How many Sanders supporters were Obama supporters in 2008

[realmirage]

and what did you think of the PUMAs? Think HARD about that one.

[jillan]

1. Me!! And I really didn't think much about the PUMAs. I knew some would come around & others

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.

[realmirage]

3. Love it!

[annavictorious]

157. Funny

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]

160. Lol.

[onehandle]

2. The only PUMAs were a handful of whiners online.

Bernie or Bust won't happen either.

[HerbChestnut]

73. Bernie or Buest is more than just online

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]

94. Same grandstanding shit we saw when cameras are on people as we did in 2008.

The only difference between 2008 and 2016 is that the loser this time, lost by a LOT MORE.

[HerbChestnut]

95. That attitude, right there, doesn't help

Rubbing it in Bernie supporter's faces that he's losing is not a good way to gain support for your own candidate.

[TheCowsCameHome]

119. Save your breath.

The gunslinger knows everything.

[merrily]

4. I was an Obama supporter in 2008 and I thought a variety of things about PUMAs,

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]

6. Here come the mental gymnastics!

[merrily]

11. I never looked at it that way, but thought and analysis can seem like mental gymnastics to some, I

guess.

[realmirage]

23. So when others are PUMAs it's silly

but when you do it at the expense of the Democratic Party there are good reasons.

Got it.

[merrily]

33. First, link to where I did "it." Second, you obviously don't "got it" at all

since your reply is nothing like what I posted.

[realmirage]

36. You are implying that today's PUMAs are

somehow different from the PUMAs of 08. It's strange that I'd have to explain your own post to you

[merrily]

39. LOL. Please see Reply 35. The only strange thing is your inability to

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]

89. lol. n/t.

[CorkySt.Clair]

15. You too?

Pass the Dramamine.

[OwlinAZ]

158. How so?

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]

55. At a rally in CA a couple of weeks ago

the crowds were shouting "Bernie or bust!".

And he just grinned.

[merrily]

66. Did he tell them that their lives would be more secure if they voted for Trump?

That is the equivalent of what Hillary did in 2008. She didn't just smile when flattered.

[LoverOfLiberty]

70. Ho hum

just making it up as you go.

No question that Sanders is poisoning the well.

[merrily]

110. Huh? I made nothing up. It was in all the papers in 2008, literally. On TV and the net, too.

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]

166. I remember that

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]

108. She sure did.

Not just once, but multiple times, I recently found out.

Once was all it took for me in 2008, though. I was livid.

[w4rma]

5. PUMAs weren't sticking with Clinton for ideological reasons. (nt)

[realmirage]

10. So your ideology is not one of a Democrat?

[w4rma]

17. No, PUMAs were part of Clinton's cult of personality. (nt)

[realmirage]

19. You said you won't vote for the democrat because

your ideology differs. Your words.

[w4rma]

22. No, I didn't. You're making that up out of thin air. Go away with your strawmen. (nt)

[realmirage]

28. Your post implies that you have ideological reasons

not to support Hillary, the soon to be Democratic nominee, unlike PUMAs who had some other reason you don't specify. Your words.

[w4rma]

57. I do have ideological reasons for not supporting Hillary in the primary. And I also have tactical

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]

65. It's as I said. You don't support the Democratic Party

because your ideology differs.

[w4rma]

168. I support FDR Democrats. I do not support the Rockefeller Republican carpetbaggers. (nt)

[merrily]

35. LOL! whenever a reply starts with "So" and totally rewords the post it supposedly replies to,

the twisting is obvious. At least try to be more subtle.

[realmirage]

37. When a post starts with LOL!

It usually means what follows will be emotion driven

[merrily]

48. Actually, it usually means I find another poster amusing or lame or both.

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.

[OwlinAZ]

159. la-de-dah

[JimDandy]

7. Reluctantly. Not holding my nose any more to vote for corporatist candidates, though.

[realmirage]

14. In other words

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]

21. No. Just what I said: I am not voting for corporatist candidates any more.

Thanks for playing.

[blm]

8. Me, and I thought then as I do now…PUMAs are spiteful idiots.

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]

16. When I see you telling Bernie fanatics

posting Hillary hate to pipe down and remember they're democrats, I'll give more weight to your advice

[blm]

25. Apparently you haven't kept up. I am fair to both sides when they are being unjustly targeted

by the other.

And your tactic is still inappropriate and unnecessary and, imo, worded to further antagonize and prevent unity here.

[realmirage]

31. Link to any post

where you have stood up against an over the top Hillary attack.

[blm]

42. LOLOLOL -

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]

60. Link please

If it was easy you'd do it to prove your point.

[emulatorloo]

59. I'm Vouching for blm's seriousness and fair-mindedness

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]

62. Link please and I will give immediate respect to him

[emulatorloo]

64. I am not your research assistant

[realmirage]

67. Then don't expect strangers to just take your word

for things. If it's easy to provide proof just do it to show the strength of your assertion

[blm]

78. All you're proving is that certain newer 'members' are demanding others prove their word because you

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]

81. Link please

The rest doesn't matter

[blm]

96. Go ask in the HRC group if you don't choose to take me at my word.

And, let's be frank, you are CHOOSING to doubt my record of fairness.

[realmirage]

97. I don't know you, so the tiniest effort on your part

would be helpful

[MyNameGoesHere]

90. Why do you think you have trained puppets here?

Go research it your damn self and stop being a rude ass.

[TacoD]

129. Hear, hear (nt)

[chknltl]

165. +1 nt

[Ferd Berfel]

9. I voted for Obama every time

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]

49. It's not the individual; it's the system.

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]

61. Curious: can you understand the pro-Kucinich anti-Clinton people?

Pity Kucinich didn't make it further.

[Garrett78]

112. Sure.

Kucinich and Sanders are basically the same policy-wise, just as Clinton and Obama are basically the same policy-wise.

[Press Virginia]

12. Me. I rejected HRC for the same reasons I don't support her today

[realmirage]

18. This time, you're the PUMA

But it's ok when you do it?

[Press Virginia]

27. Do what?

[realmirage]

29. When you're the PUMA

it's ok, but not when others did it in 08?

[Press Virginia]

38. I won't work against her but as far as supporting her, "I'll look into it"

[Matt_in_STL]

13. I really didn't give much thought to the PUMAs but I do remember being entertained by their website

http://www.hillaryis44.org/2008/06/

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]

52. Bwahahaha! Those PUMAs have discovered time travel. I could have sworn I was in

1995 on that web page.

[TheCowsCameHome]

20. Me.

Once again, someone to vote FOR, instead of against the candidate on the opposite side.

[realmirage]

40. So PUMAs are ok as long as you

are the one being the PUMA.

Got it

[Downwinder]

63. I don't tell anyone whom to vote for. That is their

decision for whatever their reasons. Nor do I criticize someone for whom they vote for.

[realmirage]

68. This site is called Democratic Underground

We're pro Democratic Party.

[realmirage]

117. Who's criticizing? If you're not voting for the Democratic Nominee you choose to help the GOP

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]

128. Bush OFF.

[realmirage]

134. Democrats to save America from Frankentrump. Join the only party that can do this

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

[realmirage]

116. So you're saying that those who weren't members of this forum in 08 were in another dimension

where there were no PUMAs and thus did not know anything about their existence.

Got it.

[realmirage]

146. Again, you alright?

You seem a bit off the rails suddenly.

[senz]

24. PUMAs were obsessed with gender. Bernie voters are obsessed with the future of the country.

[Dawgs]

43. Great answer.

[coco77]

74. They still are...

if you say anything against Hillary it is because she is a woman.

[senz]

75. True. It's the only thing that counts

but it doesn't transfer so well to other female politicians. Just her. One of life's mysteries.

[coco77]

77. I have been on DU for years...

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]

26. I was, and I didn't care.... its their vote, do as they please.

[TheKentuckian]

30. I was and remain confused about what they were pissed about, the ideological divide

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]

32. Voted for Obama both times.

Felt he was the most competent, no surprises. I don't care for loose cannons. Voted my conscience.

[realmirage]

44. So when you are the PUMA you are

voting your "conscience."

But when others do it against your candidate hey have no good reasons.

Got it.

[Autumn]

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.

[realmirage]

45. So you'll be supporting Hillary?

[Autumn]

50. No I will not support her. As for my vote, that is none of your business. nt

[realmirage]

54. So not supporting the Democratic Party is

only ok when you do it.

Understood.

[Autumn]

71. Did I say that? Why no, I did not fucking say that. You asked if I would support her, I said

" 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.

No I will not support her. As for my vote, that is none of your business. nt

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512094865#post50

[realmirage]

80. If you don't vote Hillary you are voting against a liberal SCOTUS

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]

109. I see where the confusion is, in your mind Hillary IS the democratic party. That's why you keep

bringing up the democratic party. I replied to the OP with this

Autumn (29,385 posts)
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

realmirage (785 posts)
45. So you'll be supporting Hillary?

I answered this

Star Member Autumn (29,385 posts)
50. No I will not support her. As for my vote, that is none of your business. nt

( Look up the definitions of the two words support and votes, you will see they do not mean the same thing. )

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]

114. A vote is support, at least on a basic level

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]

41. Me and didn't think about PUMA's much.

Completely different dynamics in 2008 than now.

[realmirage]

53. So not supporting the Democratic Party

against republicans is only ok when you say so?

[Dawgs]

69. Uh, I didn't say anything like that, at all.

[realmirage]

126. Yeah you did.

I think one of those obscure parties that has never won and never will could use your spite vote!

[Dawgs]

149. No I did not. nt

[OwlinAZ]

161. With your type of thinking there is no honor, there is no reason, there is no conscience.

Blind loyalty is for sheep.

[Demsrule86]

46. They came around

and we have to hope Bernie's people will too...of course Hillary helped...not sure that Bernie will.

[Jarqui]

47. I was an Obama supporter in 2008 & 2012 and helped

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]

51. I tried not to think of the PUMAs. I was a Kucinich supporter. nt

[SheenaR]

56. Edwards campaign worker

I had my own shit to worry about

But I went to O without a second thought.

[Philly-Union-Man]

58. I supported the Kooch in '08.

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]

72. Apples and Oranges

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]

83. Not supporting the Democratic Party is the same

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]

99. I refuse to act like a Repuke

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]

100. You can rationalize it all you want. Either you're a Democrat or you're choosing to help the GOP

End of story.

[ljm2002]

76. I was an Obama supporter...

...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]

84. So when others are PUMA they must have

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]

170. I did not say I'm a PUMA...

...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]

79. Your analogy would make more sense if

..you asked about "Bernie or Busters" instead of "Sanders supporters."

[realmirage]

85. I've seen few Sanders supporters speak out forcefully against

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]

92. Someone can dislike HRC but prefer her to Trump. NT

NT

[Jack Bone]

82. I was...and they're still here...they are the ones that believe that they can win

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]

86. They are the ones that believe

their candidate is winning because she has more votes

[Jack Bone]

88. "Winning' isn't a defense for sanity....nt

[realmirage]

98. Non sequitur unrelated to the original point

[Live and Learn]

87. How many PUMAs are back on DU today as Hillary supporters?

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]

91. I was. I'm reflexively anti-Clinton.

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]

124. "Reflexively" means you don't use your brain. Literally that's what it means.

[Chan790]

152. Actually, it means not even requiring thought, having been reduced to the level of automatic action.

The difference is minute enough that I don't expect you to comprehend it.

[realmirage]

154. Neither scenario uses the frontal lobe, which was separates regular

from those in a vegetative state. Are you actually saying you're in a vegetative state?

[Chan790]

162. No.

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]

156. The actual definition

copied and pasted from Merriam Webster:

"happening or done without thinking as a reaction to something"

"characterized by habitual and unthinking behavior"

[marlakay]

93. Voted for Obama

And just as much against her now as i was then!

[realmirage]

125. Ok but you answered a question no one asked.

[hobbit709]

101. How many posters that were ardently anti-Hillary are most vociferous supporters now.

[hobbit709]

104. Why are you still here?

[realmirage]

121. The only one thinking about post count is you

I do not give one shit. Not even a half or a quarter of one shit. Post count is meaningless

[realmirage]

145. you alright there dude?

you seem a bit unstable all of a sudden

[realmirage]

120. I like existential questions. Why are any of us here?

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]

111. I was for Kucinich then Edwards then Obama

and didn't pay any attention to the PUMAs.

[realmirage]

118. So you're only a Democrat a fraction of the time. You're saying you're not a real Democrat?

[TacoD]

127. WTF kind of response is that? You know Kucinich and Edwards are/were dems, right? (nt)

[realmirage]

131. Shit I read your post too fast. Edwards was my top pick.

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]

113. voted Obama primary and general both times

Never voted clinton, do not plan to start
What is a PUMA?

[realmirage]

122. What is a PUMA? You are. Party Unity My Ass

You share a lot with diehard Hillary voters of 08. The irony. Don't you think?

[CobaltBlue]

115. realmirage—In 2008, I felt great need…

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 Colorado—which is my second home state—was 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 pickup—after it carried Republican with each of the ten consecutive election cycles of 1968–2004. 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 state’s 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 think—if the PUMAs were ever real—they were admirers of former Arkansas governor Bill Clinton and former first lady Hillary Clinton. That, in theory, those 2008 PUMAs were Arkansans.

[realmirage]

123. That's a whole lot of cherry picked data applied to unrelated concepts to basically say

that PUMAs are bad except when you are one.

[CobaltBlue]

171. realmirage—It’s not, as you may think, cherry-picked data…

I have Chuck Todd’s and Sheldon Gawiser’s 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 party’s 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 shifts—barely worth noting. Lousiana went from about +14 for George W. Bush (2004) to +18 for John McCain (2008). But, it was Arkansas which stood out—and I have already noted its 10-point Republican increase—in 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.

It’s 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]

130. Me, and I thought they were crap, then and now.

I'm with Robert Reich. http://robertreich.org/post/144976019235

[realmirage]

135. Thanks for the great link

He nails the reality of the situation.

[bigwillq]

132. Bernie supporter 16, Non-Obama supporter in 08 Primary, Obama supporter in 08 GE

I have no issues with PUMAs now and then. They are free to be what they want to be.

[realmirage]

136. So I guess helping Trump and the GOP further take the Supreme Court for another 30 years is fine?

You fine with that?

[bigwillq]

151. Folks are going to do what they're going to do.

Regardless of what I say or do.

I can only control myself. I can't worry about anybody else.

[aikoaiko]

133. I was all for Obama when I learned more about him and PUMAS were idiots.

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]

137. You say PUMAs are "idiots." Then you go on to say you're a PUMA

[aikoaiko]

138. No I didn't. That's the problem with HRC, you don't read carefully.

I feel sorry for you.

[realmirage]

139. If you don't vote for the Democratic nominee you are by definition a PUMA

And according to you PUMAs are idiots. So...

[aikoaiko]

144. Where did I say I wasnt voting for the D nominee? If you see those words I urge you to see a dr.

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]

147. It's clearly implied. And thanks for supporting Hillary.

[aikoaiko]

148. I didn't say I support Hillary either. You're really not good are reading are you?

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]

140. I was. Fought a PUMA here at DU.

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]

142. No, the PUMAs woke up when the GE heated up and helped Obama win

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]

164. Your reality. You deal with it. Goodby.

Nuff F**king said.

[realmirage]

167. We'll deal with it all the way to the White House. Thanks.

While the non-voters reap the benefits from others' hard work.

[LenaBaby61]

150. Was and still am a Hillary supporter in 2008....

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]

153. I haven't heard my candidate praise the Rep

nominee yet.

[NorthCarolina]

155. Neither, I was for Kucinich. -nt-

[Scootaloo]

163. I supported Obama, and the deal with PUMAS was their unwillingness to accept a black candidate.

They made it pretty clear at the time.

[PowerToThePeople]

169. Obama supporter.

I do not recall having any thoughts regarding PUMAS.