Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Godhumor

(6,437 posts)
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 12:19 AM Jun 2016

I supported Clinton in 2008. This is what I wrote when it was clear the race was over

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5859322

I am ready to change our focus to the general
-------
I don't post on this side of the forums much, but I figured tonight deserved it. I am an ardent Clinton supporter, and I am from NY. I knew things were tightening up for my candidate right around New Hampshire, actually, but I stuck with her as long as it seemed she had a fighting chance. Obviously, tonight has deflated my sails in one respect, but in another I find myself gearing up all over again.

My candidate came in second this time around, and I am OK with that.

Obama is not my ideal candidate, and I am OK with that, too.

However, the people of this country have spoken in an election that has given more voices to this process than ever before, and I am now ready to start the election battle for all 50 states.

There has been a lot of animosity here, and there are now voices of "unity" speaking out. Consider me one of them. This election is not about popularity, or race, or sex. It is about setting this country back on a Democratic heading, and, frankly, I believe Obama can and will do that.

I still support Clinton, and I hope she finds success during the Democratic revolution that will occur in November.

As of now, I support Obama, for I am a Democrat.

----

Just saying.
27 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I supported Clinton in 2008. This is what I wrote when it was clear the race was over (Original Post) Godhumor Jun 2016 OP
Nice responses in the thread too. CorkySt.Clair Jun 2016 #1
That's really beautiful. Nice post. n/t Maru Kitteh Jun 2016 #2
That is really a stand out post Godhumor. still_one Jun 2016 #3
Your post is devoid of policy; there is no indication of how the party moves forward without JonLeibowitz Jun 2016 #4
.... sheshe2 Jun 2016 #7
"Calm down Jon. Ssssh." JonLeibowitz Jun 2016 #9
2016 is different in big part because of the vitriolic nature of BSers Sheepshank Jun 2016 #11
My reply to the OP was not negative, it was entirely factual. No negativity, no attacks. JonLeibowitz Jun 2016 #13
Memes and bumper stickers are not "policy" (nt) Recursion Jun 2016 #10
That's for damn sure. JonLeibowitz Jun 2016 #14
This message was self-deleted by its author artislife Jun 2016 #15
It's why I pretty strongly dislike both remaining candidates (nt) Recursion Jun 2016 #16
This message was self-deleted by its author artislife Jun 2016 #17
I was not here then. sheshe2 Jun 2016 #5
This is different. Obama was not a flawed candidate. He had a plan to actually BE progressive Joe the Revelator Jun 2016 #6
Race isn't over. Shouldn't be over. Isn't over. Not over till the convention. highprincipleswork Jun 2016 #8
That was a beautiful post. herding cats Jun 2016 #12
K&R nt ProudProgressiveNow Jun 2016 #18
Irrelevant. 2008 is not 2016; Clinton is not Obama; Sanders is not Clinton; and Obama merrily Jun 2016 #19
No, I wrote that well before she conceded Godhumor Jun 2016 #20
2016 is not 2008. And 2008 was not 2004 or 2000. Big difference, my candidate is losing. pampango Jun 2016 #22
I am really not sure what you mean. However, the OP is comparing 2008 merrily Jun 2016 #23
you're not entitled to your own facts. geek tragedy Jun 2016 #25
Clinton was in a worse position vis a vis pledged delegates on May 7, 2008 Vattel Jun 2016 #21
Gracious post. Bobbie Jo Jun 2016 #24
Very well said! redstatebluegirl Jun 2016 #26
I didn't support Clinton in 2008 and I support Bernie for 2016. nt valerief Jun 2016 #27

JonLeibowitz

(6,282 posts)
4. Your post is devoid of policy; there is no indication of how the party moves forward without
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 12:52 AM
Jun 2016

addressing the ideological split we have.

2008 was a battle of personalities: both were New Democrats endorsed by the status quo thinktanks and elites.

2016 is different.

JonLeibowitz

(6,282 posts)
9. "Calm down Jon. Ssssh."
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 01:08 AM
Jun 2016

Condescending much? If I were a woman (maybe I am?) that would be sexist

I am trying to point out a substantive difference.

If, as usual, you have nothing of value to add, you don't have to respond.

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
11. 2016 is different in big part because of the vitriolic nature of BSers
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 01:48 AM
Jun 2016

Op was kind in nature, and you chose to drag it into a cesspool of negativism. She, Trying to keep this thread positive, trying to keep away the negativity gets a vitriolic response from you. So predictable.....unfortunately.

JonLeibowitz

(6,282 posts)
13. My reply to the OP was not negative, it was entirely factual. No negativity, no attacks.
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 01:58 AM
Jun 2016

No vitriol. Then sheshe comes in and tells me to "calm down" when I am presenting the difference between 2008 and 2016. Um, no thanks. Bye.

Response to Recursion (Reply #10)

Response to Recursion (Reply #16)

sheshe2

(83,319 posts)
5. I was not here then.
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 12:58 AM
Jun 2016

Yet always for Obama.

Awesome post, you were for her then. You then embraced Obama. Now we both embrace Hillary. How cool is that?

 

Joe the Revelator

(14,915 posts)
6. This is different. Obama was not a flawed candidate. He had a plan to actually BE progressive
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 12:58 AM
Jun 2016

He was exciting and real. Now we can debate his actual record another time, but during the campaign that is what he was. He was also beating McCain in the polls when he secured the nomination. He also didn't have the possibility of an indictment over his head.

2016 does not = 2008.

herding cats

(19,549 posts)
12. That was a beautiful post.
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 01:55 AM
Jun 2016

After the awkward Edwards episode, I supported Obama in 2008. I worked for Obama's campaign, was a local organizer, a state delegate and had made monetary contributions and became totally entrenched in the amazing process of working a campaign. It wasn't my first rodeo, but it was the first time I'd worked for, and supported a candidate who actually won the nomination. It was an amazing feeling I will never forget. I was actually going to be working for a presidential candidate this time around who I'd supported in the primary! I still would have supported Clinton/X over McCain/Palin any day. Without hesitation.

Instead I was on our local news for making peace with the local Hillary campaign leader. Who I'm pretty sure had seriously disliked me prior to that. We're still friends today, and she's a very happy woman lately.

Clinton wasn't my first choice, but then neither was Bernie this time around. I'll still support her in the GE over Trump any day.

I understand what you were saying back then in 2008 all too well. Sometimes we lose, and sometimes we win in the primaries. Yet, in the end we're still more alike than different and need to stick together if we're going to fight the Republicans.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
19. Irrelevant. 2008 is not 2016; Clinton is not Obama; Sanders is not Clinton; and Obama
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 04:40 AM
Jun 2016

was not, in 2008, the subject of a federal investigation. Also, Clinton wanted to cut a deal with Obama with for SOS and 2016. Sanders does not. Also, not everyone is willing to overlook a war of choice that de-stabilized the entire Middle East for the sake of Party.

Of course, if all that matters to someone is whether (D) follows a name, no analysis is necessary, but we are talking about supporters of Sanders here, not those who follow the DNC's mandate, hating Hillary in 2008 with a ferocity that is foreign to me, and following and defending her unconditionally in 2016, a syndrome also quite foreign to me.

Instead of ignoring that this primary is very different from the 2008 primary, people need to do a bit more analysis. http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280155607 My analysis may not have been perfect or inclusive of all the issues, but it did at least raise issues beyond because...Democrat.


BTW, when did it become clear to you that the race was over? After Hillary conceded? Because a win by her on pledged delegates became MATHematically impossible well before that.

Godhumor

(6,437 posts)
20. No, I wrote that well before she conceded
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 06:03 AM
Jun 2016

You can tell from some key phrases like supporting her as long as realistically possible, etc. Replies in the archived thread show that there were still primaries to be had.

I'm all about the math, always have been, always will be. Might not make me popular at parties, but it is my bread and butter.

pampango

(24,692 posts)
22. 2016 is not 2008. And 2008 was not 2004 or 2000. Big difference, my candidate is losing.
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 09:13 AM
Jun 2016

In 2008 he won. It gives me a totally different perspective on conceding a primary contest.

There are many other differences in personality, policy, etc. History does not repeat itself precisely but patterns and trends are common.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
23. I am really not sure what you mean. However, the OP is comparing 2008
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 09:24 AM
Jun 2016

and 2016. My Reply 19 stated specific differences as did the post of mine that I included in Reply 19.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
25. you're not entitled to your own facts.
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 09:42 AM
Jun 2016

1) Obama had to plead with Clinton to be his Secretary of State. I was not a big fan of the move at the time, but it is what it is--and not what you claim it is.

Within a week after the November 4, 2008, presidential election, President-elect Obama and Clinton discussed over telephone the possibility of her serving as U.S. Secretary of State in his administration.[1][2] Clinton later related, "He said I want you to be my secretary of state. And I said, 'Oh, no, you don't.' I said, 'Oh, please, there's so many other people who could do this.'"[2] Clinton initially turned Obama down, but he persisted.[3][4] Some Democratic senators welcomed the idea of her leaving, having been allied with Obama during the campaign, and believing that Clinton had risked party disunity by keeping her candidacy going for so long.[5]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton's_tenure_as_Secretary_of_State#cite_note-cbs010710-3

2) Clinton was AlWAYS much closer to Obama in pledged delegates than Sanders is now. He clinched the pledged delegate lead a few weeks earlier (May 20) than Clinton did because California voted on Super Tuesday that year. He clinched the nomination itself on June 3 by rolling out 60 superdelegate endorsements. Also during that time the status of Florida and Michigan's delegates were up in the air.
 

Vattel

(9,289 posts)
21. Clinton was in a worse position vis a vis pledged delegates on May 7, 2008
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 06:16 AM
Jun 2016

than Sanders is today. But I agree that Sanders today has no realistic chance of getting the nomination. Still, I think Sanders should stay in. He polls better against Trump. He would demoralize the people who support the revolution should he quit now. Clinton is really dangerous in terms of her hawkishness. When many lives are at stake, you do the best you can and hope for the best, even if the probability of success is very low.

redstatebluegirl

(12,264 posts)
26. Very well said!
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 09:56 AM
Jun 2016

This year feels different, more animosity, more trolls, more my way or no way people but I can hope we can unify and defeat Trump. A Trump Presidency with a Republican House and Senate will destroy our country. It isn't worth withholding support to "make a point".

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»I supported Clinton in 20...