Spin-off Attack Sites Typically Fail, Mineralman

[CC27]

MineralMan (85,754 posts)

Spin-off Attack Sites Typically Fail


Since the Internet began, I've been on many discussion websites, on all sorts of topics. One thing they all had in common was sites started by banned former members attacking the original site. All of them had sites like that opposing them.

From time to time, I go and look at those splinter sites that had the sole goal of attacking the original site. Almost 100% of the time, they're gone before long. They just can't maintain interest for long without some positive goal. A few stick around, though, and end up with a few members endlessly posting outdated attacks, but nobody reads them.

Pretty much, they're all better ignored than attended to.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028004041

Must be talking about DU jr.

[Ralph Wiggum]

Hmmm, CU has been around since 2001, this wonderful place has existed since '07/'08.  Not exactly spin-offs but you all get the jist.

[Karin]

I think he's talking about JPR.  Yet another thread about it.  They really dislike the DUmp crew over there, as do Jackass Radicals.  The DUmmies just can't fathom how everyone doesn't love their kind, compassionate, generous souls.  It's un-possible.

[USA4ME]

BKH70041

4. Generally, yes. Maybe not this case.

If their sole objective is to just oppose Hillary and that's it, then I would agree. It seems their overall objective is to grow the progressive movement outside the Democratic Party, so with that in common they have the foundation to continue beyond the election.

For me, I would prefer that all Bernie supporters leave the Democratic party and join the Greens or create their own. These are the same people who, after the election, will turn and attack Secretary Clinton from within the party just like they have Obama, which is not good.

If one only looks at short term goals, you want them in to help elect Clinton. If you're a long-term strategist, then you want them out so they don't cause anymore harm. As it stands now, Clinton will go in with a lot of scandals following her with Republicans, progressives who have left the Democratic party, and some progressive insiders objecting at her every turn. Reducing the angles of attack would be preferable.

These are things I and other major donors discuss during our meetings with Party Leaders, Senators and House members, as I'm sure it will be a discussion in Philadelphia as we form the party platform and how funding will be distributed for the election. And it is a concern, and not just a small one.

I bet it is a concern with Dem party leaders who have some sense of reality. The primitives are very concerned, though they won't admit it. Their leaders haven't told them to be yet, so they don't know if they're suppose to show it or not.

socialist_n_TN

5. That sounds a lot like "sit down and shut up" to me..........
 
So if HRC is elected president, then NOBODY in the Democratic Party should question ANY of her decisions? Doesn't sound very "democratic" to me.

But I agree that they should all go and form a workers' party for the 99%. Because neither the Republicans or the Democrats are on the side of the rest of us. And that's ESPECIALLY if this mindset holds true for the Dems.

Karl Marx is just groovy, man! 

And "sit down and shut up" I'm pretty sure is the unofficial democratic party motto.

BKH70041

6. That's more the point.
 
"But I agree that they should all go and form a workers' party for the 99%. Because neither the Republicans or the Democrats are on the side of the rest of us. And that's ESPECIALLY if this mindset holds true for the Dems."

I don't agree with them, however if that's the way they view events, then the solution you expressed is the same as mine. I don't see how one can be happy within a party they believe are a bunch of shills for corporate interests. And obviously they weren't.

This primitive is MOTO (Master Of The Obvious).

Well, obvious to everyone who's not as stupid as liberals.

.