Home | About | Donate

Liberals Grow Hysterical Toward Those Who Plan To Break From Democratic Party


Liberals Grow Hysterical Toward Those Who Plan To Break From Democratic Party

Kevin Gosztola

Every four years, progressives are lectured and berated by left-leaning pundits, who have varying degrees of allegiance to the Democratic Party. Any consideration of a third-party candidate, especially the Green Party’s presidential candidate, is deemed reprehensible. Now that Hillary Clinton is officially the Democratic Party’s nominee, that moment in the election cycle is upon us.


Most negativity is motivated by fear.

The vociferousness of those who rail against Stein as a spoiler is directly proportional to their realization that they are backing a seriously flawed candidate.


Gosh Kevin, think you could have a talk with Ru Freeman, author of CD's Clinton love fest du jour, Want a Third Party? Vote Hillary, Support Bernie?

Ru already drank the Kool Aid but perhaps it isn't to late to give her an antidote.


Between the corporate mainstream media and the rogue writers Clinton trollmaster David Brock funds to write every form of propaganda imaginable, we will see an ever increasing deluge of anti-third party propaganda between now and November. They will push our fear buttons so many times that they better have spare buttons available to replace the worm out ones.

The oligarchs want Clinton in the White House and will pay whatever it costs to put her there.


Good on you, Kevin.

Seeing the anti-Stein phenomenon you saw,
I decided to jump on the bandwagon:


Thanks for the good news: the mainstream media is fighting the Green Party!

  1. First they ignore you: DONE
  2. Then they laugh at you: DONE
  3. Then they fight you: THAT's WHERE WE ARE NOW!
  4. Then you win (must be around the corner...)


Workers & Progressives should have figured out by now that the Democratic Party is a frenemy, which is even worse than a regular enemy because it pretends to be your friend. And in all liklihood, Hillary will do more damage to the USA & the world than Trump. For instance Trump might a difficult time persuading NATO to bomb his enemy du jour, whereas we already know NATO will follow Hillary anywhere. Likewise, Hillary will be able to work with Congress & the Corporations to push through the same kind of austerity, privitizing, polluting, neoliberal poison we've grown accustomed to these last 35 years. Whereas I have a hard time imagining Trump being able to push through much of a legislative agenda. In any event, we'd all be better off if the Democratic Party would just go away and die, or at least call themselves by a more accurate name...say, 'the Republicans' for instance.


Is it just me, or is this article hard to follow because it is so poorly written?


And exactly what is it that YOU are trying to say?


Sorry, but I don't know what you mean by "...David Brooks talking points..." or "...a way to respond to truth." And if you think I was responding to a typo, you have me confused with another frequent poster on this site, and she is a woman, while I am a man.


Kevin Gosztola...one of the few truth tellers in this moment--thank you for this article! And thanks to whoever is responsible for using the word "Hysterical" in the headline. It's perfect.


Who is responsible for making or allowing to continue, the rules of the game effectively eliminating the democratic emergence of a 3rd party? They are the culprits, and they are the accusers.
Those culprit-accusers should focus their energies on their own failings, focus on fixing the undemocratic system, rather than on attacking those seeking a more effective democracy..


This article made me wonder if the progressive, proHillary spite for those of us still insisting on progressive policies doesn't come primarily from a class of voter that deserves more attention:

They seem to be people who had noble sentiments about the fight for $15, the fight against TPP, the modern civil-rights struggles, etc, but when the ballot in the general election is missing someone who represents these struggles, there is no specific loss to them, personally. The ideas are worth "supporting" but not worth "doing anything about.".


And just realize that "fear" on their part is not at what Trump might do to the country, it's the fear that THEY will lose their privileged Neo-Liberal positions as pundits. These "columnists" and "reporters" aren't real journalists. They simply go to Monsanto's or Apples's or Exxon-Mobile's Twitter feed and copy verbatim. That's what they regard as "reporting" - their paychecks depend on the status quo because the are talentless hacks.


Kevin Gosztola makes cogent points again on this election and politics.

Perhaps if those now infuriated at the Bernie or Bust voters had influenced the Dem candidate and DLC/DNC establishment to embrace (yeah, I know) the issues Sanders and his supporters demanded and changed from corporate big-money standard=bearers agents, there would not be such a determined fury to never vote for Clinton's brand of corporate/banker/wall street servitude and support for militarism as a business - endless war and destabilization.......


I'm increasingly of the belief that Trump will not become
president. (For one thing, I don't think he wants to be president. Too much
work, compromise, negotiation, not getting your way. It's Pence who's running
for president.) But I'm becoming more and more convinced that he will actually
lose. Possibly by a large margin. So what is the purpose of this intensive
bullying, blaming, & shaming from the Democrats towards progressives? Why
is there such nasty mockery and withering contempt directed at those who are
adamant about holding to their values? I mean, if I'm starting to really
believe Trump will lose and Clinton will win, surely many Clinton supporters
are as well. Therefore, the bullying must serve another purpose. And that purpose
could conceivably be to ensure the continued entrenchment of the duopoly. Clinton will win, but the last thing the Dems want is a genuine movement, possibly greater than any seen before, towards multi-party elections. This frantic fear-mongering over Trump isn't about Trump. It's about Stein. It's about progressives and lefties (real ones) making a fundamental and irreversible move away from the Democrats, the party that has betrayed them over and over. The Democrats are probably not getting all frothy-mouthed at Stein supporters & Clinton opponents because they truly believe this will result in Trump in the White House. It's because they cannot afford, on an existential level as a party, for there to be any place for progressives and lefties to go. Which would seem to indicate the necessity for said voters to make that move.


Gosztola is one my favorite reads, and this piece didn't disappoint. Although I do agree with @Herdpoisoning's small suggestion, the flaws are minor.

I draw your attention to the use of the word 'hysterical' rather than 'rabid' or 'frantic.' The word should be recognized as the insult to women that it is, anyway this woman. According to Merrium-Webster: [F]rom Latin hystericus, from Greek hysterikos, from hystera womb; from the Greek notion that hysteria was peculiar to women and caused by disturbances of the uterus. Really bad PMS apparently. Then it grew to describe women who who lose emotional control in public. It was a label to slap on women to make it easier for men, specifically those in power, to ignore them, and it is still used that way today. Granted its meaning can apply to all genders nowadays, but as words in common use go, "hysterical" has a very bad history.

But I still love you Kevin!


The DNC claimed that the role of superdelegates was to insure that a viable candidate was chosen to be the Democratic
candidate. That candidate was Sanders, not Hillary. The actual role of superdelegates was to insure that the best corporate, MIC, .1%er stooge was selected. The Democratic Party left me and I had no regrets about leaving them.


"If all you do is what you did, what you get is what you got."

You want the highest incarceration rate in the world; you want even more high paying jobs sent overseas; you want more militarization of the police; you want more of our wealth to go from the middle class to the 1%; you want more fracking; you want more pay to play government corruption, etc, etc...? Well then just vote for Hillary Clinton, cause you will get a whole lot of what you got; as for Trump, he is a blowhard who exists to frighten Liberals and pseudo-Progressives to vote for the most corrupt candidate in history. Libertarians talk a good game, but they really are just Corporatists in sheep's clothing.

The only way things will ever change is to NOT vote for the duopoly. Go Green or stay home.


Who are you calling liberals? I'm liberal, and I no longer support the democratic party. Many of my liberal friends are feeling the same way. I'll never be able to unsee what Hillary and her supporters did to my candidate, and the attitude they have shown toward me. Those are not my people. I will not be voting for evil, greater or lesser.