This message was self-deleted by its author

[Csainvestor]

This message was self-deleted by its author (Csainvestor) on Thu Jun 2, 2016, 01:52 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.

[Starry Messenger]

1. Promise?

[YouDig]

2. Ha! Very good!

[highprincipleswork]

3. I know. Then we can rename it The Hillary Club!

[Starry Messenger]

13. I'm going to hold you to that.

[AgingAmerican]

21. Her supporters can't seem to repel people fast enough for their liking

[grasswire]

63. truth

every one of those posts is a vote lost for HRC.

[upaloopa]

103. Gee how many is that now 10? 12?

Sure will hand it to Trump.

[puffy socks]

126. ...

[CorkySt.Clair]

34. You can always go to the Jackpine sewer

Working against Dems is encouraged there as is all the Hillary hate you'd ever want.

[Agschmid]

48. And you can freely use the c-word.

[Bobbie Jo]

77. Wow

What a dump.

They deserve each other.

[AgingAmerican]

67. Post a few tidbits from there, with links, to prove your assertions

Thanks in advance.

[CorkySt.Clair]

68. No thanks.

I just showered. Not interested in taking another one to get rid of the smell of patulli, cumin and feet.

[AgingAmerican]

69. So you are just blowing smoke out your

....

[AgingAmerican]

72. I did and nothing came up

Because you made it all up

[CorkySt.Clair]

73. Yes, I'm sure you believe that

They just love Hillary at the Jackpine sewer.

http://jackpineradicals.org/showthread.php?9921-TYT-Hillary-Doesn%92t-Care-About-Appealing-To-Bernie-Voters

[larkrake]

138. Thanks for the link, they were having a great time

I could just picture the big hats and mint juleps , just sitting around a table

[Clemenza]

151. My God, those women on that site

Are disgusting.

[CorkySt.Clair]

152. Aren't they?

It's an anti Dem hate site at this point. Populated by cranks.

[mythology]

121. Do a google search specific to the site

site:jackpineradicals.org and the word in question.

It appears that one poster after being asked multiple times, finally edited their posts:

http://jackpineradicals.org/showthread.php?11829-Trump-goes-for-Hillary-s-jugular-posts-video-of-Bill-s-rape-accusers-on-Instagram

Then there's this post:

http://jackpineradicals.org/showthread.php?10687-Hillary-nicknames

Dorkzilla in particular seems rather fond of the word.

Or here:

http://jackpineradicals.org/showthread.php?5258-The-New-York-Times-now-featuring-anti-Clinton-articles

So now you can no longer pretend that you don't realize what utter scum some Sanders supporters who have left here for jackpineradicals are.

[rbrnmw]

156. OMG very nasty stuff

[kstewart33]

141. I'm sorry to see you go.

There are plenty of Bernie websites where you can post.

So long and good luck!

[bravenak]

44. Seriously.

[rbrnmw]

157. IKR?

[bravenak]

158. So glad skinner made his announcement

[rbrnmw]

159. me too this divisiveness has gone on long enough

[JTFrog]

134. You win the internet today! nt

[sufrommich]

5. Okay. This is the way every presidential election/primary has

been done on DU since I've been here . People come and go,that's the way it's always been.

[annavictorious]

9. That's not TRUE!!! DU is RIGGED!!!

HOW MUCH IS BROCK PAYING YOU?????

[MADem]

18. This post wins the thread! nt

[bravenak]

46. .

[HERVEPA]

87. Insightful

[larkrake]

137. LOL

[rbrnmw]

160. He stopped paying us that million ran out

[roguevalley]

150. no. this is the worst.

[KingFlorez]

6. Bye

And just so you know, private websites set their own rules and are not obligated to allow free speech.

[reformist2]

40. Be careful what you wish for... you may find yourselves turning on each other....

[bjo59]

57. Oh, most assuredly so. A cohesive group always seems to need an external enemy to feel solidarity.

It's a shame but that's the reason for scapegoating and blacklisting. I'll never forget having to read Shirley Jackson's *The Lottery* in jr. high school. Quite a lesson in that story.

[Ford F-150]

140. So by that logic...

A bakery run by fundies "should" also be free to refuse service to those they don't agree with?

[stevenleser]

163. Nope, what you posit is no logic at all. Don't take my word for it, there are several attorneys on

DU.

jberryhill and msanthrope are two. One of them a Bernie supporter and one a Hillary supporter.

Both will tell you a bakery vs an internet discussion forum are apples and oranges for the purposes of what you are discussing.

[annavictorious]

7. Making threats that no one cares about

has become the go-to strategy for one candidate's supporters.

[eastwestdem]

8. Same for Huffpo! Hopefully things will return to normal after next week. nt

[bjo59]

62. Yes, I have noticed that. Brought to you by AOL and its parent company, Verizon.

They post articles under obnoxious headlines all day long and many, many of those articles are just links to other publications so there is no way to respond to or discuss the article with other HuffPo readers. Shutting down conversation and also reducing cost and maximizing benefit for the corporation. If Clinton is elected the next president, I predict that it will be under her administration that the corporate leviathan gains full control of the Internet. What's going on hasn't been referred to for decades as "global corporate totalitarianism" for nothing.

[bobmartel]

11. Me, too

I am not a poster. I read DU everyday and have since it began. It is not about free speech when it defends a person who plays hardball. Declaring victory before victory has been obtained is done to fool people not educate and organize. There is truth and then there is what ever is not truth. Power doesn't respect truth. Truth is power makes up the truth. A very Bush-Clinton idea.

[JudyM]

42. Well for someone who doesn't say much (5posts in 10 years!!) you just definitely said a lot.

Thank you for your thoughts!

[bjo59]

64. Absolutely right.

[arikara]

118. I've been here a long time too

15 years, all through the insane Bush/Cheney years of torture, war and killing. Obama has been no saint on that front either what with his drones but I see things only getting worse if Mrs Clinton actually does get her wish to become the first woman president. I have no plans to become a cheerleader for any of that.

But it isn't over yet, and won't be on Spinner's arbitrary date either. Declaring victory before victory has been obtained just might bite them in the arse. I hope it doesn't hurt them too badly if it does, but I doubt I'll be here anymore regardless.

[840high]

130. +100

[hrmjustin]

14. You agreed to the terms of service like all of us.

No one is forcing you to post here.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

15. See ya...

[Land of Enchantment]

16. Wow. There sure are a LOT of ill mannered and mean spirited comments here.

I too was on KOS for years and left for the same reasons. I came here because of the civility and interesting conversations and topics.

Nowadays it is just toxic. Good luck to you Csainvestor, see you at JPR.

To those who are so very rude...
Just wait until your chickens come home to roost because they will.

Anything can happen.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. Somebody here said JPR is a crypto MRA site. Is that correct?

[AgingAmerican]

23. Somebody said it? lol

lol

[okasha]

49. Nothing crypto about it. Open sewer.

[bjo59]

70. I just don't understand the ugliness of this kind of comment.

What do you gain by calling that site an "open sewer"? Is that how you want people to talk to you?

[okasha]

88. See post 74.

[Lizzie Poppet]

92. Never disparage a cult figure.

Their acolytes get real ugly, real fast.

[stevenleser]

164. I don't understand you defending a site that uses the 'c' word to describe women.

Is that how you want people to refer to the women in your life? To you if you are a woman?

[zappaman]

36. Not sure what you mean by that.

If you mean posting Hillary is a c**t, a "Hildebeast", and other repulsive things, then yes.
That and worse get posted there.
Take a look if you don't believe me.
So, it's not for me.

[George II]

53. Jury results. Funny that none of the three "hide" votes explained their votes.

On Tue May 31, 2016, 06:33 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Not sure what you mean by that.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2098103

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Unnecessary to associate the c-word with Hillary to make the point. This is over the top even if it's a Hillary supporter.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue May 31, 2016, 06:37 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Point well made. That sick language is posted there a lot. Here too. The poster was making the point that such language about our likely eventual nominee is beyond the pale.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The poster isn't associating the c-word with Clinton, Sanders supporters have done so a number of times, along with many other disgusting characterizations. There is nothing wrong with this post, that word is being used as an example of what OTHER DUers have called our presumptive nominee. LEAVE!
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: looks like he discretely added asterisks after the alert got sent
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[zappaman]

56. Juror #5

"looks like he discretely added asterisks after the alert got sent "

Funny...when you click on the post it says on the bottom "This post has been edited 0 times."

Oh well.

[AgingAmerican]

58. So it is like thepeoplesview?

[zappaman]

61. Don't know that one, so couldn't tell you.

Sorry.

[MADem]

116. Does that use the C word? nt

[MADem]

115. Are you serious?

I think that's pretty egregious. If that place is so great, though, why are they here?

[zappaman]

119. Yes.

Beats me why they're here.

[MADem]

120. No words-smh! Especially after all the discussion about that here on previous occasions. nt

[Lizzie Poppet]

91. Somebody with the IQ smaller than their shoe size, apparently.

I recommend you never listen to a word that idiot says ever again...whoever it may have been.

[stevenleser]

165. Whatever their IQ they were apparently right. Here is the link to prove it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2098388

See post #12

[SmittynMo]

22. I have to agree with your every word.

I'm so fed up with it, as are others. My time here has been limited lately. I will continue that way until next weeks landslide in CA. It's all bullshit, and rigged, and ridiculous.

[bjo59]

66. Glad to see this discussed. I never post on the issue because I haven't been on here very long.

But "toxic" is the word. Extremely demoralizing and I'm certain that this is the intention. It's not demoralizing with regard to support of a candidate as much as it's demoralizing because it opens a window onto a part of American culture that I cannot stand.

[GulfCoast66]

104. Rude=telling the truth

[NobodyHere]

20. Try spouting a conservative viewpoint here

DU is free speech only for liberal free speech.

[SmittynMo]

26. For the most part

Yuuuuuuup!!!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. That is in the Terms Of Service

Don't be a wingnut (right-wing or extreme-fringe).
Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office. Teabaggers, Neo-cons, Dittoheads, Paulites, Freepers, Birthers, and right-wingers in general are not welcome here. Neither are certain extreme-fringe left-wingers, including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

[DemocratSinceBirth]

85. I have taken the test several times and receive -7 s which puts to me the left of Bernard Sanders

I have taken the test several times and receive -7 s which puts to me the left of Bernard Sanders and at the bottom left of the left quadrant with Mandela and Gandhi.

Thank you very much for judging me, though.

[Lizzie Poppet]

90. Then your choice is bizarre.

That's probably the least objectionable way I can put it...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

95. Respectfully, I don't believe he has the requisite knowledge and experience to be president.

I am not singling him out... I believe few people do...

[Lizzie Poppet]

96. Okay, that's fair.

I don't agree, but that's a reasoned, substantive rationale for your preference. Thank you for the civil response. Sorry if I was snippy.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

98. By the standards of this board you were pleasant.

Have a nice evening, what's left of it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

113. I explained my position to the satisfaction of Ms. Poppet.

You can litigate it with her.

[taught_me_patience]

24. Amf

[NanceGreggs]

25. Apparently you haven't noticed ...

... that HRC supporters have been "censored" here for months, thanks to a jury pool that consists of 85% BS supporters.

Posts that were considered even remotely anti-Bernie were hidden, and those who posted them were sent on time-outs - thus rendering the jury pool even more than 85% BSers.

Funny how "censorship" has a whole different meaning when YOU'RE the one being censored as opposed to the "other guy".

[Trust Buster]

30. You beat me to pointing out that obvious hypocrisy by mere seconds....LOL

[NanceGreggs]

41. GMTA!

Amazing how the Bernie supporters, who have had total control over DU for months, are now also claiming that DU will become an "echo chamber" if only HRCers and actual Democrats get to post here.

Exactly what did they think this place was when THEY were controlling it?

The mind boggles ...

[Trust Buster]

27. I have two points in response;

1) I find it pretty funny that those that hide posts day and night can complain about censorship. That takes real projection.

2) There is no way that DU can allow the destructive behavior directed towards the Democratic nominee. It's counterproductive to DU's interests. DU had to choose a cut off point. You are not being fair to DU.

[JudyM]

52. IMO there should be a separate group where Sanders supporters can still communicate to work through

however this goes down. It is, I always thought, a community. So many of us are so emotionally tied to our candidate and yes, eventually we will come to terms with it. But certainly not before the convention.

[GulfCoast66]

106. Well, you used the word...emotionally

And that pretty much sums up most of the Bernie supporters.

When emotion rules, intellect goes out the window. It has been decades since I have been emotionally tied to a candidate. Makes it too much like religion.

There is a certain blond headed fellow with a shit ton of supporters emotionally tied to him.

[JudyM]

146. Of course if emotion "rules" it is problematic but emotions are psychologically important and valid

signals and motivators for most well adjusted people, as with many, many Sanders supporters whose emotions are based on very real, principled values. We hate unnecessary war-for-profit. We are disgusted by corruption in our political system. We feel protecting the environment, such as stopping fracking, is urgently needed. Etc.

Glibly comparing us to tRump supporters reflects poorly on your understanding of the emotions underlying our passion. As does denigrating our position as based on being "ruled" by emotions with no intellect. If anything, I would argue that Clinton supporters are more ruled by emotions than intellect... How, as "democrats" you could support a candidate with such a horrible record in terms of both substance and process is stunning to most of us. And continuing to cling to her even with what has been unfolding in this primary and with investigations...

When we have "discussions" on DU it is strikingly apparent that an actual intellectual basis for supporting her over Bernie is not proffered. Vague assertions of her "effectiveness" or "electability" have been disproved. The only thing left that I see is that she is a female, which, even to me as an ardent feminist, pales in comparison to how she would run the country. Identity politics seems to subsume the rest of Clinton supporters' position.

Just my opinion, of course. But certainly you show no understanding if you think yourself on higher intellectual ground.

[GulfCoast66]

147. I will be the first to tell you

I am not on higher intellectual ground! If I gave you that impression it was not my intention.

But I have used what intellect I was born with and I do not think Bernie is electable. Your assertion that it has been proved is spurious as it is impossible to prove the result of an election before it occurs.

I like Bernie and I am not afraid of the label of socialist. But I am not most Americans. I think if he is the candidate he will be shredded once the GE campaign starts. Maybe I am wrong, but I do not think we will ever know.

I know we will continue to disagree but have no doubt I am as sincere in my beliefs as you are yours.

What seems to separate some Bernie supporters, not necessarily you, from almost all Hillary supporters is there emotional investment in him the man. To the point that they have convinced themselves that he is the only hope the country has. Like a Savior.

[JudyM]

148. The emotional investment is warranted in light of the stakes. But it is not about *him* - he is the

one who is championing our values and we have reason to trust him. But make no mistake, the emotion is passion for the movement that he is articulating and leading.

[TheKentuckian]

100. My served to vote to hide ratio might be 1000-1 and if you were upheld or hid I put my name to it

and comment why.

I think the real projection is maybe coming from someone who votes to hide based on disagreement or who is your buddy.

Why would you assume such a voting pattern? I've always been fine with making them public and I've always believed in petty ass alert gangs trying to pick people off, I've even seen it bragged about off site.

I mostly believe that the whole thing is a fix to help the conservatives in a series of attempts that never works because most of the folks that want to be spouting conservative crap on the internet go ahead and get about it all out. It is hard to have numbers on liberal sites so it has to be massaged a bit or the moderate right would get rolled over.

The problem of course is it doesn't work, there is no way to get enough woodchuck traffic especially on too many large sites, if the liberals aren't distributed and significantly allowed to say their piece the flow will go to where it will and the click rates suffer.

It also is a piss poor feline herding technique if you are into that kind of thing.

[basselope]

28. DailyKos is paying the price

Their traffic has seen a steep drop since the end of March.

[Land of Enchantment]

37. That is interesting.

How do you track traffic? If it's true that 70-80% of Duers are Bernie supporters it will be devastating. I have no idea because I have hundreds on 'Ignore'.

[basselope]

124. use Alexa

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/dailykos.com

You can see that DU has held up

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/democraticunderground.com

[jaceaf]

123. So has the Sanders Reddit

They're also getting less hits at the sanders4pres reddit.

Although, more important than hits is integrity.

[Karma13612]

155. I am one they lost. +100 eom

[JoePhilly]

29. The site has TOS ... getting a hide for not following the TOS is NOT Censorship.

And look ... this site allowed a ton of people to attack Obama for his entire Presidency.

They could post any crazy theory they wanted.

Call him a "F**king used car salesman".

Take on multiple personas and attack other democrats.

Hell ... in 2012 ... you could support a primary challenge against Obama (ignoring the fact that there was absolutely no candidate to run against him ... but still ... you could do it.)

So its clear DU allows a very wide interpretation of the TOS. If you can find the already blurry lines and not stray to far ... you'll survive here ... and maybe even spend 8 years attacking President Clinton predicting all manner of catastrophe as we've seen during the Obama administration.

[jack_krass]

84. Don't be afraid of Ideas FFS...

So what if someone wanted O primaried?. Is that a thought crime or something? BTW, that's neither against the TOS nor the spirit of this site.

Seems like Hildenburg watchers want an echo chamber with no dissent from the party lie(sic) allowable.

There is somethjng about HRC that attracts the authoritarian types.

[JoePhilly]

89. The folks who wanted O primaried were not hidden ... sparky.

They were allowed to do so on DU.

Which was my point, and you ... ironically helped reinforced it.

After that you babbled some really serious nonsense ("Hildenburg&quot to let us all know you might not be bright enough to understand that DU allows all kinds of attacks on Dems.

Then, you finish with a rather stupid statement .... "There is something about HRC that attracts the authoritarian types."

[seabeyond]

31. This is a Democratic board, where people of like mind can gather without RW bullshit. Go away, if

you have a problem with it being a Democratic board.

[barrow-wight]

33. There is no point to allowing DEMOCRATIC Underground to become a shill for Trump

And that's exactly what it would be if, after we have a presumptive nominee, this site continues to allow the very worst of the anti Hilllary Democrata to continue scorching the earth of the party. None of us has a right to post here. It is a privilege as this site is privately owned. There are plenty of Bernie-based hate sites you can visit like that JimJonesRadicals site.

[CorkySt.Clair]

35. Goodbye cruel world!

[cliffordu]

39. Not me. I'll just go back to the lounge.

Stay out of the echo chamber for another three years.

Who knows, maybe find someone to primary Trump who isn't being investigated by the EFF BEE EYE.....

[SwampG8r]

135. Yuuuup

Just disengage as much as possible here
Hell openly speaking progressive ideas here now is like giving cheat sheets to the conservatives.
Cliff we have been waving back and forth now.for.the best part of ten years. Did you know.when i.signed up here i wondered if i was too center to fit in. Now im fringe left
I dont mind being the fringe tho the fringe makes the whole.outfit cool

[cliffordu]

136. Really. Fringe DOES make the ensemble....!

Shit, man, I was probably center- right....this place taught me true progressivism thru a couple of hardheaded Angels of Merciless Candor who are probably not around any longer......

I've met a couple DU'ers in real life and enjoyed their company quite a bit.....You are another human I'd like to hang out with for an afternoon or so and chew the fat.....

[enid602]

43. slots

How in the world will DU ever be able to fill all the vacated juror slots come June 16?

[Yo_Mama]

45. Of course. n/t

[AZ Progressive]

47. Hillary supporters can't figure out any other way to do things other than by force

[JoePhilly]

93. I hear the URL "PerpetuallyDisgruntledUnderground" is available.

Go get it.

[AZ Progressive]

112. You neither confirm nor deny it

[bravenak]

50. Oh good grief!

[still_one]

51. This isn't censorship. This has been the rules of DU for some time. There is the Primary mode, and

there is an election mode. They are governed by different rules.

If you don't want to abide by the rules, that isn't censorship, that is on you

[TimPlo]

105. Why would say it is not censorship?

Do you even know what word means?

"the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts."

It most certainly is censorship, you can not argue that. It is fine if they do it because it is the TOS, but it is still censorship no matter what.

[GulfCoast66]

109. Imagine

Democratic Underground censoring those opposing the Democratic Nominee. Oh, the injustice.

[Agnosticsherbet]

54. Ok.

[bjo59]

55. I'm constantly amazed by the fact that many people in this country (and many liberals)

are perfectly fine with censorship when it's shutting up another person's speech. Democratic principles are loved by most, living by those principles is very difficult for many!

[TwilightZone]

80. When you joined all of three months ago, you agreed to the terms of membership.

Don't like the terms? There are plenty of other websites to visit.

[LonePirate]

128. People do not understand the difference between government censorship and private behavior.

This is a private entity. It's no different than walking into a restaurant wearing a shirt that says "F*** You" and being asked to leave. Restrictions on posting here at DU are nowhere in the same league as government censorship of the media, internet, school books, etc. I suppose it is easy to make such ridiculous false equivalencies while under the influence of wine made from sour grapes.

[msongs]

59. the purpose of this private site is to promote democratic party candidates. nt

[oasis]

60. Other forums will remain open with interesting discussions on

a variety of topics.

[SidDithers]

65. Free speech is censored here every day...

We don't allow right wingers to post at DU, and we don't allow racist or homophobic or misogynistic or bigoted content at DU either.

You agreed to a certain level of censorship when you agreed to the site's Terms of Service.

Nobody's holding you hostage here, if you don't like the TOS.

Sid

[Mr Maru]

75. Okay.

[Vote2016]

76. Me too

[Bobbie Jo]

78. Looks like you just got here.

I'm sure you'll be missed?

[TwilightZone]

79. When you joined all of three months ago, you agreed to the terms of membership.

Don't like the terms? Find someplace else to rant.

[ecstatic]

162. Lol! +1000. nt

[bigtree]

83. from your post

...to my ignore list.

[MFM008]

86. Something about Felecia?

[workinclasszero]

94. You mean all the Hillary haters will leave?

SWEET!!!

[EndElectoral]

97. Be careful what you wish for, you may get it and lose the election in the process

[Godhumor]

99. Yeah, your join date pegged you as a Kos refugee

Almost made it 4 months here, I see.

[Tarc]

101. Feeeellllliiiiiccccciiiiaaaaa

[upaloopa]

102. OK by me.

[AgingAmerican]

107. Way to GOTV!

Corporate style. You don't need us cuz DIEBOLD!!

[drray23]

108. dont let the door hit you on the way out.nt.

[MyNameGoesHere]

110. Ok

[mythology]

117. If somebody can't not advocate for not-Clinton once she is officially the presumptive nominee

then that's kind of on them. People won't be banned because there were Sanders supporters. They will be banned because they post attacks on the Democratic candidate. You can feel free to promote downstream candidates, or discuss other matters of interest.

But if it's really so hard for you to not attack the Democratic nominee, well okay, go find the rectangle with the knob on it. You don't have the right to free speech here. None of us do. If tomorrow the admins decided they wanted to only allow video posts of paint drying or grass growing, they can. You aren't having your freedom of speech violated as while Skinner is a pretty powerful guy here, he's not the U.S. government passing a law. You are welcome to go to any number of websites devoted to attacking Clinton. Others have suggested some.

[grossproffit]

122. Don't forget to take your parting gift.

[workinclasszero]

125. buhbye

[snagglepuss]

127. The wittiest people on DU are Berners. It'll be Dullsvile here with the

Hill-rah-rah-corporate-team. For snagglepuss, who's been here since 2002, it'll be exit stage left even...

[applegrove]

129. This board has always been about what is best for Democrats. You've

had a good long run here. Good luck.

[RandySF]

131. God, I hope it does.

[GRhodes]

132. Damn

and I just started posting recently. Now where am I going to go to watch Democrats pathetically defend corruption, right wing and pro-corporate economic policies and a hawkish foreign policy? Now where am I going to go for poorly argued defenses of things people shouldn't be defending, followed by an immature emoji? Say, if she's indicted, can we come back? Maybe Chairman Mao will let a thousand flowers bloom then.

[JTFrog]

133. Free speech has never been allowed here, so see ya.

There were terms when you signed up. Should have thought about the decision to do so a little harder I guess.

[JTFrog]

139. Is meta complaining about DU allowed in GDP now or something?

Didn't think so.

[baldguy]

142. People who won't support the Democratic nominee. I think that's the point.

And it's long overdue.

[brooklynite]

143. How is what you're calling "Censorship" different than the TOS you agreed to?

[DrDan]

144. it will be a tragic loss - your three months here have been ground-breaking

[auntpurl]

149. Ok, this is a bit mean, but...lol

[Surya Gayatri]

145. "I will leave and never return."

[LWolf]

153. DU has always been a censored site.

Read the TOS again.

[Codeine]

154. So how does this impact the 100 delegates

you expected Bernie to get from just three states?

[johnp3907]

161. 1!-2!-3!-4!