I think the Primaries are going to tear the Democratic base apart aren't they?

[jezebel321]

The vitriol out there on social media (Oh my GOD do not go on twitter, do NOT) by some of the supporters of a certain candidate towards other candidates is horrible. I get having your favorite but the smearing of all the other candidates is disgusting.

How will we all come together at the end of this very long primary? And if a certain candidate doesn't win many of that candidates voters apparently will not vote for the other Dems and are doing everything they can to burn them down.

Was it always this bad?

[BannonsLiver]

1. One candidate's presence increases that risk exponentially

[jezebel321]

3. It makes me want to become Never (blank) in respone. I know that's

stupid and I know all of this benefits Trump. Ugh.

[thesquanderer]

13. Yes, one candidate does seem to provoke a disproportionate number of negative posts.

I think it says more about the posters than about the candidate.

[BannonsLiver]

14. I don't.

[cwydro]

43. Me either. nt

[zanana1]

44. Not if we don't let it. nt

[artislife]

20. hmm ..yup. nt

[Cha]

34. No, it doesn't.

[oasis]

37. The candidate doesn't "provoke" me quite as much his followers.

The little darlings.

[Kurt V.]

28. a mostly unrealistic and defeatists evaluation

[CentralMass]

33. Lets look at that.

Note: For the record I am a lifelong Democrat. I registered at 18 in 1978. I haven't missed an election. I was an ardent supporter of Hillary in 2008 .

I state that IMO and by the numbers Sanders voters in 2016 were far more loyal to the party the previous Democratic primary voters whose candidate lost. I've quoted the relative supporting analysis from the article linked below. IMO the most obstinate block of voters are Hillary supporters. I got over myself in 2008 and voted ted Senator Obama. I also voted for Hillary in 2016 after Bernie lost.

For 2020 I think that Bernie Sanders is the best candidate. However should he lose I will of course vote for the nominee.
The group I would worry not following suit if Bernie wins are the Hillary supporters ftom 2008.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/24/did-enough-bernie-sanders-supporters-vote-for-trump-to-cost-clinton-the-election/

Sander-Trump voters in 2016
"How many Sanders voters voted for Donald Trump?

Two surveys estimate that 12 percent of Sanders voters voted for Trump. A third survey suggests it was 6 percent.

First, the political scientist Brian Schaffner analyzed the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, which was conducted by YouGov and interviewed 64,600 Americans in October-November 2016. In that survey, Schaffner found that 12 percent of people who voted in the primary and reported voting for Sanders also voted in November and reported voting for Trump."
"Second, the same 12 percent figure emerges in the 2016 VOTER Survey, which was also conducted by YouGov and overseen by the Democracy Fund Voter Study Group (of which I am research director). In 2016, this survey interviewed 8,000 respondents in July, when they were asked their primary vote preference, and then in December, when they were asked their general election preference. This has the advantage of measuring primary preference closer to the primaries "

Hillary McCain in 2008

"Another useful comparison is to 2008, when the question was whether Clinton supporters would vote for Barack Obama or John McCain (R-Ariz.) Based on data from the 2008 Cooperative Campaign Analysis Project, a YouGov survey that also interviewed respondents multiple times during the campaign, 24 percent of people who supported Clinton in the primary as of March 2008 then reported voting for McCain in the general election.

An analysis of a different 2008 survey by the political scientists Michael Henderson, Sunshine Hillygus and Trevor Thompson produced a similar estimate: 25 percent."

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

38. BOOOOOOM!!! Mic drop!!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[lapucelle]

41. ...

Link to tweet

[CentralMass]

42. The opinion from that analysis was that the Sanders-Trump voters were not Democrats.

"What kinds of Sanders voters supported Trump?

Perhaps the most important feature of Sanders-Trump voters is this: They weren’t really Democrats to begin with.

Of course, we know that many Sanders voters did not readily identify with the Democratic Party as of 2016, and Schaffner found that Sanders-Trump voters were even less likely to identify as Democrats. Sanders-Trump voters didn’t much approve of Obama either.

In fact, this was true well before 2016. In the VOTER Survey, we know how Sanders-Trump voters voted in 2012, based on an earlier interview in November 2012. Only 35 percent of them reported voting for Obama, compared with 95 percent of Sanders-Clinton voters. In other words, Sanders-Trump voters were predisposed to support Republicans in presidential general elections well before Trump’s candidacy"
....
There were many factors in this loss.
Lije 41,000 fewer votes in Milwaukee tgen in 2012

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/10/voter-suppression-wisconsin-election-2016/
Rigged: How Voter Suppression Threw Wisconsin to Trump
I shortened ny snippet for brevity.

"On election night, Anthony was shocked to see Trump carry Wisconsin by nearly 23,000 votes. The state, which ranked second in the nation in voter participation in 2008 and 2012, saw its lowest turnout since 2000. More than half the state’s decline in turnout occurred in Milwaukee, which Clinton carried by a 77-18 margin, but where almost 41,000 fewer people voted in 2016 than in 2012. Turnout fell only slightly in white middle-class areas of the city but plunged in black ones. In Anthony’s old district, where aging houses on quiet tree-lined streets are interspersed with boarded-up buildings and vacant lots, turnout dropped by 23 percent from 2012. This is where Clinton lost the state and, with it, the larger narrative about the election."

These states were the so called "blue wall". Hillary didn't campaign there.

The election was lost in those three states by less then 80,000 votes abd it was Sander-tRrump voters that are to blane. They were never going to vote for Hillary to begin with.

[lapucelle]

45. "The election was lost in those three states by less [sic] then 80,000 votes

[and] it was Sander-tRrump voters that are to bla[m]e."

[Cha]

35. Exactly... they can't rewrite history.

[Turbineguy]

2. If the republicans and

the Russians get their way, yes.

[RKP5637]

4. I think being an asshole has become a sport in the US, especially with social media. And, it seems

there are more assholes today than in the past ... plus, anyone can go on social media and play the game, especially in politics. I find it stupid and disgusting. I posted a couple of times on Yahoo and got disgusted. Life is too short to deal with idiots and assholes.

[abqtommy]

5. I don't see anything "bad" about how the Democrats operate.

We won the last election didn't we and it took a lot of criminality by the reTHUGS to overcome that.

[McKim]

6. Why Stir up Trouble!

Remember, social media is being used to attack the Democratic Party. My guess is that at many are just there to stir up trouble. Don’t take the bait! Here on Democratic Underground we are civil. Stay off of social media, a lot of it is fake.

[defacto7]

30. Wise statement. A lot of it IS fake.

[yaesu]

8. There could be a problem with voter turnout if people aren't energized enough but I don't think

not getting ones candidate to the GE is going to keep people from voting. Lets hope whomever gets to the GE is going to shake things up, excite the people enough to overcome any disappointments.

[Ligyron]

9. Russian trolls?

They get paid to do this stuff. You.know.who is the most polarizing candidate so of course that is the most fertile ground for them to stir the crap with.

[defacto7]

31. If true I'd like to see the constituents of said polarizing candidate

rise up and fight against it. It's up to them ultimately.

[brooklynite]

10. The average voter doesn't engage in social media debates on candidates.

[jberryhill]

11. Some people will act that way

Primary drama is not new.

[ancianita]

12. It's not bad. Of course we can come together at primary's end. We want to WIN.

We Democrats know what primaries are for -- voting our conscience and personal causes.

When it comes to the General Election, we vote to WIN.

The Liberal Democrats
AND Progressive Democrats
AND Social Democrats
AND Just Plain Old Democrats
ALL have much more in common than you lead yourself to believe.

WE ARE A UNITED PARTY -- IN 2020, WIN FIRST, ARGUE LATER.

Do not listen to the propagandists behind the media curtains.

We'll be okay.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

39. Vote blue, no matter who... that should be our ultimate battle cry!!

We will need to be united as never before to beat the Shitstain-in-Chief. My fear is that Hillary supporters will break their old record - from 2008 in voting for McLame - and refuse to vote for Bernie if (when?) he wins the 2020 Democratic nomination. I sincerely hope I'm wrong about that and that they'll join with the overwhelming majority of Democrats who'd vote for Bernie in the general.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Andy823]

15. If people are gullible enough

To let the "TROLLS" control the dialog, there will be some problems, but we have great candidates, and they are going to get the message out for our side. When a nominee is selected, I think Democrats will rally behind that person and trump will lose, bigly!

Of course here on DU, who knows what will happen. Just remember not to feed the trolls!

[Corgigal]

19. The answer.

Don't fall in love with a candidate, but you can have a preference. Fall in line when it's time to push the national security threat out of office. Most of the candidates can come back again, let them all fight and shine for now.

[Andy823]

21. I agree with you

I have my favorites, but whoever is the nominee will get my vote, period.

[Hortensis]

16. Of COURSE not. The base are a party's MOST RELIABLE voters.

Not the most passionately determined to get their way or vote Republican.

Jezebel, everyone needs to realize that that fraction of Sanders' supporters who promise they will once again refuse to vote for any Democrat if Sanders is not the nominee are NOT the Democratic Party's to lose. They're Trump's to lose to some third-party candidate.

They're what they are, and we can't control them. In fact, given their strong anti-Democratic attitudes and repetitive behaviors and experiences, I strongly suspect some are in part once again, proactively, supporting Sanders as an excuse to vote against Democrats in the GE. We all have our self images to protect, and psychologists say those prone to extremist thinking are very lacking in self awareness.

[msongs]

17. no they are not. next topic... nt

[demmiblue]

18. We'll be fine. n/t

[elleng]

22. The extreme foolishness of Dems to condemn certain candidate(s)

for non-'sins' will, if it continues, result in the Dem party 'base' being torn apart imo (as you suggest,) and must END.

I don't know about 'always,' but has been this way 'recently.'

[TCJ70]

23. Only if we let them. Some people need to stop grinding their axes...

...and posting their “concerns” about certain candidates and their supporters.

Policy criticism? Go for it. Everyone should be deciding on policy anyway.

[Indygram]

24. Read the Mueller Report

There were (and are) efforts to assist more than just Trump. It's very disheartening. The Russian trolls and bots are already at it again. I sure hope we find out what is under some of those "Ongoing Matter" redactions before people start voting.

[BlueFlorida]

26. I hope one of those "ongoing matters"

puts a strong nail in someone's coffin.

[Cha]

36. It wasn't just trump..

Link to tweet

[BlueFlorida]

25. Coming together may not be their top priority nt

[PeeJ52]

27. I'm so glad I only lasted a day on Twitter...

I tried Facebook twice and could only stand it for two weeks each time. The hatefulness was too much for me, and this was from what were a lot of my high school friends!

[Kurt V.]

29. no i don't. and yes, going back to 1790's it's been the sausage making we'd rather not see

[Baclava]

32. No, and real life isnt twitter! LOL

Only on DU is there this crazy idea that all the candidates and their supporters must pat each other on the backs through the primaries.

Politics is a dog eat dog business, until theres just one left standing at the convention, and the first votes wont be cast for another 9 months

Always has been, always will

[Iggo]

40. You can't tear the base apart. That's what makes it the base.

It's the rest of them wishy-washy ***s you gotta look out for.