Skip to main content

Just a short Diary with some questions for you to ponder as you munch on your popcorn and watch the South Carolina Primary results come in.

If you remember back to the 2008 Democratic Presidential race, after it became apparent to most that Barack Obama would be our Party's Candidate, there was a movement to unify the Party around our new inevitable nominee.  However, there were some upset Clinton supporters going around saying "Party Unity My Ass", who soon became known as PUMAs.

Will this same thing happen in the Republican Party in 2012?  And if so, what will be the result?  Join me after the jump /\ to ponder these questions just for the hell of it.

The 2012 Republican Race is starting to look somewhat like the 2008 Democratic Race, with two (or maybe 3) candidates winning delegates and no sign that any one candidate will be able to sow up the nomination without a long drawn out primary fight.  If anything, the Republican Primary is shaping up to be far more dirty and vicious than our 2008 Primary (IMHO).  So with that in mind, on to my first question:

Will there be Republican PUMAs?

In support of the "YES" answer, no matter who the eventual nominee is, the losers supporters will probably pretty pissed off, based on the tenor of the campaign thus far.  This is especially true if the nominee is Romney as many expect.  Many far-right conservatives and Tea Partiers supporting Newt or Santorum clearly loathe Mitt and have made it pretty clear that they don't want to support him as their nominee (at least that's what they're saying now).  So it could be argued that this faction of the Republican Party could easily become PUMAs.

However, in support of the "NO" answer, the Republican Party is one of the most unified organizations on the Planet when it comes down to a matter of us (Dems.) against them (Repubs.).  We often marvel with envy at the blind loyalty to Party they exude when it comes to pushing forth their legislation or stopping ours.  So it could be argued that the current split is all show, and in the end there will be no PUMAs.

You decide (vote below)

So what if there are Republican PUMAs.  That leads me to my second question:

What effect will Republican PUMAs have on the Republican Candidate?

Now we all know what happened to the Dem. PUMAs in 2008.  While a very few went home and sat on their hands after the convention, most became extinct by willingly joining the fold in support of Obama.  However, this had a lot to do with Hillary.  Clinton, to her credit, made a strident appeal for Party unity both before and at the Convention.  Which leads me to the Republican Candidates.  Will the loser, be he Mitt or Newt or Rick, make the same noble gesture to unite the Party and quell a PUMA rebellion?  Going on the assumption again that the winner will be Romney, will Newt do the noble thing and demand party unity from the PUMAs, or will he storm off in usual Newt fashion?  If its the latter, look for the PUMAs to be on Mitt's butt all through the general election.  We can only hope!

Go to go, but will check back on the discussion, if any, later.  Ya'll play nice now!
     

Poll

Will There Be Republican PUMAs?

58%28 votes
25%12 votes
16%8 votes

| 48 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (6+ / 0-)

    "Some men see things as they are and ask, 'Why?' I dream of things that never were and ask, 'Why not?"

    by Doctor Who on Sat Jan 21, 2012 at 03:10:20 PM PST

  •  Tip'd for the explanation of PUMA (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BachFan, koNko

    Just got interested in politics the last year or so.  Most abbr. I could figure out, but never did figure what PUMA stood for.  

    Democracy, if done properly, is rude, messy, and loud

    by allensl on Sat Jan 21, 2012 at 03:17:26 PM PST

    •  Me neither, and I was one. (0+ / 0-)

      Never got on board the Obama train until there was no choice. I liked Hill becuz I thought her to be more liberal than Bubba, she knew more about the workings of "The Village" than did Obama, and was less than convinced America would vote for an African American.
      Then there was a diary posted here on Kos in the first or second week of October, 2008, just a few weeks before the election, where a PA couple responding to a door-to-door pollster answered, "we're voting for the n-word... " and I knew right then and there that Obama would win. PA was/is a swing state, and the district being polled was redneck.
      Amazing.
      But, I never could figure out all the PUMA chatter on here. Many of us just thought the better candidate - the one that could WIN - was Hillary.
      Was simple as that.

  •  Meow, rowl, hiss. I think rabbits may be involved (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jan4insight

    Back scratch

    "Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing." Arundhati Roy

    by LaFeminista on Sat Jan 21, 2012 at 03:18:59 PM PST

  •  The PUMAs Were Much Reviled Here (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lungfish, Laurence Lewis, BachFan, ffour

    But actually pretty much non-existent in the actual population. I still wish Sec. Clinton had become our candidate! But you make do with what you got done to you.

    "I'll believe that corporations are people when I see Rick Perry execute one."

    by bink on Sat Jan 21, 2012 at 03:19:42 PM PST

  •  I certainly hope so. n/t (0+ / 0-)

    An armed society is... a society in which a lot of people get shot.

    by lungfish on Sat Jan 21, 2012 at 03:25:35 PM PST

  •  Republicans will be unified to defeat the (5+ / 0-)

    President, no matter who is running.  Making President Obama a one term president has always trumped anything else.  Hating President Obama is all they have.

    “when Democrats don’t vote, Democrats don’t win.” Alan Grayson

    by ahumbleopinion on Sat Jan 21, 2012 at 03:38:42 PM PST

  •  If it wasn't for the fundies (0+ / 0-)

    I'd have said no.  But since we've got two viable candidates that could run as independents with the backing of the religious right, this is definitely possible.

    If that were to happen, it would not only hand us NC, GA, VA, MO and FL on a platter, but make things mighty interesting in TX, WV, TN and KY.

    Occupy Wall Street in 2011--re-occupy the House in 2012.

    by Christian Dem in NC on Sat Jan 21, 2012 at 03:55:15 PM PST

  •  It almost entirely depends. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Doctor Who

    If the nominee is Romney, YES there will be Republi-PUMAs, and unlike the original PUMAs, most of whom reconciled by the nominee before the general, they will be looking for third-party options.

    If the nominee is Gingrich, the money folks will fall in line. The only reason they don't like him is that he's unelectable, not because he thinks any differently than they do. They would rather have Romney because they think they have a better chance of installing them, but they will take their best shot with Gingrich if that's their option.

    I support torturous regimes! Also, I kick puppies.

    by eataTREE on Sat Jan 21, 2012 at 04:01:53 PM PST

  •  Not if Newt is the non-nominee (0+ / 0-)

    Mitt would fall in line. Newt might fal in line with the Republican establishment.

    Then again, he might not!

  •  I wish people would put that (0+ / 0-)

    acronym to rest.  I still see various and sundry fools bringing up the 2008 primary fight and I see no reason to pull the scab off of that bullshit - even if you want to reapply the term to the GOP.

  •  "I just can't vote for a Mormon", I heard a (0+ / 0-)

    woman on the radio in SC say today, with scorn in her voice.

  •  I Like It! (0+ / 0-)

    And it could happen because even in the last election GOP moderates were on the run. Go Mittens!

    What about my Daughter's future?

    by koNko on Sun Jan 22, 2012 at 02:11:34 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site