2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumTrayvon Martin's mother endorses Clinton for president
Last edited Mon Jan 11, 2016, 03:26 PM - Edit history (1)
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/11/politics/hillary-clinton-trayvon-martin-sybrina-fulton-endorsement/index.htmlClinton and Fulton met in November 2015 in Chicago during the Democratic front-runner's meeting with mothers of children who died in shootings or at the hands of law enforcement. The group, according to attendees, discussed Clinton's criminal justice and gun control plans and the mothers presented the candidate with ideas on how to tackle the issue of police brutality.
The endorsement comes at an important time for Clinton: Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is enjoying a slight surge in Iowa and New Hampshire polls, which Clinton's campaign is trying to blunt by questioning his more conservative record on gun control. Fulton doesn't mention Sanders in her editorial.
With so many of our children's lives on the line or taken, we simply can't afford to elect a Republican who refuses to even acknowledge the problem of senseless gun violence. The rising generation of our young people need a President who will stand up to inaction from Republicans and indifference from the NRA," Fulton writes in a CNN Opinion piece about the endorsement. "I believe that person is Hillary Clinton."
Fulton writes that meeting Clinton in November helped cement her endorsement, primarily because the candidate listened to the group's ideas on guns and criminal justice reform.
msrizzo
(796 posts)Stronger than I could be under the circumstances. Much respect to her.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Thank you for that!
mcar
(42,372 posts)I wonder if she will be vilified like Gabby Giffords is for her endorsement.
MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)Empowerer
(3,900 posts)BainsBane
(53,066 posts)She's been through enough grief already.
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)Are you kidding?
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)One of DUs most prolific posters posted quite the infamous thread about it.
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)Take a look at the responses at:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251992133
And that's just one of them. I'd point out specific numbers to look at, but I'm not keen to give my stalkers a freebie hide.
I will concede right upfront, there's some GREAT ones by Bernie supporters as well in there, but there's some downright disgusting ones as well. Some of the things said at the link in the OP is likewise disgusting.
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)supporters at such a low bar. We're progressives. You make us out to be nazis
Empowerer
(3,900 posts)If you had, you could hardly be offended by the concern.
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)Not the grieving mother of a boy who was shot dead in cold blood by a racist. Jeez. I would never attack her. I guess I can't speak for other people but time will tell.
Empowerer
(3,900 posts)But your co-supporters have not demonstrated the same principles that you espouse. Let's hope, at least in this case, they hold their fire for the reasons you say.
Let's hope you are a good influence on them.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Bernie supporters did that as soon as they destroyed John Lewis' FB page. When a Bernie supporter tells someone as wonderful as Gabby Giffords that she is lower than a dog for supporting Hillary, I say that is a pretty low bar.
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)no matter who they support.
Arkana
(24,347 posts)because the organization didn't endorse their guy.
I can't imagine why we'd think Bernie supporters might react negatively to this situation, can you?
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)There is a difference between an organization and the grieving mother of a son who was murdered by a racist (rip)
uponit7771
(90,364 posts)liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)PP is a political organization not the mother of a murdered child.
Number23
(24,544 posts)request there.
BainsBane
(53,066 posts)What I find offensive is when people join with the right-wing anti-choice forces in an effort to defund Planned Parenthood. I find it offensive that over fifty "progressives" would recommend a thread featuring anti-choice sources and arguments against women's right to reproductive freedom and hence equality all because it goes to what they clearly see as the more important goal of attacking Hillary Clinton. So by all means, you be offended that I hope that Sabryna Fulton isn't treated like Cecile Richards and every other public figure that has dared to exercise their democratic rights independently of the control of self-described "progressives." I think Ms. Fulton has been through enough and doesn't deserve to be harassed.
You be offended by that all you want. What I find offensive is how people have been treated and that some justify any and everything through invoking the term "progressive," now sullied beyond recognition. Call those people whatever you want. It's their actions that determine who they are.
BainsBane
(53,066 posts)right now, just as has been done to every other publicly known person who has endorsed Clinton.
But you are offended that I hoped that in this one instance they would not sink so low.
Response to BainsBane (Reply #6)
Name removed Message auto-removed
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)ETA. Oh, wait. I get it. Slow on the uptake today.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)She must be an amazingly strong person. It hurts to know the additional hate that is about to be directed toward her.
Thank you for being so strong and outspoken Ms. Fulton.
I think all of our hearts are sinking a little right now while at the same time being inspired by her strength.
BainsBane
(53,066 posts)but it seems to happen to every public figure and organization.
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)Thank you, Ms Fulton.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)I fear, though, that some will. Ugh!
Qutzupalotl
(14,327 posts)KingFlorez
(12,689 posts)She disrespected the prophet and needs to be put in her place.
riversedge
(70,299 posts)uponit7771
(90,364 posts)Hulk
(6,699 posts)I just don't get why a person's endorsement is "big news". I feel like we are stuck in this "feeding frenzy" during these EIGHTEEN month election cycles, where we are force fed any scrap of information, however remotely connected, to fill the lack of actual news that might be of some value to our everyday life. In other words, I couldn't care less WHO endorses who, or what somebody's kid/dog/neighbor did to someone/thing.
It's time to get real. Bernie is talking information that is and will affect our lives. Hillary is trying to do the same, but she is perhaps just now focusing on issues she hasn't paid attention to, nor will pay attention to, once the election cycle is over. I won't even go into what "the clown car" is focusing on.
Sweet Jesus!.....how many more months of this absolute circus do we have to endure this trivia garbage injection???
Why have we heard dozens of times about Killer Mike? Why did we not simply hear that Susan Sarandon supported Sanders, which is her right entirely, but that she had to insult women in the process by insisting we are "voting with our vaginas"?
Sabryna Fulton's endorsement is about a very real issue--gun violence--the kind that took her son's life. That issue matters a hell of a lot to me. Perhaps if you had actually read the article you would have understood that it is indeed about that issue, as well as racial justice. Unfortunately, you chose to ignore that in favor of your pronouncement that Fulton's public statements were "trivia garbage injection."
There are a lot of crap threads on DU. That you chose to be rude about Sabryna Fulton's endorsement rather than any of those is unfortunate.
Uponthegears
(1,499 posts)the poor victimized Hillary supporters, but THIS Bernie supporter will tell you that Sybrina Fulton's endorsement is a thousand times more important (and more legitimate) that the Planned Parenthood endorsement.
Regardless of who wins the general election, PP cannot put themselves in a position where they can be portrayed as progressive, or for that matter, politically-driven at all. They are under fire from Red State legislatures all across the country just for the invaluable work they do and to also have to fend off attacks for being "leftist" is just too much. Indeed, their endorsement was very eloquently structured around the battles they (and Hillary and Bernie) are already fighting. That being said, I wish they would have remained silent because the difference between Bernie and Hillary would not even allow light to pass through it and I think there are other ways to fight the misogynistic cabal that is the TeaOP.
Ms. Fulton is another matter entirely. Her future does not depend on not PO-ing Teapots. She is free to speak from her heart. I may disagree with her, BUT she is not some corporate stooge (or someone whose neck is under the blade of corporate stooges). She is one of us.
I'd say Ms. Fulton is not only Hillary's best and most legitimate endorsement, she is so by far and away.
Okay . . . now you can go back and whine about how unfairly you've been treated by those of us that expect you to defend your candidate's stance on ISSUES instead of attacking SOME Bernie supporters.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Uponthegears
(1,499 posts)from the Hillary side. More outright distortion. More "We will do ANYTHING to avoid talking about the issues."
The "rest of the Bernie supporters" are doing no such thing. In fact, one of your fellow travelers tried to make that point by linking to the OP about the PP backlash and the number of posts from DU Bernie supporters saying they would still donate to PP were so overwhelming that your colleague had to add something to the effect "Yes, I know a lot of Bernie supporters are still supportive of PP, BUT, whine, whine, whine, there are a FEW that are just horrible." By and large, we have stuck by PP.
Here is a FACT. Hillary AND HER SUPPORTERS have refused to discuss ANY of the policy differences they have with Senator Sanders. Part of this was IN THE PAST due to the (okay, I admit it, understandable) arrogance of being a candidate with a big lead. The rest, however, is because the Third Way can't defend their utter and complete dedication to being Rockefeller Republican corporatists. When they talk about their policies, they LOSE Democrats and (regardless of whether their approach is defensible vis a vis attracting would-be GOPers in the general election -- it isn't) THAT is a recipe for losing a DEMOCRATIC primary.
Now go back to supporting the TPP, Citizens United, the killers of Michael Brown, Tamir Rice, etc. (not ONE of which issues Hillary will talk about except in passing) and telling yourself you are the "real" Democrats.
Response to BainsBane (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed