This has been Obama hate week over here

[Colobo]

Who's next? I think we need to give the second tier guys a chance to get some hate. :sarcasm:

[More Than A Feeling]

1. ....

RICHARDSON! I hate him so much!
...
Kidding! Just trying to get into the spirit of things.

[JI7]

2. the Obama hate is turning me off to others

[BlueIris]

3. Same here.

[illinoisprogressive]

4. agreed. If the hillarybots would quit being so hateful maybe things would cool off

[BlueIris]

5. You posted it, I didn't.

[MonkeyFunk]

8. Yeah

cuz nobody's ever hateful toward Clinton.

:eyes:

What a stupid complaint.

[William769]

21. Pot meet kettle.

[SaveElmer]

38. Look in a mirror....you are one of the reasons they are being posted...

You and a few other Obama supporters who apparently feel the only way to support your guy is to continually and releatedly post false and misleading negative stories about Hillary...usually which have been debunked time and time again...

I daresay the posts have been less directed at Obama, and more to some of his supporters...

[BlueIris]

6. And just where is the hate for Biden, by the way?

If we're going to get hateful, lay the hate where it belongs, please. Cheap hack.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

7. Biden is a good man nt

[Bullet1987]

9. A large portion of the trollish hate is coming from the Clinton supporters

or people who don't like Obama because he's not Liberal enough. There's still a large portion of active members who like Obama on this site.

[illinoisprogressive]

10. when they start their garbage I just feel the need to hit back.

either posting a bunch of pro obama or anti hillary posts in return.
I would not post anti hillary articles until they began their hate campaign recently.

[MonkeyFunk]

11. oh geez

"they started it!"

How about just posting stuff that's true and relevant and stop all the silly sniping?

[William769]

24. Boy I'm glad I'm wearing my boots.

Because it's getting deep in here.

[Ethelk2044]

12. I agree

[Nedsdag]

42. They dislike him because he threw a monkey wrench

into their grand scheme of things. No more waltz to the nomination. Now she has to earn it. Only time will tell.

[LBJDemocrat]

29. Agreed nt

[wyldwolf]

13. The Obamanians are the Deaniacs of 2008 - they can slam anyone they want...but..

..as soon as Obama gets slammed, they whine about it.

[dsc]

16. We Deaniacs are the largest group of undecided people on DU

You might, just might, want to stop calling us names. You do this an awful lot and frankly make it damn hard to listen to your message. For the record I am leaning toward Richardson but am disturbed by his less that great performances in interviews and debates with Hillary as a distinct possiblity. But again your constant name calling of people who had the termerity to support Dean makes it very hard to listen to anything else you say.

[wyldwolf]

18. Saying "Deaniac" is calling you names? Deaniacs use that term themselves!

...and you didn't even speak to the point I raised. In 2004, Deaniacs were so sure Dean was the messiah, any criticism of him was met with unending howls - even though they felt it their natural duty to tear down everyone else.

[dsc]

19. You have a star

go ahead search. Find one single solitary thread, started by me, not someone else, but me, where I tear down a candidate. Did some Dean people go over the line, yes? But I want you to find a thread by me that crosses the line.

[wyldwolf]

25. yes I do, and why do you presume when I post, I'm directing my post at YOU?

believe it or not, your name doesn't cross my mind until you respond to a post of mine.

[dsc]

27. because you said Deaniacs

not some Deaniacs, not most Deaniacs, but Deaniacs which means all Deaniacs. So again I ask for one, just one single, solitary example of my having done it or failing that an apology for saying ALL Deaniacs do.

[wyldwolf]

28. If I said "people like peanut butter," you would think I meant "ALL people."

:eyes:

And just outta curiosity, why does the thread have to have been started by you to qualify for you tearing down a candidate? Interesting little qualifier you put there.

But if you insist:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=514301

..and, for the record, here is an example of your history in Wes Clark:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=134054&mesg_id=134129

These two popped up first. Now, you're going to rationalize these and tell me they don't qualify?

[dsc]

31. I'll deal with the second link first

My statement was true, truely reported his words, and was stated as an opinion in regards to trust. If you can find a thread where I criticised such behavior in regards to Dean I would love to see it. I did have a problem with lying about Dean's record. I didn't lie about either Clark's record, nor his stated reason for having voted for Bush.

As to the first one I will post the whole text and let the people here judge.

Four years ago this month my dad took me on a little drive. He told me many things I didn't want to hear. Some of them made me angry. It would have been easier for him to tell me what I wanted to hear. Instead he told me what I needed to hear. This month I celebrated 4 years of sobriety.

It would be much, much, much easier and much, much, much more pleasant for me to tell you what you want to hear. But Kerry is our only nominee. Failure is not an option. Our country needs Bush to lose at least as much as I needed to stop drinking. Thus I will continue to tell you what you need to hear, and not necessarily what you want to hear.

By any measure things are not going all that well. Kerry is doing well in the area of raising money. That is it. Time is running out for him to fix this. Bush is organizing like mad, as another poster has pointed out. In states like mine the only advantage we tend to have is organization and grassroots. I see even that advantage slipping away.

We have had a few solid weeks of very bad news for Bush. The 9/11 Commission has been bad for Bush, the war has been bad for Bush, Richard Clark has been bad for Bush, the economy has been bad for Bush, yet Kerry actually lost ground during this time. This is down right scary. As Bush's approval drops to around 50%, Kerry isn't gaining.

All of the following are problems. Kerry's ads are not very good. The people who Kerry is targetting, the elusive swing voters, aren't impressed. The ads don't have enough information. The positive ads took too long to appear. Some of this is MoveOn's and the Media Fund's fault. Their ads aren't that great either. I have seen virtually every ad put up as I get TV out of both Erie PA and Cleveland OH. Bush's ads are substantially better than either Kerry's or our idependent groups. This can't go on. This needs fixed.

There appears to be no effort at all by this campaign to help traditional Democratic groups spread the message. Time and again I have been at meeting of people discussing increasing voter turnout in Cleveland (mostly gay but some straight too) and time and again, there has been no Kerry presence. No Kerry presence at the Stonewall Democrats. No Kerry presence at the HRC MeetUP. No Kerry presence at DFA meetings. Many Ohioans are still very bitter over Gore not campaigning here in October (a defensible decision which in hindsight was wrong). The base needs to know it won't happen again. People are really beginning to wonder what is up.

Kerry isn't making the sale. I know alot of marginal type voters. And many of them are very anti war. Many of them are certain Bush is a liar. Many of them want the man out. But, unlike us, they are not so anti Bush that just anyone will do. They need to know that the person they are choosing will be better (or at least have a reasonable belief he is). Kerry isn't making that cut. Bush still gets a lot of credit from these people for his handling of 9/11. Many are honestly afraid that Kerry wouldn't have done as well. He needs to make that sale.

You are welcome to take the above as the bitter ramblings of a Dean supporter if that is what you wish to do. Just like I could have taken what my dad said as the angry ramblings of someone who I had let down. I thank God every day I didn't do that. I pray to God now that the people around Kerry don't do it now. Just like I wouldn't be sober now had I stayed in denial, Kerry will not win if his campaign stays in denial now. It is as simple as that.

I won't offer any rationalizations as you call them. Instead I will let the above words speak for themselves in their entirety.

editted to correct typo

[wyldwolf]

32. weak

My statement was true, truely reported his words, and was stated as an opinion in regards to trust.

So if one is expressing their negative opinion based on actual actions of a candidate, it doesn't qualify as "tearing down?" C'mon! That is laughable! That gives a pass to virtually all tearing down of candidates.

As to the first one I will post the whole text and let the people here judge.

So if you write it in flowering, flowing language, sprinkle it with anecdotal stories about dear old dad, and include the language your group of supporters love to hear (help traditional Democratic groups spread the message :eyes: ) it doesn't qualify as tearing down.

I'm quite sure, short of pulling out a post where you just call someone a poopyhead, you can rationalize and spin every tearing down of candidates you've ever done.

[dsc]

33. I don't think accurate reports of a candidate are tearing down

certainly not when it refers to something that is undeniably relevent and true. Wes voted for Republicans in 1988 and in 1984 and in 1980. He gave an explanation for having done so. I accurately reported both the facts and his explanation. Then I said why I felt neither were good enough in a direct response to a post about that record. I could see if I posted it where it wasn't relevent or posted it as a stand alone thread. I did neither.

The second I will stand behind as constructive criticism which, it should be noted, it was taken as by a decent number of Kerry supporters.

[wyldwolf]

35. that's what this thread is about! Nothing written about Obama written here has been inaccurate!

[dsc]

36. Your post was about calling Dean supporters hypocrites

for posting tear down threads about candidates and complaining about ones posted about Dean. You have still not shown me engaging in that behavior. I admit you don't use the word hypocrite but the meaning is clear.

On edit do you find this crap true?

Barack Obama is the antithesis of Black Power, a man who promises with every word he speaks, with every nuance of phrase and body language, and through his voting record as a U.S. Senator, that he personifies the definitive end of Black organized struggle in the United States - a unilateral surrender to white racism. This is his appeal to the white masses: that they will no longer be challenged to confront history, or to relinquish privilege in the present.

Obama's siren song to African Americans is of an entirely different nature. He does not have to sing it; we provide the music, ourselves. The lyrics and melody are actually alien to Obama, but he has heard them off and on in his strange sojourn through life, and senses their power to sway us. He understands that most of us will demand nothing from him - not even elemental allegiance. His "Black" flank, he knows, is covered, while his white "progressive" flank is neutralized and confused by Black failure to recoil at his betrayals of the most basic elements of social democracy. The field is wide open to the greatest opportunist to emerge from melanin-rich ranks in the New Millennium.

end of quote

This text comes from an article posted in a thread on the front page of this forum.

[wyldwolf]

40. and I stand by it.

[dsc]

41. so that crap about Obama

you stand by it? Wow, just wow.

[Ethelk2044]

43. Better get your boots on it is getting thick

[TankLV]

45. I've noticed that too...

from the beginning...

But I'd do it in reference to the Kerrybots - they are the worst IMO...

[Adelante]

14. As a neutral observer, I can report

The hate this week has been about equally spread over the two candidates by their respective supporters.

[TreasonousBastard]

15. Give it time...

anyone gets a blip in the polls is up for a good serving of bile.

That's the way it works around here in primary season-- and we've got a long way to go.

[Alamom]

17. As opposed to Hate Hillary all the time, 24/7, every week, every month &

spinning every tiny thing that's done or said regarding Clinton so it's negative.

For as long as I can remember and I've been here much longer than my current profile states, there has been sheer hatred toward Senator and President Clinton.........long before she declared her run.


I've seen stories spun, outright lies and members of this forum say they would not vote, vote third party or vote for a repuke before voting for her.

Katz, you're a nice guy, but there is incredible & very real hatred for Sen. Clinton and it shows daily.

I think everyone should have their candidate and be able to cheer lead for them all they want...... but when ABAR went to ABAC or ABH and this includes repukes, I can't believe what I read some days. I also think the truth should be posted, but there seems to be all kinds of truths lately and it's unrecognizeable in a lot of posts.


The Clinton supporters did not come out in force and it was rare to see a garbage post about other candidates until the unadulterated Clinton hatred started being posted on several posts a day, then every other post and then every post, when someone gets mad about ??????????

It's been bad for a while but tolerable. It became untolerable after the second debate, as Clinton maintains a lead in most polls and the numerous endorsements started to add up. Also, Edwards not doing so well and Gore not entering the race.(yet)

Desperation has created some very wicked OP's and replies.


She is the frontrunner for now and could be the nominee........
Looks like some members (here) finally realized, the majority of the people, the people outside this forum, might actually vote for her and they can't handle it.



As for me, I'll support and vote for whomever gets the nod and for the record, we have enemies who still have enormous power. They have R's by their names.



edsp

[William769]

23. I feel dirty even coming into this thread.

We bitch so much about the hypocrisy of the Bush Administration, this thread reeks of it! I'm not saying I don't go after Obama what I am saying is anyone who who tries to say Obama gets attacked more than Clinton here on DU is a lair.

[retread]

26. OK, call me a lair. n/t

[Colobo]

30. I'm talking about this week. Clinton gets way more hate overall.

[Alamom]

34. You have said it yourself and most people know it to be true,

"Clinton gets way more hate overall."

However, most of the accusations & accusers claim the opposite.

So I'll repeat,


The Clinton supporters did not come out in force and it was rare to see a garbage post about other candidates until the unadulterated Clinton hatred started being posted on several posts a day, then every other post and then every post, when someone gets mad about ??????????

It's been bad for a while but tolerable. It became untolerable after the second debate, as Clinton maintains a lead in most polls and the numerous endorsements started to add up. Also, Edwards not doing so well and Gore not entering the race.(yet)

Desperation has created some very wicked OP's and replies.



Support your candidate wholeheartedly and grow a tough or tougher skin.

It will get worse.

[jefferson_dem]

20. "They" are feeling threatened...

The fear of losing power sucks for "them"...

[Mutineer]

22. We're doing the Repugs jobs for them

who needs to do opposition research when we're tearing one another apart?

[ElizabethDC]

37. Eh, it's just a sign he's in the big leagues

Really. I mean, because he's doing well, the media is giving him more attention, and so DUers have more to pick at.

Hillary has often said that she views a lot of the negativity aimed at her as a perverse form of flattery, because people know she has a real shot. It's the same thing for anybody else.

The best thing to do is to try not to engage in the hate-fest with regard to any candidate. Katz, you're very good at supporting and defending your candidate and not taking shots at the others. There should be more people around here like you!

[SaveElmer]

39. Not diredcted at you...but I find it interesting the sudden concern over neagitive stories...

Seems to coincide with them being posted against Obama....

It has generally been Hillary-bashing central around here for many months without the same concern...

[Forkboy]

44. You Obama people need to suck it up.

You guys have slammed Hillary at every chance you've had,with any story you can find,and now when it gets turned back on you guys you all whine about it.

I can't tell much difference between Hillary and Obama,or their supporters.

[LWolf]

46. Noone seems to have a universal definition of "hate"

when it comes to primary candidates. Any and all criticism of one's own choice seems to be regarded as "hate," while criticism of the opposition is "dissent," "disagreement," or "campaigning."

I don't hate Obama. I don't like him, either. He is totally irrelevant to me, as he is not on my list of people that I might consider voting for. Neither are Clinton, probably Edwards, or Biden, for that matter.

That's not hate. It's simply where I stand. :shrug: