[DFW]

13. It seems to me the point of the OP

Is to suggest that we NOT emulate Sen. McCaskill's rhetoric. Too many on DU seem to think it was a green light to try to be worse rather than better.

[restorefreedom]

15. i agree

but if she tosses commie around, bernie has to defend himself.

we need to get back to the issues

[DFW]

20. I think Bernie is perfectly capable of doing that on his own

McCaskill is a fellow Senator. A simple "Seriously, Claire?" a smile and a shaking of his head should do it more eloquently than any hysterics on our part could.

And I agree--issues (CURRENT issues, btw) should be what determines anyone's support. One reason I remain on the fence is that none of the three has taken a position on an issue which affects me and about 6 million other US citizens. Epithets hurled at the any of the three on this board will have no effect whatsoever on that.

[restorefreedom]

40. its a fine line

between calling liars out and launching a counter attack. i think bernie has walked that line very deftly.

if you feel like sharing, what is your primary issue thst is not being addressed by any of them?

if you want to pass, i understand

[synergie]

19. That's simply not true, put down the flame thrower and realize what you're doing.

[restorefreedom]

39. ? my name is not claire mccaskill. nt

[Hortensis]

69. Agree. That's simply not true.

[restorefreedom]

74. what part isn't true? nt

[Hortensis]

84. Neither side is "lying and smearing" as these things go.

IMO, you seem to suffer from an excess of sensitivity where one candidate is concerned and blindness where the other is concerned. They're both behaving pretty well for a political campaign.

Media portrayals of every criticism as an "attack" are good for sales but bad for democracy. It is our job to keep ourselves balanced and honest in this environment and to not get carried away into indulging in the kind of behaviors we claim to deplore.

[restorefreedom]

86. hammer and sickle is redbaiting and a blatant lie

mccaskill knows damn well bernie is a dem socialist not a communist. she is appealing to the worst aspect of the xenophobic rw base, and it is revolting.

also, hillary also knows damn well bernie is not going to dismantle obamacare. he is going to implement medicare for all and he is not going to leave people up the creek. another scare tactic lie. chelsea repeated the lie and was called out big time for it.

she also knows bernie has a d- from the nra...they hate him. but it doesn't stop her from painting him as a gun nut.

should i go on?

ps if this is good behavior i would hate to see bad

the attack conclusion was mine. i do not look to m$m for any guidance. that would be supremely sad if i did lol

have a good one!

[Thinkingabout]

2. Yes, this house needs to get together and also elect Democrats at every level, with out a Democratic

congress there is little hope of getting progressive issues passed in Congress. In 2010 and 2014 we lost in in Congress, if a republican president is elected with a republican congress it will be George W Bush all over again. Dumb president with a congress who gave him everything he wanted.

[daleanime]

6. And it's not important whether there is...

room for everyone or not.

[Fawke Em]

29. But they have to be Democrats.

Not DINOs, Third-Wayers, Blue Dogs and all those other Republican-Lite alternatives.

[Hekate]

73. They have to each be electable in their own district. Bernie Sanders in Mississippi? How?

Well, probably a bad example. Bernie was never a Democrat until recently in any state or district. He adapted quite well to Vermont, and they to him.

The point, as has been explained here many times before, is that Blue Dog Democrats get elected in Red States -- because leftier-than-thou Democrats don't stand a snowball's chance in Hell in those states. Once they get to Congress, they reliably caucus and vote with the rest of the Democrats MOST OF THE TIME. They have to please their constituents the REST OF THE TIME. So they will get re-elected in their home district, you know.

And that is why the Democratic Party has a BIG tent. Unlike the GOP, which now has a narrower and narrower slice of America to work with.

[Hortensis]

71. THIS house cannot. - burning oil and water,

But liberal and moderate Democrats and left-leaning independents are a large majority, and most of us will ultimately come together behind one candidate.

Bernie's more...ardent followers will follow him as long as fate allows. If he loses the primary some will head right (Trump?), some home, some wherever, and some will shake loose of that groupthink and back our nominee. Nice to have but not critical since the more...ardent followers are far, far smaller in numbers than their presence here might suggest.

[daleanime]

3. Try not to think of it as a divided house....

but a tough decision about which road to take. May not make it any more pleasant, but it underscores the importance a little better. These fights do serve a purpose, as regrettable as they may be.

[Orsino]

9. Yes. Primaries are supposed to be contentious.

It's the coronations that are so dull and dangerous.

We must never, ever wish for peace for its own sake. If we want a nominee who will fight for us, train 'em harder than we expect them to have to fight, I say.

[synergie]

21. No, actually debate and discussion would serve a purpose, but the level of toxicity and the abuse

and the right wing smears do not. It doesn't need to be this poisonous and it's not serving any higher purpose, it's just venting of hate, pure and simple.

If you go to the lowest form of attack whenever anyone tries to discuss policy, you know you're not terribly confident about that path you're trying to force upon everyone. You should be asking questions and demanding answers of both candidates not using right wing smears and rising to the bait to tear them down.

[daleanime]

25. So worrying about how many wars someone might start...

is just me hating and tearing down? I shouldn't be concerned about such things?

[cali]

5. it is no more contentious than 2008

What does 2008 have in common with 2016?

[HereSince1628]

16. IMO, that sorta depends on which 'it' one is talking about.

I don't think the campaigns are any more contentious in their interactions even as the tightening of polls has led to some recent mudslinging. The campaigns have actually been more respectful than usual, at least until recently.

I do think that the attitudes on DU are an order of magnitude more confrontational, and have been for 9 months or so... that may reflect a greater willingness for confrontation in society and thereby among DUers.

[Andy823]

80. I totally agree with you.

It is a lot more confrontational than it was back in 2008. Trash and bash the "other" candidate instead of pointing out the facts of how your candidate is better, seem to be the goal now. I don't mind a debate on the issues, but the constant BS from right wing sites, and the daily bash, bash, and trash crowd is really getting old.

[Puglover]

93. Were you a mod

during 2008 primaries? No? I was. I used to arrive at my job (where I modded from when things were slow which was pretty much always) and every morning there were 150-250 alerts waiting to be worked.

So at least from my experience 2008 was just as bad if not worse.

What is so incredibly ironic to me now is that some of the folks that said the most vicious things about SOS Clinton are here most ardent supporters. And I mean vicious as in "murderer" "criminal". I remember the names and I remember the deletes etc. etc. I simply do not understand how one comes back from that.

[Cosmocat]

89. B U L L S H I T

It is completely different.

I had the same personal experience.

Both times coming in supporting Hillary, then in 08 flippling to BHO and this time flipping to Bernie.

It was a normal primary in 08, tough and with the expected contentiousness.

But, the tone of BHO supporters was completely different from the tone of Sanders supporters, at least here.

BHO supporters generally had a confidence, and optimism. They were focused on BHO for the most part.

Bernie supports here are as mean, uncivil and dishonest as republicans are.

Same bullshit - they talk about and dehumanize Hillary like republicans, they demean and dehumanize Hillary supporters like republicans do to democrats while at the same time making themselves out to be victims like republican do and using the republican go to move of pointing to one thing, true or not, and using that to justify acting like bullies.

I was happy and enthusiastic to vote for BHO.

Now, I am so repulsed by you people I have to keep centering on Bernie ...

I will vote for him because he is the best candidate.

But you people do your best to drive people away from him.

Bullshit in 3, 2 1 ...

[cali]

91. BULLFUCKINGSHIT

It got incredibly nasty in 2008.

And as a clear reflection of the Clinton campaign, it's people like you that have people backing away from your corrupt, dishonest candidate.

Cheers

[Le Taz Hot]

8. I stopped reading here:

"The last time that I remember a Democratic primary being this contentious was 1980 "

SOMEbody wasn't paying attention in 2008.

I glanced at the rest of it -- pedantic Pablum. If comparing the two frontrunners and weighing pros and cons gives you the sadz, Cooking and Bakiing is down the hall and to the right. But you must first swear fealty to all things Trader Joe's.

[LeatherSofa]

17. I remember 2008 well.

My candidate lost in the primary to President Obama. She united her supporters behind him in the general election and we won as a united party.

Now, if you had not dismissed my suggestion out of hand, you would have noticed that I appealed for a united front for the general election. Excuse me. I really wasn't appealing for contentious responses and more division if that's what you thought.

[onecaliberal]

54. She has already alienated a lot of people. Many of them will never ever vote for her.

[beltanefauve]

65. EVENTUALLY she

endorsed Obama.

You left out the part where she refused to concede, long after it was mathematically impossible for her to win. She continued to be divisive. Oh, but supposedly that was good for Obama, that she was "toughening him up for the general election. "

[tularetom]

76. You make it sound like she graciously conceded to Obama in 2008

She did not. She petulantly threatened a floor fight at the convention and I believe Obama bought her off by promising her the Secretary of State position in his administration.

[Art_from_Ark]

83. Apparently you've never heard of the PUMAs

and Clintons4McCain.com

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_United_Means_Action

[mmonk]

11. My reasons are not based on the candidates

as based on the Anerican people and who will stand up for them in the present conditions they find themselves in.

[bigwillq]

12. I'd rather fight for what's right and lose

Instead of not fighting at all.

[coyote]

87. +1

[cherokeeprogressive]

18. The consequences of posting my thoughts and beliefs on DemocraticUnderground are absolutely...

Nil.

Nada.

Nicht.

Niente.

Rien du tout.

Perhaps you ascribe more importance to the Real World impact DemocraticUnderground has on anything at all than is worthy.

[LeatherSofa]

22. I wonder why.

I wonder why an appeal for unity brought only contentiousness from Sanders supporters and none from Clinton supporters.

Makes me wonder.

[cherokeeprogressive]

23. Bless your heart.

[Fawke Em]

31. Because they still think they (you) have it in the bag and

us Bernie supporters will have to vote for her.

Some of us won't. Many won't even show up.

But, that's besides the point.

When the shoe is on the other foot, then let me hear you sing Kumbaya.

[LeatherSofa]

36. When the shoe WAS on the other foot,

the Hillary supporters of 2008 united behind Obama. By your own admission, many of you plan NOT to do the same.

By your own admission in your post, Fawke Em.

[kelly1mm]

61. Some did while others did not. Remember the PUMA's? nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. In a democracy we're supposed to scrutinize candidates before voting for them.

If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. Harry Truman

[Autumn]

26. Are you really calling for unity?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1050474

I do agree, a house divided cannot stand, but this lectures does ring hollow. Posts like that really do widen the divide.

[Fawke Em]

32. And there you have it.

Kumbaya, my ass.

[LeatherSofa]

33. Yes. More than ever.

I reflected on that post. Although the OP accused the Clintons of being latently racist in the subject line itself, I responded badly and regretted it. I won't defend a bad response. I will say that I never see "hate" bandied around as much in various posts like I have seen from many of the Sanders supporters.

It's the "I hate Hillary" or "I hate the Clintons" that bother me most. In the 2008 primary defeat of Hillary, I don't recall any "I hate Obama" messages and posts during that time. Because there was no hate. There is a difference in disagreements and "hate". Hate is generally a teaparty type of far right extremist outlook. I think it nearly always identifies the extremists from both sides.

[Autumn]

59. I don't hate Hillary or Bill. I like then both,

I just don't want Hillary in the White House or in any capacity to make decisions that impact people. I have seen a lot of I hate Bernie and his supporters posts by Hillary Supporters.

[farleftlib]

35. eww that was hideous

How very interesting this OP looks in light of that post.

[LeatherSofa]

38. More hideous than the subject of the same OP?

Are you kidding me? I accepted the judgment and regretted responding tit for tat. Because you see it's impossible to even point out the hypocrisy to many of you.

I refuse to again be baited into a discussion that will ultimately result in another biased hidden post decision. So, have your way. I regretted my ill tempered, knee jerk response to an insulting, hurtful Subject Title. But perhaps that disqualifies me from any further discussion. So be it. I tried to make amends and appeal for unity. I was rejected. So be it.

[farleftlib]

41. Ok, I can see where you're coming from.

We all make mistakes. Carry on.

But ugliness is flying in both directions.

[MisterP]

67. funny thing with hidden posts is that you can't retroactively delete them

[bkkyosemite]

27. The two candidates do not want the same things.

Truth or more of the same is the issue. Many want change, some are good with the status quo. How do you convince those sides to combine. It's going to be a nail biter.

[Attorney in Texas]

28. 2008 and 2004 were equally contentious (do you remember the PUMA nonsense?)

[firebrand80]

30. Deep breath, DU isn't the real world

If you want to see a party on the verge of civil war, take a look at the GOP.

[LeatherSofa]

34. I know.

That's what makes this election year so inviting of a general election victory. And the likely possibility of Supreme Court justices being appointed in the next 4 years.

The friction going on now is threatening to spoil it all. But although the Repubs are usually good at eating their own, they are generally known for being more politically active I fear. They always seem to unite when it comes general election time.

[sadoldgirl]

37. You forget though that a very similar split

takes place in the Republican party, because
left or right the people are fed up with the
establishment politics.

I bet you that there are people who are torn
between Sanders and Trump, and that shows
you that the issues are bigger than the parties.

[99Forever]

42. 35 posts in and already going for the Loyalty Pledge?

Frankly newbie, how I intend to use my vote, is none of your fucking business. Any more questions?

[LeatherSofa]

43. Cute.

It's all in the post count. I've been there. It counts for zero, nembie.

[99Forever]

44. Not ALL, newbie.

But when you head down certain paths before establishing your creds, it certainly sends a message.

So, perhaps you could explain just where in the fuck "there" is.

[LeatherSofa]

46. You don't warrant any creds.

Have a nice day, newbie.

Work on your post count.

[99Forever]

50. Whatever you say.

Bu bye. Enjoy your stay.

[hrmjustin]

47. Your civility is a shining example to us all

[99Forever]

49. I welcome your hatred of me.

It tells me I am on the right side of things.

[hrmjustin]

52. I don't hate you.

[99Forever]

55. Sure could have fooled me.

[hrmjustin]

56. Can you link to where I gave you this impression?

[99Forever]

58. ...

[hrmjustin]

60. Well I don't hate you.

[99Forever]

62. I don't believe you.

[hrmjustin]

45. If a member can't say they will support the nominee they are suspect to me.

They maybe sore losers or gop trolls.

I may not be excited about Sanders but if he wins I will cast my vote for him.

[workinclasszero]

51. No worries here

If by some miracle Bernie wins the nomination, Ill vote for him in the general.

However, there has been post after post after post for months on end from the Sander's camp swearing up and down that they will never ever never vote for Hillary...EVER!

So in all fairness, look to the Bernie camp for the great divide. That's where it emanates from after all.

[AOR]

57. Your post ignores capitalist social relations...

and the material reality of the effects of capitalism in the crippling of labor and those struggling to attain a better life. It can't work any other way... regardless of politicians and parties working under the umbrella of the capitalist power structure. The only thing that can be mitigated under that umbrella is the degree and time frame of the destruction of the workers, labor, and the struggling. Capitalism is the redistribution and expropriation of all wealth created by the working class into the hands of the owners and a parasitic ruling class.

What those seeking to rectify the problem - of the crippling of labor and the destruction of the majority struggling to attain a better life - need is unity and solidarity in advancing the causes and demands of the working class at all times and in all things. What the working class doesn't need is solidarity and unity with those who would do the bidding of the ruling class and the owners.

That is where the house needs to be united. Organization of the working class and labor as a political movement and force that has the power to command and demand control of its own destiny. Unity of the Democratic Party in service to the ruling class and business as usual is not a unity - that anyone who seeks emancipation of the working class and the struggling should strive for. Whether the Bernie Sanders movement can understand that and be an asset in that struggle remains to be seen. We already know for a fact that Clinton and the currently constructed Democratic Party will never be anything other than business as usual in service to the ruling class when it comes to the battle between labor vs capital and economic class war.


“As long as he owns your tools he owns your job, and if he owns your job he is the master of your fate. You are in no sense a free man. You are subject to his interest and to his will. He decides whether you shall work or not. Therefore, he decides whether you shall live or die. And in that humiliating position any one who tries to persuade you that you are a free man is guilty of insulting your intelligence.”

--Eugene Debs

[reddread]

72. I wouldnt excuse Edward Kennedy but I would attribute the extended captivity GHWB paid for.

to leave that small factor out of the equation is unjust.

[in_cog_ni_to]

75. ONLY 29% of the population call themselves Democrats. After this election, they will be fortunate to

have 15%. The party will cease to exist. Independents are already 43% of the population. After this election, that will shoot up to over 50%. Only 26% admit to being Repubs.

Also, we all know a Majority of Independents LEAN LEFT.

Both the Democratic and Republican parties will be pretty much relegated to the dust bins of history and GOOD RIDDANCE. The damage both parties are doing to this country right now, in this election, have already caused irreparable damage - Repubs and their bigotry, racism, hate and lies and the Democratic party with their BLATANT election rigging, supporting the Oligarch over the 99%,
wrapping themselves in Wall St. Corruption, the LIES about Bernie and RED BAITING BERNIE are the last straws for me. If Bernie isn't the nominee, I'll never call myself a Democrat again. Bridges were burned back in May, FYI.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[PatrickforO]

77. I'm sorry, but I've got to call bullshit on this OP

Here's the thing - this country is a hair's breadth away from becoming a fascist oligarchy. We have a militarized justice system that seems to have declared war on people of color. We have a bunch of ignorant but heavily armed yahoos up in Oregon squatting on a federal facility with more joining them every day. We have the TPP, which is the oligarchs' move to take power from nation states and put it in corporate hands. We have a forever war, and we have a whole generation of of our children and grandchildren that are choking on unsustainable student debt. The American middle class has been nickel and dimed almost to extinction by shits like the Koch brothers, with their systematic union busting, dilution of benefits, stealing of pensions and mass layoffs so they can offshore good jobs.

And in the meantime we are destroying the earth we all depend on just so guys LIKE the Koch brothers can eke out another few billion in profits.

Clinton is owned by Wall Street and has way too much baggage to win a general election. She represents the status quo as evidenced by the Goldman Sachs CEO saying Wall Street would be 'comfortable' with a Clinton presidency. I DON'T want those Wall Street fucks to be comfortable after ruining so many lives and running us all into unsustainable debt. That's bullshit.

BERNIE IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE WILLING TO FIGHT THIS SHIT.

That's why I'm for Bernie.

[coyote]

88. Nice summary +1

[orpupilofnature57]

79. That fear making decision thing, hows that working so far ?

[NCTraveler]

82. The 2008 primary was more contentious than this.

By far. This is down right polite compared to 2008. That will not be recognized by people who form their worldview from DU.