home

A Difference of Opinion: Not Every Top Blog "Has Had It" With Hillary

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:09:00 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg This!! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

John Aravosis at AmericaBlog writes that every top blog "has had it with Clinton". That is patently false, whichever way you slice it.

One example: MyDD, which has more traffic than AmericaBlog.

In fact, out of the top trafficked liberal blogs, only Daily Kos, Talking Points Memo, and America Blog favor Obama over Clinton. Huffington Post as a news source seems to editorially favor Obama, but its multitude of bloggers can't be pigeonholed so easily.

Most of the top bloggers writing about the elections are not taking sides: Crooks and Liars, Atrios, Firedoglake, Washington Monthly, Digby.

These blogs will vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is. They have not "had it" with Hillary. Just as TalkLeft, which favors Hillary over Obama, will vote for Obama if he's the nominee. Democrats don't give up on each other.

Perhaps John has caught a bit of Obama's sense of hyperbole. Here are the top liberal blogs that write about the elections and weekly page view numbers, from the Liberal Blog Adverstising Network:

[Hat tip to Mad Kane.]

< What McCain Said Compared To What Obama Said | The Blogosphere Has Its Comeuppance? Boehlert's Revenge >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    A Difference of Opinion: Not Every Top Blog "Has Had It" With Hillary | 178 comments (178 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    The A List has had it with Clinton (5.00 / 7) (#1)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:06:10 PM EST
    Actually, I sort of see John's point and I think it is actually a huge problem - for those blogs.

    they have lost credibility with a significant portion of Dem readers.

    BTW, I wonder if Josh Marshall see himself as pro-Obama now? He has denied it steadfastly. It has been a ludicrous denial, but he has denied it.

    Marshall has seriously damaged his rep (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by Universal on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:10:53 PM EST
    And I mean damaged it more than he did with Lieberman in '06, which was a large hit with many Dems.

    Josh's gambit is so transparent it is laughable. If people can't see though the games many of these bloggers are playing, then they have not eyes.

    [ Parent ]

    speaking of eyes.... (none / 0) (#95)
    by Josey on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:17:04 PM EST
    apparently Obama supporters believe if they just continue mocking and hating Hillary with all the rage they can muster - Obama will WIN!!

    http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2008/4/12/191659/104/77#c77

    [ Parent ]

    Notice the tag of the first commenter, (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by MarkL on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 09:45:31 PM EST
    about the need to defend Wright, and compare with my comment here

    [ Parent ]
    do they all get together over virtual cocktails (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by TeresaInPa on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:44:32 PM EST
    and decide what the top blog storyline is? It seems to me some folk just want to be the blog version of the liberal stooges in the print and TV media.

    [ Parent ]
    That's exactly what they want to be (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Universal on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:51:15 PM EST
    You think Keith Olbermann isn't checking on what Josh wrote before Marshall shows up on "Countdown?"

    For many of these people -- and Marshall in particular, from what I have seen -- this is a game. The readers are pawns.

    [ Parent ]

    Interesting hypothesis (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by Virginian on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:47:57 PM EST
    and I tend to agree...but I don't think that is where many of these folks started, nor their original intent...

    The MSM co-opted these folks because they (the MSM) were terrified that these folks would hurt their bottom line...

    Many bloggers turned to the nets because they wanted their voice heard, and the little guy doesn't get invited on Larry King to be heard...but how do you maintain your desire to be heard, and the driving momentum to your opining on your blog when you actually DO get invited onto Larry King, and ARE heard -- You don't, you're now one of them that you railed against suppressing your voice and rightness -- this is just cyclical...the Markos and Josh like bloggers will be usurped down the line by some other upstart...who will be co-opted by the big boys (or become a big boy if they are a pioneer)...

    [ Parent ]

    When I see them distort the facts about (5.00 / 2) (#78)
    by ruffian on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 06:05:03 PM EST
    Dems, I now don't really trust their words about Republicans either.  

    My surfing habits have become more niche, as I learn which blogs have which specialties, whereas I used to spend more time on Kos and TPM.

    Myabe the saddest part is that there are now blogs where I never, repeat never, visit the comments section. Between the nonsense and nastiness it is a waste of time.  Do I really care who was the first to post a comment in a thread? No. Are we still that amazed by technology?

    [ Parent ]

    Amen Chorus (5.00 / 2) (#102)
    by jussumbody on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 08:00:21 PM EST
    I used to read FDL religiously, and I still go there every once in a while to read what Jane has to say, or emptywheel (not TBogg, since he seems like an Obamabot, to my limited exposure to him).  

    But the comments at FDL have become a politically correct echochamber which I have come to avoid in the last couple years.  The last time I read a comment by TeddySF it was because the subject was pretty incredible (about some fundy wanting to deport the gays).  Wondering if I might be sent to the Riviera or to Soweto, I read the post which was so silly it was embarrassing to me as a gay man, and I couldn't resist the urge to comment.  My comment was the 65th or so, and I was the first to even hint that it was hysterical nonsense taken completely out of context.  TeddySF responded by calling me a misogynist and homophobe for using the word "hysteria" (and never responded to the substance of my criticism).  And then he had my response to his response deleted (no, there was no profanity or flaming, since I knew I was surrounded by zombies loyal to TeddySF).

    Anyway, it's like that old saying about the Nazis.  First they came for the trolls, and then they came for the "concern trolls"...  And then all that was left was Fitz!  Jane! First! and the amen chorus.

    The sad thing about the liberal resurgence I think we've experienced in the last year or so is that it's mostly made up of the stupid sheep who voted for Bush not long ago, and they are incapable of critical thinking or accepting that their side or their man (or woman) has any serious flaws.

    BTW, although Digby and Kevin Drum have not "had it with Hillary" they have both voted for Obama and declared their support for him.  And I suspect the same of Atrios.

    [ Parent ]

    heh... (none / 0) (#93)
    by jor on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:11:16 PM EST
    .. you are joking right? The majority of blog readers are young. Young people overwhelmingly support Obama. Hell, if you look at other sites, like social bookmarking sites, hillary is just getting killed all over the internet (c.f. digg or reddit).

    [ Parent ]
    What's your point here? n/t (none / 0) (#108)
    by Gabriele Droz on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 08:25:34 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Are you saying simply supporting (none / 0) (#117)
    by shpilk on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 09:37:58 PM EST
    Obama is damaging to one's own credibility? I don't see where there is that much difference between either candidate on the major issues.

    Is being 'pro-Obama' more or less 'pro-Democratic Party' than being 'pro-Clinton'? I don't see why there needs to be a distinction.

    Now, of course if you are talking about ridiculous tin foil attacks that spew forth [mostly against Hillary], I agree this part is damaging to the reputation of those blogs.

    You know where I come from, and to honest I just recently have decided to support Obama, but you also I have fiercely attacked the unfair outrageous stuff against Hillary over at the GOS.

    [ Parent ]

    I am saying denying it when it is true (none / 0) (#178)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:25:07 AM EST
    and being a leader in false charges against Clinton damages your credibility.

    That is Josh Marshall now.

    [ Parent ]

    I always appreciated (none / 0) (#179)
    by eleanora on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:31:31 AM EST
    your fairness over there back when I used to visit. Most of the Obama and Clinton supporters I know in real-life are awesome, positive people who see both candidates whole, with all their flaws and strengths :)

    [ Parent ]
    I have found it harder and harder to (none / 0) (#182)
    by shpilk on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 08:09:18 PM EST
    be neutral, it's hard to view the whole, with the strengths Hillary could offer, when all I see are the flaws.

    [ Parent ]
    Marshall (none / 0) (#164)
    by gyrfalcon on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 07:41:54 AM EST
    is still vehemently, angrily denying he is an Obama supporter.  Weird.


    [ Parent ]
    Fact is (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:08:16 PM EST
    he is wrong. Top blogs have not "had it" with Clinton.

    Make that (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:15:14 PM EST
    "not every top blog" which is what he claims.

    [ Parent ]
    They perpetually underestimate (5.00 / 7) (#3)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:08:54 PM EST
    Clinton's support.
    I'm going to have to raise an objection here (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by Universal on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:09:05 PM EST
    MyDD had been solidly behind Clinton until very recently.

    But there has been a change, and one which likely isn't coincidental to blog owner's Jerome Armstrong taking a trip to Israel and other voices, like Jonathan Singer's, taking more center stage.

    I know intimately about this because I was just kicked off of the blog, for what I feel are most dubious reasons.

    I don't expect you, Jeralyn, or anyone else who front posts here to comment on that, for your own sake.

    However, I will tell you this: Someone who was not happy with my banning wrote an email to one of the admins and was told something to the effect that now as it looks like Obama will be the nominee the blog has to support him, etc.

    A premature Kumbaya, then?

    Yeah, I think so.

    I have written about this on my own site, if anyone cares to read about it. That is, what happened with MyDD and me (and others who were recently purged, some of whom have been reinstated). If you want to see it, just Google my name and you'll get the site. Go to the Off-topic section.

    Now, don't get me wrong. I know who and what I am. I am a very passionate and fierce debater, and some don't handle that well. But I always bring accurate facts and won't roll over for anybody. And if someone tries to railroad me, I will let the world know that.

    *

    There are too many blogs which are going through the transformation which has slowly been happening over at MyDD the past 2 months or so. More Obama triumphalists coming in to crow and try to jigger with the recommended lists and get nayasyers banned. Let me tell you, it has not been pretty. I am a striker from Kos and have now been forced to move on from MyDD.

    There are some pro-Clinton sites left, such as TL and Taylor Marsh's site. But the vast majority of the sites, IMO, are pro-Obama. And the tenor of many of the Obama supporters is beyond the pale. They wonder why people like myself attract so much support, but it is they who have made fierce Clinton supporters like Taylor and you, Jeralyn, a more sought-after commodity.

    I have never been more ashamed to be a Dem than during this contest. The tactics that have been used by Obama's camp are beyond ridiculous. And the MSM and many good Dems have fallen for them.

    Sad stuff.

    But it's not even close to being over yet.

    - Paul F. Villarreal AKA "Universal" AKA "RokSki"

    And Here I Thought (5.00 / 4) (#19)
    by The Maven on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:37:20 PM EST
    that one of the distinguishing features as between progressives and right-wingers was that there wasn't supposed to be an expectation that everyone would fall in line in unquestioned support of the leadership.  Certainly that wasn't the case in 2004-07, when everyone felt free to criticize our candidates and/or members of Congress whenever they did something we felt was worthy of calling them out.

    The only times I can recall when banning was routinely raised was when a site user/commenter would repeatedly make remarks suggesting that all Dems were bad or that there was no point in supporting Democrats over Republicans.  But the stifling of reasoned criticism is not only unhealthy for the party (do we really want to model ourselves along Eleventh Commandment or Rovian lines?) but also fundamentally anti-democratic.

    Where, exactly, do these folks want to lead us?

    [ Parent ]

    That's a great question (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by Universal on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:49:08 PM EST
    Where are we being led, indeed?

    I can tell you where many of the purported "A List" bloggers are leading us:

    To their own next books and media gigs.

    I've worked in media before and have a brother who was a national host for a ZDTV (now I think it's called G4 TV or something; it's a tech network) show called "Gamespot TV." You see this all the time, especially with things like elections:

    Everyone loves the frontrunner, especially if the frontrunner is relatively new to the scene and might think you helped him achieve his position.

    This is what I wrote about as regards my banning and Jonathan Singer (who I absolutely am sure was behind the banning). Singer's been pushing Obama as hard as he can. Well if Obama gets nominated and then elected, guess who might get himself and MyDD some choice access?

    This is all transparent to me. Now, does that mean that no one that is backing Obama in the media/blogs doesn't believe in him? No, it doesn't. I'm sure some do believe in him and want him genuinely. But there are many other agendas going on as well, not the least of which is career advancement for many bloggers looking for their ticket up the media ladder.

    *

    Also, what we are seeing from many (certainly not all) Obama backers is what happened in Stalinist Russia. I know that will strike some as overkill, but it is not. In the same way that America was heading towards fascism in the aftermath of 9/11 and with the Bush Admin. at the helm, that is what we are seeing from many of what I think of as David Axelrod's internet astroturfers. They don't want ANY dissent. I have seen more vile things go on this election season than I want to remember. I'm talking career and death threats, really disgusting stuff. And most of it has come from the side with the Chicago machine behind it.

    [ Parent ]

    That attitude is a mistake (5.00 / 5) (#20)
    by dianem on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:37:45 PM EST
    Not every progressive is going to support Obama, but it's a mistake to write somebody off merely for that purpose. Personally, I won't try to get in Obama's way - but I'm d**n well going to support downticket candidates. We're going to need every Dem we can get in the House when McCain is President. I may even try to set aside my absolute phobia about "cold-calling" and do some door to door for Charlie Brown, who has a reasonable chance of taking Doolittle's abandoned seat. My husband and I have already discussed contributing to his campaign again this year.

    Obama isn't the only Democrat who matters.

    [ Parent ]

    Couldn't agree more, Diane (5.00 / 3) (#25)
    by Universal on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:41:03 PM EST
    And honestly, I'm tired of being force-fed him.

    [ Parent ]
    I think we may find that (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by Virginian on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:56:02 PM EST
    after this general election, progressivism will be sorely set-back...Obama will not advance progressivism for the sake of advancing progressivism (that is both a vice and a virtue for him depending on which side of the lens you stand). And to be sure McCain is no progressive...so either option that we seem to presented with is not a victory for progressivism

    I think when the dust of Nov '08 settles, we'll see a splintered progressive movement...one branch focused on maintaining a semblance of power (or access to it) much like a political party, and another branch that is issues based and is focussed on pushing agendas and issues (or a slate of issues), much like an interest group...

    [ Parent ]

    Let's be honest about this (5.00 / 5) (#79)
    by Kathy on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 06:07:23 PM EST
    Bloggers find news stories and respond to them with their opinions.  Very rarely do bloggers "break" news.  They can use their power to stir up existing news, but it is not often that they break the actual stories and do the actual gumshoe-ing.  (With respect to citizen journalism, of course)  Blogs don't hire people whose sole job it is to do investigative journalism, but then again, neither do many of the TV news channels lately.  The only faction consistently doing investigative journalism is...that quaint and dying beast, the newspaper.

    That being said, what we are looking at in some of these blogs is opinion backed up by more opinion, with no accountability and no room for dissent.  Posters are mostly anonymous.  There are no repercussions for bad reporting.  Where the only stop-gap against total tyranny is the ethical standards of the person controlling the blog...you get what you pay for.

    [ Parent ]

    Also known as... (5.00 / 3) (#88)
    by dianem on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 06:35:41 PM EST
    ...an echo chamber. Daily Kos worked fairly well as a communication spot as long as people felt free to speak their minds. I really learned a lot about progressive politics and the views of my fellow citizens, and I got into some fascinating discussions that helped me hone my views (and even change them on occasion). But when the blogs become a place where dissenting views are mocked and even banned, then they fail as a communication tool. They become echo chambers with no purpose whatsoever except as a social club.

    [ Parent ]
    I agree 100% (none / 0) (#107)
    by Virginian on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 08:18:18 PM EST
    And I do think the netroots will absolutely mirror what I am predicting in the netroots.

    I think you're right

    [ Parent ]

    Supposed to read (none / 0) (#174)
    by Virginian on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 09:50:29 AM EST
    And I do think the netroots will absolutely mirror what I am predicting in the progressive movement.

    [ Parent ]
    Pot meet Kettle (none / 0) (#155)
    by Skex on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 01:01:01 AM EST
    Seriously this place is just as much if not more of an echo chamber for Clinton supporters or should I say Obama detractors since I see precious little supporting of Clinton compared to constant savaging of Obama.

    To some extent it's understandable. People like having places to go where they can hang out and talk to people that agree with them.

    But don't get all self righteous about it.

    I personally prefer reading over here because I like the challenge of trying to make my point to people who don't agree. But I've been suspended several times for saying things that were no where near as hostile or brutal as the anti-Obama people spew with impunity.

    Now this is Jeralyn's blog and as such she can moderate it however she see's fit. But I watch the conversations here for the most part turn into frenzied circular hate rants against the probable democratic Nominee. And I don't even see the purported Obama supporting BTD pipe up to bring any reason to the debate. Something I do regularly see on Dailykos where Obama supporters will even call foul on attacks on Clinton that are beyond the pale.

    But here it seems sometimes that no source is too vile no attack too unfair to garner unlimited blind support.

    Clinton supporters talk about Obamabots and Kool Aide drinkers and make all sorts of condescending accusations at people who support Obama.

    I'm turning 38 in June and there has been a Bush or a Clinton in the oval office for my entire adult life. There are people who will vote in this election who have had one of the other for their entire lives.

    That in itself is almost reason to vote against her.

    Now here is the pure reality I know people who determined liberals hardcore leftist progressives like my old Marine buddy in Ohio who said he'd McCain before he'd vote for Clinton before the primaries even began.

    Myself I'll hold my nose and select her name if it comes to it but I'd have to hold my damned nose and I'd be tempted to just stay home that day since I'm in Texas anyway and there is no way in hell she's winning this state.

    I've said it before and I'll say it again. Clinton has all the negatives of a leftist candidate with non of the positives.

    The Right will come out in force against her and the Left won't come out to defend her.

    She voted for the War and spin Obama giving political cover to Kerry and other Dems who shared in that mistake all you want but the anti-War left don't trust her.

    I don't trust her to stop torture I'm afraid she'll cave on that crap because she'll be afraid of being seen as week.

    I don't trust her on net neutrality I don't trust her in dealing with Media consolidation I don't trust her on Campaign finance. I don't trust her on the 1st Amendment nor on the 2nd.

    Her cozying up to the Right over the last couple years don't make me feel warm and fuzzy about her either.

    And I don't feel this way about her just because I don't know her. I feel this way because of what I do know about her. Her record is clear on these matters.

    While I may not know with certitude what I'm getting with Obama I know what we'll get from the Clinton. More good rhetoric on the campaign trail and a bunch of triangulated folding to corporate interest when in the White house.

    More selling out the Unions more fast tracked trade bills. More slashing of social programs and more pandering to their corporate base.

    I'm a realist and a bit of political pessimist I know that I occupy a ideological zone that that is pretty damned exclusive. I know what most believe because I believed it myself at one point before discarding all the "conventional wisdom" and looking at the world with a critical eye.

    Obama may end up being just as much a sell out as ever politician who came before him. But I think there is a better than even chance that he's sincere in his beliefs and his goals. That he really wants to bring the type of change this country needs to right our ship of state. Because of all the things people are trying to paint him as bad because of.

    Because he did sit in those sermons that Rev. Wright gave I think he does have a good understanding of what real people think about their lives.

    Because he did work in the poor neighborhoods and try to help people get control of their lives because he has shown that he has an understanding of power and how to manipulate it's levers.

    It's like I said talking to a buddy of mine recently about Obama, He's far less direct on a lot of things than I'd like he's not as forceful as I'd be but you know what I'm just running my mouth and Obama is running a so far successful campaign to become the next President so maybe he's got a point.

    I know I see people motivated and excited this year like I've never seen before in my life. The country is ripe for an Obama candidacy we're ready for change and we're sick and tired of being sick and tired.

    We just came out of supposed economic expansion that for the first time ever did not result in wage growth for working people.

    When they sent our good paying manufacturing jobs overseas they told us that's the past go get some computer training when we did that they started sending those jobs overseas (or importing scabs that they can get for sub-market wages) now it seems the only thing left to us it to become Walmart associates or fry-cooks and most of them they're bringing people in illegally to drive those wages down as well.

    It ain't just rural America that's bitter.


    [ Parent ]

    please don't break your arm (none / 0) (#175)
    by english teacher on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 09:56:33 AM EST
    patting yourself on the back.  

    [ Parent ]
    heh... (none / 0) (#181)
    by kayla on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 12:50:28 PM EST
    "It ain't just rural America that's bitter. "

    Exactly!

    "I know I see people motivated and excited this year like I've never seen before in my life. The country is ripe for an Obama candidacy we're ready for change and we're sick and tired of being sick and tired."

    This is one of the things I dislike about some Obama supporters.  They say things like that.  Last time I checked Obama had 49% of voters so far and Hillary has 47% in the Dem race, the rest mostly went to Edwards I suppose.  Obama and his supporters DO NOT speak for the entire country.  The country is NOT "ripe" for an Obama candidacy, only some of it is.  Okay?  Yes, Obama gets thousands of his supporters stuffed into high school gymnasiums chanting his name, women faint at his presence, Oprah, Robert DeNiro and some Kennedys adore him, and he even has his own news network, but please realize that there are people out there - lots of them - who do not understand what in the world the fuss is about.  I have nothing against Obama supporters, but please understand, they do not speak for all of us.  Thank you.

    This also may surprise you - I LIKE Hillary Clinton!


    [ Parent ]

    Mydd (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by Dave B on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:42:02 PM EST
    What seems to have happened over there is some folks came over from Daily Kos to tilt the balance.

    There are a few folks on there that I've seen consistently making over 100 comments per day.  They try to dominate every thread that comes down the pike.

    Maybe they are getting paid by the Obama Campaign???

    I don't enjoy reading blogs that are dominated by a few very outspoken people.

    [ Parent ]

    I see the change at MyDD (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by OxyCon on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:32:50 PM EST
    It started about two weeks ago. Now whenever anyone posts something pro-Hillary, they are immediately blogswarmed and ridiculed by Obama's Hope & Unity crowd. Derisive posts mocking Hillary supporters are prominently displayed with a tough chit attitude by DailyKook members.

    As for Avarosis and Moulitsas, those two were former devoted Repubs who still have their giant authoritarian streaks running through them.

    [ Parent ]

    it started when (none / 0) (#115)
    by TheRefugee on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 09:04:45 PM EST
    Jerome went on dKos and recommended Alegre's diary for a dKos strike.

    [ Parent ]
    Your observation is dead-on, Dave (none / 0) (#43)
    by Universal on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:55:22 PM EST
    Once Obama had his sweep month in February, the exodus from Daily Kos to MyDD began in earnest.

    The site is now in transition but is rapidly heading towards Obama-ville, or Daily Kos West. With Jerome taking a trip, HRC supporters being purged and Obama supporters and their multiple accounts to tilt the rec diary list and troll ratings, we are heading down the same slope which engulfed Daily Kos.

    Jerome does his best to keep things in check, and I'm sure he'll clean things up when he gets back (not sure when that is). But if you go over there and see that Bob Johnson is at the top of the rec list, you can be fairly certain that the assimilation is in full swing.

    :)

    [ Parent ]

    i too have been wondering whatever (none / 0) (#176)
    by english teacher on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 09:58:58 AM EST
    happened to all the bush trolls who used to inhabit progressive blogs.  seems to me they all just disappeared into the ether about the same time obama burst upon the scene, with his own amen chorus of ardent online supporters.  strange days indeed.

    [ Parent ]
    I agree (5.00 / 7) (#6)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:14:20 PM EST
    pro-Hillary blogs are in the minority. And yes, I'm not familiar with changes at MyDD but I do know Jerome supports Hillary.

    To say every single top blog has "had it" with Hillary is just not true. Between the top blogs not taking sides and ones like TL and TM, it's just a false claim.

    Washington Monthly/Kevin Drum (5.00 / 4) (#9)
    by katiebird on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:19:49 PM EST
    Is an interesting case.  He voted for Obama (he said) and from that day to this his comments section has become unbearable.

    The abuse doesn't come from him -- his posts are OK-ish.  But his commenters are as bad as anything at dKos.

    Political Animal used to me one of my regular stops.  But the lack of rigorous moderation has made it an unfriendly place.

    [ Parent ]

    Lots of so called liberal blogs piss me off (none / 0) (#41)
    by jerry on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:54:05 PM EST
    Often times because of the crappy behavior of the commenters, if not for creepy authoritarian posts from the bloggers themselves, bloggers that insist on government mandated injections into kids, or insist on speech codes, or insist on making sexist and racist comments "in the name of progress", or insist on defending processes that encourage false allegations.  Non-reality based bloggers.

    With all due respect to Jeralyn's commenting policy here, the cure for those other blogs is to learn the joy of being an anonymous piss in their punch bowl always speaking truth troll.

    Last week, just by commenting in a normal tone of voice, and asking questions, and questioning assumptions, I "won" a thread at a very popular, very divisive, authoritarian nutcase "liberal" blog.  That wasn't my judgment, that was the judgment of some of the regulars there who admitted I had run rings around the blogger and the commenters.

    And there's always a moral victory if you can make reasonable comments and get quickly banned.

    Truly, some of the better blogs are the ones with the best trolls combating the regular commenters.  One of Kevin Drum's problems has always been his trolls are really stupid, almost botlike.

    So, for good blogs, there are comments.  For other blogs, there is trolling.

    In the meantime, I think the lesson of the past six months are that the rightwing has a point when they say there is no hate like liberal hate, that we on the left who claim to be able to see nuance, often act like complete a*h*les when it comes to demonizing people we disagree with.

    There are a lot of righty bloggers out there that *do make sense on many issues.  And there are a lot of lefty bloggers out there that are not reality based and if put into power would be every bit as authoritarian and empire building and vengeful as our current administration.  I myself have also learned to really despise identity politics groups.  And we should throw away the terms troll and concern troll.  Most often what the label means is the person who uses the label has very little to add and just wants to shut down a conversation.

    [ Parent ]

    *Apparently* putting stars around words bolds em (none / 0) (#42)
    by jerry on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:54:52 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    But they can't be content (5.00 / 2) (#58)
    by Kathy on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:17:00 PM EST
    with just bashing Clinton--they have to bash the Clinton blogs, too.  I know that you, Jeralyn, have said that you've gotten some nasty emails.  Taylor Marsh posts some of hers and they are just awful.  These are attacks from fellow dems who are FURIOUS at Clinton supporters.  The anger is palpable.  They can't just "win," they have to completely destroy all things Clinton.  There is such hatred at the center, such anti-woman vehemence, that it's sickening.  I haven't seen that kind of thing since I picketed against rabid anti-choice a-holes in front of the Atlanta Feminist Women's Center back in the eighties.  They spit on us.  One man tried to urinate on us.  They seethed with hatred.

    Did y'all see that No Quarter had a really mysterious problem with their server the other day and had to change?  I mean, what is up with that?  These are not the types of dems I want to associate myself with.  These guys (and they are mostly guys) are fame-seeking fascists.

    They are just one of the many reasons I will not vote Obama if he gets the nom (which to me looks unlikely as the days grow long).  As others have said, I'll support down-ticket dems, but not Obama.

    [ Parent ]

    That's just irresponsible (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by jussumbody on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 09:00:49 PM EST
    I don't like Obama for his crappy health care plan and his generally unprogressive Liebermanesque "bipartisanship".  And I really don't like his supporters and their smug, sanctimonious attitudes towards those of us who see Clinton as the lesser of two DLC evils.  

    But John McCain is as dangerous and stupid or more so than Bush.  Try to remember it's not about you, or me, personally and our insulted intelligences and motives.  This country is in a major economic slow motion trainwreck and I think Obama is a political lightweight who is almost as inexperienced and untested as Bush was, and as smart as he is, he is completely unprepared for the mess he's about to step into.  But a McCain presidency is just absolutely unthinkable.  Suck it up and vote straight Dem if you can't bring yourself to vote for Obama outright.  But vote Dem, please.

    [ Parent ]

    See the problem (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by rooge04 on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 12:23:10 AM EST
    is that I actually think Obama is worse than McCain. I think he'd be a terrible President and would destroy the Party with his incompetence.  I truly believe that. I believe he will be ineffective. And we'll hand the Republicans all three branches in 2012. Not that I think he'd even win the General.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm with you rooge04 (5.00 / 1) (#157)
    by Rainsong on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 02:00:38 AM EST

    I think Obama is worse than McCain, or at best, no different, as he doesn't stand for any thing.

    In his campaign to date, he barely even mentions the Party in passing. He has run his whole campaign for more than a year as an Independent - an Indie that maybe, or maybe not, "leans" Democrat.

    I'm not even convinced he "leans", he is too far to the right for me. I know many people keep saying he is solid centrist, but I dont see the evidence of that - the evidence of his public record that I see, thin as it is - is into the right-wing, or at best lazy and never makes a decision on his own. A puppet, and I have no way of knowing for sure who'll be pulling his strings.

    And if Obama does represent "new" Party politics, then the Democratic Party is no longer a Party I wish to support, as it will no longer represent my interests.

    I dont care if he is more electable because the MSM adores him. I'm not voting for a lazy right-winger, who can't even convince me that he genuinely represents the Party, who just walks into the Presidency, because the MSM gets tingles up its legs.

    If, as Dem partisans and activists we then end up having to work at WH damage control from within Congress, then I'd rather be working to block a Repub, than a fake Dem.

    [ Parent ]

    I'll agree (none / 0) (#151)
    by jussumbody on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 12:50:18 AM EST
    that I think he'll be ineffective and his first year or two will suck.  But he's smart, so he might catch on like Clinton did in his first term.  And most likely there will be a Dem Congress next year that could (theoretically) stop Obama from really screwing things up too bad.

    But you should really start reading more about McCain before you make statements like that.  Elect McCain and there might not be much of a economy, or military, or constitution left by 2012.

    [ Parent ]

    And another thing... (none / 0) (#154)
    by jussumbody on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 12:55:00 AM EST
    If the Dems CAN'T win the White House for a 3rd time in a row, against a clown like McCain, there won't be a Democratic party left to speak of in 2012.

    [ Parent ]
    Small sad story (none / 0) (#59)
    by waldenpond on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:21:57 PM EST
    My neighbor was at a starbucks and had on a Hillary t-shirt.  A man walked up to her and called her a freak.  When they went outside, the man spit on her car..... when he drove off, she dumped her coffee in the back of his truck. :)

    [ Parent ]
    Was the attacker (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by OxyCon on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:50:40 PM EST
    A right wing nut?
    Or an Obama nut?
    Hard to tell these days.

    [ Parent ]
    Exactly (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by Blue Jean on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 09:06:53 PM EST
    Sometimes I wonder whether all these vehemently anti-Hillary left blog commentators are really pro-Obama--or they're just Freeper trolls disguising themselves as pro-Obama Dems.

    [ Parent ]
    She wasted a perfectly mediocre (none / 0) (#68)
    by Fabian on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:36:04 PM EST
    cup of coffee on him!  The horror!

    (Sorry, out here in bland, vanilla Columbus we have a very good roaster which easily outclasses Starbucks.  I find Starbucks coffee to be inferior.  I admit to being a coffee snob.)

    [ Parent ]

    depends upon... (none / 0) (#72)
    by white n az on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:49:08 PM EST
    what you consider wasted...

    If someone had spit on my car for my political beliefs, I wouldn't think that I wasted a coffee by tossing it on their truck, but hey, that's me.

    Seems as though here was another Obama supporter with a strange notion of party unity.

    [ Parent ]

    Just coffee, be a waste--need cream & sugar (none / 0) (#76)
    by jawbone on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 06:01:38 PM EST
    to make it harder to clean up!

    Joke, ok?

    [ Parent ]

    I can get really upset (none / 0) (#92)
    by Fabian on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:06:38 PM EST
    over a spilled cup of coffee.  Hot coffee, brewed to perfection, fresh and steaming one minute and the next, wasted!  And me without my coffee fix.

    Plus Starbucks is over priced.

    I wouldn't have bothered.  I've learned that for people who truly are jerks, any time spent on them is time better used for something else.

    The internet taught me that.  I'll get all PO'd about some comment and then....realize that the poster will not listen to a thing I say in reply.  

    [ Parent ]

    While the Boiz at the big blogs (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by myiq2xu on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:48:52 PM EST
    might think they are "winning," all they have done is drive some of their best talent into new venues.

    There are several new blogs, and others are growing.

    [ Parent ]

    Does anyone know if TalkLeft (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by derridog on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 09:01:48 PM EST
    hits have increased in the past few months? I never even knew about it until I got so discouraged with Kos that I looked around for other more reasonable blogs. I'm wondering if Kos has lost people or if all the crazies in the universe go there now and keep the numbers up.

    [ Parent ]
    his numbers are down (none / 0) (#120)
    by bigbay on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:13:47 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    TalkLeft's traffic (none / 0) (#150)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 12:47:34 AM EST
    has doubled since January when I went to Iowa for the caucuses and BTD and I have been writing so much on the primaries. But it also had dropped since the 2006 election, and is the same now as it was during the 2004 elections. So all in all, we've rebounded.

    [ Parent ]
    They are confused. (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by FlaDemFem on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 06:32:43 PM EST
    What they really mean is that Hillary supporters are through with most of the major blogs. Why hang out at a place where your political opinion is villified and you are subjected to vicious attacks for having it. That is why I left DKos. I got tired of being called a bitch, ignorant, reactionary and stupid. That is no way to gather support for one's candidate.

    [ Parent ]
    And it seems to be contagious. (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by Fabian on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:28:06 PM EST
    When teacherken wrote his spiel about Hillary going too far(Wolcott covered it) that's when I took a good hard look around dk.  Teacherken was someone who appeared to look at all sides of an issue before making a decision and yet it seemed that he had accepted all the wild anti-Hillary accusations as fact.

    It was amazing how fast the pendulum swung too.  When Edwards was still in, it was the pseudo Obama supporters who demanded he drop out.  Then when Edwards suspended his campaign, it waffled for a week or two and then rapidly went anti-Hillary.  All the Hillary bashing did was to make me increasingly uncomfortable.  I thought every one else saw through the over the top rhetoric too.  And then they began to repeat it and the narratives began be accepted as fact.

    Two weeks prior to the OH vote, I knew I was probably going to leave.  Oh, I kept saying I wouldn't, I kept looking for sanity, but it was never there.  So I moved on...almost.  I still visit but always regret it when I read campaign stuff.

    [ Parent ]

    Fair enough, Jeralyn (none / 0) (#10)
    by Universal on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:23:12 PM EST
    You're correct. I think my mistake was allowing myself to be fooled by what constitutes "the top blogs."

    When looking at it from a different perspective and your list of the page hits, it is true that many top blogs have not given up on Hillary.

    Another blog of note is Hillaryis44.org, which might not get tons of traffic (don't honestly know) but which is watched by insiders from both Democratic campaigns and many in the media as well.

    :)

    [ Parent ]

    Hillary IS44 is awful (5.00 / 4) (#12)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:24:10 PM EST
    imo. It is precisely what I criticize from the Obama blogs.

    [ Parent ]
    That view is shared by many, BTD (none / 0) (#23)
    by Universal on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:39:27 PM EST
    But it is probably the one spot where many die-hard HRC supporters speak the freest, and many there seem to have some fairly deep pockets (donations-wise) and longstanding ties as political activists and/or operatives.

    Not everyone, to be sure. But some. I think the reason it is valued is that many see it as an arm of the campaign, although it is not from everything I have gleamed from articles written about it.

    If you want a good reflection of what those who are really emotionally attached to the campaign and who will freely talk about possible strategies they're aware of to come (not to mention air out Donna Brazile emails), it is a useful site. It is definitely kept an eye on by some in the media, if not many.

    The person who runs it gets good info, too. The admin posts some stuff that I haven't seen in other spots. So, that's useful.

    A lot of regrettable things get said there, that I will concede. But with the spread of the "Obama Internet Empire" only growing, I think that places like TL, TM and yes, Hillaryis44 become all the more popular, as I was saying to Jeralyn earlier.

    We have to remember that more Dems have voted for HRC than BHO. That's a large group of people who feel that their concerns aren't being heard, even though some of them don't have or frequently use the internet.

    [ Parent ]

    I was plagiarized on (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:29:44 PM EST
    Hillaryis44.

    It was awesome.

    [ Parent ]

    If you know them can you ask them (none / 0) (#14)
    by 1jpb on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:29:20 PM EST
    to take me out of commenting exile?

    I'm actually very happy here, but I wish that I had the option of commenting there too.  I still read that blog several times a day, even though I don't get to participate.

    And, for the record I was never nasty over there, I was occasionally sarcastic, but now I've even learned to temper that.  Further in my defense, I have made plenty of contrite comments over there, right up to the point they cut me off without warning or explanation.

    [ Parent ]

    They ban for sarcasm? (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by dianem on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:32:34 PM EST
    I wouldn't last a week.

    [ Parent ]
    go look at my old comments (none / 0) (#31)
    by 1jpb on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:44:37 PM EST
    same name: 1jpb

    I don't think anything I did was that bad, in fact my sarcastic tones were often reflected as a response to sarcasm.  But, even so I wasn't that bad.

    I'll admit that my signature line was crude,  but I have abandoned that here, and I can't change it over there unless they let me fully log in.

    [ Parent ]

    Your comments seem pretty mild compared (none / 0) (#55)
    by Teresa on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:09:08 PM EST
    to many I have read there, from both sides. Maybe something is messed up with your log on? You should write an email and ask what happened.

    I'm a Clinton supporter and unless Jeralyn or BTD are deleting some of your comments, it makes no sense to me that you were banned. I don't agree with you much, but I don't find you offensive at all, at least what I've read.

    [ Parent ]

    I have no complaints about talkleft (none / 0) (#61)
    by 1jpb on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:24:21 PM EST
    I've never had an on-topic comment deleted here.

    And, I've only had commenting suspended for a very short time on my first day.  That was when I was trying to cause trouble, because I randomly stumbled on this site, and I didn't realize that this was a blog full of informed people, where I would want to participate.

    It was myDD that cut me off, you can see a link to my old comments above.

    [ Parent ]

    I know. I read the first page of your comment (none / 0) (#91)
    by Teresa on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 06:53:46 PM EST
    link to MyDD. I didn' see anything that you said that warranted banning. I didn't check your ratings but I haven't seen you abuse that here. I would write them if I were you.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm confused by the threading of... (none / 0) (#22)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:38:53 PM EST
    ...comments. Which one banned you?

    [ Parent ]
    Someone at myDD, Jerome? n/t (none / 0) (#34)
    by 1jpb on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:45:27 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I thought I recognized those initials. (none / 0) (#37)
    by Joan in VA on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:48:30 PM EST
    As I recall, you could be a bit sharp. Though there are far worse there right now. Seems MYDD has been swarmed with the haters so I don't go there as much as I used to.

    [ Parent ]
    But, I'm reformed now (5.00 / 4) (#45)
    by 1jpb on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:57:20 PM EST
    it's a lot harder to be sloppy here.  Y'all are a lot better at picking apart comments for technical glitches.  And, throwing verbal bombs is frowned on here.  

    So, hopefully my reformed self will be welcomed back.  First order of business would be to change my signature.

    [ Parent ]

    Good idea! LOL (none / 0) (#49)
    by Joan in VA on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:59:11 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I haven't given up on Democrats (5.00 / 3) (#7)
    by dianem on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:14:41 PM EST
    But I still won't support Obama. Partly because he has offended me with what I clearly see as race-baiting and sexist comments. But, when I think of it, mostly because I don't think he can win and I won't put myself through what I went through with Kerry. Gore wasn't so bad. It was a disappointment, but I figured that Bush Sr. had not been horrible and thought "How much damage can W do in 4 years?". Then I found out how much damage he could do, and fought hard for Kerry. But when Kerry lost I was devastated. I won't tie my emotions that strongly to a candidate I don't think can win. And I have never thought Obama could win. He has too many negatives and too few positive. If he'd waited and seasoned himself first, he could have been great, but was catapulted into the spotlight when he wasn't ready, and that is a disaster for a politician.

    I'm not voting for Obama if he's nominated (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Universal on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:30:33 PM EST
    The Jesse Jackson, Jr., Amaya Smith SC Memo, 'fairy tale,' Doug Wilder stuff pushed me to the edge, and what has happened with MI and FL sealed the deal.

    I will probably write-in Hillary if she is not nominated. The actions of Obama's camp and many of his supporters should not be rewarded, lest a very bad example be advanced in our party.

    That a Harvard Law grad's campaign is resorting to these tactics makes them even more absurd and offensive.

    [ Parent ]

    Hillary wouldn't want you to write her name in: (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by ahazydelirium on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:43:24 PM EST
    she'd want you to support the Democratic candidate. Yet another reason why she is the better Democratic candidate.

    It's an awful paradox: she wants her supporters to support the candidate, which is such a wonderfully loyal trait that it makes you want her to be the President even more. So you want to write her name in, if she doesn't get the nomination. Even though this goes against her own position.

    It would be an awful place to find yourself in when it comes time to vote in November. But I may be sharing it with you.

    [ Parent ]

    It's a good point (none / 0) (#51)
    by Universal on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:03:46 PM EST
    If I had my druthers, Hillary would run as an Independent if she's not nominated.

    She won't, of course. And she shouldn't, politically. But I would personally love for that to happen.

    As I've said in other forums, I have two options left if I don't write Hillary's name in:

    • Vote McCain
    • Vote McCain and actively help McCain to win

    One or both of these is likely to happen. My distaste at what has happened to the Clintons is very real and very justified. I honestly believe that if we go down the road with Obama, there is going to be lasting damage to the party. And MORE damage could be done if he were elected. That's not something I want to see happen.

    Do I think he can be elected? There's a chance, although I certainly wouldn't bet on it. But if what has happened is allowed to stand, our party could split. This is why the "will vote for McCain if Obama is nominated" numbers are as large as they are when Clinton supporters are polled.

    [ Parent ]

    Just don't give up on Dems (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by dianem on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:44:27 PM EST
    The party is not bad. When I spent a lot of time on Daily Kos, I started to see Democrats as the problem, not the solution. A lot of people, especially the most regularly recommended diarists, spent more time criticizing Democrats than Republicans. I left because I needed perspective. I was actually hoping to find somewhere  that people could convince me to like Obama, but every pro-Obama site I checked out was so full of hate and bile that I didn't even post. I still don't like Obama, but I'm not going to let my feelings turn me against the party. It's a good party, even if it's not perfect. I'm not giving up on the net, just Daily Kos, and I'm not giving up on the Party, just one person in it. There is a lot worth fighting for.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm not going to lie to you (none / 0) (#52)
    by Universal on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:06:36 PM EST
    Thoughts of leaving the party have entered my mind.

    For the first time I could actually imagine not being a Democrat. That's how bad this has been. It has been an out and out embarrassment, from Obama's camp to the MSM. I now understand how conservatives feel about the "liberal media." I'll tell you, it has been an eye-opening experience, and one that I know a lot of HRC supporters have shared in. Many of us now look to Fox News and people like Hannity and Limbaugh to provide perspective. That is how bad it has been.

    [ Parent ]

    Same Thing Here Universal (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by cplummer on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 12:50:59 AM EST
    I feel like the Democratic party has left me.  After weeks of debating myself, yesterday, I filled out a voter's registration card and mailed it in changing my affiliation from Democrat to unaffiliated.  Even tonight, I get a lump in my throat and tears in my eyes because I've been a lifelong Democratic activitist for decades.  Every four years, I forget EVERYTHING else--my kids, my housework, my hobbies--to work on getting a Democrat in the White House.

    Not this year...if Hillary is not the nominee, I will not work for Sen. Obama.  He has been disrespectful to me and has taken this middle-aged woman's vote for granted.  He hasn't earned my vote, and if he is the Democratic nominee, I will NOT just give it to him.

    The latest INDY convert...TRDMF  (tears rolling down my face).

    [ Parent ]

    Me, too (none / 0) (#69)
    by dianem on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:45:28 PM EST
    Although it hasn't gotten bad enough that I have turned to Fox.  I did get so disillusioned with fellow Dems and the party in general that I considered re-registering as an independent. But ... I'm a Democrat. I believe in the principles of the Democratic Party. That doesn't mean that I like every Dem, or vote for every Dem, or agree with every Dem (although until now I've voted straight ticker for 25 years). I'm not going to let some loud-mouthed idiots convince me to give up on the party. Heck, I suspect that a lot of the rabble-rousers on Daily Kos and MyDD and all of the unmoderated blogs are actually young Republicans creating dissent. Look at how much damage was done here a few days ago by ONE troll who registered under several names. Jeralyn was able to sort that out - but unmoderated and larger blogs don't have that ability.

    [ Parent ]
    In a sense, I'm lucky (none / 0) (#82)
    by rghojai on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 06:14:08 PM EST
    I live in California, assume that the Dem nominee will win with ease. Assuming that's how it shapes up and Obama is the nominee, I'll vote third-party for Pres). If it looks closer, it will likely be big-time hold my nose and... .

    [ Parent ]
    I stopped going to Carpetbagger, (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by Anne on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:28:46 PM EST
    because the comments had been taken over by Clinton-haters, fed, in large part, by the bias of Steve Benen's posts on the race.  During my time there, Steve made no outright declaration for Obama, but his posts were hardly neutral.

    In fact, my support for Hillary developed there, as I found myself objecting to the nonsense being posted in the comments, and felt compelled to at least put the right information out there.  When Edwards dropped out, I was bummed, but found that I could make the transition to Hillary because of what I had learned in defending her for so long.

    I haven't been back in weeks, and don't miss it.

    I would put it the other way around (5.00 / 8) (#32)
    by stillife on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:44:49 PM EST
    Clinton supporters have "had it" with many top blogs.

    Not only Clinton supporters have had it (5.00 / 4) (#60)
    by peachkfc on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:22:59 PM EST
    but I'm sure I'm not the only fairly neutral Democrat (I was for Richardson, then Dodd, then Edwards, then just threw up my hands and decided to support whoever gets nominated) who can't stand the incessant Clinton-bashing at Americablog and TPM.  (Josh saying he is not pro-Obama, or, at least, anti-Clinton, is simply ludicrous.)  Daily Kos jumped the shark long ago about a lot of things, including its Clinton-bashing, but I was a big fan of John Aravosis until he allowed his Clinton-hatred to destoy his blog and his reputation; Marshall is well on his way to the same fate.  I'm not particularly thrilled with either Obama or Clinton, but I simply can't understand the vitriol I've seen coming from both sides' supporters toward the others' candidate and supporters, especially from the Obama extremists like Aravosis.  The worst of it, though, are the outright lies and distortions that formerly reputable journalists like Aravosis, Marshall, and some others have been printing for months, along with their own nasty commentary.  It's that far more than the comments, which you can always just not bother with, that have driven me away.  

    And, by the way, if we're talking about top blogs, I think influence should be considered as well as traffic and ad rates.  In that light, I would say the the majority of the most influential liberal blogs (Digby, Firedoglake, C&L, My DD, Atrios, and I'd add Glenn Greenwald to the list) have remained admirably neutral.

    [ Parent ]

    ditto (none / 0) (#168)
    by pluege on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 08:52:42 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Like I said in an earlier thread (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by white n az on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:52:44 PM EST
    CDS is the gift that keeps on giving

    Arivosis speaks for no one but himself.

    The fact is that the bloggers who are all out Obama supporters are killing their credibility with many main stream Democrats who won't return to their sites after the nomination is decided.

    I was just at americablog (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by kenosharick on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 04:56:48 PM EST
    and they are going off the deepend. They are bashing tweety(who has been a staunch Barack backer) for a slight criticism over coffee versus OJ. I love Hillary and KNOW she would make a great president, but those people are bordering on scary/fanatical.

    They're very thin-skinned (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by stillife on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 05:00:42 PM EST
    some of these Obama supp