Why is there still vitriol here?

[Zynx]

The voting is all done. California is close to fully counted, and it doesn't really matter anyway except a few delegates at the margins now. The conclusion of all of this is in the wrap-up phase. Sanders has stopped attacking Hillary. He's taking his time in getting out, but it's a foregone conclusion that he's getting out at some point.

The party is unified and delivering a consolidated message. We'll do a great job at the convention and we'll kick Trump's ass.

Just chill.

[Ned_Devine]

1. I still feel some vitriol when I read articles like this one here

http://www.inquisitr.com/3207171/election-fraud-study-points-to-rigged-democratic-primary-against-bernie-sanders-video/

[Metric System]

2. Exit polling discrepancies? Actual votes count, not flawed exit polls.

[TwilightZone]

4. Especially self-selected exit poll data from a handful of counties out of 58.

As in the case of CA.

[Ned_Devine]

5. I'm glad you're cool with it

[Cali_Democrat]

45. Cool with what? There's no proof of election fraud.

You guys are something else.

[Cal33]

117. Come on, guys. I'm all for cooling it, but how about not denying the obvious? For example:

Winning coin tosses six times in a row straight, and all favoring one person? Mathematically
there is 1 chance in 64 of that happening.

[Cali_Democrat]

118. That has also been debunked

http://www.npr.org/2016/02/02/465268206/coin-toss-fact-check-no-coin-flips-did-not-win-iowa-for-hillary-clinton

Do try to keep up.

[Cal33]

121. How about Debbie W. Schultz's rigging of the Democratic Primary Debates to 6 initially, and placing

them mostly on weekends and before holidays, so that few people would be watching them?

Below are just 5 articles from Google: There are 58,000+ more of them:


Lawsuit Finds Millions Of Uncounted Bernie Sanders Ballots | Your ...

www.yournewswire.com/lawsuit-finds-millions-of-uncounted-bernie-sanders-ballots/ - View by Ixquick Proxy - Highlight

4 days ago ... Make no mistake, Bernie Sanders supporters lost their ballots, their democratic ... with dictatorships in undemocratic states – media collusion, voter .... Considering there are lawsuits for Election Fraud and such, AND Hillary Clinton herself is ... space also on the ballot you can ...



Was the Democratic Primary Just Manipulated, or Was It Stolen?

www.truth-out.org/news/item/36408-was-the-democratic-primary-just-manipulated-or-was-it-stolen - View by Ixquick Proxy - Highlight

3 days ago ... With buyer's remorse sweeping the GOP, election fraud lawsuits ... news article claiming two hundred deceased voters are still listed as casting ballots ... The article in no way associated Hillary Clinton with this particular voting problem. .... against Sanders supporters, ...



Racketeering Lawsuit Exposing Nationwide Vote Rigging in DNC ...

www.thefreethoughtproject.com/election-fraud-rico-lawsuit-alleging-widespread-e-vote-rigging-dnc-primaries-derail-clinton-nomination/ - View by Ixquick Proxy - Highlight

4 days ago ... Arnebeck, an election lawyer, got his J.D. from Harvard and is the chair of ... used as an indicator of election fraud when contrasted with electronic voting totals. ... In my opinion Hillary Clinton has been used for the purpose of scuttling .... ..the RNC does not want to run ...



Did 'Hillary for America' steal Bernie's voter database? - Baltimore ...

www.baltimorepostexaminer.com/hillary-america-steal-bernies-voter-database/2016/04/23 - View by Ixquick Proxy - Highlight

Apr 23, 2016 ... As a long-term supporter of Bernie Sanders, I was startled to receive an ... a lifelong Independent so I could vote for Bernie Sanders. and it was listed correctly . ... as static % voting patterns for Clinton over Sanders with a 21% lead. .... but this anecdote is not evidence of ...



California's Crazy Election Quirks Limit Voter ... - National Review

www.nationalreview.com/article/436220/californias-presidential-primary-rules-are-crazy - View by Ixquick Proxy - Highlight

Jun 5, 2016 ... Clinton greets supporters in Riverside, Calif., May 24, 2016. ... Clinton led Sanders by nine percentage points among those voters. ... savaging Hillary Clinton for her exclusive use of a private e-mail server, which broke the ... in a court case vote and leave the courtroom before ...



April | 2016 | 34justice

https://34justice.com/2016/04/ - View by Ixquick Proxy - Highlight

Apr 29, 2016 ... Of those voters, 83 percent cast their ballots for Hillary Clinton. ... Head-to-head polling matchups against potential Republican ... In short, the electability evidence overwhelmingly favors Sanders, and .... Voters Listed in Wrong Location ... are under investigation for election ...

[Lord Magus]

122. Well seeing as that DIDN'T happen, you need to drop the false claims.

Nobody won 6 coin tosses in a row and coin tosses had no actual influence on the outcome in Iowa.

[fleabiscuit]

22. Tubes. It's easy to find exactly what one 'wants' to find on the Al Gore internets. eom

[Ned_Devine]

28. I'm glad you're cool with it too

[fleabiscuit]

80. In case you get stuck...

http://sebpearce.com/bullshit/

[Ned_Devine]

95. Aww! Aren't you the sweetest

[Zynx]

59. I'm sorry, but that's a load of shit. That's an article with a preordained answer.

And it really doesn't hold up to pre-election polling and demographic analysis. Exit polls are frequently considerably off. There's really no reason why a nonrandom sample of 1200 on the day of the election should be that much more accurate than several random samples of 600 to 1000 just before the election.

[floriduck]

83. I think it needs to be said that the Trust Vote lawsuit indicates that Hillary is not the accused

in the case. Instead, it is the state's themselves where these discrepancies occurred. The lead attorney just believes she was used by the corrupt system so no one is pointing any blame her way.

Regardless of how this case ends up, the purpose of this is not to attack any of Clinton supporters or the candidate herself.

[Lord Magus]

123. I still feel some vitriol when people POST articles like that one.

I'm sick of all the lies and conspiracy theories being posted to claim fraud when nothing of the sort actually happened.
http://www.thenation.com/article/reminder-exit-poll-conspiracy-theories-are-totally-baseless/

[Ned_Devine]

124. What about in 2004 with the exit polls in Ohio? Were they conspiracy theories then too?

[Lord Magus]

126. What ABOUT in 2004 with the exit polls in Ohio? Nobody invented FAKE exit poll discrepancies then.

But that's what's being done now to falsely claim Bernie was cheated.

[Ned_Devine]

129. No it's not

[geek tragedy]

3. Sanders isn't getting out. He's made that crystal clear.

He thinks he deserved to win and doesn't accept the validity of the process that saw him lose.

Most of his demands are to change things he's using as an excuse for losing--DWS, closed primaries, etc.

He's challenging the legitimacy of Clinton's win.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

6. You just made the OP's point.

[geek tragedy]

8. Until he says "she won because she got more votes"

then he's still undermining her legitimacy. He convinced a lot of his supporters--who should know better--that she's only winning because of superdelegates, closed primaries, and DWS, and that she needed to win 2383 pledged delegates to be declared the winner.

He's making a lot of demands while refusing to merely acknowledge that she won the voting.

That's not a guy who is motivated by unity.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

9. And you're still arguing. She won. Don't be a sore winner.

[LoverOfLiberty]

11. She won

Why won't Sanders simply say that?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

13. She won. Why do you care whether he says it or not?

It makes no difference as to the outcome. Do you just want to whine that Sanders and his supporters have not been sufficiently humbled?

[LoverOfLiberty]

16. Perhaps because he is whipping his supporters

into a frenzy about how the Democratic Party screwed him over?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

21. What frenzy? I'm not frenzied. I don't know anybody who's frenzied.

Last email I got from his campaign said simply that the purpose of his campaign was always to "propose new and far-reaching policies to deal with the crises of our time" and those efforts will continue. There was nothing in it that was angry or frenzy-inducing. And even if we were frenzied, Hillary has still won. So enjoy the victory and quite griping about how Bernie's face hasn't been ground far enough enough into the pavement.

[pat_k]

54. +1

[Silver_Witch]

78. +2

[George Eliot]

97. +3

[JackInGreen]

102. +4

[pangaia]

53. You're the ones in a frenzy, not me.

[pangaia]

52. They do not understand what Bernie's fight is really about.

[Demsrule86]

68. He can fight on but must leave the primary to do so. nt

[George Eliot]

98. Emotional supporters can't let go of the emotion.

[ancianita]

46. He's thinking and doing no such thing. We know him better than you know your own.

DWS is going to be YOUR excuse for losing for Hillary if you don't see the merits of getting rid of her.

Or is this some "don't change horses in mid-stream," oh-so-special situation.

[geek tragedy]

66. What difference does it make if DWS serves out her term?

Her term is up in January.

Then the president (assuming Trump doesn't get a brain transplant) names her replacement.

[ancianita]

85. Her removal is symbolic of Hill's change in policy goals, if any of that is important beyond the

first woman president goal.

If you think she's a tool, as I do (at best), it still makes a difference because of the huge downticket losses over her tenure.

[geek tragedy]

89. She sucks and she won't have that job in 2017

Scalp-hunting is usually a symbol of something besides hope for change.

[ancianita]

90. Symbol as in optics. I said it will reflect a real change in leadership and governance goals.

[Demsrule86]

108. No,

If Sanders demands it then no. Too late anyway.

[ancianita]

120. "If Sanders demands it then no"?How Republican of you. HRC'ers know damned good & well WE ALL

wanted DWS gone when the primary season began -- way before he did.

Too late? Too late for what. To change direction away from neolib wars and domestic austerity bullshit toward better prioritized spending. Is it really, now.

Why is it too late, again?

[Marr]

125. Did you just admit you think she rigged things for HRC...?

Why would replacing DWS at this point be 'too late' for anything? 'Too late' to change what, exactly?

[TheFarseer]

7. I think people have bigger goals than stopping Trump

And we really don't seem to be moving toward them.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. What could be a bigger goal than stopping a man who wants to stop Muslims from coming to ...

What could be a bigger goal than stopping a man who wants to stop our Muslim brothers and sisters from coming to America and surveil the ones who are already here?


What could be a bigger goal than stopping a man who wants to build a wall to keep out our Hispanic brothers and sisters and round up and deport the ones who are already here?

What could be a bigger goal than stopping a man who wants to abridge the First Amendment by punishing members of the press he deems hostile?


Thank you in advance.

[panader0]

14. It's lucky that HRC is going to be running against such a complete idiot.

I saw today that Trump's negatives are 71% and that HRC's are only 55%.

[redstateblues]

30. Boom- That's where the vitriol keeps coming from

The sour grapers are being very creative in their bashing. Practicing for the 20th

[CorkySt.Clair]

15. White privilege?

[TheFarseer]

20. I think not having a crazy person as president is kind of a minimum

Vote for me, I'm not crazy isn't a great slogan.

[jamese777]

23. You can have short term goals...

stop Trump and then longer term goals. But if Trump usn't stopped, the long term goals are delayed for four or eight more years.

[Ned_Devine]

25. More like four

[redstateblues]

31. Bernie planning on losing again in 4 years? Heard it here first.

[Vogon_Glory]

32. No, Eight to Twenty Years

No, not four years, much, much longer. I don't think progressives of any stripe have paid enough attention to what happens when the Rethuglies win the Trifecta. Look what happened in Trxas. Look what happened in Kansas. Look at what happened in Wisconsin. Look at what happened in North Carolina. It will take the better part of two decades to restore functional representative rule in those states after what the R's did with redistricting and vote suppression.

Sitting on your backside this election is the action of a clueless, immature, spoiled brat.

[Demsrule86]

34. So true. nt

[Ned_Devine]

36. "Sitting on your backside this election is the action of a clueless, immature, spoiled brat"

First off, I never said I was going to sit this election out. I live in MA so we're solid blue. I will vote my conscience and vote green.

Secondly, I would hate for you to think you can talk to me like that. You don't know me and you're totally crossing the line.

Thirdly, four years is how long Trump will last. The thought of eight years of the Clintons and their drama and republican-lite policies turns my stomach.

[Vogon_Glory]

41. So you live in a blue state? Nice for you

And isn't it nice that voting Democrats will keep guys and gals like you from getting the full ALEC treatment? I live in a red state where the good guys have been beaten at the polls over and over and over again because the people most likely to be Phillips-headed by Rethuglican misrule have sat on the sidelines and let it be done to them. And yes, I count the vaunted (but no-show) millennial youth vote.

Enjoy your little non-Democrat stand. Others, like little ol' me, are aware that it's a luxury we can't afford. You'll excuse me, but I'm not particularly impressed by your grand gesture.l

I intend to vote Democratic this fall.

[Ned_Devine]

43. If democrats ran strong progressive candidates they would never lose

It's a pretty simple formula. Instead they run The Lundergen Grimes, Andrew Cuomo and Joe Manchin types and don't get behind progressive liberals like Donna Edwards. They think the best way to beat republicans is to be just like them only nicer to your face. Find the progressive people in your state and district and campaign hard for them. They won't lose.

[Demsrule86]

70. What makes you all think

That if Bernie could not win a primary, he could win a general?

[Vogon_Glory]

81. Probably happy thoughts and pixie-dust

Probably happy thoughts and pixie dust. The fact that the rest of the country might not be as far to the left as they are seems not to have occurred to them.

[Demsrule86]

114. The country is not far left..and we would need a bushel of pixie dust.

I do believe there has been a shift to the left but no way a socialist of any sort wins the election. Plus, I don't think Sanders would make a good president...he does not play well with others.

[WhiteTara]

127. We ran George McGovern and he lost

every state except one. How's that for a kick in the teeth?

[Ned_Devine]

128. That was 44 years ago and circumstances were different

We have better ways of mobilizing. I don't like the idea of one cautionary tale ruining it for every future possibility.

[WhiteTara]

131. That "never" sort of got to me.

So you are saying that the future progressives will win every time? Sort of like Lucy Flores?

[Ned_Devine]

132. Maybe I was hyperbolic. But I feel like...

...if democrats ran on progressive issues that appeal to the poor and working class instead of running candidates that are scared of their own shadows, they would have much greater success.

[WhiteTara]

133. This is our moment. What office

would you like to run for? You have a choice...run as a Democrat or as an Green or as an Indie. Good luck! We need all the good candidates we can get.

[Ned_Devine]

135. Ha! I'm more of an advisor

[WhiteTara]

140. Ah

a keyboard quarterback. I see. It reminds me of the old adage "Do as I say, not as I do"

[Ned_Devine]

141. That's pretty rude

For a second there I thought we were having a polite exchange. I should have known better

[WhiteTara]

142. Sorry.

I apologize if you thought I was being rude. I certainly didn't mean to come off that way.

[Demsrule86]

27. There can be no more important goal then stopping Trump...

all else depends on it. Kiss any chance of your movement succeeding should he get five court picks.

[ancianita]

47. Oh, for chrissake. Even you fake unifiers know Trump is handily beating himself without any of us.

[Demsrule86]

71. You can't count on that. The GOP voters will come home in the end

The race will tighten. We need to make sure this man gets nowhere near the white house. He is a monster.

[GreatGazoo]

74. +1 in a nutshell

[CorkySt.Clair]

12. Because the software wasn't ready, or something like that

[Grassy Knoll]

18. LOL

[bigwillq]

17. There will always be vitriol here, and I am cool with it.

It's just a message board. No biggie.

[ucrdem]

19. As long as the "struggle continues," as Sanders put it last week,

there are going to be misunderstanding emanating from his campaign, which are going to appear here, and are going to be swatted down. This will continue until he pulls the plug, which is why Dems are trying to tell him that the game has been over for some time.

[pat_k]

55. "misunderstanding emanating from his campaign"

What I see is a lot of people putting up a lot of strawman "Sanders is doing this..." "Sanders is thinking this..." crap that has nothing to do with what he has actually said or done (I don't claim, as so many others seem to, to know what he is thinking).

He committed to campaign in every state until the last vote was cast. He kept that commitment. The last vote was cast about 18 hours ago. Just hours after that last vote was cast he announced that he's doing a live address tomorrow. Why is everyone complaining about what he's saying when he hasn't said it yet?

Gee Wiz.

Seriously.

Chill.

[Fozzledick]

24. Some people just seem to want to provoke Democrats into fighting with each other.

[stopwastingmymoney]

50. Best answer so far, imho, nt

[elleng]

26. THOMAS FRANK ON HOW DEMOCRATS WENT FROM BEING THE ‘PARTY OF THE PEOPLE’ TO THE PARTY OF RICH ELITES

Democrats have gone from the party of the New Deal to a party that is defending mass inequality.

'THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WAS ONCE THE PARTY OF THE NEW DEAL and the ally of organized labor. But by the time of Bill Clinton's presidency, it had become the enemy of New Deal programs like welfare and Social Security and the champion of free trade deals. What explains this apparent reversal? Thomas Frank—best known for his analysis of the Republican Party base in What's the Matter with Kansas?—attempts to answer this question in his latest book, Listen Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People?

According to Frank, popular explanations which blame corporate lobby groups and the growing power of money in politics are insufficient. Frank instead points to a decision by Democratic Party elites in the 1970s to marginalize labor unions and transform from the party of the working class to the party of the professional class. In so doing, the Democratic Party radically changed the way it understood social problems and how to solve them, trading in the principle of solidarity for the principle of competitive individualism and meritocracy. The end result is that the party which created the New Deal and helped create the middle class has now become “the party of mass inequality.” In These Times spoke with Frank recently about the book via telephone.

The book is about how the Democratic Party turned its back on working people and now pursues policies that actually increase inequality. What are the policies or ideological commitments in the Democratic Party that make you think this?

The first piece of evidence is what’s happened since the financial crisis. This is the great story of our time. Inequality has actually gotten worse since then, which is a remarkable thing. This is under a Democratic president who we were assured (or warned) was the most liberal or radical president we would ever see. Yet inequality has gotten worse, and the gains since the financial crisis, since the recovery began, have gone entirely to the top 10 percent of the income distribution.'>>>

http://inthesetimes.com/features/listen-liberal-thomas-frank-democratic-party-elites-inequality.html


Frank was interviewed on the PBS NewsHour tonight.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016160790

[Demsrule86]

33. The new deal

Romanticized by Bernie folk...while a step in the right direction...it did nothing for POC or women for that matter. You guys know nothing of the history of the depression. I would be happy when this sort of whining post is gone...you do get it that just like the tea party you clamor for the good old days only they were not good for everyone...you fear the future. Has it ever occurred to you we might find better solutions for our 21st-century problems...rather than living in the past.

[elleng]

35. Nothing romantic about it,

and no 'whining,' a meme someone invented when they had nothing substantive to say. I/we fear the future if it's a rerun of the recent past, and contains no real reforms.

[Demsrule86]

37. You don't go back in time...

Some of the most successful progressive policy came from Johnson. Time to move into the future...first order of business...beat Trump.

[elleng]

38. I was around during LBJ's tenure, recognize the Civil Rights Act etc,

which in no way negates what Frank says.

[Demsrule86]

40. Living in the past is not a good thing

Not for anyone...move on.

[elleng]

42. YOU move on,

and recognize what's happened; I've BEEN moving on, ever since I first voted. I want CHANGE.

[Demsrule86]

67. Living in the past is not change.

It is what it is. Sen. Sanders lost. Now we have a choice between. Sen. Clinton and Trump...I will vote for Clinton who is a liberal and will do some things I like and some I don't but someone who will not destroy the progressive movement for a generation by stacking the courts, will not destroy much-needed programs like social security and medicare among others, who will not allow the GOP to recriminalize the LGBT and big on my list is a president who will not nuke Europe or Syria...(yes he said nukes were on the table).

[AntiBank]

58. your idea of moving on is simply further to the right

There is nothing time-regressive about univeral health care, anti war foreign policy, opposing horrific trade deals, tution free education, actually breaking up big banks. Things from the past that ARE needed are the return of Glass Steagall and the re-outlawing of most derivatives. Bill Clinton's administration is the one who demolished those last two and laid the groundwork from the 2008 financial crisis.

Hillary Clinton supports none of the above and the Clintonian, neoliberal, ever-rightward side of the party and this board want to eradicate all hope of them coming to fruition as well as crush most all progressive,leftish tendancies, people, and power inside the Democratic Party.

[Demsrule86]

73. I am a liberal

I want universal health care, anti-war policy...and fair trade. I do not think Bernie's tuition program is viable...although a better plan is needed. We all want that ...the idea that Bernie invented what have been Democratic goals for years is simply not true. As for Glass-Steagall (different times), Bill did that another deal with the GOP... if you want a consistently liberal president then give him a liberal congress. Don't abandon the president during the next election cycle. Otherwise, deals will have to be made as Obama has been forced to do. We need to move into the 21st century and solve modern problems. While FDR and Johnson can help guide us, the problems they faced were very different. I do not believe in living in the past.

[elleng]

94. Thanks and Welcome, AntiBank.

[DLCWIdem]

44. not to mention that by romanticizing FDR as the god progressive

They're romanticizing the president who herded Japanese into our own concentration camps. Hey I am sure the income inequality too.

[RiverLover]

60. Such a bs argument against the greatest leader the US has ever known.

He's the reason the US became a great nation & the New Democrats (originally led by Clinton1) slowly dismantling everything he did and allowing Moneyed Interests to control them along with rethugs is why the country today is one of the least progressive developed countries in the world.

Democrats should be deeply ashamed & highly motivated to turn things around.

But no, all that matters is winning. The Charlie Sheenism of America.

[Demsrule86]

82. I think Pres. Roosevelt saved this country

I have long been an admirer...that being said, the issues we face today are different and we need fresh solutions...we should not abandon the Roosevelt accomplishments, but we do need to move into the 21st century. And no man is perfect. Roosevelt did not further equality for POC. He was a man of his times on race. He incarcerated and confiscated money from Japanese Americans during the war (did you ever wonder why German Americans did not share the same fate?) and he did not lift a finger to save Europe's Jewish population. Johnson despite the mess that was Vietnam was one of our greatest presidents (no man is perfect) and accomplished civil rights and Medicare...huge accomplishments...he found new ideas that suited his time and the needs of average Americans. President Obama saved our country from financial ruin in 08 and should be celebrated as one of our greatest presidents also; he saved the automobile industry and after more than 100 years gave us health care...which will lead to single payer in my opinion in the end. Great presidents may look to the past for inspiration, but will find new, innovative solutions to the problems we face.

[Demsrule86]

110. Roosevelt did intern Japanese Americans and steal their money too.

That does not negate the good he did. No man or woman is perfect.

[DLCWIdem]

134. I am not denying FDR did good especially with the new deal

However, the way Sanderistas have idolized him is getting ridiculous. He was good in some areas and bad in others. A full rounded politician who was the product of his times. He had failings and should not be held up as a idolized figure for us to follow as the perfect example of the "one true progressive".

[DLCWIdem]

144. what is b.s about it

Are you denying the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. Are you denying the lack of care in those camps and how many Japanese Americans died especially because of the poor conditions. Have you become a denier of history, also. As well as a denier of Sanders' losing?

[Demsrule86]

75. And who exempted POC from most new deal relief programs nt

[ancianita]

48. What? You call wanting to join the 21st Century of modern nations "living in the past"? Ridiculous.

[Demsrule86]

76. I think copying any country is a waste of time

We need to come up with our own solutions. I think universal health care will come in time...but not until we take back the congress. You have to build support for is a top- down strategy and will not work.

[RiverLover]

61. +1 /nt

[Demsrule86]

29. Because Bernie Sanders has not conceded ...that's why and until he does there will

be vitriol. It is disrespectful to Sec. Clinton. Fine don't endorse but concede or suspend...one or the other.

[workinclasszero]

39. Because...for the 100th time...

Bernie has refused to concede the race and is attacking Hillary and the democratic party daily.

As are lots of his followers here on DU.

Should we just be Bernies whipping boys till the convention? I don't think so!

[DLCWIdem]

49. +1000

Not to mention trying to de-legitimatize her wins

[Scootaloo]

51. Because there are factions on DU that have no purpose or goal other than reflexive rage and hatred

[melman]

56. Because it's all some have to offer

[Warren DeMontague]

57. because some people are just assholes.

[Deny and Shred]

62. Disqualify Him, Defeat Him, Unify Party Later

When that is a stated goal, expect vitriol.

A million dollars spent by Brock to do the first two. That money goes a long way.

What is the consolidated message? Beat Trump?

[MrMickeysMom]

63. He never was attacking Hillary, number one...

Number two... Yes, there's plenty of it here for another 4 days.

Thanks, Elad!

[NurseJackie]

69. He never attacked Hillary, huh? "She's not qualified to be president" wasn't an attack?

[workinclasszero]

87. NOPE

[Vinca]

64. I'm beginning to wonder if some Hillary "supporters" might be on the Trump payroll.

Why else would they continue to bash the losing candidate and piss off his supporters whose votes they require for her victory?

[VulgarPoet]

65. No point asking that question.

Vitriol will be splashed in faces, and truncheons will be taken to the heads and shoulders of all who stand in Clinton's way. Every day, the Third Way supplicants more and more resemble the Inner Party of Oceania. Hell, they even have a Jewish guy for their Two Minutes Hate, if the reactions of some "highly respected" posters here are anything to go by.

[whistler162]

72. Sore loser Hillary supporters

They are angry that she wasn't crowned the second she announced her candidacy.

[Demsrule86]

77. Perhaps sore winner would be more appropriate...although I disagree with that also. nt

A primary is over. Sen. Clinton won. Sen. Sanders has not conceded...I can not believe that any serious person would act that way. If the roles' were reversed, you all would be over the top furious. It is disrespectful towards Sen Clinton and the fact she is the first woman to win...only makes it worse.

[LonePirate]

79. It's more like sore loser Bernie supporters. They are responsible for the vitriol.

[Demsrule86]

106. They are indeed...

If Bernie would suspend or concede...the vitriol would cease...he gives his supporters false hope by staying in...and given the numbers, I do not understand how he hopes to succeed. He is fighting for exactly what? Does he think he stays in and fights a shadow campaign against Trump? That would never work. I don't understand what Bernie is thinking. I do think that he should not make any speeches and have no say at the convention unless he concedes and endorses...and no trashing the DNC in his speech if he ever has one either.

[Miles Archer]

116. 100% of it? Come on, I know you don't believe that.

It has not been 100% Sanders supporters "attacking" Clinton supporters while they "defend" themselves.

It has not been 100% Clinton supporters "attacking" Sanders supporters while they "defend" themselves.

The community has shared the responsibility of filling the swamp.

Yesterday, someone posted in one of my threads that as far as they were concerned, Sanders could "go piss up a rope."

Do you feel that was an appropriate statement? The person was not under "attack." It was a response to an original post about Sanders meeting with Clinton and leaving without giving an endorsement, which I posted without any commentary of my own. The thread is now half "he did the right thing" and half "fuck Sanders, he's less that a footnote in history."

There have been sore loser Bernie supporters and sore winner Clinton supporters, and what's left after that are the people here who have been trying to engage in a civil conversation. You can call it whatever you want, but the facts aren't on your side.

[DLCWIdem]

143. that is bullshit

HILLARY SUPPORTERS HAVE BEEN CALLED CORPORATE SHILLS, CORRUPT, WARMONGERS etc... CORPORATE DEMOCRATIC WHORES THE NAME SHillary ring a bell. Most of the threads on GDP are anti Hillary threads. For example, Someone posts something about SNL and drugs. The thread is immediately swarmed by Bernie supporters and them taken over about war. Hillary is blamed for apartheid. There are threads that accuse Hill of cheating with no damn proof. Right wing sources okay and allowed to stand.

[DLCWIdem]

145. In 2008

There was a lot of vitriol humped on Clinton because she wouldn't concede and her delegate count was closer than it is now. I wonder what your response was to her non concession was then at that time.

[bvf]

84. Because assholes?

Discuss.

[rurallib]

86. you don't have the right people on ignore

[NorthCarolina]

88. Because it's an idiological discrepency between progressives and those that want to redifine

"progressive" as something much farther politically right than the conventional meaning of the term.

[LibDemAlways]

91. Don't worry, Hillary fans. This website

is only a couple of days away from becoming your echo chamber and sole domain. Some of the best and brightest on DU have already fled for uncensored pastures. Others will follow. This once great progressive website where spirited debate took place among Democrats of all stripes has become a centrist/right leaning shell of its former self. Carry on.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

93. The exodus from here is going to be epic. When all is said and done, there will be about 50...

...Hillary supporters left here, if there's even that many here in the first place. I keep seeing the same names over and over.

[Demsrule86]

111. Some who were driven out by unfair practices

will return.

[TwilightZone]

105. So, you're going to an echo chamber because DU is going to be too echo-chambery for you?

That's interesting.

"Democrats of all stripes"

As they would no doubt inform you, many of the members of that other site aren't Democrats, so if that's what you're looking for, you're going to be sorely disappointed. Some of them have been reminding us of their non-Democrat status here on DU for anywhere from months to 15 years.

[NurseJackie]

119. I was thinking the very same thing. It's very amusing if you think about it.

I found this ...

6. Most Importantly, this website supports Bernie Sanders for President.
Please do not waste our time extolling the imaginary virtues of any other candidate or try to sneak them in pretending you're undecided, or pretending you're a Bernie supporter when all you can talk about is how wonderful Hillary is. We're not interested; find another site for that.

(Sitename) is a private web club and visiting this website or being a member is a privilege, not a right.

(Sitename) has full liberty to choose its members. We reserve the right to accept or reject any member signups, remove or banish any member from the site, grant and revoke any privileges to members within the site.

[vintx]

92. The party is unified?

Have you not noticed all the threads about how horrible Bernie is for not kissing H's ring? How stupid his supporters are for thinking there was anything wrong with any elections anywhere, etc etc etc?

That's why there's vitriol. Ugly, nasty shit from sore winners.

[vintx]

99. Also dumb shit like this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512192764

[vintx]

100. Also shit like this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2192813


There are so many people here whom I have lost ALL respect for.

[TwilightZone]

107. You're seriously objecting to a post with nothing but the delegate totals in it?

Let me suggest that you consider taking a break.

[vintx]

109. Typical.

Look at what the post is kicking, and do your best to figure out why he's kicking it.

I know you can figure it out. I have faith in you.

[TwilightZone]

113. The post is a ridiculous assertion that Sanders is going to win CA based on nothing of substance.

And a bunch of conspiracy nonsense with no basis in reality.

Assuming the kick was sarcastic, as I'm sure we agree it was, if you have a problem with the original post, perhaps you should take it up with the person who posted the nonsense in the first place.

If you agree with the original post's nonsense, then kicking it should be the least of your concerns. It just gave it more exposure.

[tonyt53]

101. Isn't vitriol a brand of cough medicine?

[rock]

103. I can make a guess

It's because the BSers have continually for a year defamed, lied about, slandered, misrepresented, made up stuff about Hillary, as well as called her names, said untrue things about her, besmirched her, etc. I'm just saying, 'Could be".

[Orsino]

104. Most of us vote for faces rather than on issues.

In our minds, we equate candidates with solutions, not realizing that candidates are simply tools...and that we are the solutions.

[Rex]

112. Well if there was nobody to complain about, many posters would never have anything to say.

Haven't ya noticed?

[vintx]

115. Aaaaand dumb shit like this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512193102

[TwilightZone]

137. If you can't tell when posters are obvious trolls...

it's not anyone else's fault.

[vintx]

130. And shit like this

http://www.democraticunderground.com

[TwilightZone]

138. The whole website?

[vintx]

139. Obviously I copied the link wrong

Odd how certain posters seem to have a hard time with critical thinking, taking cues from context, etc

Of course I don't believethe feigned ignorance for a second

Just more being annoying for the sake of being annoying

[SidDithers]

136. The indictment fairy still lives..nt

Sid