Hillary-hate from the far left seems more intense than Obama-hate. Why is that?

[DanTex]

It's mostly coming from the same people on the far left, but the Hillary bashing rhetoric is much more unhinged than the anti-Obama stuff (with some obvious exceptions). Which doesn't make much sense, because they are pretty similar from a policy standpoint. If anything, Hillary is further left.

And this isn't residual animosity from the contentious 2008 primary, because Obama and his supporters got over whatever bad blood there was quickly. Hillary endorsed Obama, both Clintons campaigned for him vigorously, she served as SoS, and basically the fences are mended.

One possibility is that, since Obama is fighting the Republicans every day and his policies are being blocked by them, it's hard to make the "Obama is a Republican" argument with a straight face. In this case, as soon as the GE comes around, and Hillary is up against the GOP, then the Hillary-bashing should abate somewhat, as it becomes clear what an actual Republican is and how far that is from Hillary.

But I think it's more than that. For some reason, a segment on the far left just truly hates her personally. It's beyond reason.

[TexasProgresive]

1. They hated her when she was first lady.

This is a mature well aged hate.

[DanTex]

4. Too young to remember. Did the far left hate Hillary specifically, or the whole administration?

[TexasProgresive]

11. Not really sure

What I do know is she is a lightening rod that attracts all the wrong attention.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

45. You made a declarative statement re the left hating Hillary in the 90's.

Then you stated that you had no idea of what you were talking about. Since you've made two opposite statements, it would probably be a good idea for you to link to something showing that today's "far left" hated Hillary in the 90's.

[Armstead]

64. Those who don't understand history -- have no business discussing it

[ericson00]

223. yes the far-left did, hence the showings of

Ross Perot (over NAFTA) and Ralph Nader (over not just NAFTA but crime, welfare reform, Palestinians, WTO, etc.) in 1992/1996 and 2000. People forget Perot was, like Clinton, pro-abortion, pro-gun control, hence why his support in both elections had exit polls showing he cost no one any election. Nader is obvious, and it unlike Perot, did change the ultimate outcome. But I still hold a grudge on the far-left for hurting Clinton's mandate.

[LeftOfWest]

286. Very telling.

okay n/t.

[LeftOfWest]

287. "Too young to remember."

okay.

n/t.

[AgingAmerican]

96. The 'far left' hated her in the 90s?

lol

[roguevalley]

137. I think the new definition of far left is any dem that says they won't vote for her

for some, that's hate.

[Hortensis]

152. No. Far Left: Those who are hard to distinguish from the Far Right.

[TransitJohn]

204. Oh, good Christ!

Seriously? A hardline tea-bagger nativist is indistinguishable from an FDR Democrat?
Sheesh!

[Hortensis]

278. TransitJohn, "FDR Democrats" aren't far/radical left. FDR Democrats were/are

progressive liberals who joined with progressive conservatives (far more in common with each other than with radicals/reactionaries of either extreme) to use large federal programs to fix the grave problems of an entire nation. Worked pretty well, too.

FDR Democrats might SEEM more left than they are now because most of the nation shifted right, and with them definitions, during the Reagan Revolution. I was never radical and never shifted, though, and am as happy now as back then to be seen as an FDR Democrat. Also a Truman Democrat and a Johnson Democrat. I was never crazy about Kennedy; I was just a child then and liked Nixon because he was older and thus knew more than Kennedy.

[AgingAmerican]

271. Well that made sense

[Tommy2Tone]

159. A Dem that won't vote for a Dem is not a Dem!

[Ed Suspicious]

180. A dem that choses to spend their vote on a different dem candidate is a dem.

[roguevalley]

188. no. george wallace was a dem. think about that remark.

[Tommy2Tone]

194. Again and again I get more proof

that Bernie's supporters aren't Democrats. You comment comparing HIllary to George Wallace is just more confirmation.

[Vattel]

199. Wait, you made a general claim: a dem who don't vote for a dem is not a dem.

Roguevalley then provided a nice counterexample: George Wallace was a dem, but not voting for him wouldn't disqualify someone from being a dem. Your appropriate reply should have been, "Good point, there are exceptions to the rule, but I don't think Clinton is one of those." Instead, you made another sweeping generalization about Bernie supporters not being dems, and claimed that Roguevalley's comment was confirmation of that. That sort of response will not win you points from pedantic debate judges like me.

[BlueStateLib]

258. When George Wallace ran for President in 1968, it was not as a Democrat –

1964 and 1972 there were plenty of other Democrat's to choose from

[Vattel]

260. irrelevant to my point

[Tommy2Tone]

265. I was going to make that point but thanks for making it for me

[Hortensis]

279. Tommy, parties are political organizations different people may support for

different practical and ideological reasons.

In contrast, we now know that liberal and conservative are very different basic PERSONALITY TYPES that all human beings are born to (possibly libertarian is a third, less common and very different type). These orientations are hard-wired into us genetically and then also are affected by our life experiences, so that people can end up almost any combination of liberal and conservative (and libertarian?).

Learn the main characteristics of each personality type and you'll be able to figure out which political groups and societies around the planet tend to be liberal and which conservative by their behaviors instead of trying to figure that from their labels.

Please check this out. It's a wonderful eye-opener, I promise.

[Art_from_Ark]

267. Wallace ran as a Democrat in both the '64 and '72 primaries

[Tommy2Tone]

264. Why don't I give you my password and you post for me

Since you know what I should have said.

Hillary has a favorable number among Democrats of 73% and Bernie is in the 40+% range. Yet a poll was taken here a few days ago and he was chosen by 80-90% of the respondents. Not only is Bernie not a Democrat but it looks like most of his followers aren't either.

The guy is how old? How many of those years was he an independent? Running as a Democrat, out of necessity, does not make him a Democrat.

[roguevalley]

217. again and again, you show yourself to be a sad boy. I didn't compare your queen to wallace.

I said blanket voting for dems can be stupid. go back and read the posts I am responding too. Your remarks tell more about you and your aims on this thread than my remark that voting for a dem isn't always righteous. Good night, sweet prince Tommy2Tone(deaf)

[PatrickforO]

238. Well, I'll probably vote for her if she's the nominee but I'm working really hard to help

Bernie win the primaries.

As to your statement, maybe we should look at it another way. The Democratic Party establishment has been forced right because of massive decades long corporate propaganda, and the rise of the right wing noise machine after Reagan killed the Fairness Doctrine.

So, maybe we should say that the Democratic Party abandoned its core beliefs when it moved right, and thus abandoned the more traditional FDR Democrats. I've said before that Bernie is more of a Democrat than the Democrats, and I mean that. He stands for everything the Party used to stand for before it went 'free trade,' welfare reform and crime bill. Plus I don't like Hillary's hawkishness. Foreign policy should not be a pissing contest like these foolish Republicans and their equally foolish corporate-owned pundits think. War should ALWAYS be an UTTERLY LAST resort.

The real problem here is the imbalance of wealth, but the worst of it is the military industrial complex Ike warned us about. It has grown into a huge, uncontrollable behemoth with tentacles stealing our tax money right and left. That's NOT OK with me, and again is why I'm supporting Bernie Sanders.

[VanillaRhapsody]

202. Hating the person most likely to prevent Republicans fom

Owning all three branches of govt...is foolish.

[artislife]

257. My fear is that she will hand them exactly what they want.

[AgingAmerican]

274. That is what Obama did

Gave them all these things they have wanted for Decades, but couldn't do themselves because it was political suicide. And they got them in exchange for temporary 'bandaids'. Like extending unemployment for a few extra months, etc.

The country has gone so far to the right with Obama as president, we can't afford a repeat.

[AgingAmerican]

273. The fear card

Everything BUT the 'issues card'.

[Fred Sanders]

2. Fairly clear that anyone right of Karl Marx is in for a bashing in some small circles.

[Armstead]

65. VERY SMALL CIRCLES, goddamn it

[Cali_Democrat]

241. Small, but loud circles. nt

[kenfrequed]

272. Soo...

By inversion are you stating that there actually are real marxists here posting against Hillary? Are you comfortable with that kind of red-baiting? Do you maybe have a list of names?

[LondonReign2]

3. Have you stopped beating your wife? Why is that?

Such bullshit reminds me why I had you on ignore the first time.

[DanTex]

5. I'm single. So what do you think of Hillary-hate versus Obama-hate?

[LondonReign2]

9. I'm not surprised. What do you think of dishonest framing?

[DanTex]

17. Not surprised, huh. Is that a personal attack?

Do you not think that Hillary-hate is more intense that Obama-hate? Interested in your opinion here.

[SonderWoman]

18. Of course it's a personal attack.

That's kinda their thing, hence your op title.

[virtualobserver]

24. I have never forgiven Hillary for using Reverend Wright against Obama....

or for her ad in which she used the "they cling to guns or religion" line against him.


I don't hate her, but from then on I no longer trusted her.

[SonderWoman]

28. If Obama can and you can't....

What does that say about you?

[virtualobserver]

30. I don't forgive politicians who stoop that low.....

because they always do it again.


The President didn't have to worry about running against her again.

[SonderWoman]

36. Yeah okay. How about Obama's anti-Hillary ads?

I wonder if she forgives him for running an ad with a sledge hammer being thrown at her face then exploding her. Probably, because they are now bestie's. But you keep holding a grudge.

[virtualobserver]

46. Nice try, but Obama didn't create the ad.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_1984


you want to call it a grudge.....it isn't....I don't trust her.

I do trust her more than any of the Republicans, which is why I will vote for her if she is the nominee.

[SonderWoman]

51. Oh no! You mean it was his surrogates???

Who ran it during SuperBowl???

[virtualobserver]

59. it was the Apple ad that ran during the Super Bowl back in 1984, Hillary 1984 ad was on youtube

Obama said that he had no connection to the ad.

Are you accusing President Obama of lying?

[Phlem]

82. Fail.

They're both Third Way, any simpleton knows that and it is exactly why he can"forgive" her. They're both working for the same boss.

What does that say about you?

[MADem]

144. And it's not "Third Way" to affect dissatisfaction with militarism while hopping into bed with the

MIC?

Who ISN'T "Third Way," really? Who doesn't "triangulate?"

[Phlem]

158. It's not so much about triangulation but

economics for the "Thirdway", or "NEOLIBERALS". They'll give you whatever social justice you need as long as the money keeps going to the top. A group run by investment bankers.

The "Thirdway" have been discussed on DU exhaustively, look it up.

Bernie is NOT Thirdway.

Give me an example of Bernie being a "Neoliberal".

[MADem]

170. Well, this election cycle it's the "economic" argument, but previous to this it was

the "triangulation" argument. I've been here since the beginning--I've seen the arguments and don't need to "look it up."

Before this 'economic' showstopper, it was "those gunny guys," but now people opposed to the Brady bill get a pass, even though the "hunting" argument doesn't apply there.

Anyone who says one thing about military actions and then makes an obvious accommodation with a MIC element like Lockheed Martin IS 'triangulating' and playing both ends, so we can call it "what ever."

We can call it "Being a politician."

What we can't say is that it did not happen. Because it has happened. Those aren't sheep being stationed in Burlington--they're F-35s.

It is what it is, regardless of the labels. Labels used as catchphrase slurs are boring--they're too easy, and they offer a false picture.

It's terribly easy to pooh pooh "social justice" when it is not your ox being gored. It's terribly important, though, to people who don't get hired because of their skin color or gender, or who get chased, harassed, brutalized by police for their race or ethnicity. It makes a difference to the people who go to shitty schools and get lousy educations because they live in a "minority" neighborhood that gets the fewest services.

You can't have "economic justice" without "social justice." Until black and brown people and women are offered a place at the table along with the white guys worried about their wallets, there will be no economic justice. Or "There will be economic justice....for the Working (White) Man." And that's not justice at all.

[Phlem]

176. Maybe he's triangulating on the F-35's

or thinking we've sunk this much money into it, let's finish it before starting a new hole to throw money into.

1. I will be watching how this turns out but that action alone does not make him a Neo liberal.

2. I did not pooh pooh social justice. I don't appreciate people putting words into my mouth.

3. I'm the last person you want to talk too about economic justice. Computer and tech workers are notoriously overworked and underpaid. It's called "White Collar Slavery".

I'm half Filipino and I worked for 3 white Mormon men who abused all their employees, sold the company, and ran off with the profits. I also haven't had a steady job since Nafta. So give me a break with your fricken race card.

You can't have social justice without economic justice because in the end you can have all the fucking social justice you want until you can't feed yourselves anymore and die off.

How's this been done over the years? With money and until we equalize that then it's going to continue.

They are tearing us apart right now by buying politicians! We need to take their weapon from them.

If not we'll be a merry band of malnourished, ignorant, poor folks holding hands against militarized police.

[MADem]

184. You shouldn't be ignoring your race card, then. Instead of yelling at ME about it,

you might want to consider that you're rowing the same boat. Even if no one says it to your face.

I didn't say you "pooh poohed" social justice. I said "It's terribly easy to pooh pooh "social justice" when it is not your ox being gored." Catch the nuance, there?

You might just want to consider that it IS your ox.

You can't have one without the other. And economic justice doesn't "bring" social justice. It can't make up for deficits that have to be corrected in order that underserved minorities have a fair crack at getting those jobs, that education, that housing, etc.

If you're only lifting up the white end of the economy, you're going to end up with a serious imbalance not just between the rich and the poor, but between the white middle class and the people who live in "that neighborhood" who are poorly housed, poorly educated, have no jobs in their community, have no hope of finding work, and who turn to crime to 'get by.'

That's just the big picture. I always say a rising tide lifts ALL boats. And that rising tide is social justice.

[Phlem]

190. "You shouldn't be ignoring your race card, then."

It's not like that in tech. It's the bottom line, race has nothing to do with it. If you think that I don't care about everyone getting a fair shake then you're not listening to me. Catch the nuance there?

Jeesus. Goodnight.

[MADem]

191. Really? You don't say!! No racism in tech? None? My, we need to ALERT THE MEDIA!!!!!

They're saying the very opposite, you know!

I think you need to do some homework. In TECH, especially, race and gender are HUGE barriers to success:


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/22/we-need-to-talk-about-silicon-valley-s-racism.html
http://gawker.com/5981825/racism-doesnt-exist-in-tech-because-white-tech-blog-millionaire-jason-calacanis-has-never-seen-it
http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/black-woman-tech-industry/
http://www.colorlines.com/articles/how-tech-stays-white


Jeesus. Goodnight. yourself! There are none so blind as those who will not see!

[Phlem]

192. Really?

I was specifically talking about my office, we had all races there but I was close to the hiring process and it was all about money. Every game company I've ever worked for cared more about money than race.

Racism happens everywhere. Duh.

There are none so blind as those who cannot follow along.

[MADem]

203. Come on--the conversation I was having wasn't about your office.

The topic was larger than your current situation--even you acknowledged that with your entire work history.

Computer and tech workers are notoriously overworked and underpaid. It's called "White Collar Slavery".

I'm half Filipino and I worked for 3 white Mormon men who abused all their employees, sold the company, and ran off with the profits. I also haven't had a steady job since Nafta. So give me a break with your fricken race card.

Sounds to me like you've been victimized. Not sure why you are defending the status quo.

And if you're having such a hard time getting ahead, there may be something you're missing that doesn't put you among the favored few. You really should be asking for some of that social justice, yourself....

[Phlem]

210. OMFG.

You are not hearing me. In the game industry it is not about race, it is all about who is willing to put the most time in a project. You skin color doesn't matter, if you've been sleeping at work for the last week guess who get's the gold star!

I've been a manager during the hiring process and that's what they want. Essentially anyone willing to work 80 hour weeks for a 40 hour a week salary get's to stay during the layoff process. Color? Nah... Slaves? Yea!

What we need is a union. Otherwise it goes on unchecked.

[MADem]

221. Yes, it DOES matter--just because no one is telling you doesn't mean it's not happening.

You just told me you were a slave, now you're a manager? A manager of slaves? Give you a title, make you feel special? Yet you've been in the gig for years, and you never move up. Can't get a foot on the ladder, can you? Haven't had any doggone job security since NAFTA.

Bet you know some people who have moved up, though--guys you worked with back in the day...and I'll bet they're all white guys. Of course, it was "just luck" that they got picked and not you, hmmm?

I think you're so busy defending the status quo that you don't realize that there's a lot wrong with it. Maybe you're just not "included" -- you're close, but no cigar? They'll slap you on the back, mutter with you about "them," but you never get an invite to the board room--do you?

I think you should read some of the stuff I've given you. And are you seriously trying to tell me that Elaine Pao got a fair shake at Reddit? Come on. If they knew then what they know now, they'd cry to have her back. Too late for that, though. And she's not the only female and/or person of color to get shit on in the tech sphere.

You hit the glass ceiling yet?

You will:

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_28058612/report-asian-american-tech-workers-absent-from-silicon

SAN JOSE -- As Silicon Valley companies seek to diversify their ranks and address the glaring absence of women, black and Latino engineers, a new report says they are overlooking a problem hidden in plain sight.

Asian-Americans are well-represented at the Bay Area's leading technology firms, but few rise to the ranks of management and even fewer are in executive positions, according to an analysis of the employment records of Google, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, LinkedIn and Yahoo by the Ascend Foundation.

Don't defend them and don't keep denying this is a problem, because it plainly is--they don't deserve your 'protection.' It's obvious that you work in a discriminatory industry. Acknowledge it. Challenge them. If that constant headache you've got is from banging your head against a glass ceiling, you're in need of a little social justice, too. You just don't realize it yet.

Once you got that, economic justice will follow.


Here--read this, too. Your specific gig. It's on both sides of the keyboard. Eye opener: http://www.salon.com/2013/12/11/video_games_race_problem_goes_all_the_way_to_the_top/

http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-25207-gamerfate.html

http://thenerdsofcolor.org/2014/02/24/missing-polygons-asians-race-and-video-games/

[Phlem]

227. You just make shit up don't ya.

"I think you're so busy defending the status quo"

Yes that's why I'm voting for pro union Bernie, civil rights activist Bernie, Bernie with a past that can't be beat, and I have a mind of my own that follows logic and facts being in tech and all but that doesn't matter does it?.

You have full knowledge of what I've been through for the past 20+ years because of a few blue links, OK that's the same.

Are you just logically challenged? I'm done with this conversation.

you are welcome to the last word because I know that's what you want.



Yep Bernie the "White Supremacist".

[Juicy_Bellows]

230. Well done. You went longer than I could.

Some here carry water at all costs despite the rusty, leaking bucket. Cheers!

[Phlem]

231. Thank You.

[Juicy_Bellows]

244. Well Phlem, I guess you are perpetually screwed then.

Your only hope is social justice! However, I've yet to hear any concrete ideas as to how you legislate or implement that kind of change.

I'll go out on a limb here - while we are waiting for this social justice paradigm shift, you could probably use a union/representation and a better wage.

Am I warm?

Cheers!

[MADem]

237. You missed the point. Heckuvajob. nt

[Juicy_Bellows]

239. If the point was to ignore and then deride then kudos to you.

He seemed to be telling us about his story and experiences and you seemed unwilling to listen, let alone accept his version of events.

[MADem]

240. I listened. I heard what he was saying, and I provided him with some links about

the industry he is working in.

He is at a disadvantage because of his ethnicity. That's not a rumor, that's fact.

I don't care who anyone votes for--that's not what my conversation was about.

My point was that if a minority can't make it to the board room, that increased wage or that collective bargaining isn't going to mean a thing. There's a glass ceiling for anyone who isn't white and male in his line of work. The only thing that will cure that is SOCIAL justice--from where ever it might issue.

A rising tide of social justice lifts all boats--including the black, brown, Asian-Pacific-Islander, and female boats.

[Juicy_Bellows]

242. I agree with much you say.

However, you didn't seem to extend the possibility they are speaking their truth. As if a minority working in their industry doesn't have a valid opinion. I am in tech, not gaming. Often, outside of the very highest levels in management, it's pretty much a meritocracy. Sexism and racism have impacts, to be sure, nepotism probably more so but when it comes down to getting stuff done they care about numbers.

Social justice doesn't ease hunger pangs quite like economic justice does.


EDIT - I do not pretend to speak for Phlem and if I have misconstrued your point, I apologize.

[MADem]

245. Economic justice alone doesn't help the people who are outside the bubble, though.

It will help the white guys, it will help the asian guys in the boiler room, in the sense that it will be harder to fire them and they may get a few more pennies in their pay packet, but it will not help the black and brown guys--and gals--who never got the decent education, couldn't get any advanced training, never mind college, who were never considered for those lousy jobs in the boiler room, and who, of course, have no hope of finding their way to the board room.

I understand you are speaking for yourself, it's cool.

It's a matter of priorities, you see. If you are inside the network--where you can get hired, where your grammar and high school gave you some skills, where you live in a place where there are jobs and you can commute to them, you might not think that social justice matters as much. But the truth is that when half of society is excluded, pushed off, not given any of that opportunity to even SEEK economic justice, that it's easier for "THEM" -- those guys with the money--to throw the white guys and their asian pals a few bones and they'll think they actually GOT something...when in fact, if they stand with the brown, the black and the female, they'll have some serious numbers on their side.

Those guys stay in power by dividing and conquering. Hell, if those white boardroom guys start demanding unions, they just may "lower" (gotta use the thing because some people don't get it) themselves to hire some brown people who just may do it cheaper for them. Then the white guys get mad at the brown guys, instead of getting mad at the assholes in the boardroom who refused to give opportunity to EVERYONE without regard for race or ethnicity or gender, and are trying to pinch that silver dollah till the eagle screams.

Now, in the tech game, it's white guys who are the oppressors, AND the oppressed. The ones who are oppressed, and who can't break out and move up the ladder, they are starting to get an idea about how it feels to be devalued in this society. They haven't, many of them, translated what they are feeling into the reality that this is how other sectors of society are treated as a matter of routine, but maybe one day they will start to take the point. They need to try to get a sense of how that feels for all of your life--like no matter what you do, where you go, you have to work twice as hard, twice as many hours, to get half the credit. Picture that. It's the name of that tune if you are black/brown/female. This is why the social justice component is so damn important. The bigger the workforce, the bigger the clout. They can't turn one against the other, if everyone is playing on the same team.

If you're in a tech job, nowadays, for your job to look like the national demographic, half of your office would have to be black, brown or some flavor of hispanic, and maybe three percent Asian. Oh, and pretty much half of them should be female. We know most tech places don't look like that. There is a wall keeping people out--it's not that they don't want in, it's that they are pushed away, not welcomed, and the road is made rough for them. That needs to change.

And those people, all of them, need to populate the boardrooms, too. It's past time.

[Juicy_Bellows]

248. Thank you for taking the time to reply in such a manner.

It is well received. I think you make a lot of sense, good points throughout. I refrain from bringing in my own demographics into discussions like these because I don't really think it matters unless I am specifically addressing my own issues but then it's merely anecdotal. However, if you're interested, I will.

Your paragraph here sings of the power unions have:

Now, in the tech game, it's white guys who are the oppressors, AND the oppressed. The ones who are oppressed, and who can't break out and move up the ladder, they are starting to get an idea about how it feels to be devalued in this society. They haven't, many of them, translated what they are feeling into the reality that this is how other sectors of society are treated as a matter of routine, but maybe one day they will start to take the point. They need to try to get a sense of how that feels for all of your life--like no matter what you do, where you go, you have to work twice as hard, twice as many hours, to get half the credit. Picture that. It's the name of that tune if you are black/brown/female. This is why the social justice component is so damn important. The bigger the workforce, the bigger the clout. They can't turn one against the other, if everyone is playing on the same team.

With good union representation we are all playing on the same team - a union board can and should represent a cross section of the workers concerns and it is much quicker to get proper representation of minorities within a union than waiting for some huge societal paradigm shift to do it writ large.

The war on unions has to cease. To me, I think this is the fastest path to social and economic justice.

[MADem]

249. Unions are in a good position to sponsor minority entry into underrepresented fields.

It's a question of will, really.

I am old enough that I remember the day when black police and fire fighters were really rare to the point of being non-existent in all but a few "chocolate" cities (DC/Chicago, e.g.)--and forget women! The only "police woman" was the one who came along AFTERWARDS to do the search if a cop arrested a female suspect!! Nowadays, we see black police chiefs and fire chiefs and we don't bat an eye. We see female police chiefs too--no one even notices. We got OVER it. It took a little tussling from within the unions to get past that point; but those guys in leadership at the time were older, whiter, really entrenched--and some of them thought their jobs were hereditary.

I would like to see that happen in the tech sphere too--a little more color and gender. Maybe unions could reach out to underserved communities and offer scholarships, training programs, things like that--maybe a little STEM jumpstarting in the school systems.

If unions serving the tech communities could reach out to minorities and women, that would be a huge leap forward.

[Juicy_Bellows]

252. Well said and true.

Our problem as a nation is that it is difficult to organize. The tech sector has abysmal union representation. We need to pass laws to make it easier to organize for all lines of work. I believe you and I agree, unions are the best way to combat the societal and economic woes of our country. It's not an end all be all but it is the fastest route. Cheers!

DU is at it's best when folks engage in reality and can find some common ground and for that I thank you.

[MADem]

255. I've always looked for the union label....

I had family who were union members. I know they make the nation stronger, and they certainly make conditions safer for workers. And if given the chance, they sure as hell know how to organize!

[Juicy_Bellows]

256. How about something from this lovely union store?

https://store.berniesanders.com/



"Union Made In the USA - Every item in our store will always be made and printed by union workers right here in the United States."

On this small point, you've got to give Sanders some propers. Support whomever you wish as long as they aren't a god damn Republican - I'm all in for Sanders but I am not yet immune to rational debate.

Cheers!

[MADem]

268. Hee hee--I'm shopping at this union-made store!!

http://unionwear.com/hillaryclinton-com-opens-union-made-merch-shop/


Hillary Clinton became the first political candidate to open a web store selling union made in USA campaign merchandise, including Unionwear branded hats and bags. Visit the shop at https://shop.hillaryclinton.com/

[MADem]

235. No--I am just listening to what you are telling me.

You're in a job where you can't get ahead, it's slavery, only you get to manage the slaves; you're of Asian heritage, and you work in an industry which is pretty much entirely whites and Asians...only the Asians don't make it to the boardroom.

I'm not making this up. I've given you links. Read them. Take the chip off your shoulder and read them.

I don't really care for whom you vote. Knock yourself out! I'm not TALKING about "Bernie" -- the "White Supremacist" or otherwise (FWIW, I don't think that of him--I think he is clumsy and operates on old, outdated paradigms but I don't think he means ill--I just think he's ineffective).

I'm talking about you, and about social justice, and how you don't even seem to appreciate that you could USE some.


Unless that job you were telling me was so lousy is now all of a sudden the greatest thing since sliced bread, or something...?


I think you need to understand, though, that you're not one of THEM, those guys in charge, those guys making the decisions, calling the shots, doing the Big Picture Visionary Thing--and until you get yourself some social justice--WHERE EVER you may happen to find it -- you are never gonna BE one of THEM. Never. You can't move UP. You might get a slightly better wage, you might get a tad more job security, but you're not going to move up so long as the models that your industry operate under remain intact.

They just won't shift without social justice, you see.

You'll be out amongst the rank and file, barking orders at the younger kids, and all those white males in the board room will keep giving you the orders. You can get a few dollars extra for bossing people around for eighty hours a week, but you won't be making the big decisions. They'll move on, new ones will come in, they'll get younger, your underlings...and there you will sit.

And all the head banging icons in the world won't change that.

That banging isn't a brick wall--it's your GLASS CEILING.

Ouch.

[randys1]

102. Reminds me of how can Bernie manage to barely criticize Hillary yet many, not all, of his

supporters do little else.

[dsc]

53. would you cut the same slack in terms of being unwilling to trust

in terms of Obama after he had McClurkin emcee an event for him, give testimony about how gays can change, and then lied about it when asked on MTV?

[virtualobserver]

71. I'm not familiar with that event.......but let me get this straight

The defense of Hillary here is......Obama is a liar?

[dsc]

259. No but many many gay members of this board were literally

called racists and chased off this board for pointing out that we didn't like that behavior (and to be blunt I can't imagine you haven't heard of McClurkin) so I just wonder if the priviledge of trashing Democrats one doesn't like belongs to all of us or just you.

[virtualobserver]

263. You have the right to speak the truth....and so do I

The fact that President Obama's behavior was objectionable does not remove my mistrust of Hillary.
I wasn't happy with Obama or Hillary on their position on gay marriage in 2008, but that detail of how wrong Obama was....I missed that.


What I do know, is that the reason that I support Bernie with passion is that searching through his past does not lead
to some moment where he played politics with fundamentally important issues concerning discrimination or civil rights or even respect.

C-span is littered with Bernie moments.....this one is a little angry, but the anger is justified......and he made me proud.



http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4542132/bernie-sanders-calls-duke-cunningham

Bernie does not change.

[Armstead]

70. Do you HATE Sanders?

[LondonReign2]

23. Do you think dishonest framing is a shitty technique?

Interested in your opinion here.

[DanTex]

25. Looks like you're only in this for the personal attacks and dodges.

Kinda strange that you decided to respond to this OP in the first place. Maybe stick to the email server threads.

[LondonReign2]

27. Looks like you are only in this to frame issues dishonestly

Maybe stick to groups where tripe such as the OP would be appreciated.

[DanTex]

31. Both Hillary and Obama hate from the far left are very real. The question is, why

is the Hillary hate more intense. I guess you don't have an opinion.

[LondonReign2]

33. I will construct a strawman, than fill it with lies. Then I will ask how much you agree with it,

just a little bit, or a whole lot.

You attempt at deceitful framing is both sophomoric and transparent.

[DanTex]

34. Well, if you don't think Hillary hate exists, you can just say so.

I'm interested in the opinions of people who live in reality, though.

[LondonReign2]

35. Keep practicing. You'll get the hang of this yet.

[SonderWoman]

37. You're in deep denial:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025075831

Plenty more where that came from.

[DanTex]

40. Yup 115 recs for pure Hillary bashing.

[SonderWoman]

42. And not just bashing, but advocating sitting out of election.

[LondonReign2]

88. It's awful when people advocate sitting out elections, isn't it?

SonderWoman (758 posts)
190. This is why Hillary supporters will not vote for Bernie if he wins nomination.

Reap what you sow.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=561863
Yes indeed

[LondonReign2]

44. LOL. Of all the people complaining...

Don't you need to make another post about how Bernie is a pedophile, or how he is secretly in bed with the MIC?

[SonderWoman]

48. Who called Bernie a pedophile?

You precious snowflakes and your perpetual persecution complex. LOL. Find me ONE TIME I mentioned Bernie and pedophile. I won't hold my breath.

[LondonReign2]

52. Either you have been struck on the head and lost your memory from two weeks ago

or someone has gotten ahold of your account information.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251549982

[SonderWoman]

57. I think you may have been "struck on the head".

Still see nothing anywhere in that post calling Bernie a pedophile. Keep trying! You can do it!

[LondonReign2]

66. Of course you don't. Which of course explains why is was hidden

[SonderWoman]

69. Still got nothing, huh?

Try smearing me again and I'll take it up with MIRT. Have a nice day.

[LondonReign2]

74. I've got nothing...except your post trying to make Bernie out as pedophile and getting the hide it

deserved.

[SonderWoman]

79. Which you produced no evidence of.

I even clearly stated in my post that its BS. Hope that head wound heals quickly.

[LondonReign2]

81. And here is another, which also got a hide

SonderWoman This message was hidden by Jury decision. Hide

199. LOL. Look at the post I was responding to first.





Aww, people can dish it but can't take it without their wittle feefee's getting hurt. Btw, I never said those bottom 2 quotes, and why did Bernie vote to protect child molesters and against AMBER alert?
A Jury voted 4-3 to hide this post on Tue Sep 1, 2015, 04:43 AM. Reason: This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

[SonderWoman]

85. Yup, still nothing about me calling him a pedophile.

And still no answer as to his votes. How convenient. Keep wasting your time researching though, or you can just apologize for trying to smear me. Your choice.

[LondonReign2]

86. It is awful how one can be "smeared" simply by pointing to his or her posts, isn't it?

Or in this case, two posts. Which both rightfully got hides.

[SonderWoman]

91. Still can't find that post you claim, huh?

How awful, a channel 4 nbc news report from Vermont makes Bernies fans sad. YOU said I called Bernie a pedophile, YOU produced no evidence. YOU lose. That's how the internet works. Deal with it.

[LondonReign2]

95. I don't know that I've ever seen anyone, when presented with their own posts, continue to insist

they don't exist. Awesome.

Well, enjoy your hides, whether you think they exist or not.

[AgingAmerican]

103. Integrity and Hillary support

not happening in this subthread.

[Armstead]

111. You are correct. You didn't call him a pedophile

Just posted a TV news report dredging up claims that he voted against a child pornography bill and "he's against CHILDREN."

Not a pedophile -- but against children and laws against child porn.

[AgingAmerican]

101. He produced it

I clicked on it and he is right and you are wrong. Integrity is a GOOD thing, not a BAD thing.

[MADem]

187. It was hidden because it got a "good" (cough) jury. The question is still out there for the GOP to

have fun with.

Would have been better to rebut and refute it.

Funny how personal insults about how people are loopy and got hit in the head are no problem here (and no, I haven't alerted on you, someone else can do that if they'd like), but a policy question about a vote--even if issued snarkily or testily--gets hidden.

Don't you think the "answer" to that question would be a useful thing for a Sanders supporter (or even a non-supporter who believes in fairness) to have in their arsenal? I do.

Instead of playing it out, and getting the information out there, the question was shut down--for now. No answer was provided. And it will remain a mystery. Until someone here decides to do the homework, or the right wing decides to drag it out, frame it, and make something of it.

And then we'll all have to scramble to find out what the reason was.

I'm sure it was a good reason. I'm just not motivated to do your homework for you, because you don't debate in a very nice way.

[MADem]

174. Where does that post (bad hide, IMO) say what you said she is saying?

I don't see a single mention of "that word" in her post. More to the point, she clearly put a caveat (or two) on her question:

I get it, this is far more nuanced than is reported in this clip, and it seems to lean heavily towards the R candidate, but all of that BS aside, 1-what exactly were the provisions that caused Bernie to vote against these policies?

The measure had to do with an AMBER ALERT coordinator on a national level.


He did vote against that measure. So did Barney Frank. So did Elijah Cummings. So did Dennis Kucinich. So did John Lewis.


http://www.ontheissues.org/HouseVote/Party_2003-127.htm

Most Dems didn't, though.

Obviously, there was some sort of "poison pill" in the measure. Instead of finding out what it was, good old DU swept the entire topic under the rug and PUNISHED the person who dared to ask the question--like that will make it go away. Will the GOP cooperate in similar fashion, and say "Oh, pshaw, hush up now" when someone tries to pull this old chestnut out again? What's the answer to the "Why?" question? I mean, I'm not stupid, there had to be some valid reason, but what was it?

Instead of resolving the issue and getting to the point of WHY he voted against it (and--one more time-- he clearly had a reason), the thread got hidden, like people were afraid of the answer, or something--five to two, no less! Talk about knee jerk!

Out in the real world, should Sanders somehow become the nominee, do you seriously think that the news networks will vote five to two to "hide" a discussion of that topic, because someone here stomps a foot and hits an alert button?

It may well be that the poster is not a Sanders fan, but there was no "P" word--nothing even close to it--in her post. Your characterization is untrue and unfair.

Further, making comments about how she must be "loopy" (struck on the head) is just personal attack. You acquit yourself poorly when you stoop that low.

[AgingAmerican]

98. June 2014?

Had to dig deep, eh?

[Stallion]

115. I'm Feeling More DanTex Hate in this Thread than Hillary Hate

nm

[MADem]

175. Look who's talking--this entire subthread is based on a false assertion you made! nt

[Armstead]

68. How about you stop using the word "hate"

You dont want a serious answer, You're just trolling

[DanTex]

73. The word "hate" is the correct one to describe the phenomenon here.

On the other hand your use of "trolling" is out of place.

[Armstead]

83. Why are so many people so critical of Obama and Clinton?

"Why is the animosity level so much higher."

That's an honest way to phrase the question.

Okay I wonlt use the "T" word. How's this? The use of "hate" is deliberately provocative and meant to stir up shit with an inflammatory and insulting characterization of a large goup of people with whom you happen to disagree with.

[DanTex]

87. That would be the correct way of phrasing it if there weren't hatred going around.

But there is. Clearly, IMO. You may disagree, but I can't believe you haven't seen it.

There is also some legitimate criticism, but that doesn't mean there's not a good deal of hatred also. I believe it's more than just policy-based, as evidence by the fact that Obama is very similar on policy, but doesn't get the same amount of bashing. Although he gets his share as well.

[Armstead]

97. There's "bashing" of candidates on all sides.

That's what tends to happen in political debates. And sometimes people make fun of or say disparaging things about opposing candidates...Again, part of the drill on all sides.

But that's a WHOLE LOT DIFFERENT than "hate" in the vast majority of instances. And it's not "levels of Hillary Hate or Obama hate."

For examp,e, I think President Obama's great. But he has done a few things that have really pissed me off, as legitimate ;policy doifernces. And I have criticized that here. There are a lot of peope like that, but they (we) get branded as "haters."

The casual tossing around of the word "hate" us Real Housewives of Beverly Hills crap.

[DanTex]

109. I disagree with the "both sides" thing.

The intensity of hatred against Hillary is much greater than what people say against Bernie. Actually, it's kind of ironic, because after bashing Hillary incessantly, the same people lose their heads at even mild criticism of Bernie.

There's criticism and there's hating and bashing, and I can tell the two apart.

[Armstead]

113. You're biased in your asessment

And as I've said to you at other times, you're smarter and much better than your tendency to engage in these moronic hyped-up insults at people who are critical of Clinton.

You'd be a lot more effective in your advocacy for your candidate if you didn't stoop to that kind of crap.

[DanTex]

116. Well, to me it seems that you are biased in your assessment.

You're smarter and much better than your tendency to call assessments you disagree with "moronic hyped-up insults."

[Armstead]

132. No, a moronic hyped up insult is using the word "haters and other facile insulting characterizations

You might have prompted a more useful discussion if you had posed your original question in less loaded terms than the level of "hatred" and asked in more reasonable terms.

[DanTex]

139. Well, again, I disagree. I use the word "hate" when I think it's appropriate.

For example, I would describe the way Rush Limbaugh feels about Obama as "hate". Not mere disagreement. There is such a thing as hate, and I call it as I see it.

If you are looking for "moronic hyped up insults" here, you can find them in the threads calling Hillary a corporatist war-monger and so on. Or you can look, for example, at the responses to this OP about Hillary's campaign finance proposals (yet another issue where she and Bernie agree). You'll like the part about "flatulence". Or maybe the comparison of Hillary to a junkie. Lots of good stuff in there!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251577532

[randys1]

105. I agree, I see the same thing on rightwing boards that I Often see here, as a Bernie supporter

it pisses me off that he (Bernie) is being used, often, not always, by rightwingers.

[arcane1]

90. +1

They fool no one, except for a few fools.

[Divernan]

211. And you won the jury on an alert!

On Tue Sep 8, 2015, 07:49 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Have you stopped beating your wife? Why is that?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=577790

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is nothing but an unprovoked and really nasty and unnecessary personal attack

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Sep 8, 2015, 07:55 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I disagree that this is "unprovoked." The OP is bullshit, IMO, but this post is rude. The point could have been made without the snarky question about wife beating.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It's no worse than the OP.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Not only was it provoked, but it is deserved. The OP is flame bait and got the intended result.

[SouthernProgressive]

6. The right has fomented the hate for decades and tailored it to low info voters.

The language of the right in this area resonates with them. Look no further than how many people are currently carrying Gowdys water for him. He has them hook, line and sinker.

Notice if they talk about her war vote or if they talk about emails. Those disseminating the email story are the ones I mention above. There is nothing wrong with the people I have seen here going after her on the IWR and other stances. That part isn't hate. Understand the email crew for what who they are, LIV's being easily used by the right.

[stevenleser]

7. I think at Obama-hate's height, it was about equal. It's faded because Obama is nearly gone now...

... and the same element that hated on Obama hates Hillary and for most of the same silly reasons.

[Armstead]

80. Just like those who "HATE" the left

The word "hate" is despicable and gets tossed around very fast and loose by those who see any challenge to the status quo as personal animosity and "hatred."

yes some people go overboard sometimes. But that' not confined to any one "faction."

But this "Hillary hate" and "Obama hate" has become an all purpose catchall meme for some people.

For supposedly sophisticated people, some sound a lot like the Real Housewives of Beverly Hills

[Mnpaul]

206. What are the silly reasons?

Most of the Obama(and Hillary) detractors have real reasons for their dislike of these two.

[rufus dog]

236. Nope, doesn't fit me

Obama is the best President in my lifetime and I was born in the sixties, I like him. I don't like Hillary, ponder that.

[el_bryanto]

8. Well certainly her policies are beyond reproach in the sense that criticizing her policies

will be characterized as blind and irrational hatred.

Bryant

[LondonReign2]

12. Indeed

[DanTex]

14. Her policies aren't much different from Obama's. If anything, they are further left.

[randys1]

106. I know which ones I oppose, which policies of hers do you oppose? Please explain in detail

and provide a link to her campaign to show what her stance is and how you differ.

Just curious.

[randys1]

150. I havent seen a response to my question. Which policies, exactly, do you oppose?

Please provide links to her campaign documents showing those which you oppose, thanks.

Just wondering.

[el_bryanto]

160. I'm sorry not to respond as quickly as you would like

In fairness, I am not particularly focused on the policies she is underlining right now; but her historical positions. She has opposed stricter regulation of wall street for example. She was a part of the survellance state as Secretary of State, and seemed not to have a problem with it.

Bryant

[randys1]

166. I kind thought this would be your response. In typing this, can you concede that

your opposition isnt really policy based?

You see regardless of your personal motives, I have seen this before.

I see it with Obama and now Hillary.

I know why I think it is happening. I do.

[el_bryanto]

183. Because both Hillary and Obama are moderate conservatives? nt

[djean111]

10. It seems to me that, for your purposes, not supporting Hillary - Hillary-hate.

Whatever. Do you really think the only reason someone would not support Hillary is because they hate her? Odd, to say the least.
And I would like to remind you the the GOP really does hate her.

[HassleCat]

13. It is personal

We saw this with Nixon. From a policy perspective, Nixon was not very far right. In fact, there is a decent argument to be made that he was further to the left than many of today's Democrats. But people hated him, and still hate him, with an intense fury. He had the personality somewhere between used car salesman and dead fish, and his "enemies list" paranoia is famous. Hillary Clinton suffers from somewhat the same problem. She just doesn't have that quality her husband has, that ability to quickly connect on a personal level. I get the feeling if I hung out with her for a while, I would like her on a personal level, but I don't get the immediate vibe of, "I like this person!" I know she's been working on this "likeability factor," but it just doesn't come naturally to her. Fortunately for her, none of primary opponents has the magic touch, so she's not threatened by Sanders or O'Malley in this department.

[jonno99]

41. I agree. nt

[sunnystarr]

100. So we're back to which candidate you

would rather have a beer with. That got us far in 2000. I don't care if I "like" a candidate or not. They're not coming over to visit me. I care that they hold to the basic principles of the Democratic Party in their programs and have enough education and knowledge to be the leader of the free world. I don't nitpick each and every decision but look at the overall picture, knowing that I don't have enough knowledge to understand what they are dealing with.

Each of our Democratic candidates are well qualified to be POTUS. There's no need to tear down one or the other. The rancor at DU is unbearable unless you are a Bernie supporter. Honestly I always liked Bernie but wasn't sure he could make it all the way and I'm still not sure. The most important thing to me is to support the candidate who can beat the Republicans. Even if I don't "like" that person I'm most afraid of what would happen to our country with Republicans controlling every branch of government.

Priorities are important.

[liberal N proud]

133. Nailed it!

[RufusTFirefly]

15. "Hillary hate" is like "the liberal media", "the gay agenda," and even "voter fraud"

It's a phrase designed to appeal to people with a certain type of persecution complex.

Oh, and by the way, so is "a segment on the far left." A truly laughable concept in this country, given that we basically have no "far left" to speak of and haven't for at least a generation.

My guess is that maybe 1 in 1,000,000 people could even name a single notable American on "the far left."

People who are truly on the far left view Hillary and Bernie with almost equal suspicion.

[hifiguy]

154. +1 Rufus!

[hueymahl]

156. Absolutely correct

If anything, the OP's "question" is a series of dog whistles mostly heard by hard-right repugs. It is the exact type of question you would hear on Limbaugh or hannity, designed to stir up the base. Or in more simple terms, the OP is trolling. And yes, you can have thousands of posts, and still engage in trollish behavior.

[virtualobserver]

161. more than one Hillary supporter has posted attacks on bernie using those "far left " sources

I haven't seen one in a few months, thankfully. The pure Socialists think that he has sold out.

[RufusTFirefly]

163. Socialists are impossible to please. They should be thrilled to have their man in the White House.

And yet they do nothing but carp and complain instead.

Eight years of left-winger Obama with the prospect of electing ultra liberal Hillary to replace him.

They should be pleased as punch by the prospect.

But nooooooooo! They want their Stalinist pony, and they won't stop bellyaching until they finally get a chance to ride it to political Valhalla: the mysterious and legendary Far Left.

[DonCoquixote]

16. If anything, Hillary is further left.

That is obviously wrong, and having that sort of stuff shoved down our throats is a major reason why many of us have resentment. Aye you going to tell us someone who wanted to go to war with the Syrians, who supports Keystone XL, and who supports the TPP is somehow left of Obama?

like I said, I will vote against the GOP, regardless or who the democrats put up, but as this primary IS NOT OVER, I gave every right to put as much pressure on Hillary to at least lean left, as I know she has plenty of champagne-swilling, fat check writing, wall street worship types who ARE placing pressure on her to move right.

And double that is she is stupid enough to pick a right wing dino for Veep.

[DanTex]

21. Look at what she's running on. Even in 2008, she was slightly to Obama's left.

For example, her health care proposal had the individual mandate in it and Obama's didn't. When he got into office, he adopted the individual mandate also, but before that, her proposal was stronger.

She is slightly more hawkish than Obama, true, although they are close. She didn't want to go to war with Syria, she wanted to arm rebels, which is very different. As far as TPP, obviously Obama supports that also. Keystone we don't yet know what either of them will do, Obama is about to decide and Clinton has said she wouldn't second guess him.

[bvar22]

269. You DO know that the Mandate to BUY Health Insurance...

...from For Profit vendors IS, in fact, a REPUBLICAN Plan?
Yes?

That said, Obama "borrowed" the Public Option from John Edwards when he saw how well it was polling.
He never had any intention of actually implementing it.
He ridiculed and shamed Hillary in the debates over HER Mandate,
and then took a few minutes telling America WHY a Mandate for Insurance wouldn't work.
(You remember..."If Mandates worked, we could make it a Mandate for everyone to buy a home, and that would solve homelessness" with a big "gotcha" smile.)

I wonder I Hillary was pissed when she saw that Obama had passed HER Republican Health Care Plan.

No way was the ProWAR Hillary to The Left of Obama, at least in campaign promises.

[Logical]

19. Hillary whining from the left seems more intense now also. Nt

[HooptieWagon]

20. Ooooo...straw man!

[tech3149]

22. Hillary hate from the "far left"?

Are you serious or just a troll? I consider myself to the left of the left in our political spectrum and I have no hate for Clinton, she is just the least best choice in the upcoming election. I haven't seen any serious posts here that represent what could be deemed Hillary hate. As far as real life? I live a pretty secluded life and only let politics get involved in a superficial manner. There may be a high level of dissatisfaction with Clinton as a candidate but they are anything but left wing. Point of fact, everyone I interact with on a personal basis demeans and denigrates progressive and liberals until you get down to discussing the issues and policy to correct the failures.

[DanTex]

29. Surprised you haven't seen it.

For starters, the gleeful cheering on of the RW witch hunt over the email server. And then there's the fact that every OP presenting part of her (remarkably strong and progressive) policy platform gets hit with a bunch of non sequitur attacks.

[tech3149]

58. You've got to better than that to sell me that story

I don't remember anyone "on the left" giving two squats about the so called email problem. She might have a history of being on the right side of issues over her political life
Sanders on the other hand has been absolutely consistent in his policies, not just an adult but as a high school student.
This discussion isn't about what the RW " Hillary hate" story line is,that is a given.

It's about a left wing attack of Hillary being represented as hatred of the candidate. You could probably pull up many posts here that constitute what might be considered "hatred" for Hillary but if you research the posters and analyze the content, I'm pretty sure you'll find no serious argument and a history of disruptive posts.

[LondonReign2]

32. No shit. "Hey, let's see how many lies we can pump into one thread. Won't that be fun!?!?!!"

[AtomicKitten]

26. Many Democrats are tired of the blowback from the Clintons' lack of ethical standards.

What you describe as "Obama hate" is really an unvarnished criticism of his policies over time.

[Skwmom]

60. Exactly. Though it's the Clintons' lack of ethical standards plus their corporate policies.

I won't post what I've heard from lifelong Democrats, I mean Democrats that ALWAYS get out and vote and vote a straight Democratic ticket.

And while her supporters want to tout all of the Democrats endorsing her, it is only making the whole Democratic Party look like they lack ethics (though let me assure you that this a nice way of saying what I've heard from lifelong Democrats and Independents).

[AtomicKitten]

108. Bill Clinton signed/supported the most egregious GOP-inspired bills and policy.

Policy that hurt the middle class, minorities, LGBTQ, and especially the poor. Repealing Glass-Steagall and protecting risky derivatives set in motion the crash of the economy in 2007. My biggest concern about Hillary is her neoliberal foreign policy that guarantees preemptive intervention and perpetual war. She is as bad and possibly worse than the GOP on foreign policy because hers will be deliberate and not the byproduct of abject incompetence. The Clintons have feathered their nest over the years and I look forward to their retirement from US politics.

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. The 1950s called, The HUAC would like their talking points back

[RufusTFirefly]

39. Really. It's a pity Joseph Welch isn't alive and posting to DU. n/t

[DanTex]

43. Of course, because nobody actually hates Hillary. No way!

Well, maybe just 115 people, but that's it!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025075831

[nadinbrzezinski]

47. Once again, the 1950s called for that red baiting of yours

They are envious. McCarthy in particular sees potential in you. What a waste, decades after the Wall finally fell.

[DanTex]

49. Umm, I didn't say anything remotely red-baiting. Notice the lack of the word "communist".

I'm talking about the Hillary hate on the far left. For example, that OP I linked to, and many more posts just like it.

What this has to do with the red scare is beyond me.

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. You did

the far left

That is a dishonest right wing frame originating in the HUAC. You can try to fool others though.

[DanTex]

62. Oh, I see. Yeah, the "far left" is people who are "far" to the "left".

Not sure what term you would prefer.

[RufusTFirefly]

75. For reference purposes, can you please name someone who is "far left"?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Thanks in advance!

[DanTex]

76. Ralph Nader.

[nadinbrzezinski]

84. Lmao!!!!!!

Ralph Nader is best case center left. And things like consumer protections were (still are) democratic values.

See why I said the 1950s called? It is truly a Right Wing meme that you are using. It started in the Committee and really Senator McCarthy would like it back

This is really hilarious.

[DanTex]

110. LMAO indeed. Ralph Nader is "center left". I guess it depends what planet you're on.

[nadinbrzezinski]

114. I call mine reality

But ymmv. I have met real scary actual far left people. Poor Ralph ain't even registering as a leftie.

[AgingAmerican]

123. Is he a Democrat? Does he post here? Seriously?

[RufusTFirefly]

92. Well, alrighty then. Thanks for sharing. It says a great deal about you.

By those standards, HRC would almost be far right.

[DanTex]

112. LOL. Based on some internet chart. Good times.

[Mnpaul]

200. Based on actual positions

in a 40+ question review. Not just a chart. This one actual uses real opposites(unlike the ones Hillary supporters use). They can back their reasoning with actual facts.

[LondonReign2]

220. When you are Third Way, i.e., 1980s Republicans now claiming to be Democrats

anything to the left of Bob Dole is "far left".

[Mnpaul]

225. Agreed

It's a perspective issue. The left seems far left for the conservadems. The far right Republicans do the same thing. Bush was a DINO in their minds.

[Armstead]

93. Funny the meme used to be that nader was "far right"

Y'all need to get your stories straight.

[AgingAmerican]

122. You have to go that far outside the party?

Is Ralph Nader posting OPs here that upset you?

[DanTex]

125. I was asked to name one person who is "far left" and I answered.

Ralph's not the only one, but he's a recognizable figure, so I picked him. Where are those goalposts again?

[AgingAmerican]

126. And you couldn't name a single Democrat

nt

[DanTex]

129. I wasn't asked to name a Democrat.

But that's a good point, it's not clear how many of the Hillary haters on DU are actually Democrats.

[AgingAmerican]

130. You are projecting

nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

250. Nader? Name some "far left" positions he's taken.

[Mnpaul]

212. Which of Nader's positions do you consider far left?

on what do you base this claim?

[sunnystarr]

162. Bernie Sanders

He's always been far left which is what I loved about him.

[RufusTFirefly]

165. Glad you love Bernie. But he isn't far left.

In the past, he could've easily found a home in the Franklin Roosevelt administration.

As for the present, his views would probably put him squarely at the center of the European political continuum.

[sunnystarr]

167. In the US in 2015 he's far left

and there's nothing wrong with that!

[RufusTFirefly]

171. Mebbe so, but it gives us a pretty skewed sense of what "far left" actually entails

Reminds me of an exchange I have probably garbled from a movie whose name I can't even remember:

Man: Come on! I'm just as racially tolerant as the next guy!
Friend: If the next guy is a Klansman.

[sunnystarr]

193. democratic socialist

A self-described democratic socialist he favors policies similar to those of social democratic parties in Europe, particularly those instituted by the Nordic countries.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders

In the US that's the far left.

[PowerToThePeople]

195. I agree

In a fascist nation, Bernie would be considered far left.

The great thing is, at least in my opinion, the non-fascists greatly outnumber the fascists here even though the fascist owned media would like you to think otherwise.

[RufusTFirefly]

56. I have here in my hand the names of 115 Hillary Haters!

[HooptieWagon]

63. Thread winner!

And it's amusing to me how low the Clintonistas will go in their desperation over her plummeting #s. I don't think they've bottomed out yet.

[Wilms]

135. OK. Who squealed?

[nadinbrzezinski]

141. Seems we got a stool pigeon problem.

[cherokeeprogressive]

208. He's makin' a list... checkin' it twice... gonna find out who's (you know the rest)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

251. I won't vote for her but don't hate her.

I just don't want her to be president.

[ibegurpard]

50. Yeah like he fought with them on TPP

Oh yeah...he didnt. And like he fought for a single payer healthcare solution. Oh yeah...he didnt. And like he fights to keep corporate education "reform" away from our schools...except he doesnt.
This is the sort of policy I expected from Hillary in 08 which is why I was supporting the alternative (who ended up delivering exactly what I expected from her).

[immoderate]

61. We don't want to be triangulated again.

--imm

[Capn Sunshine]

67. A significant portion is coming from Crossroads America

Via "stealth" websites set up to mislead the gullible into thinking Hillary is

1) republican lite- many on the left are eager to buy into this meme and never question sources
2) a hater of any and all things left of Bill Clinton
3) shady, sneaky, criminally prone since Arkansas-where there's smoke, there's fire

These memes are dribbled into otherwise typical leftwing posts and websites to appear couched in genuine and applicable rhetoric. many we have found are environmental sites ( the save the planet or save the whales kind of thing)

Most are contextual, and are taken out of the context and tenor of the times which things occurred.

Others imply guilt by association, like she worked with a guy who worked for Monsanto, so she's on Monsanto's take.

The result is a vitriolic food fight in the party that was formerly an unbeatable juggernaut.
Of course, no one counted on T Rump.

[LondonReign2]

148. There is no need for misleading, her record is clear

* She voted with George Bush to invade Iraq, a country that had not attacked us
* She used racists dog whistles in an attempt to defeat Obama
* She took advice from Henry Fucking Kissenger as SoS
* She's denied she is a liberal -- until it became convenient to say she is
* She was against gay marriage up until March 2013 when is suddenly became inconvenient to oppose it any longer
* She supports the TPP
* She'll tell us where she stands on Keystone once she is President
* She won't support $15/hr minimum wage
* Opposes reinstating Glass-Steagall

No need to use rightwing sources when her record says it all

[Capn Sunshine]

169. Funny, you're proving my point

your argument is couched in the terms most often used by Crossroads websites.

I'm not a big fan on her stand regarding Glass Steagall but consider the source. Her husband in the 90's presided over the final denouement of Glass- Steagal, what was left of it.

Hillary's stand is we need newer stronger regulations to accommodate the hybrid financial structures we are seeing, and having a Glass-Steagall fight will falsely give people the impression the system is fixed.

It's worth noting that Citigroup, the merger of Citibank and Travellers Insurance, took place before Glass Steagall was repealed. Yet this was the primary thrust of the original bill. keep Bank assets and insurance/Investment company assets separate.

I could pick apart every claim you make ( except the Iraq vote) but we don't want to be here all day.

[LondonReign2]

196. It is a list of what she has done and what her policies are

perhaps she should change them

[Capn Sunshine]

198. No it's a list of interpretations of things you have heard

Like I said, it's not really accurate , but as I also keep saying, Bernie's Campaign is about HIS ideas, Not Hillary's.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

243. So you don't have any idea about what a standard of proof is?

Do you really maintain that because someone uses words you claim sound like someone else's words, that therefore means that the second person is getting talking points from the first party? Words have meaning, and if you can't say anything meaningful and consistent with your words, you have nothing of value to convey. When you start a post with a title that makes a claim that you're utterly unable to prove, you've started from a real deficit--the kind that keeps thinking people from believing anything else you say.

Here's a little example for you that gives lie to your subject line claim: Hillary Clinton lied about her Bosnia trip. I didn't hear that from Crossroads GPS, or Rove, or Hannity, or any other right wing luminary. I saw it on the news when it happened, I've read commentary here since it happened. So you see, I didn't take talking points from the right wing and use them as my own. Instead, I synthesized my own opinion, and then I stated it. This probably has something to do with me not being a right wing fuckface or one of the various losers who likes to keep up with right wing utterances.

[Boomer]

72. More Hillary-hysteria when faced with criticism

I haven't seen "Hillary-hate" nearly as often as I've seen the indignant ranting of Clinton supporters when faced with valid criticism of their candidate.

I'm not far-left, and I don't give a fig about the whole email-server nonsense. I distrust Clinton because of her close ties to Wall Street and her support of numerous issues -- from the Iraq War to the Keystone Pipeline -- that I oppose.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

77. I'm a "leftist" and I don't "hate" Hillary. I just don't want her as president.

Holding her accountable and scrutinizing her history isn't "bashing".

"If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen." Harry Truman

[nichomachus]

99. You have to understand

In Hillary World there are only two states -- fawning admiration and "hate."

Anyone who doesn't praise Hillary loud and often enough is a "hater."

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

104. Yep. Similar to the way that a parent reacts when you don't agree that their baby is cute or smart.

[RufusTFirefly]

155. Admit it, nicho! Karl Rove paid you to post that.

[Mnpaul]

215. Sounds conservative to me

they see everything as a black/white issue with no gray areas in between.

[applegrove]

78. GOP trolls ginning up hatred and anti hillary talking points.

[AgingAmerican]

94. ANYTHING

but the issues.

[DanTex]

107. Interestingly, one of the OPs that brought this to mind was about Hillary's proposals for

campaign finance reform.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=577532

The substance, was of course, ignored by the Hillary haters who proceeded directly to bashing. This idea that Hillary haters care about issues is a myth.

[BlueCaliDem]

117. Oh, they say they care "about the issues" but it's been clear for some time that the ONLY

issues they care about are the issues of real Democrats running for the Democratic Party nomination. And that's about all.

[AgingAmerican]

118. How many issues based OPs have you posted lately?

All the OPs I see you post bash either Sanders or his supporters, or cry about critique of Clinton.

[DanTex]

120. You have selective memory. My last OP in this forum:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251565345

[AgingAmerican]

146. 80% of the OPs I have seen you post

Bash Sanders or his supporters. You are projecting.

[ibegurpard]

186. Because people don't believe her

Nowhere in her record has she been a vocal and active advocate for campaign reform. Why should we believe her now with the people funding her campaign? That is just ludicrous and betrays the incredible arrogance with which political consultants view the general public.

[DanTex]

197. Of course Hillary haters don't believe her. That's my point.

It doesn't matter that she co-sponsored McCain Feingold (which is what CU partially overturned) or that she's been consistently opposed to CU. Hillary haters pretend to care about "issues", but in the end it's just about bashing Hillary.

[mahina]

119. I don't know anybody who hates her.

Red. Herring.

[SidDithers]

121. DU rec...nt

Sid

[guillaumeb]

124. "seems', "I think" and the basic tenor of the post makes it clear that your opinion,

so far unsupported by any evidence, is that the mythical far left in the US hates HRC for personal reasons.

The first problem is defining what you consider to be the far left. Given that the two major US parties are center right and far right, there is no real left, much less a far left, on the national stage. Both the Democrats and Republicans are corporate owned entities. Money is the real power in the US, and both parties bow down to money interests.

If there were two actual different parties perhaps the percentage of people who actually vote would not be so pathetically low.

But as to "Hillary-hate from the far left ", your term, perhaps you are equating policy disagreement with personal hatred? Unless or until you can provide actual examples of such hatred I see no reason for your post. Except as a way of framing any opponents of HRC as being motivated by personal hatred.

[Ron Green]

127. Far left? THE FAR LEFT?

What the hell does that mean? Why are you posting on a "Democratic Underground" site about people on the "far left?"

You know what? I'm just interested in a candidate who tells the truth, who's not playing the same stupid game that's brought us to this ridiculous point.

[DanTex]

134. I'm posting on DU about the far left because the far left has contempt for most Democrats,

including not only Hillary Clinton, likely to be the nominee in 2016, but also Obama, two-term Democratic president and the best president since at least LBJ if not FDR.

If this were far-left-underground, a post like this might be out of place.

[Ron Green]

147. I supported Obama. I campaigned for him. I WAS ON THE BALLOT with Barack Obama

in 2012, as a Democrat. I defended him at door after door, meeting after meeting, from those who called him a Socialist as well as those who wondered what happened to the "public option."

Not only couldn't I get help in my own campaign from his people, I couldn't get much support from statewide Dems busy triangulating my uphill race in a Republican district.

I will say that PBO is a fine guy with a great family and that history will treat him well; but he is the biggest disappointment as a President since... well, since Bill Clinton.

And you know - it's not about left and right. That's the language of fools. It's about vital political engagement vs. bought media and candidates. And THAT is where I wish you would change sides.

[RufusTFirefly]

172. "it's not about left and right. That's the language of fools. It's about vital political engagement.

Excellent point, Ron!

I'm sorry that PBO and the Oregon Dems left you high and dry. I'm guessing you could probably start a support group with people in Wisconsin who felt similarly abandoned following their courageous stand against Scott Walker.

The fact that the President's famous "comfortable shoes" remain unused and unscuffed speaks volumes about his commitment to what used to be considered core Democratic values.

[ibegurpard]

181. Don't forget Arkansas

[JoePhilly]

128. After being wrong about Obama for 6+ years ...

... they are doubling down on Hillary.

The loudest anti-Hillary folks today are the same folks who have been making failed predictions about Obama's evil plan to kill us all for over 6 years.

They could not get him primaried in 2012, and its clear he has no intention of being a lame duck, or giving in to the GOP now. They hate that. They were so sure he'd give the GOP everything they wanted once he won re-election.

They were wrong, and they are angry. But maybe this was part of Obama's secret plan ... to NOT do all those evil things ... so Hillary could do them later!!!!

Yeah!!! That's it!

[betsuni]

216. "They were wrong, and they are angry" -- yes, this.

After all these years, Obama didn't turn out to be the devil they were convinced he was so Hillary MUST be that devil. The only evidence I see of a devil is the lust of some to see one. Also, their reading comprehension is poor.

[hifiguy]

131. My take is fairly simple.

Obama promised change and little of significance did change - the banksters and plutocrats are more powerful than ever, neo-liberal economics is more firmly entrenched than ever, the war and surveillance machines grind on just as they did under His Chimperial Highness. The economy is still shitty for many people. The status quo is, to put it simply, crappy.

HRH promises more of the same.

It is time for REAL change, not the appearance of change.

[840high]

138. Yep. Firthermore I don't

hate Hillary - just ready for honest change.

[DanTex]

143. Not sure how you can argue that nothing has changed...

Still a lot more to fix, but things are much, much better.

[hifiguy]

151. I haven't taken the government-issued unemployment figures

as anything but BS since the Reagan years.

And neoliberalism and the surveillance/war state continue their rampage unabated.

[PowerToThePeople]

177. Unemployment numbers

I lost my job after the crash and was unemployed nearly three years.

I DO have a full time job now, again.

If I work 7 days a week, 32 hours of overtime a paycheck, I take home almost as much as my unemployment check was. It is not a minimum wage job. It is about 150% mininum wage and above the poverty line here. Luckily, it is still low enough to qualify for extended medicaid under Obama care.

I do not know how people can live for so little. Given enough time, I know I will end up homeless or dead from overwork unless I can land a living wage job again.

[MADem]

136. I think some (not ALL, mind you--SOME) of the "far lefties" are not "far lefties" at all.

I think some are Randies, some are Trumpies, and some are trolls and disruptors. I think they do a great job of disrupting, shit-stirring, obfuscating, saying "mean things" (often of a sexist nature) and reducing arguments to Fauxsnooze - style sound bites.

Most Democrats at least listen to the issues, understand the policy points, and consider those aspects during campaign season. They're thoughtful, not rude, not snarky, not nasty...at least when left to their own devices. When they get a few troublemakers in the mix to stir 'em up, though, they sometimes lose their way. It's a shame. Makes the whole "issues debate" kind of suck.

[Bobbie Jo]

214. Da ding ding ding

We have a winner.


I concur with your assessment.

[betsuni]

219. And their snark isn't funny because it isn't based on anything true.

The mean rude things -- always the same, boring. Is it too much to ask the trolls and disruptors for a bit more creativity when insulting someone?

[MADem]

222. Really. The same old insults in the same old way.... nt

[DanTex]

142. LOL. Thanks for making my point.

[stevenleser]

145. Seriously. That person couldn't have made your point for you any better if they tried. nt

[Romulox]

153. Your utter inability to refute the post didn't slip past anyone's attention. nt

[arcane1]

182. No surprise there! That thread is like Kryptonite to Clinton supporters.

That's why these pseudo-meta threads pop up so often: stir up a little in-fighting to distract and dilute

[KamaAina]

149. The warmongering? C Street?

[Tommy2Tone]

157. Most of the hate is coming from non Democrats

[bvar22]

164. Who are these "Far Lefties" of which you speak?

because that is a crazy, but persistent myth on DU and in the USA.
Are you using a mythological creature to support your position?

I don't know anyone on DU who has called for the confiscation of all private property, and having the workers divided into agricultural collectives, so WHO is this "Far Left" of which you speak?

Are you talking about the mainstream/center FDR/LBJ Liberal Democrats?
...because that is as Far Left as I can find on DU, AND
I am one of those. I JOINED the Democratic Party in 1966 BECAUSE of the following Democratic Party Values and Goals.

FDR Economic Bill of Rights

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be[font size=3] established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.[/font]

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

[font size=3]America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens.[/font]

Please note that the above are stipulated as Basic Human RIGHTS to be protected by our government,
and NOT as COMMODITIES to be SOLD to Americans by For Profit Corporations.


There was a time when voting FOR The Democrat was voting FOR the above values.
Sadly, this is no longer true.

So....are the above who you are broad brushing as "The Far Left",
because it is mainstream/center as far as I am concerned.

[Phlem]

168. You know,

Last edited Tue Sep 8, 2015, 10:57 PM - Edit history (1)

the "professional left" that Obama threw under the bus on Fox news knowing full well that his action would pull other Dems right.

We're still here, it's just someone has alienated us. I wonder who might that be?

I thought Communism was far left, apparently being a liberal qualifies too? Sheeple, what are ya gonna do?

[jfern]

173. Hillary is terrible on the issues like her husband

Obama leaves much to be desired, but is somewhat better on the issues. Anyone who thinks a peace agreement with Iran would have happened under a Hillary administration is insane.

[NYCButterfinger]

232. If she's terrible on the issues, why was Clinton so popular as president?

It is clear that some of Clinton's policies from 1993 to 2001 worked. He had to cooperate with the Gingrich/Lott/Hastert GOP Congress; he had no other choice. Daschle and Gephardt should have ran better messaging campaigns in the '90's.

[jfern]

233. He had charisma, Hillary doesn't

And things like DADT, DOMA, and repealling Glass Steagall have become more obviously bad since then. DADT seemed like the stupidest thing ever at the time to me, but I wasn't exactly the normal American.

[PowerToThePeople]

178. Patriot act, AUMF, TPP.

She stands in support of every policy that any Democratic member should stand firmly against.

[Vinca]

185. You might say the same thing about Bernie-hate.

Clinton supporters don't have halos above their heads on this one.

[artislife]

189. He is way more likable.

He also was the most openly attacked presidents in history. We don't see his failures as lack of trying or connecting. And maybe for me, seeing another minority make it just makes him a hero. He did it all on his own and with the Goodwill of lots of people.

[TransitJohn]

201. "Hate"? "Far left"?

Smells like something stinky, lol.

[wendylaroux]

205. give it a rest

[orpupilofnature57]

207. For the same reasons the President is an enabler of the 1%, she is untrustworthy .

[Doingto]

209. She's a southerner

They can't stand southerners.

[SMC22307]

228. Ah, yes, don't you just love the Old South grandeur of...

Chicago?

[demmiblue]

213. If people who value/uphold traditional Democratic values are far left...

where does that leave Hillary Clinton on the political spectrum?

[Veritas48]

218. The media's manipulation and distortions of Hillary Clinton

http://www.hillarymen.com has great articles on this subject- Here's one that helps to explain how the right has feed the media on left and they bought it hook, line & sinker-

http://www.hillarymen.com/latest/great-american-brainwash

Also a video of a 1994 interview with Larry King when he asks her where she thinks the anger towards her comes from:
http://www.tubechop.com/watch/6831137

Another clip from the same interview Larry King discusses a direct front page lie (1994!) about Hillary- so it's not a new phenomenon - Right from the start - a woman with brains, strong values and power- very scary apparently.

http://www.tubechop.com/watch/6831200

[ericson00]

224. because they still resent that it took moderates like the Clintons

to bring Democrats states like CA, NJ, MI, IL, MD, DE, NH, VT, NM, ME, CT, and PA, which all voted GOP at least 4 times from 1968-1988 (many of them 6 times for 6). They resent that it took "selling out" on welfare and crime, even tho those two issues ruined the Democratic Party from 1968-1988. It was the Clintons who brought the suburbs to Democratic voting. They just forget it when they think about Obama because Obama played off Clinton's electoral college achievements.

[Scootaloo]

226. Ah yes, that diabolical Hillary hate

Like... pointing out her actual record.

Let me know when we say half the shit that Camp Windsock has been throwing out at Bernie these last four months.

[Vattel]

229. Your question is tendenciously framed, of course.

But setting that aside, many on the left think that Obama is in many important ways a better person than Clinton. Two examples: All politicians lie, but Clinton is (rightly in my view) perceived to be deeply dishonest, while Obama is perceived to be relatively honest. Clinton is also (rightly I think) perceived as being much less concerned about the deaths of innocent bystanders in war than Obama.

Among other things, the left loves the honesty of Sanders and the left loves his appreciation of the moral costs of war. Obama is closer to Sanders in those respects. Next to Bernie, Hillary looks pretty morally deficient in several respects that matter to those on the left.

[rufus dog]

234. I like Obama, dislike Hillary, and as per the online test match best with Bernie

So I would think I am far left, who doesn't hate Hillary, but don't like her.

[Fawke Em]

246. Because I'm not sexist or racist and she still sucks. eom

[McCamy Taylor]

247. Racism is unacceptable (in the left), sexism is still the status quo.

People on the left are afraid to criticize Obama's centrist policies for fear of sounding racist. They are not afraid of criticizing Clinton's centrist policies, because sexism is still widely tolerated. And so, criticism of Clinton becomes their way of staying ideologically "pure" while avoiding accusations of racism.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

253. I criticized Obama and voted for a woman for president in 2012.

How about you?

[Fumesucker]

254. Welcome to DU!

Clearly you are new here if you think "the far left" are afraid to criticize Obama's centrist policies....

[Beacool]

285. You hit the nail on the head.

That's the one lesson I got from the 2008 election. The Left can be just as sexist as the Right. I stopped watching MSNBC around that time, they were no better than FOX.

[eridani]

261. The "far left" is just a bunch of progressive policy junkies who don't care about personalities

The "far left' loves the Iran deal and hates TPP. That has nothing to do with Obama's personality.

The "far left" thinks the DREAM Act and standing up for reproductive rights are good things, but that TPP, endless war, perpetuating the War on Some Drugs, etc are bad things. They do not give a shit about Benghazi. None of this has to do with Clinton's personality.

[Gothmog]

262. The Hillary bashing is getting old

[JackInGreen]

266. Typical third way hyperbole

Criticism and objection = hate
Ya'll sound more rightwing with every passing whine.

[AgingAmerican]

270. Another 'no link' OP projecting onto Sanders supporters

The lack of self awareness is puzzling.

[marmar]

275. Hillary hate = Any type of Hillary criticism

These type of OPs are sounding increasingly desperate.

[Gothmog]

276. I agree that the intensity is indeed greater

[marlakay]

277. I don't hate her but I lost respect for her a long time ago

Staying in her marriage not after just one affair of Bill's but many showed me it was a sham and basically they are friends and he is helping her campaign.

I just think it sends the wrong message to women, it says let your guy go to bed with anyone he wants and just take it.

My ex cheated on me around the time of the intern thing so yes it affected me more as I lost trust then split up.

I would have admired Hillary more if she went out on her own.

[Beacool]

280. Her marriage, her decision. Not yours to make.

What you did in your marriage was your business, the same goes for her.

Live and let live.......

[marlakay]

283. Of course it was her decision

Just like all the other decisions she has made and its up to every one of us as voters if the candidates values match our own.

[Chan790]

281. " If anything, Hillary is further left."--Because this isn't actually true.

Hillary is actually probably the most-rightward major Democratic candidate to have been viable in seeking the Democratic nomination for the Presidency in my lifetime. Even Bill is more liberal than Hillary if we consider policy to be worth a lot and lip-service to be worth virtually nothing. (She talks a good game for a hawkish neo-liberal who embraces fiscally-conservative measures, is anti-regulation and pro-Wall St.) Only two other major politicians I can think of in the Democratic party have managed to verbally embrace progressive values while consistently voting and pursuing policies that were right-wing...Joe Lieberman and Joe Manchin. That's not good company; those right there are two Democrats that we should have thrown out of the tent by their ass-flaps years ago. The same with Hillary. I've said it before and meant it...I have no use for Hillary or her supporters. I hope when she loses they all realize they need to never feel entitled to an opinion again and fall in line.

The short answer is that Hillary is about as far to the left as Richard Nixon...it's just that our standards have dropped (I don't think she or Bill would have been given the time-of-day on a national stage before we suffered 12 years of GOP rule under Reagan and Pappy Bush) and the GOP has gone so buck-nutty crazy that she just seems progressive compared to the likes of Cruz and Huckabee. Don't be fooled, Hillary isn't even a moderate...she's a conservative Democrat.

We need to suffocate conservative Democrats out of existence, not nominate them for President.

[Hollingsworth]

282. I've seen a lot of unsupported Obama hate

but usually there was no there there in the end, just ugly rumors and such. In my view he is probably the most sincere President possible under circumstances, considering the job he has and what mazes he has to find a way through. It's a really horrible job and I don't know why a good person would want it.

Hillary has some major problems with her history of doings and sayings that are recorded in stone and not very attractive to left democrats. We should be leaning more left and not more right? That disturbs me very much how that line is getting faded more into the right spectrum.

For every action there is a reaction. Bernie Sanders is the reaction.

[slipslidingaway]

284. There is no hate, disagreement yes, deal with it and try to confuse the issues. n/t