A question for warring candidate supporters

[Djinn]

To an outsider the whole primaries thing is interesting but quite bizarre.

I can understand that people might view candidate A as being more palatable to non Dems so make choice based on that. Others prefer a candidate that speaks truth to them and want to work to boost that person regardless of broader appeal. I understand that once you pick a side it's hard not to become defensive of what one views as an attack against ones own.

BUT

Does anyone who's spent the last few months screaming at opposing supporters really honestly believe that the Dem's are that big a tent?

Do you really think there is a large enough difference between your candidate and another's that it justifies this kind of animosity?

If one candidate espoused nationalisation of vital industries or worker committees running manufacturing, or anything really then I'd get it, but (to a non American certainly) the differences between Republicans and Democrats aren't all that big, the differences between Dem candidates are just minute and mostly relate to style over substance.

So, anyone think they might be going a bit overboard?

[cali]

1. I don't have a candidate

and I agree that the differences between the candidates, with the exception of DK, are not that big, but people get fiercely attached to their candidates and the differences become magnified. It's a matter of perspective. In 2004 I supported Dean and the differences between Dean and Kerry, stylistically as well as substantively did seem large to me. In fact, at some points, I really disliked Kerry, a politician I had always admired.

[blogslut]

2. Here's my problem

There posters on this board that make concerted efforts to attack one candidate in the misguided belief that the attack (or concern trolling) will make their candidate look better. I don't like it and if I see it, I call them on it. I've seen this tactic used on each and every one of the candidates and I think it stinks.

[Djinn]

3. an outsider might

suggest you're projecting.

Every time you "call" someone on something the "other" side no doubt views your statements as yet another partisan attack even if you think you're being even handed.

Everything you fling about a candidate is no doubt waiting to be flung by Republicans during the Presidential campaign, seems awfully counterproductive but then you are the nation that conceived the term "blowback". As I said it's just interesting from an outsiders point of view.

[blogslut]

4. My conscience is clear

I don't fling. I merely reciprocate.

[Djinn]

5. small logical problem there

[blogslut]

6. sigh

I would so love to keep going back and forth with you but I have to wash my hair. Ciao.

[MannyGoldstein]

7. Some Issues Are Enormous. Enormous.

Such as war and "free" trade. Most Democratic candidates - but not all - were in favor of both.