Good news for the GOP:
A sizable proportion of Democrats would vote for John McCain next November if he is matched against the candidate they do not support for the Democratic nomination. This is particularly true for Hillary Clinton supporters, more than a quarter of whom currently say they would vote for McCain if Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee.
As would be expected, almost all Democratic voters who say they support Obama for their party’s nomination also say they would vote for him in a general election matchup against McCain. But only 59% of Democratic voters who support Clinton say they would vote for Obama against McCain, while 28% say they would vote for the Republican McCain. This suggests that some Clinton supporters are so strongly opposed to Obama (or so loyal to Clinton) that they would go so far as to vote for the “other” party’s candidate next November if Obama is the Democratic nominee.
Remember the Clintonite spin after their string of losses that “real” Democrats were not the base of Obama’s support? if you don’t you can check commenter “F’s” babble in this thread, most notably this. Regardless, the protracted fight has a bunch of people worried:
Democrats are increasingly nervous about their party’s protracted nomination fight, and some prominent figures are publicly warning that the party needs to act fast to avoid disaster.
Chief among these voices is Phil Bredesen, the two-term governor of Tennessee who is uncommitted to either Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) or Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).
In an interview this week with Politico, Bredesen said flatly that if the contentious slog continues until the Democrats’ late-August convention in Denver, the party would have a vastly diminished chance of recapturing the White House.
Well, you know Governor Bredesen, you could do something about this rather than wringing your hands in anxiety. You could get off your ass and endorse someone. Put up or shut up.
BH Buck
Yep. That’s the “crybaby” factor.
Dulcie
The governor of Tennessee is on MSNBC right now talking about a Superdelegate primary in June, after the last primaries are held. I don’t think we can wait that long.
Billy K
AMEN!
Frakkin’ weenies. I’m sick of Democrat emo whinery and helplessness.
The Moar You Know
Shorter Bredesen: I’m getting leaned on by both campaigns to make a decision, but I don’t want to fuck up my chances of getting a cabinet post by endorsing the loser. Can you guys hurry this up?
Jen
Yeah, I don’t really understand why Gore, Edwards, Pelosi, Reid, name a bunch of other Democrats here, haven’t gathered at the Hall of Justice or something to become a force for ending this thing yet. Probably because of our commitment to failure at all costs.
Soylent Green
I think the percentage won’t be anywhere near that high. Right now people are telling pollsters the equivalent of holding their breath until they turn blue in the hope of scaring Obamans into switching sides.
But the number of Dems who switch could well be enough, in close contests, to get McCain elected.
Clearly more of Hillary’s backers would follow through on this threat than Obama’s would. It’s as though a third political party has emerged behind her. The Republican Lite Party.
So: defeat from the jaws of sure victory, as usual.
Rarely Posts
I’m not great at math, but if 28% of Clinton supporters and 19% of Obama supporters would vote for McCain depending on the Dem nominee, that means that 23.5% of Democrats would vote for a Republican.
I find this very hard to believe. IMO, each camp is pissed off at the other camp and things will settle down once we have a nominee.
If true, Hillary is the logical choice. McCain is on the right, Hillary is center left, and Obama is left…at least that is the most logical way to classify them.
I wonder how this information will effect the superdelegates?
Scrutinizer
We’re Democrats. It’s what we do.
Krista
“Almost” all? WTF? There are people out there who support Obama for the Dem nomination, but would vote against him in the general? Jesus H. Christ on a hang-glider, that just doesn’t seem right at all!
Zifnab
Ugh. This’ll be an interesting convention, to say the least. All said, however, I’m betting the Clintonistas will fall back in line once they start seeing Obama and McCain go toe-to-toe. Can you honestly believe an anti-war activist, an environmentalist, a pro-choicer, a backer of universal medicare, or a liberal tax reformer is going to pull the lever for McCain no matter how much he/she loves Clinton?
This is all Limbaugh-speak. Rabble, rabble, “I’m not going to vote for your candidate if you don’t support my candidate” rabble, rabble. Then they turn on a dime two weeks later.
Chris
Again, maybe I’m whistling past the graveyard, but I can’t say I’m terribly concerned about this. It’s currently March, and if Harry Reid’s comments are to be taken at face value, this should be wrapped up a while before the convention. There should be plenty of time for Obama (or even Hillary) to start a general campaign and illustrate the significant difference between the two platforms.
As far as Hillary’s supporters being a bit more… entrenched than Obama’s, I think it has more to do with the fact that their candidate is losing right now. With most everyone talking about Obama as the presumptive Democratic nominee, his supporters (myself included) can feel a little more magnanimous about the entire process. In contrast, when you’re running out of options and everyone’s calling for you to quit like in Hillary’s case, talk of being willing to support Obama in the general sounds more like surrender.
But I’d also like to join in on the chorus demanding Superdelegates get off the damn fence already. I caught some of Diane Rehm’s show on monday, and Bredesen was part of the panel. He actually said something to the effect of “Well, I know a protracted fight is bad for the democrats, but really I’m just waiting for someone to tell me when I have to make a final commitment.” To which, I think Tad Devine, said “Ok, well, I’m TELLING YOU. Who do you endorse.”
Bredesen laughed and implied it had to be someone like Gov. Dean or somesuch. Christ, Democrats drive me up a fucking wall.
joe
That number will surely come down once the primary is over.
It was just a couple of weeks ago that Republicans were insisting they’d never vote for McCain, and even support Hillary. Then McCain won, and that’s that.
Some kissey-face and a unified focus on the Republican candidate is all it will take to put this to bed.
The Other Steve
It’s quite possible that 28% of Hillary’s support is coming from Republicans and they’d vote for McCain even if she were the nominee.
LiberalTarian
I’ve actually come around to supporting Obama. He’s stoic, and if there is one thing we could really use right now, it’s a stoic leader. The charisma stuff isn’t really it for me–I think he is serious. The fact that Clinton employed so many Penns put me off her.
If these folks really do swing for McCain, they are not very serious about their convictions, are they? Just what we need–more followers of a cult of personality.
I would love to think they’d be smart enough to vote a Democratic ticket anyway, but, well … I’ve gotten so that I hesitate to underestimate the power of stupid.
Dungheap
I’d be interested to see, back when there was still a race on the R side, how many Republicans claimed they wouldn’t vote for McCain in the general as compared to what they are saying now.
Jen
I hope and do think that the tone will have changed a lot to be much more unifying by November. But I think the Clintons will have a lot to with that. She’s like a hammer. She’s not inspirational, brilliant, or original, but she can build a house if she wants to. Or, she could fracture your patella if she prefers. How graciously she concedes (!) and how hard she works for Obama could make a difference. On that score, nv optomistic.
Dennis - SGMM
Then you’re more optimistic than I am. I’m betting that if Obama gets the nom, Clinton will have to sit out the campaign recuperating and spending more time with the family.
ntr Fausto Carmona
I’d like to hope that this is just a passing phase, but then I remember what Ted Kennedy did to Jimmy Carter and shudder.
jenniebee
That only helps if they all go for the same candidate; if they split, the partisanship only gets more heated.
Besides, when it comes to commitment to failure, we’ve got nothing on those folks who fell in line fast behind the 2000 Bush candidacy. They made all the right moves and did everything they could to quash dissent and turn a semi-literate dry drunk who thought league expansion would be the ruination of baseball and who couldn’t find oil in freakin’ Texas into the Worst President Ever. We’re much too deliberative to push our cock-ups quite that far.
cleek
the Dems were given a pony. while they argued over who would get to ride the pony first, the pony wandered into the neighbor’s yard. it doesn’t want to come back.
Jake
Mid-October 2000: I’m gonna do it! I’ll show “them”! I’m gonna vote for Nader!
Mid-November 2000: Heh. I voted for Gore.
Also seconding what Chris said. Look at the calendar. Keep in mind that this circus has been going on since November 2006. Have a beer.
F
John,
Thanks for the front page.
Its ironic, I wrote my letter asking for Party loyalty in reducing some of the rhetoric aimed at the Clintons and what I got was a virulent attack on the Clintons. Someone used the term GOP-lite to describe Bill Clinton’s policies from the 90s, well I think that term (GOP-lite) is also applicable to the anti-Clinton attacks from some in the Democratic Party (Jen, etc.) Good job yall, you’re now doing the Republicans job for them.
Jen
That was the idea, yes.
myiq2xu
Gore probably remembers what happened when they stopped counting votes and appointed a winner.
How did that work out again?
cleek
F joins the piepeople!
John S.
General elections = democratic primaries!
/drool
myiq2xu
Something about them boiz just ain’t right.
D-Chance.
LOL! This is fucking Hillarious!
Wasn’t it, like, only 60 DAYS AGO that I was reading on this and almost every other liberal blog how it was the REPUBLICANS who were irreparably split amongst all their various factions and that it was the Democrats who were perfectly happy, cozy, and quaint with any of their fine, outstanding candidates? And what happened to that “unity” thing… is Obama not magic anymore?
The next 7 1/2 months are going to be the ultimate 45-gazillion ring circus… what a process this country endures just to send a bunch of crooks to the Halls of Power to find even more ways to steal its collective wealth.
ntr Fausto Carmona
He won the nomination over Bill Bradley.
Jen
Wow, you’re right, this is exactly like Florida in 2000. I can’t think of a single thing distinguishing those two analogies.
Jen
When you put it like that, it *does* seem hilarious! Always helpful, D!
Zifnab
There’s enough logic to that. Pelosi and Reid have less room. Edwards even slimmer. I expect John’ll give his endorsement to Obama once Obama takes NC. If Hillary loses her grip in PA, expect landslide support for the MUP. Otherwise, it’ll just be death by a thousand cuts for Clinton.
myiq2xu
“Fall back in line?” Interesting phraseology.
Will the MUPpets fall back in line if Hillary is the nominee?
Rarely Posts
That was funny. Sad, but funny.
ntr Fausto Carmona
Shorter F the Spoof: La partie, c’est Clinton.
F
Which anti-Hillary camp do you fall into?
.
Brainwashed
Definition – Came of age in the 90s/00s and probably did not participate in previous elections. However listened to and internalized the Republican’s anti-Clinton rhetoric of the past 18 years (Clintons are bad, Clintons are corrupt, Clintons are divisive, etc).
Hillary Support – Expecting them to support Hillary Clinton after 18 years of brainwashing would have been difficult, especially with a young charismatic candidate running.
Example – Newly registered Democratic voters, particularly the under 40 crowd.
.
Radical Leftists
Definition – Left wing of the Democratic Party who felt betrayed by the Clinton’s centrist message.
Hillary Support – Expecting them to support Hillary Clinton after feeling betrayed by Bill Clinton on Welfare Reform, NAFTA, Bosnia, etc. is a reach.
Example – Nader supporters
.
Disgruntled Republicans/DINOs
Definition – Previously never liked or voted for the Clintons and probably participated and enabled the Republican attacks on the Clintons.
Hillary Support – Expecting them to support Hillary Clinton would have taken a great deal of alcohol.
Example – John Cole, Andrew Sullivan
.
Right wing Republicans
Definition – Self-explanatory
Hillary Support – Not going to happen. No way, no how. Not in this or any lifetime. NEVER!!!!!!!
Example – The current Republican Party
.
Some Obama Supporters
Definition – They like Obama better and wrongly feel the only way to support him is to denigrate the Clintons.
Hillary Support – Will probably support Hillary if she is the Democratic candidate.
Example – Kos
chopper
sounds like typical primary bluster to me.
Prospero
They got a deathwish or something?
myiq2xu
Considering that the official Obama meme is that it would be a “coup” if the unpledged delegates give Hillary the nomination, I find it hilarious that an Obama supporter is suggesting that a back-room deal be made to determine the nominee.
Why don’t we let all the voters have a say first?
Maybe North Carolina will tip the scales.
MJ
Well said D-Chance.
Scrutinizer
But they may not tip the way you want, as Obama is currently up 20% over Clinton in NC.
Jen
I don’t think she’s planning on dropping out at any time during this campaign. I think Obama could win NC by 15 percentage points and we would learn why NC doesn’t matter. What would be the margin of victory that you would consider decisive enough that she should leave?
John S.
What a load of shit. I fall into a different group not listed:
Sensible Democrat
Definition – They like Obama better and have become increasingly disgusted with Clinton and her campaign.
Hillary Support – Will support Hillary in the extremely slim chance she is the noiminee because McCain is batshit fucking insane.
Example – Most of the commenters at Balloon Juice.
Jen
(by the way, the answer is because Obama picked NC in his bracket, so clearly we are in the tank for him.)
The Moar You Know
Oh, the trolling here is so sad. You guys fail it.
MyIQ brings up an interesting question, though it’s meant as trollbait:
Sure. I think those who would actually be pissed enough to cross the line or sit out the election number in the hundreds, out of a country of almost 300 million.
It’s a hypothetical question, though. The numbers just aren’t there for her.
F: I like the “which group of losers do you choose to own” troll. Nice, if a bit overused.
myiq2xu
When Obama has enough delegates locked up to win the nomination.
myiq2xu
Let them vote anyway. We’re supposed to be Democrats.
Democrat – democracy
crw
Funny, for a process that’s supposedly destroying the Democratic party, this extended primary sure is generating a lot of enthusiasm in places like Pennsylvania that normally never have a say. From what I hear, we’re seeing record numbers of people registering D there to participate. Some of this may be ratfuckers participating in Operation Chaos, but I suspect most of it is honest enthusiasm. I think either way, if we cut the process short, it’ll be worse in the long run than if we wait until June.
Voice of Reason
I would vote for a vegetable as long as it isn’t John McCain.
Notorious P.A.T.
Every day I get more confused about the mind of a Hillary supporter.
John posts a poll revealing that a quarter of Clinton’s supporters would vote for McCain over Obama. . . and this means that it’s the OBAMA forces that are anti-Democrat???
Soylent Green
That’s a skewed definition. A lot of us were okay with Hillary, if not actively behind her, and thought as she did that she would win the nomination. We expected to vote for her in the GE unflinchingly.
Then she denigrated herself by campaigning on Republican talking points and slander, running an incompetent campaign, kneecapping her opponent, etc.
I don’t denigrate the Clintons to support Obama, I do it because they deserve it. If she were running a clean and positive campaign, I would have no objection to her staying in.
Sasha
Ah, the Democratic Circular Firing Squad takes aim again . . .
Jen
I go back and forth on this. Sometimes I think, well, if I were a rational Hillary voter, and if Obama won fair and square after all 50 states and Puerto Rico and Guam had their say, then I would just have to get on board and vote for Obama. Whereas if it were cut short, you could maintain this mythical world where Hillary gets 60% of the remaining states and the superdelegates are awed by her awesomeness and she got robbed.
But then I revisit the premise of a rational Hillary voter, and I remember Mark Twain’s bon mot, and I am back to my Hall of Justice idea again.
I don’t really know what’s best, but this primary season is killing my productivity.
Sasha
So Edwards simply left the race too early, huh?
If Edwards had just hung in there despite the hard mathematical evidence showing that he couldn’t make up his delegate deficit without resorting to extreme measures, he’d still be a contender!
Martin
My neighbor (a Marine vet) will vote for McCain because he feels that McCain has earned it since being a POW. He likes Obama, though.
Not sure what passes for standards of promotion in the military these days, but I’m a bit worried.
But keep in mind that something like 5% of Dems voted for Alan Keyes over Obama in the Illinois election, so clearly some voters base their decisions on factors that defy analysis.
And for F, I’m a separate group of anti-Hill. Citizens deserve a candidate that has moral courage, integrity, and values voters. So you could say that I oppose Hillary on moral grounds. I think you’d find a lot of Obama supporters and those that dislike Clinton are the same way. But you’ve defined every voter as retarded or an irrational hater, which speaks volumes about your limitations to assess the candidates or the voters in a reasonable manner.
BTW, I don’t think the way for Obama to win is to denigrate the Clintons, in fact, I think the opposite is true. That said, I denigrate the Clintons because of the way that they have treated me as a citizen and a voter. Treat voters with contempt and expect to draw their ire.
HeartlandLiberal
Hades will experience an early frost before I EVER vote for a Republican again. Of this I assure you. But it will ALSO frost over before I vote for HRC. I will vote libertarian or green, for the first time in my life, before I vote for her. She has proven that she is flat evil. Totally self-absorbed, and a (*_)(* liar to boot.
Llelldorin
It’s funny–John Cole is so well spoken that I sometimes forget how new he is to Democratic politics. This is just how we do things over on this side of the aisle. It looks dysfunctional, but that’s just because it’s deeply, deeply dysfunctional. Still, seeing the stunning success that we’ve had over the last thirty years, it’s hard to see why we’d change now.
Sadly, this has been the party since the progressive era. It’s not so much a solid political block as a standing USENET flamewar that’s been going on for at least a century. Every so often we get a really compelling leader—Bryant, or FDR–who manages to pull the party into some semblance of coherence. The rest of the time, we all wail about our pet issues and make the political equivalent of flounce posts.
Andrew
If MUPpers are GOP-lite, does that mean Hillary’s folks are full on GOP now?
chopper
what’s funny is how the poll shows that more hillary backers wouldn’t vote for obama vs obama backers not voting for hillary.
you’d think it would be the other way around because if hillary gets the nom it’ll be over an obama lead in delegates, states won and popular vote. if that happens many democrats would see her win as illegitimate and many would walk away (blacks, much of the youth vote etc).
crw
Jen:
The way I see it, it’s pretty much a given this is going to be decided by the super delegates anyway. Given that, in my opinion the party leadership would be wise to dot every i and cross every t to mitigate charges the primary process is not “free and fair.” It’s about appearances, really. I think throwing things now will just feed another GOP talking point: “Democrats don’t believe in democracy!”
Yes, it’s excruciating now, but I have faith people’s attention spans are incredibly short. Especially their emotional attention spans. I have a feeling (heh) come November the vast bulk of Democrats will have completely forgotten how they felt waaaay back in April, let alone why they felt that way.
Napoleon
But I don’t think the question was asked with that hypethetical presented, so I suspect that number would be much much higher if that ends up being the case (at least as an initial reaction, once passions cool some I would expect the number to come down).
zzyzx
My prediction – Clinton wins PA, Obama wins NC by similar margins and IN is close. At that point, people see that Obama’s pledged delegate lead is about 80% of the remaining delegates and the calls grow louder.
myiq2xu
His call, not mine.
Martin
Something to keep in mind is that the ‘I won’t vote for…’ reaction is very dependent on conditions. After Texas, a lot of Kossacks backed away from their ‘won’t vote Clinton’ positions because the threat was no longer productive and the likelihood of having to carry out the threat was much lower.
Most Obama supporters see a Clinton win as a single-digit percentage likelihood. I think most Clinton supporters see it much higher – maybe 25%. That’s in part due to many of them seeing Wright as a death-blow and Obama as completely unelectable now. To them the threat has more meaning, so I’m not surprised to see Clinton supporters as ‘more likely to defect’. Plus, supporters on both sides have yet to be on the receiving end of McCain’s attacks, so it’s easy to say that they’ll vote for him. In 5 months, they’ll hate the guy and have a different view.
The poll is pretty meaningless, IMO.
Scrutinizer
Ah, disfranchisement. That’s how things work for us in NC, too. I can’t really get too upset over the MI-FL voters; I can’t recall many times when my primary vote counted, and I’ve been voting for close on to 40 years now.
Countervail
Frankly, I’m one of those Clinton supporters who would possibly vote for McCain if she’s not the Democratic candidate.
It has nothing to do with Obama-hate. I would choose McCain over Obama for his more extensive experience and, what I think is a larger, less talked about concern, that Obama’s policy positions and plans are simply too far to the left. While there are some very specific issues I disagree with, I have more confidence that McCain can accomplish bi-partisan agreements more effectively.
Obama would have a Democratic congress in his pocket if he were elected but I think his agenda would be more controversial and suffer more specific opposition from congressional Republicans. It would be four years of spinning the wheels in place.
ken
Count me among the Clinton supports who will never, under any circumstance, vote for Obama.
F
I’m a Hillary supporter who will gladly vote for Obama.
I think right now she would a better president, but I have no problem voting for Obama who is vastly superior to McCain on the issues and from a personality standpoint (angry McCain).
Andrew
Number of Total Fucking Idiots = Number of Total Fucking Idiots + 1
Andrew
This is a great summation of DLC politics and why it’s so fucking stupid.
orogeny
I’m someone who is supporting Clinton because I feel she is the better of two poor choices. Personally, I think that some folks are deluded if they think that the Wright/Meeks/Farrakan/black nationalism issue isn’t going to play strongly against Obama in the general. This is not a comment on the validity of that issue, just on its impact on swing voters. However, once the nomination is decided, I’ll do everything I can to make sure the Democratic candidate is elected.
LiberalTarian
Don’t you worry your pretty little head. The Republicans are going to make sure that there’s nothing left to steal.
John Cole
I, too, remember all of the great bi-partisan legislation of the past few years. Namely, the Iraq War, the Patriot act, the Protect America Act, the Bankruptcy Bill, NCLB, the Prescription Drug Plan.
Do I need to go on? You are an idiot. I may have voted for Bush twice, but I fucking learned something.
Christ.
LiberalTarian
What I think is interesting is that he/she thinks there *is* a functional left in this country. It just ain’t so.
But, there is some pragmatic movement from the mid-left–Barney Frank is trying to repeal the prohibition on personal pot use. If any of those peeps in DC really cares about reducing the cost of government, that would be a good way. Stop sending cancer patients to jail over medical marijuana. Better yet, stop sending tax-paying citizens to jail based on their choice of recreational anesthetic. Even better-better yet, legalize industrial hemp and tax the crap out of wacky tabacky. All kinds of economic benefits, and a whole new sin tax. Good grief–people pay a whole lotta money for weed. The government could use that cash for a whole lot of programs–probably even save freakin’ Medicare.
But, I guess it is still literally just a pipe dream. People like their stupid, and by gawd, they are going to keep it.
F
While reading John’s latest pontification it came to me we need some New Voting Rules. h/t to Bill Maher
.
New Voting Rules
1. If you vote for an obvious idiot for more than one election cycle, you are required to miss the following election cycles equal to the number of times you voted for the idiot beyond the first election cycle.
. – John voted for Republicans in 2000, 2002 and 2004 (2006 awareness factor*)
. – 2002 and 2004 were continued support beyond the first election (2 election cycles).
. – Accordingly, he would then have missed the 2006 and 2008 elections not being allowed to vote until 2010 (2 election cycles).
. – Everyone gets a pass for being fooled once.
*John became aware that Bush was an idiot in 2006, which made 2006 his awareness election and 2002 and 2004 his continued support cycles.
.
2. If you vote for an obvious spoiler, which results in harm you are required to miss the following 2 election cycles (awareness factor*).
. – Nader voters in 2000 (1 election cycle)
. – Accordingly, they would then have missed the 2002 and 2004 elections not being allowed to vote until 206 (2 election cycles).
*They are aware that there actions may cause harm, they just don’t care.
.
3. If your support for an idiot/spoiler caused harm, yet you continue to self-righteously claim that you are not at fault, you not only lose the ability to vote (see Rule 1 and 2) you are also required to donate the maximum allowable to the IRS Election Campaign Fund equal to every year that the idiot/spoiler caused harm.
. – Bush supporter = 8 years of donations
. – Nader supporter = 8 years of donations (possibly more)
AkaDad
If Hillary doesn’t get nominated, I’m gonna vote for the guy with 30 years of bad judgment, who doesn’t know much about the economy, will keep us in Iraq indefinitely, and basically continue the failed policies of George Bush.
If I don’t get what I want, everyone can suffer with me.
Zuzu
A Clinton supporter posted a similar threat on some thread awhile back … that she planned to vote for McCain if Obama was nominated. As I recall, it was snit-city.
I’m pretty sure my response to her, on behalf of my active duty loved one, included a swear word I don’t normally use in life or online.
mere mortal
“A sizable proportion of Democrats would vote for John McCain next November if he is matched against the candidate they do not support for the Democratic nomination.”
I would be surprised if these numbers reflect reality. In the midst of a tight primary contest, I would suspect a fair number of these respondents to be answering strategically. Even among those answering honestly, most Democrats will stick with the party once the two final choices are presented. On policy (Iraq, economy, taxes), McCain is so far from either Democrat that I just can’t buy a rational choice order of Clinton, McCain, Obama.
In short, I suspect the survey might be junk.
kmeyer
Here’s my plan for November if HRC gets the nomination:
Get into my car. Breathe deeply, relaxing, and begin chanting “Three Supreme Court Justices” over and over, until I reach my polling place.
Take two shooters of whiskey from my glove box, down them, and resume chanting (under my breath, of course; I don’t wanna look like a crazy person, especially with whiskey on my breath) until I am inside the voting booth.
Then, controlling my urge to wretch, I scream at the top of my lungs “THREE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES” as I bush the button for HRC.
Go immediately home, and drink myself to sleep.
If I can do it, so can you.
CBD
I’d say that 23% of the Democratic participation are actually self-described “Independents”, not Democrats that would vote Republican.
Asti
I’m not going to vote for Son of Cain, I’m just going to sit out if my only Democratic choice is “Ms. I usta be president with my husband”.
Well, if she used to be president with her husband, than I say she shouldn’t be allowed a third term. EOS!
Tax Analyst
You know what? You’re very fucking annoying. How about:
Some Obama supporters. He has actually articulated some positions, dares to speak out in a non-gibberishial (yes, I made that word up) manner, seems like he might have some vision of the future beyond just sitting around with a freaking crown on his head and a scepter in his hand. He is thoughtful and doesn’t seem to parse meanings in such a way that they mean nothing and everything all at once…Oh, wait, I wasn’t supposed to knock Hillary here, was I?
Well, shit – I tell you what’s happened, but I shouldn’t have to; umpteen commenter’s have already SAID they initially either favored Clinton or were on the fence – I’m one of them – and would have been happy with either candidate…UNTIL the Clinton campaign started with all the bullshit (no, I’m not going to give you examples, you shouldn’t need any). Hey, I’ll tell you what, even though I was leaning towards Obama I was sort of pleased in a strange way when Clinton came back and won NH. I was LEANING towards Obama, but I felt like a tight race would make either candidate stronger. But no more – I don’t think anything will make Senator Clinton any better as a candidate. She’s already clearly signaled that she’s comfortable and wedded to this crappy “50 + 1” mentality that has helped put us all in the toilet. She’s run a crappy, bottom-feeder campaign that has taken her from no worse than even (and probably better than that) into a desparate and probably losing position. Her response to that? Re-double the dirt and slime. I’m tired of it, she’s just not that spectular a candidate and she has absolutely no political instincts – some people think that there is some sort of magical osmosis that transfers traits between married folks. Frankly, that’s BS – know any married people like that? I don’t. People may do things to ACCOMODATE their mate, but they don’t turn into them.
So FUCK YOU and your smug defining and labelling of how other people think.
And, uh…have a nice day.
Tax Analyst
And one more thing, F – yes, I will still vote for Clinton if she somehow ends up with the nomination, but I won’t do it with any sense of conviction or belief that she can pull the nation together in any way – or put together enough votes in Congress to do much of anything. It would just be another round of “lesser of two evils” voting; knowing how miserable McCain would be.
That sucks. I resent being handed a piece-of-shit option like that. Can’t we at least TRY to do better?
Naw, that would fuck up your label-making machine.
TenguPhule
Beej
Jesus H. Christ on a crutch! So Hillary and McCain have all that foreign policy experience and Obama has almost none? Allow me to present you with a couple of lists:
Almost no foreign policy experience when they became Pres.:
George W. Bush
Bill Clinton
Ronald Reagan
Jimmy Carter
John F. Kennedy
Harry Truman
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Substantial amount of foreign policy experience when they became Pres.:
George H.W. Bush
Gerald Ford
Richard Nixon
Lyndon Baines Johnson
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Herbert Hoover
Now, would someone like to tell me how foreign policy experience should be THE deciding factor in who becomes President? Hell’s bells, Nixon had even more fp experience than McCain. That worked out sooooooooo well!