Presidential Election 2016

[grant1simons2]

I hate this thread

[Nathan]

Those sorts of tactics are used to send messages to the establishment that they aren't all powerful. They may very well be people who don't normally vote, but would vote if Bernie was a candidate. The party has a lot to loose. Just because one candidate would get them out doesn't mean another would. Our country has dismal voter turn out and lots of people detest the establishment politicians i.e. hillary so they don't go vote. That's really not hard to digest.

[amiller92]

Concerns aside, I'll be caucusing for Bernie, simply out of frustration with Clinton's attempt to hijack the process

Wait, what? Didn't you just get done saying that "process arguments" are "infuriating" and irrelevant, given how the party did after a difficult 2008 primary season?

[amiller92]

And didn't major Hilary supporters tell women they were going to hell for not voting for a woman? Yeah. sexism is fucking terrible but both sides are using it.

I'm sorry. What's sexist about arguing that women should support women?

[Nathan]

And didn't major Hilary supporters tell women they were going to hell for not voting for a woman? Yeah. sexism is fucking terrible but both sides are using it.

No, she didn't, which is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. Madeleine Albright has used that line for over a decade; she used it when she was Secretary of State. It's her catchphrase. It wasn't a deep political statement. And there is a world of difference between saying that line (which, again, both Albright and other women have used many other times in many other circumstances without outrage) and saying "you're just voting for Hillary Clinton because of your vagina." Stop pretending they are comparable.

So you think it's appropriate for one of Hillary's supporters to tell a group of women they're going to hell because she's been saying it a long time? Still not appropriate and it shows both sides are using bad language and tactics if Hillary supporters can't see their hypocrisy it's just another bad sign. I never claim to support anyone talking about anyone's vagina as a reason for voting for a woman. I've also never implied that I think it's appropriate for men to say that. To think Hillary and her supporters don't have judgemental and discriminatory blood on their hands as well as the "Bernie Bros" is so so so blind.

[Nathan]

And didn't major Hilary supporters tell women they were going to hell for not voting for a woman? Yeah. sexism is fucking terrible but both sides are using it.

I'm sorry. What's sexist about arguing that women should support women?

Uh, the implication that they'll go to hell for using their minds to independently consider both candidates instead being pressured to vote for a woman because of their own vagina? This is so dumb. Everyone should have free will. I don't support men telling women not to vote for a woman or woman telling woman they HAVE to vote for a woman.

[Sacrelicio]

One of the other things I don't get is how she's somehow mostly to blame for the economy, Wall Street, corporate influence, etc. when she's just one Senator like Bernie is. And he doesn't even have much support from his own party. He has 4 endorsements from the House and that's it. The only candidate with fewer is Donald Trump. If I mention this to some Bernie fans, they're like "Oh well see she bought everyone off and they're scared of her." All 500 of her endorsements were paid off and/or are afraid of her? Come on.

And I don't remember this kind of tone in 2008. I liked Obama back then but I didn't hate Hillary and I didn't remember much hate coming from the Hillary crowd. No one wanted to destroy the other candidate or threatened to stay home and not vote.= if they didn't get what they wanted.

[Nathan]

One of the other things I don't get is how she's somehow mostly to blame for the economy, Wall Street, corporate influence, etc. when she's just one Senator like Bernie is. And he doesn't even have much support from his own party. He has 4 endorsements from the House and that's it. The only candidate with fewer is Donald Trump. If I mention this to some Bernie fans, they're like "Oh well see she bought everyone off and they're scared of her." All 500 of her endorsements were paid off and/or are afraid of her? Come on.

And I don't remember this kind of tone in 2008. I liked Obama back then but I didn't hate Hillary and I didn't remember much hate coming from the Hillary crowd. No one wanted to destroy the other candidate or threatened to stay home and not vote.= if they didn't get what they wanted.

Um, if I recall plenty of African Americans were willing to vote for Barack but not Hillary, and said so. Because they traditionally hadn't voted in elections before, he energized a lot of people she couldn't. The same way Bernie is energizing people who have been disenchanted with the establishment, but will come out and vote for him. but keep trying.

[Sacrelicio]

One of the other things I don't get is how she's somehow mostly to blame for the economy, Wall Street, corporate influence, etc. when she's just one Senator like Bernie is. And he doesn't even have much support from his own party. He has 4 endorsements from the House and that's it. The only candidate with fewer is Donald Trump. If I mention this to some Bernie fans, they're like "Oh well see she bought everyone off and they're scared of her." All 500 of her endorsements were paid off and/or are afraid of her? Come on.

And I don't remember this kind of tone in 2008. I liked Obama back then but I didn't hate Hillary and I didn't remember much hate coming from the Hillary crowd. No one wanted to destroy the other candidate or threatened to stay home and not vote.= if they didn't get what they wanted.

Um, if I recall plenty of African Americans were willing to vote for Barack but not Hillary, and said so. Because they traditionally hadn't voted in elections before, he energized a lot of people she couldn't. The same way Bernie is energizing people who have been disenchanted with the establishment, but will come out and vote for him. but keep trying.

...which part of my statement are you responding to??

[Nathan]

The second half, sorry. I think it's pretty obvious why Hillary is associated with corporate America.

[amiller92]

Uh, the implication that they'll go to hell for using their minds to independently consider both candidates instead being pressured to vote for a woman because of their own vagina? This is so dumb. Everyone should have free will. I don't support men telling women not to vote for a woman or woman telling woman they HAVE to vote for a woman.

You have to work pretty hard to get from a pretty standard statement of solidarity among women (in phrasing I wouldn't choose, but then I'm not believer in hell) to a reading that says women have no free will.

I get why you don't like what Albright said, and I think even she did not mean it to sound quite like it did, but no, it's not sexist. She's not saying that women are not capable of choosing differently. She's saying women should support each other.

[Nathan]

You convinced me. /sarcasm.

Anyone telling someone how they should make a choice with a threat of some existential punishment whether you believe in hell or not is a discriminatory and bullying practice. She's not saying women should support each other she's implying that they aren't quality women if they don't. And that's sexist. She's in a place of power and she's exercising discriminatory rhetoric.

Again it's like all the forgiveness when someone on Hillary's side screws up or says something off the wall but not on the Sanders side... it's just continual hypocrisy...

[UrsusUrbanicus]

I'm sorry. What's sexist about arguing that women should support women?

Oh... so now biology is destiny.

[Tiller]

(an aside to grant, primary politics in the democratic party has apparently been like this for decades, we just haven't seen a primary recently, the last one being 8 years ago. It'll help once you reach a point where partisan negativity slides off you.)

So, I just took 5 minutes, and found an example for every thing that "doesn't happen". I went with image macros since they're quicker, but I found 2 headlines first for one of them. Each of these are representative of a swath of comments/articles/memes/etc.

You mean to say that Bernie Bros isn't to imply misogynistic dumb jock chauvinism!? You're funny.

Of course it is. But no-one says that a male Bernie supporter is just voting for Bernie "because of his dick,"

that's because bernie supporters are only voting for
FREE STUFF FREE STUFF FREE STUFF
https://i.imgur.com/e12kzfb.png

No-one says that Bernie is a liar

https://imgur.com/Ob2yufO
(yes, people are actually circulating this. Hillary supporters are literally circulating stuff straight out of 4chan (I've seen a lot of the sausage being made). I think someone mentioned "right wing" talking points earlier. Does this, "FREE STUFF", and "SPOOKY SOCIALISM" count?)

and a rapist

https://i.imgur.com/J6VuIb5.png
(some Clinton supporters just outright call him Racist/Sexist now, let alone what they call his supporters.)

and "deeply corrupt."

https://i.imgur.com/mTRqaBE.png

Bernie's age has been consistently held as "off-limits,"

https://i.imgur.com/i6LiUCv.png

But pretending that all political attacks are equal is lazy and disingenuous.

I agree. Social Media vs. Normal Media is fundamentally a situation of "punching up" vs. "punching down".

If some of you think Sanders' camp has been particularly dirty (or that 2008 wasn't dirty), then that's probably due to your own social bubble (everyone has one). Hillary's partisans frequently resemble the STRIB's online comments, but on steriods. If Bernie really stands a chance to "damage" Clinton with how many punches that have been held, then there's no way she survives until November. Hillary hasn't actually been in a national election yet (and has only won a single election, in deep blue new york), so it's naive to assume she can't be sunk because she's been in the spotlight for a while.

If you really want to see what negative campaigning would look like, imagine the portion of this video between 4:50 and 5:20 being ran on television, with better editing:


(and yes, proceed to project all your grievences with Camp Sanders onto me. An article on our recent culture wars and its suggested "rules of engagement" come to mind as relevant to this topic: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... ar/462918/)

Edit: oops, missed a name.

[WHS]

Concerns aside, I'll be caucusing for Bernie, simply out of frustration with Clinton's attempt to hijack the process

Wait, what? Didn't you just get done saying that "process arguments" are "infuriating" and irrelevant, given how the party did after a difficult 2008 primary season?

Yes, I think there should be a genuinely contested primary in which candidates compete on policy proposals and their position on the ideological spectrum. Clinton's supporters, both among the general population and in the party itself, have done everything within their power to delegitimize Sanders and his supporters (not to mention, before the primary, push out potential candidates like Elizabeth Warren). The next time you find a Sanders supporter saying Clinton should stop running, not because she's a terrible nominee, but because her candidacy somehow presents an illegitimate, dangerous challenge to The Party, let me know. (Hint: no Sanders supporter ever says this.)

[WHS]

One thing that astonishes me is that everyone who works for the DFL knows and openly discusses the way the Clintons have essentially attempted to subvert the primary, but are perfectly willing to present this idea as a conspiracy theory in the media, because they're operatives in hock to the same machine the Clintons are running.

[amiller92]

She's not saying women should support each other she's implying that they aren't quality women if they don't. And that's sexist. She's in a place of power and she's exercising discriminatory rhetoric.

[amiller92]

[obscure stuff from the interwebs]

Didn't we just get done discussing how there's lots of mean people on the internet and we shouldn't assume they are representative. And for what it's worth, I've never seen any of those before.

If some of you think Sanders' camp has been particularly dirty (or that 2008 wasn't dirty), then that's probably due to your own social bubble (everyone has one).

I don't think anyone thinks that. Just the opposite, in fact. The Sander's campaign has been particularly clean.

[LakeCharles]

If some of you think Sanders' camp has been particularly dirty [...] then that's probably due to your own social bubble (everyone has one).

This is probably quite true for me, and I hadn't really thought of it, so thanks. Not in the sense that I think the Sanders camp is dirty, because I don't, but I do sometimes think "Man, Sanders supporters are whiny, and I don't hear that out of the Clinton supporters." But as you pointed out, that is because I and all of my friends and family are Bernie supporters! So that's all I ever hear, for both the good and bad.

[Didier]

Clinton's supporters, both among the general population and in the party itself, have done everything within their power to delegitimize Sanders and his supporters

It's like there was an election going on or something.