when will we give the terms "HillShill, HillBot, Paid Poster, Hillaroid" a rest?

:sarcasm:

"shaming ritual".

Is it your argument that because a candidate's staff member planted a question that gives you a license to call that candidate's supporter anything you like?

staff.

there is no evidence to support that, just alleged claims by CHEEP operatives... Secondly, true or lie, it is only a question for Chrissake.......*bush uses a wirer as a sitting President!

There's zero evidence that any other campaign does it. But there's proof Clinton has done it repeatedly.

Next strawman argument?

:sarcasm:

Good one. :toast:

their nonsense.

we all need to agree on one of those terms to use.

and HRC has a better chance of collecting from that guy in Nigeria: the one who keeps emailing me begging to give me his inheritance than she does of winning my vote in this lifetime.

everyone will suddenly love her.

Really, it is.

She knows it too. It's clear that she has conducted her campaign with no concern about support from the base. She doesn't want us, she believes she will win without us, and she is almost certainly right.

A despicable practice! (am I at 400 yet?)

Once the first few caucuses and primaries are held though I think the level of hysteria will rise to levels currently unimaginable.

The Party blogs will enforce rules against dissent.

Most people who can't support her will know there isn't a point to look for hope for change from the Democratic Party. Not that there is much doubt now. Places like this will be love fests for Hillary because only her supporters will be left. She isn't going to win converts from the people who see her for what she is, but they won't be allowed to express their discontent, so it will look fine.

hope to accomplish with the condescending spam and insults?

Your response will be an insult, so I'd like to respond to it preemptively with a follow-up question.

Seriously, what is your objective? Do you hope to capture support with spam? Is it working?

Your response to this next question will be to claim all the candidates do it, so I'd like to respond to it preemptively with a follow-up question.

It is to that all the campaigns do it, but the total of all the similar acts by other campaigns equals 10% of what the Hillary campaign produces in attacks, bullying and division. It isn't becoming of any of them, but the quantity from the Hillary campaign is overwhelming. If there is any possibility of persuasion it is lost with this tactic, so what it the strategic objective?

Your response will be an insult, so I'd like to respond to it preemptively with a follow-up question.

But why? Do you really think it works? Or do you just want to silence critics? Does it silence them? You do know they will be officially silenced soon enough, don't you? What will you do then? The bridges will be burned, there won't be anyone to fight with, do you have a post coronation plan?

is that I am unable to change my username to "hillbot".;)

:rofl:
Actually, I do have a sockpuppet left over from 2004 on another forum named "kerrybot"

:rofl:

I also commit to keeping my criticisms of Hillary, or any other candidate, as fair and impartial as I possibly can. I will refrain from being snarky, childish, or vitriolic with regards to all candidates.

Will you, MethuenProgressive, promise the same? Note that I make my pledge unilaterally; it does not depend on the actions of others.