2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: The reason for such venom at Bernie and his supporters from HRC fans [View all]CanadianComrade
(30 posts)And I cited where you did. Changing it now to say you'd only stated Sanders is not Obama is misleading, but you know that.
It isn't just DU where there are words against HRC, but you know that, too. Nobody suggested DU is turning an election. And nobody said they were using DU as a "measure" of anything. Yes, that would be "folly". It would also be a strawman argument made by you.
Not caring about the language and vitriol both ways is part of the problem. If you truly cared about electing a Democrat for the White House next year, you'd care about how the debate between Democrats is done.
And I referred to the vitriol at the HRC site you frequent. That is majority HRC supporters by design, and is a cesspool of vitriolic insults. Oh right. You don't care. I forgot.
The OP, and me, never stated that this nastiness was a problem only here, because it isn't. And that is what both of us were speaking to. Strawman arguments don't help make your point, but they do draw a big red circle around the weakness of your argument, whatever that is. It seems to be that HRC is the greatest, is the inevitable nominee, and anyone who says otherwise deserves whatever they get in return. You're entitled to this opinion, if that is what you are arguing (seems to be but I can't tell - you're too busy arguing against points nobody has made), but it is one that isn't easy to respect.
If you don't agree that the nastiness and accusatory tone matters at all (not just here but in the national debate between supporters) - we will have to agree to disagree. It really is hard to see how you'd argue against having a debate on policy differences instead of throwing insults, but like I said twice now: You are either better than that it you aren't. I think we have our answer.