Who is the most politically calculating, war-mongering Democratic candidate?

[jefferson_dem]

Just askin'...

Since incendiary polls seem to be in fashion on DU this evening...

[daninthemoon]

1. Interesting wording. Didn't take much guessing or thought to pick

Mrs Clinton.

[jefferson_dem]

3. LOL!

You think i've loaded the question wording or something?

[daninthemoon]

5. Well, I see somebody voted Kucinich, so maybe not.

[Tesha]

52. Those would be the Hillary supporters. (NT)

[Bicoastal]

2. Jesus H. Christ.

You give the Freeper polls a run for their money--

"Free Republic Opinion Poll: (10/14) If it's the pro-life, strong defense, small government federalist Fred Thompson vs the abortionist, big government socialist Hillary Clinton in '08, how do you vote?" (The results may surprise you.)

[CoffeeCat]

4. So, the Republicans hate Hillary...

...and at least half of the Democratic party won't vote for her--with 90 percent of
progressives finding her revolting.

Gee. That sure sounds like a winning ticket for the general election!

:eyes:

[Common Sense Party]

11. What's surprising about those results? nt

[rwheeler31]

6. Funny

[Colobo]

7. Gravel.

[Whisp]

8. I'd say Colbert, but he's not there.

[rAVES]

9. HAHA!! Kucinich!! funneh!

[AtomicKitten]

10. OK, which one of you knuckleheads voted for Kucinich?

[Rincewind]

12. I did

I voted for Dennis, I always vote for Dennis in totally meaningless polls.

[daninthemoon]

18. It may be a slanted/leading poll, but I wouldn't say meaningless.

One candidate absolutely does fit this criteria like a glove.

[calteacherguy]

13. You forgot an option for "non of them are war-mongering." nt

[silverojo]

14. Who the hell voted for Kucinich?

Were these sarcasm votes?

[Perry Logan]

15. It's our way of saying, I've got your poll right here."

Hillary-bashers are so sad.

[jefferson_dem]

16. "I've got your poll right here." Good one.

Why do you say "Hillary bashers"? :shrug: She's merely listed as an option right alongside all the other Democratic candidates.

[flvegan]

17. Hillary has a serious lead in this race.

Oh, wait...that's NOT a good thing.

[Totally Committed]

19. Kucinich???

Who says the Clintonista Mafia on this board doesn't have a sense of humor?

:rofl:

Very funny, indeed.

TC

[cali]

27. What would DU do without your progressive voice?

I hope you're not too terribly disappointed about the lack of exploding heads you were so eagerly wishing to see with the use of the term "Clintonista Mafia".

You know what I find both funny and curious? That you guys post that stuff over there using your DU names. That's very funny to me.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Lerkfish]

28. dudette: you need a better hobby

I'm just sayin.

:shrug:

[cali]

29. Maybe you should tell that to your friend

TC, who's the one who admitted that she purposefully posted a flamebait comment. Oh, and send a memo to yourself.

Looks to me like you gossips are the ones needing a better hobby.

Just sayin'.

[Lerkfish]

31. I think you're a broad brusher, there.

if the assumption is that what someone posts on another board is automatically agreed with by everyone else on that board, then by that logic, you'd agree with everything I said here.

Like I said, I think you're getting yourself wound WAY TOO TIGHT on this. just some free personal advice. Life is too short.

at least I"M not referencing other sites HERE against the rules, as you insist on doing. The other site does not have the same rules.
That's up to the individual owners of the respective sites.

What I'm saying is you are painting me PERSONALLY as an evil person because I disagree with you POLITICALLY.
I'm saying that's WAY OVER THE LINE and unacceptable. You need to take a step back and decide if that is exactly the type of person you want to be.

[cali]

32. quite wrong. I'm quite sure, you're not an evil person

and I've never said anything to that effect. And I don't even assume that you agree with everything other people say. I will say that your little lectures and assumptions about what sort of person I am, ring hollow, however. You don't know me, any more than I know you. If you're going to dog me and lecture, i'll respond. you may not like the response. that's ok. but it's not going to stop me from responding.

[Lerkfish]

34. fair enough, however, your behavior

is to respond to ANYONE who posts at another site attacking them for doing so, EVERY TIME THEY POST, even if the post has nothing to do with the other site.
I'm saying that's not healthy for you. The purpose in my advice is to help you. If you don't want help, fine, but then expect me to call you on it EVERY TIME I see you attacking people for no reason for things they say on other sites. You aren't going to stop me from responding, either.

[cali]

35. that's simply not true. or even close to true.

and caps don't make it truer. I don't respond to everybody who posts at another site, every time they post here. It's probably more like 2% of the time and 10% of the people. I'm saying you don't have any way of knowing what's healthy for me. And feel free to dog me. i enjoy pointing out your hypocrisy. I'm not the one, gossiping about other DUers and demonizing them on another site. And yes, some people there do that. And yes, the poster I responded to bragged about posting flamebait here, and waiting for heads to explode. That you're sooo concerned for me, and sooo unable to address that, speaks to your hypocrisy.

[Lerkfish]

36. well, that's fair enough since nothing you said about me was remotely true, either

but see, you said it to me first.

get it?

some people don't like their own behavior directed back at them, they see it as ugly and repugnant but don't recognize it as their own.
I responded to YOU giving someone else advice.

see how this works? Hypocrisy resides in your hotel on this one, not mine.

[cali]

37. keep cranking out the bullshit

i maintain that you started this shit, but i don't particularly care. you can't prove it and neither can i. love the faux psychology though. and as i said, maybe your concern should extend to someone who brags about posting flamebait. you seem to be squirming madly avoiding touching that. and there's YOUR hypocrisy right there; dashing madly about re my comments and ignoring those salient little facts. now that's hypocrisy; get it?

[Lerkfish]

38. actually, I don't think you understand hypocrisy

its based on one person's behavior in conflict to what they claim.
its not based on what one person does and a completely separate other person does. I'm not joined at the hip with anyone else, so their behavior can be in conflict with my statements without hypocrisy.

sadly, I think you are in serious need of psychological help, but you don't recognize it.

I was unaware of the post on the other site you mention, as I've not been there today.
I don't post there a lot. Although I DO recall posting to tell other people to leave you alone.

funny.

[cali]

39. sadly, you don't seem to understand even the fundamentals

of hypocrisy, and guess what? telling someone you don't know on a political posting board that you think they need psychological help isn't an kind expression of concern, it's a nasty personal attack. how nasty? you could, if you had any real concern for my mental well being, simply have sent me a pm. you chose to do otherwise. that shows your colors. Will i alert? I don't think so. i prefer to leave it as an example of the hypocrisy of your behavior. you didn't have to jump in here. you chose to. and you chose to attack me, after suggesting that we both refrain from doing so. again, that is hypocrisy.

glad to hear you asked people to stop attacking me on another site. I appreciate it. i don't appreciate your attack in the post i'm responding to.

[Lerkfish]

42. well, to be honest, I understand your frustration.

I was also unfairly attacked on a separate site that chose to take their attacks from there to here.
I was falsely accused of being an antisemite for opposing Isreal's unprovoked attack on Lebanon.
There were several overlapping members on that other site and here, and I felt powerless to redress the wrong.

But I let it go eventually. That's why I am attempting to advise you of the same thing.

you wouldn't be familiar with that other site, would you? the one that makes targets of anyone on DU that doesn't completely support Isreal?

[cali]

53. Yep. it's been pointed out to me.

I don't have any use for it either. They employ the same kind of language that the other does, just from another perspective. Hey, weren't you just lecturing me about not bringing other sites up?

Hypocrisy.

[Lerkfish]

48. I find it amusing you decided to stop arguing once I mentioned that other

site that targeted me in the past. You weren't involved in that other site, were you?

INquiring minds are curious.

my memory seems to think so. Am I remembering incorrectly?

[seemslikeadream]

51. oh I think you have a good memory

[cali]

55. Nope. I have never posted there

And would never do so. I see it as another site that engages in name calling and gossiping about DUers. I leave that for you and others to do.

[cali]

54. Nope. Not stopping at all.

Just didn't realize you'd posted a response to me here. NOw I've cleared up that I don't think well of that site that you've mentioned, and I've never posted there. That should sooth your curiosity, I hope. Or you can continue with your patented innuendo.

[cali]

56. And you think I'm

mentally unstable? How interesting that you're keeping this going every bit as much as I am. Nope. Make that more.

[Whisp]

40. I take it you voted for Dennis the Warmonger.

and not Hillary the Peacemaker.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

DON'T LET THE SUN CATCH YOU LYING
by Hillary and The Peacemakers
(Marsden - Marsden - Chadwick - Maguire)

Don't let the sun catch me lyin'
The night's the time for all my tears
The polls may be broken tonight
But tomorrow in the morning light
We'll fix it up, with some lyin'

The night-time shadows disappear
And with them go all your fears
For the lobbyists will bring joy
For every rich girl and boy
So don't let the sun catch me lyin'

We know that the DLC says lyin's not a bad thing
We'll stop your lyin', maybe some birds will sing

It may be hard to discover
That you've been 'right' for another
But don't forget that war's a game
And it will always come again
Oh don't let the sun catch me cryin'
Don't let the sun catch me lyin', oh no
Oh, oh, oh

[stimbox]

41. roflmao

"You know what I find both funny and curious? That you guys post that stuff over there using your DU names. That's very funny to me."

Why hide it?

What's your handle at PSU, Cali?

[LanternWaste]

60. Transparency...

Transparency and lack a of disingenuously sobriquets are humorous?

I guess that's why all the best undercover operative jobs are already taken....

"The box has left the train. Grab the package and respond." If you only have one name, you won't know what the super secret code means...

[uppityperson]

49. Why do you find that funny and curious?

Some of us chose to not hide or deceive. But that's just my opinion.

[stranger81]

50. Do you really think DU would be better off without progressive voices? eom

[Totally Committed]

20. Self-delete. Double post.

Never mind.

TC

[Clark2008]

21. Politically calculating? Edwards

War mongering? Clinton.

You can be politically calculating without being a war monger and vice versa. And you can be both. However, they can be mutually exclusive.

[jefferson_dem]

22. I admit to offering a double-barreled question.

In this case, I guess we'll just have to consider them a "package deal." :bounce:

[cuke]

23. Another informative thread from JD

At least this one isn't linked to a right wing website

[jefferson_dem]

26. Thanks for bestowing your typically brilliant observations on the rest of us "cuke"...

:hi:

[cuke]

44. Any time, day or night

I aim to please

[Donald Ian Rankin]

24. None of the above.

Clinton is probably the most "politically calculating", or at least the most politically astute; but thankfully all of them are pretty good at politics (Kucinich less so than the others) so we don't have to worry on that score.

None of them is a "warmonger", though.

[Forkboy]

25. I don't think any of our candidates are war mongers.

I think some candidates supporters are fucking idiots though.

[cuke]

30. The repukes are running a similar poll

http://www.gop.com/Net/ScariestDemocrat/

Looks like the only way idiots know how to fight back is with a stupid poll

[William769]

33. It's called deflection.

When your candidate doesn't have a leg to stand on, well you know the rest.

[jefferson_dem]

43. Fight back?

You're easy-peasy, per usual.

[cuke]

45. You don't know what "fight back" means?

Quelle surprise!!

[jefferson_dem]

46. Apparently you don't...

given that you are so threatened by this simple poll.

[cuke]

47. Is "threatened" the word you use for laughter?

[Freddie Stubbs]

57. What is interesting is that the candidate who leads this poll is also

the candidate with the most support from Democrats. What can we infer from this? That there is a great number of calculating, war-mongering Democrats?

[w4rma]

58. I infer that too many Democrats are too easily led around by the nose by big media. (nt)

[LanternWaste]

59. I don't think there is one...

I don't think there is one...

But then again, as I've neither decided on, nor ruled out a candidate, I don't really have an agenda or an opportunity to smear any of the candidates yet. But I'm sure that as soon as I pick one to support, I'll be calling all the other candidates 'authoritarian fascists' or something just as puerile.

:)