Reader Posts

« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »

The distant clacking of anonymous keyboards

The Hillary supporters who are bent out of shape about comments by anonymous posters on a political blog are just looking for excuses not to support Obama. Why humor them? The ones who go around posting inflammatory comments, then whining and pouting about how the Obama supporters on this site better treat them nicely or else they won't vote for Obama, aren't serious about the latter or else they wouldn't still be doing the former.

Some of you are trying very hard to treat them with kid gloves. But they just go seek out others from whom they can provoke abuse, and they'll always be able to provoke the response that they're trying so hard to provoke. And your sympathy (those of you who are treating them with kid gloves) only reinforces that behavior by validating the view that all those mean, mean people on those distant keyboards are keeping the Hillary supporters with hurt feelings from being able to support Obama.

It's bullshit. Posting inflammatory things in some threads to provoke the very responses that in other threads they say is keeping them from supporting Obama, is nothing but a bullshit game.

I wish them well. Some will go support McCain (or maybe Barr) because, like Lieberman, they think an aggressive foreign policy is more important than pretty much everything else. Others may go to Nader, to express support for progressive causes. Or they may write-in Hillary or vote for McCain simply as a form of protest.  

I wish them well in whatever candidate they decide they like better than Obama. If, in the end, they decide to vote for Obama that's even better, but I wish them well in whatever direction they choose.

I just refuse to participate in their pretense that their decision will depend on the distant clacking of anonymous keyboards that provide the response they work so hard to provoke. That's just stupid.


Comments (34)

avatar

You're saying we should continue to post derogatory things about Hillary instead of trying to heal the wounds of the primary and achieve party unity?

If so, you're a bleeding idiot.

Read it again. I'm saying that there are some drama-addicted Hillary supporters who go out of their way to provoke derogatory responses. They work hard at it. Sympathizing with them over the the fact that their inflammatory posts are inflammatory just reinforces that behavior.

Ignoring them is best. But it really doesn't matter how you respond to them, because ultimately the way they vote doesn't depend on which keys you click on your keyboard. That's just a game they're trying to draw you into.

And again, I'm only talking about the ones who are doing both things, posting inflammatory comments all over the place, while also pouting about how these mean old Obama supporters who respond to their inflammatory comments are making it so, so hard for them to come around to supporting Obama. Bullshit.

Interesting. I tend to agree.

Curious, though... What would you say then to the drama-addicted Obama supporters who go out of their way to provoke derogatory responses?

But they NEEEEEED our scorn.

In some sick way, they really do, I think. They've convinced themselves that it justifies their continued opposition to Obama, even though the idea of letting anonymous comments on some political web site determine how you vote is just bonehead stupid.

Party-leaving, nominee-bashing, process-insulted, hyperventilating Hillary supporters have adopted their candidate's martyr complex. They can't be reached until after Hillary concedes gracefully, meaning when she wholeheartedly endorses Obama. You remember him, don't you? THE NOMINEE! Until then, they're content to be victims licking their wounds and nursing their resentments. Rabbit Hussein Smorgasbord is right.

I've always thought that some people (like Potus Obama) were actually Clinton supporters posting inflammatory anti-Clinton rhetoric so that other Clinton supporters could attack it. (I abandoned my earlier belief that they were Republicans).

Goes along nicely with your theory. Same could also be true of some extreme anti-Obama posters on this site. Could "Present" really be supporting Obama by giving Clinton supporters a bad name?

Could "Present" really be supporting Obama by giving Clinton supporters a bad name?

Interesting theory. I'd certainly hate to see him start to support Obama in the same mode that he now "supports" Clinton.

I think a theory that fits the facts even better is that he's simply an unhinged GOP troll.

You are a very Machiavellian-thinking baby.

Rabbit,

I have witnessed and been most impressed by your past attempts to logically engage some of the more frustrating bloggers whom you describe. Frankly, I suspect your patience has, on many instances, far outstripped the limits of mine.

With respect, I disagree with this post. I suggest that if your patience has finally and understandably reached its limit, you step aside temporarily and let us second-stringers come off the bench for awhile and give you a breather. We can take turns picking through the garbage. :)

Though I too have shared your conclusion that ours may be an unwinnable struggle, I will not yield. As you so accurately point out, succumbing to their infantilism serves no purpose but their own. So take your own advice, ignore them fully and let your Zen regrow. I expect to see the return of an even stronger Rabbit than the one I have come to know. In the meantime, I for one must keep the kid gloves on - even hoping beyond hope.

Yes We Can.

As you so accurately point out, succumbing to their infantilism serves no purpose but their own.

I think I'd have to disagree with something I've so accurately pointed out then!

Ignoring them is best, for those who have the strength to do so. But it leaves false statements unchallenged at the same time.

Responding in kind, as long as you are also tearing apart their false statements, is a mixture of giving them what they want and making sure they aren't successful in lies. (I can't think of any who operate in the mode I'm talking about who aren't also pumping out lies non-stop when they do so.)

The thing that serves no purpose but their own is treating them with kid gloves and agreeing with them that they've been so terribly mistreated by Obama supporters who responded in kind to their inflammatory comments in other threads. That just reinforces the behavior.

The only helpful response when they pout about being mistreated is to point out that they're provoking the very behavior they are pouting about, and that using this as an excuse for not supporting Obama is really very, very stupid. Although if you want to point this out without actually using the word "stupid" that would be fine also.

I tried being playing nice these past few days, but it just doesn't come naturally to me. So now I'm going back to being my same old bitchy self again, and I feel much better.

This thing's gonna take time. Heads are still very hot -- on both sides -- and there's no point trying to change people's minds. Or so I've come to learn.

Thanks for a thoughtful post on the subject, Rabbit. I rec it just for the title alone.

I certainly gave up on it this week.

I prefer bitchy Lis! You know what happens if we start to let our guard down. ;)

Gee, I really liked nice LisB. I'll still like mean LisB, but I prefer the nice one.

Seriously, I find all the attacks, whether perpetrated by me or by other, to be at least as corrosive to the attacker as to the attackee. But I've been hanging out at other sites, where I can have some conversations without all the hatin'/hateful antihatin'/hatefulness. I just miss you guys sometimes.

Ah! Thanks for the explanation...


The thing that serves no purpose but their own is treating them with kid gloves and agreeing with them that they've been so terribly mistreated by Obama supporters who responded in kind to their inflammatory comments in other threads.

Agreed.

When I state that I intend to keep the gloves on, I am only willing to go so far as to avoid active attacks. Specifically, I do not advocate absolution of their attacks via mis-guided attempts to categorize inflammatory retaliation as unjustified. Doing so would not only serve little purpose, but would in fact likely be detrimental.

At any rate, I still plan (at least till burnout catches me) to continue my attempts at direct engagement.

The above written in response to Rabbit's 12:58 comment.

I think we're not so far apart on this, except that you're nicer than me.

If I were an actual potential McCain voter, I'd seriously be giving Barr a second look.

http://www.bobbarr2008.com/

I love the Bobbarr stories. Such a cute little elephant!

I wish Barr a lot of success in attracting potential McCain voters.

avatar

Aha! Busted! You're really Stephen Colbert disguised as a cute baby dressed in swaddling clothes. I saw the show last night. I knew it!

So funny Rabit. After trying to say they have been doing this for not just today, but several weeks if not months, and even getting into shouting matches with them while knowing they were doing this, its kinda surreal to have you start a topic off that. The gemini in me gets caught up in the Fuck you piss off....and then Im sorry I shouldnt have said that with them. Its hard because I try to be good...

Sorry "Rabbit"

I've begun to suspect more and more strongly that a lot of the anonymous "Clinton supporters" are really just McCainites racking up their blogging points. I have a hard time taking anyone's true position for granted anymore, given the benefits accrued to those who keep stirring the pot.

Since the Republicans are clearly hoping to siphon off some "angry Hillary" votes, and since the "angry Hillary voters" strategy was all the Clinton campaign had left in its final days, I think the "Operation Chaos" mentality has come to cross-pollinate anti-Obama sentiment in both camps.

But I honestly believe that the most vitriolic "Hillary" supporters are mischievous Republican trolls - and while it's always nice to be nice when we can, it's often better to just ignore them.

a leader we can believe in

Possibly interesting and somewhat related:

[Hillary's] supporters are divided into two distinct categories. The original Clintonistas were strong Democrats, party faithful, pro-choice, middle-aged and up, largely female and all white. But Hillary's recent backers have been downscale whites of both genders who were turned off by Obama's pastor, wife and other associates and were afraid he might be a Muslim in disguise. Unhappy about voting for a woman, they never really liked Hillary but turned to her when the alternative was Obama.

If Hillary had won the Democratic nomination, these latent backers of Hillary in the primaries might still have voted for McCain in the general. Their support of Hillary is purely linked to her opposition to Obama. Were she to join the ticket, they would vote for McCain anyway. After all, Obama will still be black and the Rev. Wright will still be nuts.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/06/no_menageatrois_for_obama.html

Morris seems to have come to a similar conclusion.

Well stated, Rabbit. Rec'ed!

I heard something interesting on the news last night, though it was unscientific:

The Hillary supporters are angry at Obama supporters, the media, Bill Clinton... but not Obama himself.

The Obama supporters are angry at... Hillary Clinton.

That about sums up the complaints we hear. Obama supporters complain about Hillary and her supporters complain about anonymous posters on the intertubes.

Did you see that movie on the intertube the other day? Made me want to take my Edsel down to Western Union and send the Clinton campaign a telegram: Not very groovy stop. It's not that I have anything against the colored people, but it's like Mrs. Clinton says: you can't xerox change.

it's like Mrs. Clinton says: you can't xerox change.

Another scurrilous lie from Hillary. You can xerox change. It's paper money that you're not allowed to xerox.

Time to move on.

A solution to the dilemma of how to respond to the insult-spewing-folks-who-claim-to-be-Clinton- supporters-but-we-don't-really-know who-they-are: As Ben Hocking suggested elsewhere, TPM could give each of us the power to exclude from view a list of posters of our choosing. Then we wouldn't be tempted to respond. A small list of posters generate the vast majority of vitriolic blather that derails threads and inflames tempers.

RU Serious? There are several threads talking about REAL software features that would make this place nicer ... and you want TPM to spend software upgrade time/money so you aren't tempted to write something mean - or bothered by meanies?!?

That wouldn't be my first choice.

avatar

Rabbit, I agree with you. I don't accommodate the sour loser Hillary supporters any more than I would a bad child falling out in public. No begging will take place here. Don't let the door hit you where...

Post a Comment

Inside Cafe



Cafe Features


September 15-20

Book Cover

September 22-27

Book Cover

September 29-October 3

Book Cover

October 6-10

Book Cover

October 13-17

Book Cover

October 20-24

Book Cover

December 1-5

Book Cover





Book Club Archive



Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall

Site Editor
Lila Shapiro

Intern
Claire Wilcox



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address