Dude - how much time have you spent on blogs? I'm so damn tired of the whining from people who haven't been around, I guess, long enough to understand comments boards dynamics, but there is not one blog where the same dynamic doesn't prevail.

So if you don't like it - get offline - it really honestly is either/or.

And as Phoebe points out - this ain't real life people!!!!

Can you not tell the difference? This is the internet. No one even knows for sure who they are talking to

So either ride it for what it is, or put up your own blog and see if people hang around for polite discussions of mutual subjects - and how long it takes before you die of boredom.

*sigh* I can only assume that the environment is what drives the thing - because it's the just the same everywhere...

HusseinTenaX-

Rest assured that I can and will continue to participate and take the heat that goes along with it. I just find it despicable when people forego reason and degenerate into a repetition of expletives, ramblings, and exclamation marks.

Gotalife -

My sentiments exactly. It's pathetic to see, both on the blogs and in the MSM, the double standard that people are employing.

I guess my point is, when you post (and in real life) try to think about what underlies the other person's opinion. If you're one-sided and determined of your superiority, you're not going to convince anyone and will only further the divide that exists both within the Democratic party and in the nation.

I appreciae the heads up, if it's the case. Troll or not, he makes a point that I whole-heartedly agree with.

Other sites are worse but the misogyny and Clinton hate are rampant and indeed sad to see at TPM and TPM Cafe. It was more than ironic to see all the gotcha hate repeated here over-and-over towards Clinton and then all the shock-and-awe when the ABC "debate" used this same kind of material on Obama. the blogosphere had already put its stamp of approval on the tactics. ABC's mistake was in not understanding that you can only do that to Clinton and get away with it.

There are strictly enforced blogosphere Obama rules against fellow dems who ask about Rezko, or Nadhmi Auchi or Obama's weaknesses in any number of other arenas. It is frightening because they want Hillary to get out before anyone else asks too many questions about Obama's past. And they have beat her up so badly that there is nowhere to go, even if these stories erupt in a bad way for Obama in the GE, or even after if he were to win the WH, the consequences for democrats and the success of our political agenda is huge.

It might not just be sad it may well be tragic.

I agree that things have gotten way too polarized and ugly and that it's a depressing thing to witness.
You are courageous to admit to feeling sad about it, to allow yourself to be human rather than macho. I'm all for that.
I have to say, though, as an Obama supporter, that I truly believe that your candidate, Hillary Clinton, has to take responsibility for how ugly things have become. Why? Because even before the Ohio and Texas primaries it became clear that she could not win by any reasonable means. Hence, the kitchen sink strategy and all that it entails. Right now, hers is a campaign devoted taking him down so that she can prevail. This occasions a lot of really ugly campaigning that has a trickle down effect that tends to poison the citizenry at large. You're reading the effect of that poisoning on the web.
Now we're all either angry or depressed. Personally, I'm increasingly dispirited by the fact that she's taking down a candidate who really does stand for a different kind of politics than the kind that's creating so much ugliness.

This is a good post.

So much vitriol and hatefulness has been lobbed at Clinton on this site. The ration of inane, vitriolic and childish posts has to run 10 to 1 or worse Obamaites to Clintonites.

Ben Hocking and the other reasonable Obama supporters are helping their candidate. You'll need us Clinton supporters in the fall. The sycophantic, hero worshiping Hillary-haters are doing their candidate no good. Honestly, they've come close (not too close though) to scaring me off Obama, and I'm a long time, hardcore progressive.

Hillary has my vote if she wins the primary battle without getting any dirtier. But when she and her people started saying that she OR McCain were better than Obama (3am, etc), THAT'S when she started really earning all the vitriol. That she wants to win badly enough to do whatever it takes earns her vitriol. And I'll leave it at that to avoid just becoming a rant because I can sure keep dumping. Bottom line, Hillary's first for Hillary, THEN for us -- if there's time.

How about a hanky and some hot cocoa?

"reasonable Clinton supporter" is somewhat of an oxymoron, no?

I guess the comment from shrivtl1 is a good case in point.

I'm a passionate Obama supporter and a newbie to the comment section of this site but I have to say that I agree completely with what brand182 posted. It's true that this incivility is present in just about every political comment or message board out there but is this something we're just going to accept and live with? Kinda like the internet adopting a NYC street attitude. No thanks. (And that was just a big insult to the folks on NYC streets. Sorry. I know the internet is much worse.)

I stumbled on an interesting method at Thom Hartmann's message boards where a user can give another user a "karma" vote - either positive or negative. (I imagine everyone is allowed only one vote against one particular user.) Anyway, a consistently negative poster would accumulate a negative karma rating that shows on each post. The more respectful posters would build up a positive karma rating. It's a good way to know the reputation of the various posters and thus be able to regard their comments accordingly. Something to think about.

But many thanks for the post.

Egads, my comment was meant to go way up-thread. I will read the TPM users manual, I promise!

Why, I'm an old-timer, remember the blog -- don't think they were even called blogs back then -- skirmishes of the '00 recount. Took a bullet in my thigh. It's still there.

Then the "March to War" war of '02. You want to see mean-spirited comments? Try wading into a fight with neocons with reasoned debate, how the evidence for WMDs was just not there, how Americans shouldn't invade other countries that haven't attacked us or allies. I got a bullet in my other thigh from that one.

The fight we got here is nothing. Wait until we got our nominee and the Republicans invade the site.

And one last thing - look, you doofuses - since when was political conversation polite? The reason you aren't supposed to bring up religion and politics is because it leads to bar fights.

And sometimes those are a lot of fun.

Engaging in a discussion that matters to those involved is difficult under the best of circumstances and it takes a good deal of effort. For example, simply ensuring that a point is understood as meant can be difficult and, for example, it is very easy to hear disagreement as having an element of personal attack. This gets more difficult in this kind of medium.

I do not think you can expect the situation in these particular types of venues to change. Some people like them. To each his own.

If you want a different kind of discussion, look for or start an Internet group where membership is restricted. (That does not mean excessively controlled. It just means that there is a way to exclude folks who show up for some other reason than the stated focus of the group.)

Even then, there is an art to getting it to work but much of it has to do with personally avoiding exactly the type of behavior that is saddening. However, it can work out surprising well but just like any other endeavor, there will be ups and downs. I don't know if anyone has written much about this type of skill. However, it is the same skill required to have a real conversation with other human beings. How many people have you met who were exceptionally good at that?

I think all you can expect from blogs like this is what you are seeing. Like many things that are what they are, there is no reason to categorize it as good or bad. Perhaps it pretends to be something more than it is but that is just part of what it is.

Let's be clear here:

I do not, for a second, believe that anyone *here* who is for either of the Dem candidates does not already know what they will do should their candidate not be the nominee.

Note, I said *here* as on TPM. People here are overly politico-junkified and live for this stuff. As a result, they have already had deep thoughts about various contingencies.

So can we be at least a little honest and say that anyone who posts here and says "You'll need me in the fall, so you better kiss my ass now..." is just playing a game?

It's a good post. I remember one a while back from an Obama supporter that was turned off by some of the more vitriolic posts *here*. It had given her pause and she started to consider Hillary a little closer for an upcoming vote in her state. There were lots of comments. Every one of them was respectful. People took her seriously and made an effort to let her know that the vitriol didn't represent them. Obama does his best to keep things out of the gutter. I want to do the same in solidarity to his message. At least until McCain comes......

After reading the topic, I wanted to be clear. It is not opinion that if Clinton steals this away from Obama with Super Dels, that there will be a revolt in the Party. (Maybe it is because Im sure that Obama is classy enough to say to his people to do whats best for the Country and thats suppert her) However, Hillary had a chance to do that(do whats best for the Human Race as you say it) when it was determined that it was not mathmaticaly possible for her to win,or she would need to win enough of the remaining elections by something 60% (all of them) to when with out over turning the peoples choice.
It is not opinion that her stating that kitchen sink strategy to bring Obama's positives down would split the party. Her out right lies are not opinion, rather you can look up what she said, use rational thought and apply what she said,to what we have on tape on many issues.

If the concern is whats best for the Human Race as stated, then the candidate that cannot not win by no other way than to go against the peoples will should step down and the sooner the better. After all, by that argument, that truly has to be whats best for the human race at this point, right?

It's ridiculous to me that a person would state:
(quote)
"But I am saddened at the amount of disrespect people often have for each other in these settings. The political process has brought out a lot of emotion on both sides of the debate, but we need to remember that regardless of who wins, we are all in this together"

I love how people claim to be objective observers but dont simply understand the cause and effect theory. This may be opinion here that I cant fathom that Hillary would not understand the implications of :
-McCain and I bring experience, and Obama brings a speech.
-No he's not a Muslim, as far as I know.

These are just two of the many things that have me as an independent voter infuriated with her. If you want me to go into what my opinions are I could do that as well, but why bother when we have actual things that can be proven.

It's especially important that we treat each other respectfully in real life (that's one of the things I most enjoyed about a senatorial district caucus I attended; one-on-one, the Obama and Clinton supporters in my precinct got along great). When we're representing a group, it becomes more important to try to push the group agenda (at the aforementioned caucus, quite a bit of booing took place over a disengenuous motion). Currently, the main group agenda for both Clinton and Obama supporters is, assumably, winning the nomination.

I've seen obnoxious posts from both sides. I've seen less fair-minded posts from the Clinton side, but HAVE seen them, and the fact that there are more Obama supporters here could account for that discrepancy. What frustrates me, however, is when one group accuses the other of "going negative" when in fact that other only pushed back against an initial attack. "Annie Oakley" for example was a push BACK, not an instigating push. The point that former president Clinton pardoned two convicted members of the Weather Underground was a push BACK, not a push.

There is a difference.

This site is the most civil political blog on the net. It is slightly pro Obama which I prefer, but if Hillary is your cup of tea, you can always go to http://www.talkleft.com which Hillary supporters are abundant.

This site is much easy to navigate and post comments compare to sites like Politico or Huffington Post.

A lot of Hillary-hatred is disillusionment about a candidate we once admired. A lot of us Obama supporters started out admiring both candidates and thinking that even if our preferred candidate didn't win, at least there were 4 or 5 outstanding Democratic candidates (if you include Biden, Dodd, Richardson).

But then Clinton began the "fun" part of the campaign. The fact is Clinton went negative first. Before her "kitchen sink" strategy, the most negative thing Obama said about her was that she was a typical politician who was beholden to lobbyists and would do and say anything to win. Pretty mild stuff when you compare it to the race-baiting, muslim-baiting, etc. that has come out of the Clinton campaign.

The fact is Obama's original, mild criticism has been proven in spades. She will do and say anything to win. Because she thinks that she's the only candidate that can beat McCain, she is willing to do absolutely anything to bring down Obama.

Clinton's mistake is in coming to the conclusion that she can say anything about Obama (race baiting, muslim smears, etc.), because the Republicans will do it anyway. I find this attitude to be very offensive. As a hispanic, a large part of the reason I am a Democrat is that we are NOT the party of intolerance. We are NOT the party of Jesse Helms, Tom Tancredo, etc. It is not acceptable under any circumstance to appeal to racial or religious hatred or resentment to win votes. Sadly, the Clinton campaign has crossed the line on several occasions.

I completely agree with the poster, but I dont agree with it for TPM.
Its actually why when I first got to TPM 2 weeks ago I decided to stick around and then sign up days later.
I was tired of going to the Newsweek.com sites and CNN's where every other hillary supporter or McCain supporter would fling out "Nigger" this and "Barack HUSSEIN" etc etc. The mudslinging was grotesque at best.

Some sites have more adult like individuals, and others do not, my advice to search around for a fw sites you can manage to read, that some how keep a little objectivity....or at least there sane humanity.

Because just like you said , some of these blogs, and news sites and the comments that fill up after wards are disgusting and majority of the folks posting it are cowards and completely full of shit. THAT saddens me.

If Obama supporters are going to riot in Denver if Hillary wins the nomination, they'll need to start conditioning training now. What with the high altitude and all.

she is not sure he isnt muslim.
she has been caught in out right lies that she lied about 3 times in speeches, on camera. That in particular would have been forgivin if she said, yes, I over reached when trying to exploit my so called experience, but she chose to offend peoples intelligence. She keeps bringing up Obama's pastor, which most people(democrats) think is a non-issue, just to win political points. Obama does not use her negatives against her the way he could, instead of her embracing that, her supporters call it weak rather than honnorable. I'm becoming bitter with the so-called objective opinionators who don't call her on her bullshit. Either you want the politics of old that she plays, or you want a different direction. We the people lose if you validate Clintons behavior the way they have been. It means that Rovian tactics work, and the people that support it, would get what they deserve.

She wont win the nomination, it will have been givin to her. She has already lost the nomination, its just upto the judges to interpret the score cards. I live in Denver, so you know I'm acclimated and ready to Go. However, I will just probably pull that lever (in the general) for Hillary and walk away from politics forever. Most people I know will either riot, or walk away, leaving out pulling the levor for her lying ass!

Okay, there are way too many to list, and it is important to not appear as a stalker.