awwwwwwww!

When I put together what I knew of the beginnings of PUMA, I looked for the original comment that set it all off, but no luck. Not to worry, myiq2xu [was there ever a better nic than that one?] has it.

On the internet, nobody knows you're a PUMA

So, hipparchia, what do you think? Are the PUMAs primarily a GOP front org, as it appears?

--- SB, the YDS

It's a fair question to ask about an issue as potentially important as electing the next president, so I'll answer it: I dunno.

What I do know...

The PUMA un-party appears to have arisen spontaneously, on or about the 1st of June, out of a conversation here, at the pro-Hillary blog The Confluence. The Confluence was started by riverdaughter, who was goldberry, apparently after getting thrown out of dkos, which isn't terribly difficult to accomplish. I've had one of my sock puppets banned at dkos [concern troll!] and if I can do it, anybody can.

While I've only lurked very occasionally at The Confluence --- some of the commenters do seem to be terminally suffering from Obama Derangement Syndrome, which is just tiring to read --- and only in recent weeks, riverdaughter and her blog both appear to be genuinely pro-Hillary and liberal [though not nearly so cool as my readers!] and have been for some time now. Additionally, I've run into Confluence contributor ronkseattle in various venues around cyberspace over the past 3 or 4 years, and he has always been reliably liberal.

Very shortly after that, murphy started Puma PAC, and Will Bower started P.U.M.A. At that point, being a bit on the solitary side myself, like many a real-life Florida panther, I mostly lost interest in actually following these people around the internet. I have, though, been quite partial to the idea, and have been spending a fair amount of time hanging out with the [mostly] uber-liberals at Corrente, keeping up especially with vastleft's blog and Sarah's manifestos there.

So, yes, Virginia, there are PUMAs and they are real and they are real liberals.

What I don't know is how much of the newly viral PUMA phenomenon is being hijacked and propagated by Republican operatives who see this as one possible means-to-an-end to sink Obama.

Certainly there are people declaring themselves Hillary suppporters who vow they was will vote for McCain before they'll ever, ever, ever vote for Obama, and unfortunately, a noticeable number of them do seem to be rather, ah, bigoted. It's quite possible they are Republicans who were, genuinely or not, crossing party lines and supporting Hillary Clinton. I mean, c'mon, look at what their own party has given them as candidates this year.

As for Darragh Murphy's assertion that that $500 contribution to McCain's primary campaign in 2000 [the one that Pandagon, and ilk, is all in an uproar about] was one of those strategic moves that politically active people try, supporting the opposition of the candidate they hate most, I find this entirely plausible. But even if Murphy really is a registered Republican, why shouldn't she, and others like her, be allowed to want Hillary for President?

But, yeah, the very virulent racism displayed by some of the self-proclaimed PUMAs is the main reason why I haven't formally joined them or endorsed them, even as I approve of their rebellious mood and actions.


Update, 7-3-2008: Darragh Murphy has been donating money to Hillary Clinton's campaign, $50 and $100 at a time [scroll down here], since March.

PUMAs are

Or not. I link, you decide.






additional reference


update: post title edited, h/t michael in comments

update update: post title changed yet again, as steve reminds me that rats are pretty darn kewl ackshully.

PUMA power

"The problem is the party itself. 2008 was the year that the party abandoned its principles. It is no longer the party of FDR and shared responsibility. Now, it is the party of wannabe rich libertarian Democrats. It is the party of the Ariana Huffingtons who, dissatisfied with their own party, have decided to steal someone else’s."