General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: How the extreme left gave us Nixon, Bush and now Trump [View all]BainsBane
(53,029 posts)What's divisive about it? None of those Stein voters are eligible to participate in DU. Stein continues to attack Democrats, often falsely, like when every single Dem voted against a Trump nominee and she insisted it was the fault of "corporate Dems." She made clear she favored Trump over Clinton, which is precisely the stand third-party voters took. That played a role. So why does that information need to be censored here? She is currently $4 million dollars richer (and she was already rich) because she scammed money off of vulnerable people desperately upset about the election results. She way overinflated her ask in order to keep the money, and then she did keep it. Why does that kind of predation require special protection?
I particularly don't understand the divisive claim because, as I said, this site is for people who vote for Democrats, not Stein or anyone else. How is it any more divisive than comments about the deplorables? Anyone who continues to post here after voting for someone besides Clinton in the GE is in violation of the TOS. That means they lied when they signed the TOS after election day, and it also means they lack the integrity of their convictions if they would falsely misrepresent themselves in that way. I fail to see how the OP is divisive to anyone who posts on this site honestly. And if they are lying, why do they require protection against their deceit?