Are you saying that they were lying?

Her supporters never said she was lying, they simply hoped she'd get into the race.

"She said she WASN'T running, but she didn't say she WOULDN'T run....."

Fan is short for fanatic. They were not lying. They were hoping.

They explicitly stated that she didn't mean what she said. The implication was that she was lying.

I'll digress, though, for comity's sake. Perhaps they were merely implying that she was confused.

Creative allegations... no doubt, based in part on the misnomer you know the difference between imply and infer.

In lieu of that, what was my mistake?

to a run for quite a while. It's the sort of things politicians do, even ones who don't suck.

But Bernie represents the same wing of the party, so it's highly unlikely she'll step forward at this point and actually split the support and momentum he's building.

this is the kind of shit right here that is not helping Clinton. keep up the good work.

Not fickle, going with the declared candidate who thinks much the same as Ms. Warren. Thanks for asking!

people should keep supporting her for president when she isn't running. How very bizarre of you.

People kept supporting her for months after she stated that she wasn't running. How forgetful of you.

not running. This is simple; see if you can manage to wrap your brain around it: fickle would be if she were running and those who urged her to run abandoned her for another candidate. Duh.

Maybe they found a new shiny thing.

Fickle is giving up the fight when you discover you're gonna get paid one way or the other.

My entire library consists of sixteen copies of The Catcher in the Rye.

Maybe it's time to broaden my horizons.

Nine posts (including the OP) and three alerts. I never get the time of day around these parts, and suddenly I'm a celebrity!

Now go..... use your imagination.

Some women find it to be a sexist term. Other people can find the term "hon" condescending.

I'm not Juror #7...just trying to shed some light on the subject.

Thought it was silly then too. People seem to almost look for ways to be offended.... I prefer to operate under the assumption that everyone means well & does their best....

As a woman working in an office in the 70's and 80's, "hon" was one of the words the bosses called you when they didn't care to even remember your name. You know, just another woman working in the office who could get you coffee or "whatever". It still makes me cringe, so people aren't "always looking for ways to be offended". We were legitimately offended, as also noted by Juror #7.

It wasn't silly then, and it's not silly now, particularly when women continue to only make77 cents on the dollar compared to men.

Thank you for listening.

But now I totally see where you are coming from. Thank you!

Last edited Mon Jun 1, 2015, 05:14 PM - Edit history (1)

...she officially threw her hat in the ring. Before that time, she was noncommittal about whether she would be running.

And Hillary is not the only one, many republican candidates pull the same ploy. Why? Because there are legal ramifications to officially announcing (reporting requirements, etc.).

So a lot of people who were willing to support her running were at least hoping she was being coy. It isn't the mystery (nor the fickleness) that you make it out to be.

Clearly, it's not a done deal yet lol

Still a few who stick with principle over practicality.

My faith is restored.

I was afraid maybe she had died or something.

On Mon Jun 1, 2015, 10:15 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Yeah, I'm wicked mean like that.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6760438

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

disgusting

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Jun 1, 2015, 10:31 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No violation of TOS, and nothing "disgusting" about it. Alerter needs to take a Chill Pill and calm down.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Do what now?
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The OP should have been left to sink unfed into its own foul juices. Why start the pruning here?

So here's a gratuitous bump for those who've missed their chance.

Sadly GD is full of them.

What the heck is going on tonight with the posts?

Trolls? Full moon?

You cannot make this shit up!

It's just a fascinating, albeit unsurprising, glimpse at the dynamics of personality cultism. Despite the reality of a pending Sanders candidacy and an explicit disinterest from Warren, her true believers were adamantly dedicated to her inevitability.

All it took was an actual event - Sanders' formal declaration - to immediately disabuse the zealots of their fantasy and shift their attention elsewhere. That she and Sanders (according to one remarkably quixotic poster) are two sides of the same coin is a feeble excuse for their shift in loyalty. The simple reality is that Warren didn't adequately reciprocate their undying devotion. At least not in a timely fashion.

Pity poor Liz. We hardly knew ye.

Nothing proves an absence of idolatry like a substitue idol and an overnight conversion.

Maybe it's because they're so close on the issues, and just to let you know, I was never one of those that urged her to run

I'd argue that Warren is closer to Clinton than Sanders... but I'm not here to argue.

BTW, no one (to my knowlege) accused you of urging Warren to run. You have, nonetheless, argued stridently about the candidates. I haven't. I've remained decidedly agnostic, resulting in a good bit of ostracism - most notably from Clinton supporters.

someone alerting all over this thread. Same Skinner reference as posted upthread. Anyway, FYI...

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
On Mon Jun 1, 2015, 10:19 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Yes, of course.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6761652

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This guy is repeatedly using disruptive, divisive insulting language. This is straight up shit-stirring, for no useful purpose. At least not useful to Democrats. Skinner told us to hide the shit-stirrers, so lets see some hiding here.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Jun 1, 2015, 10:33 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I fail to see what's so divisive about this post.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The point of the entire thread was to discuss brand loyalty or the lack thereof. This reply is in keeping with the subject and the discourse that follows.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Tend to your own house. Bernie supporters are among the rudest shit-stirrers on this board.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Yes... shit-stirring. In the whole thread.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

If you were a gentleman/lady, you would self delete the OP. There's enough drama in GD right now to keep daytime tv in business for years! Why add something that is much ado about nothing.

With all due respect, the wholesale dumping of Elizabeth Warren is a tidy summary of GD Primary 2016 thus far.

Ado about nothing? I beg to differ.

This place is like a garbage heap right now. Sad, because almost all of us are going to vote for the primary winner.

...and not run after all her promises.

But as I have been saying, ad nauseum and ad infinutum, Bernie has emerged as the anti-Hillary and owns that space.

That was back when they though she could be persuaded to run. Turned out she couldn't.

Were I a host, I might note this OP is meta, flamebait, and hyperbole.

Based on your reply #20

She initially attracted the anti-Hillary crowd. It wasn't as much about Warren as it was about opposition to Hillary. Sanders has jumped in and filled the void. All of her Presidential support went to Sanders on day one of him announcing. She really doesn't have a home in the primary at this point. If she did jump in, the current level of nastiness would only escalate.

Does this somehow make you feel good? If so you should probably take a break because this is rude flamebate based on an incorrect assumption. She never declared nor intended to and it seems you are either the only one who does not know this or you are just shit stirring.

I wish I could give you the benefit of the doubt but....nope. bye bye

so I figured you for a Hillary supporter. If you don't support her then I guess you don't like any of the Democrats running and from your OP I guess it's an easy guess what you do support. Have a nice day.

Can't remember the name of it, something like - Spin the Tail on the Donkey.

She's fighting Wall Street's predations on the American people, among other things.

Unlike Hillary whatshername who actually voted for the interests of the plutocrats over the American people on bankruptcy and credit card reform. Did I mention what she did for the Bankster bailout?

I am so proud of myself that I never start these divisive threads, rarely speak ill of my fellow Democrats, and largely confine myself to touting the candidate of my choice.

I ask myself WWHD-What would Hillary do? and I know she would never sow discord among Democrats and neither do I.

so this OP is kinda silly.

Please proceed.

Lot's of time for more shit to come out of Hillary's closet. Bobby Kennedy announced he was running in March of 68 with the election only 8 months away.

I imagine her presidential aspirations are most likely in the same general area as the actual relevance and sincerity of this particular OP.

"Is fickle the newest fad?"
No more, nor no less than a peevish, schoolboy petulance.

Is Warren being added to the Paul-Nader-Greenwald derangement trollery list?

The OP is the very definition of disruptive meta, but it sounds like it got by a jury. This is how DU works now.