2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe PUMAs (Part Unity My Ass)...who, in 2008, refused to "rally around" Barack Obama.
Cheap acronymic humor aside, the question is an important one. PUMAs, for those who have forgotten the 2008 Democratic primary race, were the supposedly-numerous Hillary Clinton supporters who refused to back Barack Obama (due to slights perceived during the hard-fought primary, as well as ideological differences), and were instead going to defect en masse and vote for John McCain. The name stood for Party Unity My Ass! which was also their rallying cry. This year, they may be replaced by the Bernie Or Bust! crowd, or (to coin a neologism) the BOBs.
But before we got to the BOBs, a quick historical review of the PUMAs is necessary. The entire Party Unity My Ass! movement (if it can even be called that, in retrospect) was the result of two things which turned out to not actually be representational of how the partys base was feeling. The first was the viciousness of the online flamewar between supporters of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Exactly eight years ago, reading the comments section on any article or blog post about the state of the Democratic race was like watching a to-the-death gladiator battle. No holds were barred, no scathing insult deemed too extreme. From both sides, I hasten to mention (lest I be called biased). The personalities of Barack and Hillary were being savaged online, on a daily basis. This might sound familiar to anyone watching the Bernie-versus-Hillary flamewars online today. But while its hard to accurately measure such things, it certainly seemed a lot more personal and vicious back then (at least, to me I certainly dont read every articles comments section, though).
So you had loud voices screaming at each other online. Due to the loudness and nastiness, some in the media started a narrative that the Democratic Party was split beyond repair. The convention, they all confidently predicted, would be contentious and possibly even violent. The spectre of 1968 was trotted out. For weeks before the convention, the media fanned these flames vigorously. I reached a different conclusion, however:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-weigant/puma-bobs_b_10111592.html
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)PUMAs were a racist hate movement. Their entire thing was that they could not stand the idea of a black man being president, no matter what. It's why they threatened to jump for McCain, and cheered for Palin's nomination as VP, because, well, they don't get much whiter than McCain and Palin.
Busters by contrast, are just Sanders dead-enders. There's no "I'm going to vote for Trump!" just "I'll write in Bernie / not vote for president," etc. And the motivation isn't identity, it's politics; Bobs want Bernie's platform incorporated into and followed by the party. TO what degree depends on the individual, but there's a very definite "release valve," you know, "I'll vote for her if..." kinda thing.
For a historical comparison, PUMAS were akin to the Dixiecrats, who would stick with it and become Republicans. The Busters are more like reluctant Deaniacs who end up either making votes with their nose held, or just skipping the presidential slot on their ballot.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)PUMAs were not just racists. They were mostly "Hillary or the highway" types.
ronnykmarshall
(35,356 posts)Not unlike the #BernieOrBust peeps.
insta8er
(960 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)to me and my children's future as Trump? Granted, for different reasons, but as harmful all the same.
I see them both as horrid choices.
Response to Fawke Em (Reply #8)
Post removed
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Hillary's PUMAs thought, as they do now, that it's her turn: she's entitled. The were, and still are, the party establishment. They are mostly financially comfortable and/or are afraid to rock the status quo.
Bernie's BoBs are those of us who are either fed up with the every rightward shift of the party, are new to the system or are liberal Independents who aren't beholden to the party.
It really is quite different.
Miles Archer
(18,837 posts)...and for what it's worth, I am a Bernie supporter. The point of my post was basically that I agree, and also feel the "rally around Hillary" cries in 2016 are because "it's her turn: she's entitled," which I also refer to as "total crap."
And the reason I want him to stay in this, whether he gets the nomination or not, is I'm not buying what she's selling, her "turn" or not.
Response to Miles Archer (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
jillan
(39,451 posts)very clear they are not interested in earning the votes of Bernie supporters.
We've been told she doesn't need our votes.
Party Unity My Ass there ya go. Nothing has changed.
ronnykmarshall
(35,356 posts)I was told in 2008 to "get out of the way" and "we don't need you".
I don't supported Obama 100% when Hillary left the race. Even before that.