Democratic Primaries
In reply to the discussion: Which of our candidates, other than Harris, have made statements defending Joe Biden by name? [View all]Bongo Prophet
(2,650 posts)And I don't have 'the ludicrous idea that asking if any other candidates (besides Harris) defended Biden by is "divide and conquer." '
As I said in another post to you, I agree with your post without the callout 2 sentences that you removed, to your credit.
You must have seen that those 2 sentences were a bit much, and so we agree on that also.
If you look at your response above, you would see you LOLed at a mischaracterization you made about my position. Claimed a moral high ground, proclaiming innocence of intent, then another micharacterization -"If you don't think defending..is important..." - which I did not, nor would ever say, you can see that you have a responsibility to check yourself as well.
Divide and conquer can work in many ways. And it was not a reference to your OP specifically, but based on recent history this cycle. At least since the 1st debate, positions have hardened a lot for many posters. It's like every other cycle, at least in internet era, and I have observed several patterns that come up again and again.
There are certain personality types that fill the same or similar roles every primary.
Point people, who often have a lot of spare time, will do research and post talking points, push narratives that often come from candidates own sites, or those of published allies to their cause. They can be very valuable. But unfortunately, they often can be overly aggressive, and insulting to their peers. This can be self-defeating in the long run, but they enjoy the role, the praise, and the feeling they are leading an army of righteousness.
Cheerleaders don't do as many detailed posts, if any, but just cheer on those who do.
Snarky stick pokers, who just post laughing emojis, or gifs of celebrities laughing, whatever. To mock and dis their "opponents" - who aren't necessarily really opponents, just supporters of a different candidate. I think they have least to contribute, but want to be in the cool kids. Just a theory.
There are also "Can't we all just get along" types, who bemoan the state of discourse going too low to win the long game. I prefer light more than heat, and conflict resolution over "beating someone in an argument" approach.
And the analyzers, who see it from bird's eye level, wondering how to best explain patterns that might be better to evolve out of.
I guess that's sort of where I am now. I have also been guilty of other roles in the past, (defending Kerry, Obama, Clinton) but pretty weary after seeing the process play out for 20+ years.
It always goes pretty much the same way. We start out focused on the gen election opponent, then move to disagreements, then outrages promoted by the pack leaders, which in turn cause deep rifts and bad takes on things that happened during the whole sordid process.
Sorry for the long post, and apologies for coming out too harsh. I won't be posting much at all in the primaries this cycle either. I had sworn it off after 2016, getting accused by one on my own "side" after saying I drew the line at calling Bernie supporters "vermin", even though I was appalled at their actions during the convention. THAT is how far that year went.
I don't want a repeat of that level of contention.
I hope we agree on that, as well.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden