2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHow many Sanders supporters were Obama supporters in 2008
and what did you think of the PUMAs? Think HARD about that one.
jillan
(39,451 posts)were moderate repugs that were voting for Hillary because she was a woman.
I knew in my heart that Obama would win with or without them.
annavictorious
(934 posts)because I think the BOBs are authoritarians who are supporting Sanders partially because they think its hip and partially because Sanders isn't a woman.
And I know in my heart that Hillary will win with or without them.
Repeat after me...Madame President.
jillan
(39,451 posts)onehandle
(51,122 posts)Bernie or Bust won't happen either.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)People have called for it at rallies and interviews. I even witnessed a woman stand up and shout it at my caucus in Maine. It certainly isn't the majority of Bernie supporters, but it may be a significant enough percentage to sway the GE should Clinton be the nominee.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)The only difference between 2008 and 2016 is that the loser this time, lost by a LOT MORE.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)Rubbing it in Bernie supporter's faces that he's losing is not a good way to gain support for your own candidate.
TheCowsCameHome
(40,169 posts)The gunslinger knows everything.
merrily
(45,251 posts)one of which is that Hillary had encouraged them and should not have, including with her 3 am phone call remark.
AFAIK, Bernie has never once implied that, given a choice between Hillary and Trump, his supporters and their families would be safer if they voted for Trump.
What some people are failing to realize, however, is that 2016 is not 2008 and Hillary is not Obama.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)guess.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)but when you do it at the expense of the Democratic Party there are good reasons.
Got it.
merrily
(45,251 posts)since your reply is nothing like what I posted.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)somehow different from the PUMAs of 08. It's strange that I'd have to explain your own post to you
merrily
(45,251 posts)back up your claims and your need to twist the posts of others rather than to address what they actually do say.
Reminds me a lot of another poster, actually.
okieinpain
(9,397 posts)CorkySt.Clair
(1,507 posts)Pass the Dramamine.
Pumas had a right to vote or not vote as they pleased. Just never could figure out why they supported Hillary so fervently when she lied constantly.
LoverOfLiberty
(1,438 posts)the crowds were shouting "Bernie or bust!".
And he just grinned.
merrily
(45,251 posts)That is the equivalent of what Hillary did in 2008. She didn't just smile when flattered.
LoverOfLiberty
(1,438 posts)just making it up as you go.
No question that Sanders is poisoning the well.
merrily
(45,251 posts)You can try to play that a smile to a cheering crowd is the equivalent of what she did in 2008, but most of know better.
stopwastingmymoney
(2,042 posts)And I was and always have been an Obama supporter.
And yes, I'm voting for Bernie next week and all Dems in November.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Not just once, but multiple times, I recently found out.
Once was all it took for me in 2008, though. I was livid.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)w4rma
(31,700 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)your ideology differs. Your words.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)not to support Hillary, the soon to be Democratic nominee, unlike PUMAs who had some other reason you don't specify. Your words.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)reasons for not supporting her in the primary. She can't win the general election. She's going to be indicted. With her at the top of the ticket, the discussion will be about Clinton scandals, 24/7, and nothing on the issues that help Democrats win elections. And this is reflected in her polling that shows her losing to Trump.
She, herself, doesn't want a discussion on issues, herself, because she's out of touch with the vast majority of Democrats on the issues. She has been lying to the population about her e-mail server. She said everything was above board, and now we find out that she was even deceiving President Obama by using it.
The only people she *might* not lie to are her big donors, when she talks to them in secret with noise emitters pointed at the rest of us.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)because your ideology differs.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)the twisting is obvious. At least try to be more subtle.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)It usually means what follows will be emotion driven
merrily
(45,251 posts)I guess this is the level of discourse that one can expect on this thread. It's not even a little interesting, so I will bid you a good day.
Response to w4rma (Reply #17)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
OwlinAZ
(410 posts)JimDandy
(7,318 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)when the candidate you wanted wins the nom, you'll vote for them, if not, you suddenly have certain principles that won't let you vote democrat
JimDandy
(7,318 posts)Thanks for playing.
blm
(113,129 posts)They only help ONE side - Republicans. Period.
Why add the unnecessary advice to 'think hard', as if we wouldn't do so in the first place? This is one of the ways HRC supporters use smarminess to bring grief upon themselves and to this site
think 'hard' about that before you do it again, eh?
realmirage
(2,117 posts)posting Hillary hate to pipe down and remember they're democrats, I'll give more weight to your advice
blm
(113,129 posts)by the other.
And your tactic is still inappropriate and unnecessary and, imo, worded to further antagonize and prevent unity here.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)where you have stood up against an over the top Hillary attack.
blm
(113,129 posts)I don't have to do your due diligence for doubters like you. My reputation here is on solid ground with all fair-minded DUers from both camps. For the hissyfitters in both camps I am, indeed, an annoyance.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)If it was easy you'd do it to prove your point.
emulatorloo
(44,261 posts)I am a Longtimer here as is blm.
I find your post divisive and I don't believe you are in any position to be judgemental about posters.
You weren't here in '08 so you don't know that history either. I will tell you the Puma's made a lot of noise but were insignificant in the long run.
I suggest you self-delete your thread.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)emulatorloo
(44,261 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)for things. If it's easy to provide proof just do it to show the strength of your assertion
blm
(113,129 posts)haven't been paying as much attention as you'd like to claim in this BRIEF amount of time that you've parked yourself.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)The rest doesn't matter
blm
(113,129 posts)And, let's be frank, you are CHOOSING to doubt my record of fairness.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)would be helpful
MyNameGoesHere
(7,638 posts)Go research it your damn self and stop being a rude ass.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)from Senate primary on up..... (I was not a Clinton fan back then either)
I've been terribly disappointed with this performance -
eg.
Putting social security on the chopping block
TPP
not renegotiating NAFTA as promised
Drone strikes - killing women/children/non combatants
not prosecuting Wall Street banks and their Sr. Management
the most transparently incompetent 'negotiating; style in the history of the WH
Garrett78
(10,721 posts)My expectations for the Obama Admin were the same as my expectations for a Clinton Admin.
I don't understand the pro-Obama and anti-Clinton people. All I can figure is that people confuse style and personality with substance. A Clinton Admin will operate the same as the Obama Admin has.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)Pity Kucinich didn't make it further.
Garrett78
(10,721 posts)Kucinich and Sanders are basically the same policy-wise, just as Clinton and Obama are basically the same policy-wise.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)But it's ok when you do it?
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)it's ok, but not when others did it in 08?
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)Response to realmirage (Reply #18)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
Matt_in_STL
(1,446 posts)This horrible website was well visited by them and was noted here many times. Other than their ability to put together a modern website versus a mid-90's Geocities page, they were more than welcome to do what they wanted.
The person who designed that site most likely went on to run private servers out of a bathroom.
valerief
(53,235 posts)1995 on that web page.
TheCowsCameHome
(40,169 posts)Once again, someone to vote FOR, instead of against the candidate on the opposite side.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)are the one being the PUMA.
Got it
Downwinder
(12,869 posts)decision for whatever their reasons. Nor do I criticize someone for whom they vote for.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)We're pro Democratic Party.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)take even more control over the Supreme Court for the next 30 or so years so they can destroy this country. Or you can help the Democrats take the Supreme Court for the first time in decades and make REAL CHANGE.
Not criticism. Fact.
Downwinder
(12,869 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)or help the GOP further dominate the supreme court for another 30 years. Real change can happen if we take the Supreme Court.
"But I guess you already knew that.. That's what I love about you, your attention to detail"
- Ace Ventura
Response to realmirage (Reply #40)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)where there were no PUMAs and thus did not know anything about their existence.
Got it.
Response to realmirage (Reply #116)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)You seem a bit off the rails suddenly.
senz
(11,945 posts)Dawgs
(14,755 posts)coco77
(1,327 posts)if you say anything against Hillary it is because she is a woman.
senz
(11,945 posts)but it doesn't transfer so well to other female politicians. Just her. One of life's mysteries.
coco77
(1,327 posts)and have never been put on an alert but once. but yesterday the Hillirites were out in full force trying to ban me for what I just said to you.
JPnoodleman
(454 posts)TheKentuckian
(25,035 posts)between Obama and Clinton essentially boiled down to Iraq being a debacle and Clinton still defending it at the time and the insurance mandate which he flipped on instantly so it was like they were melting down because they supported the stupid and illegal invasion of Iraq which seemed absurd so I chalked then as personality cultists with some bigots thrown in, mostly soft Republican women was my guess.
Downwinder
(12,869 posts)Felt he was the most competent, no surprises. I don't care for loose cannons. Voted my conscience.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)voting your "conscience."
But when others do it against your candidate hey have no good reasons.
Got it.
Autumn
(45,120 posts)than gender and skin color there's not much of a difference between them.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)Autumn
(45,120 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)only ok when you do it.
Understood.
Autumn
(45,120 posts)" No I will not support her." I said nothing about the democratic party.
I'm terribly sad that I can't break those six words down any further so you can understand them.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512094865#post50
realmirage
(2,117 posts)You simply can't say you're not voting Hillary and then say you're for the Democratic Party. Being for the Democratic Party means you vote for their candidates to stop republicans from destroying the country. That starts with the presidency. One entire branch of our government, an extremely powerful position, and one we need not just for the Supreme Court, but for the Paris Accord, immigration, Wall Street reform... The list is very long.
Autumn
(45,120 posts)bringing up the democratic party. I replied to the OP with this
34. Hillary supporter in 2008. Bernie supporter 2016. Nothing to think about, Obama won easily and other
than gender and skin color there's not much of a difference between them.
Here's the question that you asked me
45. So you'll be supporting Hillary?
I answered this
50. No I will not support her. As for my vote, that is none of your business. nt
and from there you went into the democratic party stuff. I'm not a registered democrat anymore so I don't bother with that issue
realmirage
(2,117 posts)And since the Democratic Party is about to nominate Hillary, then yes, she does represent the Democratic Party. Voting for Hillary is supporting the Democratic Party. You can parse it, but I think you know what I'm saying here. I don't expect anyone to like everything about every candidate the party nominates. But that's not possible for any party, or any organization anywhere in the world. I don't like Sanders, but I would grudgingly vote for him as well if he were the nominee. At least you and I both know where the cliff is and we aren't willing to jump off out of spite.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Completely different dynamics in 2008 than now.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)against republicans is only ok when you say so?
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)I think one of those obscure parties that has never won and never will could use your spite vote!
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)OwlinAZ
(410 posts)Blind loyalty is for sheep.
Demsrule86
(68,768 posts)and we have to hope Bernie's people will too...of course Hillary helped...not sure that Bernie will.
Jarqui
(10,131 posts)his campaign.
I didn't really care for PUMAs but respected their right to support pr stick with their candidate even after she lost the primary in 2008.
valerief
(53,235 posts)SheenaR
(2,052 posts)I had my own shit to worry about
But I went to O without a second thought.
Philly-Union-Man
(79 posts)The PUMAs were idiots.
I support Bernie this time around. Once the primaries are over, I'll hold my nose and support the nominee, just like I do every single election.
Only an idiot would vote for Trump in this election.
trudyco
(1,258 posts)I thought I was choosing between two very exciting candidates back then. As I did at the beginning of this primary cycle. I just felt like Hillary was too entrenched and didn't come across as sincere. Both times. But this time around I started educating myself on Hillary and watched the exit polls and "shenanigans" and really looked at the Clinton Foundation. The Clintons are crooks, maybe not as bad as the BFEE but it's just a different level. They all should be in jail, the BFEE possibly tried as traitors.
So to say a Bernie supporter should vote for the party nominee when that person is obviously a crook is quite different from comparing to a PUMA back in 2008. Oranges and rotten Apples.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)no matter when you do it. Having your candidate not win is hard, but being a PUMA is still being a PUMA no matter who does it
trudyco
(1,258 posts)and fall in line just to fall in line. If Clinton is the nominee then the 2016 party isn't the Democratic Party I've been supporting for over 3 decades. There is no reason for a sane person to support her. She's corrupt, unethical. That's obvious. Not sure if she will get indicted but she should. As far as I know the only one who pulled shenanigans in 2008 was Clinton and Podesta, so for the PUMAs to get on board with Obama was reasonable. Getting on board with the Clinton Dynasty in 2016 is not reasonable.
As for your implication that if I don't swallow the Clinton poison pill I'm not a real Democrat - I think I'll show my democratic leanings more down ticket. There are some local candidates and propositions to support. There are progressive candidates in other locales I will financially support. But not the corrupt corporatists. My eyes are wide open, I'm spreading the word, and so far nobody I know voting for Bernie is going to support Clinton in the GE. Nobody trusts her. Why should they?
realmirage
(2,117 posts)End of story.
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...and I always thought the PUMAs were ridiculous, largely based on their wanting a woman-president-no-matter-what. In fact an acquaintance of mine who was a PUMA asked me, after McCain chose Palin as his VP pick, whether I was excited about that...
I laughed. To keep from crying.
But as for your point, which is obviously about who people will or will not vote for in the GE -- that is 100% their choice. It is up to each candidate to make their case. The end.
On edit: Oh yeah, I forgot to mention: one big reason that I supported Obama over Clinton was his more liberal positions on things like single payer or at least a public option... Oh well.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)terrible reasons, ones that you alone define, but when you are a PUMA it is allowed and the reasons are good.
I see your reasoning. Not that it's good reasoning. But I see it.
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...not at all. I have never stated Bernie or Bust, and while I am critical of Clinton, I will certainly take into account the horrifying prospect of a Trump presidency, and vote accordingly -- tempered by knowledge about how my state is sure to go or whether it is a swing state, and also by my opinion in November after all is said and done.
What I said is, that ever voter has the 100% right to vote for the candidate of their choice, period. I do wish we all made our choices in a healthier and more informed political environment.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)..you asked about "Bernie or Busters" instead of "Sanders supporters."
realmirage
(2,117 posts)the dozens of daily hit pieces here on Hillary that use republican sources to smear her. So the headline is appropriate.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)NT
Jack Bone
(2,023 posts)without independents. somehow the 30 something % of democrats (nationally) will sweep Hillary to victory.
They're still crazy...just in control of things this time around.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)their candidate is winning because she has more votes
Jack Bone
(2,023 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)I think the difference is in what we stand for. PUMAs haven't changed a bit and neither have Obama supporters that now support Bernie.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)I think they're both cretins and scum on the take from big business...corrupt in a way most Republicans can't match. The only pant-suit Hillary should be wearing is the jumpsuit with stripes the state of Arkansas gives you to break rocks in, along with the ankle-cuff they use to bind you to your fellow-man-or-woman.
I thought the PUMAs were soft in the head to support someone that criminally corrupt...this is also how I feel about Hillary's supporters now.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)Chan790
(20,176 posts)The difference is minute enough that I don't expect you to comprehend it.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)from those in a vegetative state. Are you actually saying you're in a vegetative state?
Chan790
(20,176 posts)I'm saying that deciding whether I oppose the Clintons no longer requires thought, it's an automatic response like breathing or swearing in Lebanese when I stub my toe. I didn't say I was incapable of higher thought...just that I don't need to use it to ascertain or grasp bedrock principles like "time flows in one direction, but at an uneven rate dependent on my relative location in the universe." and "Hillary Clinton is an evil person."
However, I am a solipsist so I can't be entirely sure that you exist and I'm not just a brain in a jar being prodded by electric stimuli to imagine this reality. In that sense, I could be in a vegetative state...but that would mean you're imaginary.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)copied and pasted from Merriam Webster:
"happening or done without thinking as a reaction to something"
"characterized by habitual and unthinking behavior"
marlakay
(11,527 posts)And just as much against her now as i was then!
realmirage
(2,117 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Response to realmirage (Original post)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Response to hobbit709 (Reply #104)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)I do not give one shit. Not even a half or a quarter of one shit. Post count is meaningless
Response to realmirage (Reply #121)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)you seem a bit unstable all of a sudden
realmirage
(2,117 posts)What is the meaning of the universe?
What happens if you row a kayak into a black hole? Do your particles blend with the kayak's?
If endless universes exist in other dimensions, does this mean that everything you can imagine will eventually become real and thus a smurf village exists in one of those universes right now, or will at some point in the future?
Food for thought indeed.
k8conant
(3,030 posts)and didn't pay any attention to the PUMAs.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)TacoD
(581 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)I will be voting for ANY democrat this year if for no other reason than to take the Supreme Court for the first time in DECADES
oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)Never voted clinton, do not plan to start
What is a PUMA?
realmirage
(2,117 posts)You share a lot with diehard Hillary voters of 08. The irony. Don't you think?
CobaltBlue
(1,122 posts)for the White House to flip from Republican to Democratic.
I ran the historical guide as my prediction: meaning, that Republican president George W. Bush was overseeing the Iraq War, the economy was bad (the meltdown had not yet happened), and I asked myself the following question: In a past situation anything like this, with a two-term president from a given party, were voters willing to let that White House party have the next four years?
That was my first indication of knowing that 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain was running for second place. And I knew that 2008 would end up a Democratic pickup of the presidency.
The PUMA stuff did not impact me. I knew bellwether states like Ohio, Florida, Nevada, and New Mexico were flipping. I was thrilled Coloradowhich is my second home statewas flipping from R to D. But, I knew 2008 was going to be a terrible year for the Republicans because Virginia was on the radar as a potential Democratic pickupafter it carried Republican with each of the ten consecutive election cycles of 19682004. Indiana had that same distinction. I said to myself, If the Republican nominee for president of the United States has to worry about holding onto states like Virginia and Indiana, that party is definitely going to fail to hold the White House.
I later deduced that if PUMAs were real, they came from Arkansas. In 2004, that state carried at +9.76 for Republican George Bush, who won the U.S. Popular Vote, over losing Democratic challenger John Kerry, by +2.46 percentage points. In 2008, the nation shifted +9.72 percentage points Democratic to give Barack Obama a Democratic pickup to win the popular vote by +7.26. There were 45 states which shifted in the direction of the Democrats. But, Arkansas actually shifted +10.10 more Republican as John McCain carried it by +19.86. Why? What explains it are the gender-vote results: the states male voters gave both the 2004 and 2008 Democratic nominees 40 percent. But, the female voters gave John Kerry 49 percent, in 2004, and dropped party support for a 2008 Barack Obama at 39 percent. So, this is why I thinkif the PUMAs were ever realthey were admirers of former Arkansas governor Bill Clinton and former first lady Hillary Clinton. That, in theory, those 2008 PUMAs were Arkansans.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)that PUMAs are bad except when you are one.
CobaltBlue
(1,122 posts)I have Chuck Todds and Sheldon Gawisers book, How Barack Obama Won
, which has the 2008 presidential election, and I have also looked to CNN, both which give lots of exit-poll information.
Election 2008 was a flipping of the White House from the Republican to the Democratic column. When a presidential election results in a party switch, nearly every state shifts in the direction of the party which ends up with the pickup.
There were five states in 2008 which did not have a Democratic shift; that they had a Republican shift: Arkansas, Lousiana, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and West Virginia. Obviously, for Barack Obama having won a Democratic pickup of the presidency, not only did 45 states shift in his partys direction
so too key demographic groups nationwide and state after state (and they were enough to flip nine states from 2004 Republican to 2008 Democratic).
The results in 2008 Arkansas were far more jarring. Oklahoma, Tennessee, and West Virginia had modest 2004-to-2008 Republican shiftsbarely worth noting. Lousiana went from about +14 for George W. Bush (2004) to +18 for John McCain (2008). But, it was Arkansas which stood outand I have already noted its 10-point Republican increasein a year in which the party had the White House; a president with less than a 40-percent job approval rating; and a presidential election year in which the country shifted in the opposite direction of Arkansas.
Its not a stretch to suspect that any real existence of PUMAs, with any possible impact from 2008, were female voters from the state Bill Clinton was its governor and Hillary Clinton was its first lady. (After all, Arkansas's females gave John Kerry 49 percent of their vote and dropped their support for Barack Obama to 39 percent.)
TacoD
(581 posts)I'm with Robert Reich. http://robertreich.org/post/144976019235
realmirage
(2,117 posts)He nails the reality of the situation.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)I have no issues with PUMAs now and then. They are free to be what they want to be.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)You fine with that?
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Regardless of what I say or do.
I can only control myself. I can't worry about anybody else.
aikoaiko
(34,185 posts)But HRC is not Obama no matter how much she wraps herself in his accomplishments.
Obama declined the chance to say that HRC was presidential material by making her his VP. Twice he rejected the option.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)aikoaiko
(34,185 posts)I feel sorry for you.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)And according to you PUMAs are idiots. So...
aikoaiko
(34,185 posts)You're hallucinating if you do. Or you're making shit up like an ass?
So.... which is it?
Eta: Oh, I just saw your transparency page and your April 2016 join date. I know what you are. I'll stop feeding you.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)aikoaiko
(34,185 posts)Even if I do vote for HRC, don't confuse that with supporting her.
And I don't want thanks from the likes of you.
chknltl
(10,558 posts)If memory serves the PUMA i tangled with had an annoying grinning toad. I confess that i don't miss that toad.
Sadly labels are a fickle thing in that their meanings can be hijacked. Take the words Liberal and Progressive for instance. There was once a time i was proud to call myself a liberal but then the propagandists on the right made the word into something it definitely was not.
The same can be said about Progressive but in this case it was soneone with a non-progressive history who took on that name solely for the sake of votes. Now thanks to the rightward, corporatist swing that has taken hold of my party, (the same corporatism that holds the Republican party in lockdown btw), I am finding it hard to call myself an American much less a Democrat.
The PUMAs of '08 lost last time but they appear to be winning this time. They are the ones allowing corporatism to take over our party/our country, not us. Our principles have not changed, nor have theirs, I see no reason for their label to change just because they are on a 'winning' side this time.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)And the meaning of PUMA is Party Unity My Ass. If you don't vote for the Democratic nominee that's what you are. And you're de facto supporting Trump and the GOP. I know you wish it weren't so, but that is reality.
chknltl
(10,558 posts)Nuff F**king said.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)While the non-voters reap the benefits from others' hard work.
LenaBaby61
(6,979 posts)But was never a PUMA. I was always going to vote for Sen. Obama if he won the Dem primaries, and he did. Yes, I was not happy about Hillary losing out in 2008 to then Sen. Barack Obama. BUT, right after she dropped out of the Dem primaries, I pivoted really quickly to supporting then Sen. Obama. Now here it is 8 years later and I'm on the other side where it appears that the candidate I support in Hillary WILL secure the Dem nomination not long from now.
8 years later and on "other" side this time around
CanadaexPat
(496 posts)nominee yet.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)They made it pretty clear at the time.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)I do not recall having any thoughts regarding PUMAS.