Many voting for Clinton to boost GOP, Seek to prolong bitter battle

[dkf]

By Scott Helman
Globe Staff / March 17, 2008

For a party that loves to hate the Clintons, Republican voters have cast an awful lot of ballots lately for Senator Hillary Clinton: About 100,000 GOP loyalists voted for her in Ohio, 119,000 in Texas, and about 38,000 in Mississippi, exit polls show.
more stories like this

A sudden change of heart? Hardly.

Since Senator John McCain effectively sewed up the GOP nomination last month, Republicans have begun participating in Democratic primaries specifically to vote for Clinton, a tactic that some voters and local Republican activists think will help their party in November. With every delegate important in the tight Democratic race, this trend could help shape the outcome if it continues in the remaining Democratic primaries open to all voters.

Spurred by conservative talk radio, GOP voters who say they would never back Clinton in a general election are voting for her now for strategic reasons: Some want to prolong her bitter nomination battle with Barack Obama, others believe she would be easier to beat than Obama in the fall, or they simply want to register objections to Obama.

"It's as simple as, I don't think McCain can beat Obama if Obama is the Democratic choice," said Kyle Britt, 49, a Republican-leaning independent from Huntsville, Texas, who voted for Clinton in the March 4 primary. "I do believe Hillary can mobilize enough people to keep her out of office."

Britt, who works in financial services, said he is certain he will vote for McCain in November.

About 1,100 miles north, in Granville, Ohio, Ben Rader, a 66-year-old retired entrepreneur, said he voted for Clinton in Ohio's primary to further confuse the Democratic race. "I'm pretty much tired of the Clintons, and to see her squirm for three or four months with Obama beating her up, it's great, it's wonderful," he said. "It broke my heart, but I had to."

Local Republican activists say stories like these abound in Texas, Ohio, and Mississippi, the three states where the recent surge in Republicans voting for Clinton was evident.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/03/17/many_voting_for_clinton_to_boost_gop/

[Swamp Rat]

1. ditto

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

2. Kicked, recommended and posted at Monday's daily news

:applause:

[jconner27]

6. who's kidding who

Who wants who

Most of the states Senator Obama has won are Republicans strongholds, in fact Sen. Obama and his supporters have bragged about Republicans switching over to vote for him yet his supporters do not care.

As for the article it self I have first hand account of how Mississippi was won for Sen. Obama, the Republicans invited Obama to speak at a event and the state Republicans were passing out pro Obama pamphlets and making sure black people knew where to vote in the primary. This doesn't sound like the Republican party I grew up to dislike.

[indimuse]

15. let's not forget the flyers his campagin handed out in NV!!!

hyppo's!

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

16. Here's from one of Hillary's biggest fans

[Yurovsky]

26. That is one evil SOB ...

it would be more accurate to swap the hammer/sickle for the twisted cross, though.

I'm not a religious person, but if there's a hell, Rush Limpdick will burn in it.

[catgirl]

29. These are republicans who will vote for him in the general

The repugs voting for HRC, are doing so, to screw up our elections. They will vote
for McCain in the general.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

3. how nice of Rush to help Hillary after having Bill on the show

on March 4, 2008 the day of the Ohio and Texas primaries.

[Metric System]

4. I wonder if Teddy called in a favor?

[CitizenLeft]

5. uh-huh.

So. That Obama-is-losing-the-white-vote crap is bullshit.

Thought so.

[LulaMay]

7. Is that why she's been the Dem's choice? If anything, they've voted for him. We'll see in PA

[jconner27]

8. This latest talking point does not make sense

Obama has won the hardest of the hard core Republican states
the elite of the right wing media "likes" him
and I have actual person tell me the Republicans were being active for him yet the Republicans want Hillary?

[cali]

9. He's won dems in the hard core repuke states

and he's won a lot of blue states. In fact, how do you want to spin his blow out here in Vermont? Want to tell me that it was because so many repukes voted for him here? Oh, and we may well be the most liberal state in the union. Vermont has lots of progressives. We don't like Hillary.

[Drachasor]

10. Look at the Mississippi exit polls, 13.6% of Hillary voters would be unhappy if she won

A negligible amount of Obama voters felt the same way.

Note, that the 13.6% that would be unhappy if she won, have neutral to positive feelings about Obama winning (these are not people that would be unhappy no matter who won).

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

18. I suspect the % of so-called "Hillary supporters" on DU who would regret her winning is even higher!

[Umbram]

28. Making sense is not part of the agenda (nt)

[McCamy Taylor]

11. The Republicans voted for Obama when he was low. Now they vote for Hillary.

Guys, the conservative pundits like George Will who send out the talking points to the Republican voters have been sending signals since last year---that I have been trying to warn you about since last year--that they want a Brokered Democratic Convention a la 1968 or 1972. A circular firing squad. When Hillary was ahead, they said good things about Obama and the Republicans crossed over to vote for Obama---remember. When Obama was ahead, the conservatives started saying good things about Hillary and they started crossing over to vote for Hillary.

You can not say that Obama's cross over GOP votes were legitimate votes (like he claimed) but now claim that Hillary's votes are fake. These votes are all either fake votes intended to keep the Dems from getting a nominee or they are disillusioned Republicans who listen to their conservative pundits and say to themselves "Obama must be the lesser two evils. No wait. Now Hillary is the lesser of two evils."

The next time someone says "All of Obama's GOP votes count, but none of Hillary's do" I am sending a cyberspace slap towards that person.

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0811,374100,374100,2.html/2

Here is Wayne Barret documenting how the conservative pundits have changed their tunes,

[kristopher]

12. So the disillusioned Republican is a myth?

I don't think so; they are real and they are a factor.
Leave the semantic games behind ("if for one, then for the other" ignores the probability of a complex explanation and reduces the choice to a single improbable choice of explanation) and look at the dynamics at play. I believe the Republican vote pre Texas Ohio was an accurate reflection of the disenchanted and penitent Republican. Yes there was noise from the talking heads even then. Some were urging a vote for Obama and some were saying they'd support Clinton if McCain won the primary (that was actually the much more common meme).
I think a lot of the vote Obama talk was to cover the exodus. RW talk radio exists by giving rationalization a perceptual place to get a toehold for growth. In this case they see Republicans leaving and going to the Dems and they try to position themselves as causal agents instead of losers. The shift to Hillary, though was different. This was a concerted effort to take what had been a fig leaf and make it work to their advantage.

They have successfully cast doubt on the level of support for both D candidates and they have extended the fight.

But I'm not sure it is such a bad thing. I think their planning on this is going to prove to be as bad as their planning for everything else since rove came to washington. If the infighting lasts past PA, then I might start to get worried. But the contest now can work to minimize the overall negative of things that, like Wright, have to be dealt with for the GE.

That's how I see it anyway.

[spooky3]

20. it's hardly a "semantic game" to note that labeling R&I votes for one as good

but for the other as suspect makes no sense. No one knows what was in the minds of Republican and Independent voters who voted in open primaries and caucuses, unless you talked to each one of them individually and believe they told you the truth. Coming up with a more complicated hypothesis to suggest something that appears on its face illogical, and with no data to support it, doesn't make yours more convincing than McCamy's. Also, I believe that the exit polls (at cnn.com) showed at least in Ohio that Obama won more of the Republicans and Independents than did Clinton, but because she strongly won among Dems., she won overall, which would be contrary to your hypothesis.

Having lived in Ohio for a number of years before moving and having relatives in IN, I'll offer another hypothesis, for which I have anecdotal but no systematic evidence: in those states, which have been very hard hit with economic problems and the loss of living wage paying blue collar jobs (and which have worsened considerably since January, with the financial and housing market messes, lots of foreclosures, etc.), there are a number of "Reagan Democrats" and "life-long Republicans" who voted for Bush and other candidates because they believed they share religious views. But over the past few years, they can no longer ignore what is happening to them or all around them. Many are really disillusioned with Bush now. They don't want more of the same, and they don't want to gamble on vague speeches, promises, and "hope." When they think back to the Clinton years, they realize they were better off, and they would like to have those years back (which may be impossible), and they prefer someone with more of a record of achievement and experience, whose faults as well as strengths are well-known, to help them. So at least some of the Reagan Dems. and maybe a few of the "life-long Repubs." have come back and voted for Clinton in the Dem. primary. If the Dems. had been able to make more of a difference in Congress this year, I believe some of the "life-long Repubs." would be supporting the Dems.; right now I think a lot, who don't pay a lot of attention to politics, think both parties have let them down and don't know what they're doing.

[KittyWampus]

19. show us some exit polling that supports your theory, otherwise it's nothing but spin

[spooky3]

21. no, the burden is on people who claim that it's good that R&Is voted for Obama

(such as in Virginia) but illogically now claim that it's bad that R&Is in other states voted for Clinton. They're the ones that need to provide the evidence as to why, because this simply makes no sense otherwise.

[MADem]

13. This TEXAS paper says the opposite. Who knows who's telling the truth?

It also says Obama voters just came to vote for him, and didn't bother voting in other contests, i.e., they're not too terribly "informed" voters. http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/030908dnpoldemvoters.3a5249f.html

....review of the Texas vote shows that among the 15 counties Mr. Obama won with his biggest margins, the voter falloff between the president and Senate races ranged from 22 percent, in Harris County, to 38 percent, in Jefferson County.

The biggest falloff was in Republican-heavy Collin County, which Mr. Obama carried by 55 percent. Four in 10 Democratic voters who cast ballots in the presidential race didn't vote in the Senate race.

Republican strategist Royal Masset said the Collin County vote illustrates a big reason for the voter falloff – Republican crossover voters who wanted to influence the outcome.

Although some conservative talk show hosts had urged Republicans to cross over and vote for Mrs. Clinton in order to keep the contest going, there was little evidence that happened.

According to exit polls, only 9 percent of Democratic voters statewide identified themselves as Republicans, and they went for Mr. Obama, 53 percent to 46 percent.

Republican pollster Mike Baselice said a 9 percent to 15 percent crossover vote is typical in Texas, and early-voter analysis indicates many of the "new" voters had some history of voting Democratic in general elections and were only new to a primary.

Of course, the Obama campaign actually SOLICITED GOP votes in at least one contest. A precinct captain on the Obama campaign distributed this flyer in NV:

[kristopher]

17. That is not the thrust of the article

The article places this interpretation on the data. Note the Clinton campaign supporter's comment. You quote ONLY the REPUBLICAN strategist at the end of the article.

"It's impossible to tell which voters skipped the down-ballot contest, though the counties in question leaned heavily to one candidate or the other. And it cannot take into account the decisions of individual voters, driven by many different factors.

But the numbers suggest that many Obama voters were drawn singularly to him and might not return in the fall if he's not the nominee – blunting the flood of new voters who Democrats hope will help revive the party in Texas and sweep it into the White House.

"We wouldn't get a lot of those young voters that came into the process exclusively for him," said Dallas lawyer Doug Haloftis, a Clinton supporter.

It's a crucial point as the campaigns continue their long and possibly bloody battle for weeks, and perhaps months more. As they argue over familiar themes of experience and judgment, Democratic voters might become increasingly concerned with a more fundamental issue: Who can beat Republican John McCain in November?

The Obama campaign has attracted new voters, including young people and black voters "who had, by a factor of 10, more information on the presidential race than anything down-ballot," said Democratic strategist and Obama volunteer Glenn Smith.

"To get these people to return to the polls in November, the odds are much better if Barack Obama is the nominee," he said.""

Again I ask: are you denying that this election offers the chance to enlarge the base of the Democratic party? The a very large percentage of the Republicans are SICK of their party and are willing to look to someone addressing their interests. That has been a target group of Obama from the beginning; are you saying he is wrong to do so?

Are you equating legitimate crossovers with those put up to it by Limbaugh???

REALLY??

[MADem]

30. What I am saying, and have said consistently since the start of the primaries and caucus events,

is that open contests do a disservice to the Democratic Party.

There's plenty of mischief to go around, even if you want to "credit" the late entry of the Limbaugh louts for anything.

That "Be a Democrat for a Day" shit won Obama more than a few caucus events. Like it or not.

And for you to insist that Obama crossovers are "legitimate" when Clinton ones are not is interesting. Do try the Mango Kool Aid, it's delecious, BTW. Even though there are members of "Republicans for Obama" who do NOT want him to win, but only want to stop Clinton. Don't believe me?

Here, from the MS-OBAMA website, too: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23394070/

Stop-Clinton movement takes root
“Obamacans,” as the campaign likes to call its Republican supporters, offer a variety of reasons for turning out for Obama, not the least of them a lack of interest in the Republican primary now that Sen. John McCain of Arizona has all but wrapped up his party’s nomination. Others say they genuinely think Obama is the best candidate for change.

But a significant proportion say they are temporarily backing Obama for strategic reasons. They plan to vote Republican in November, but for now, their goal is to try to make sure Clinton cannot win.

Although he said he sincerely supported Obama, Rau acknowledged that “Hillary kind of represents the antithesis of a lot of Republican values.”

Baselice, the Texas pollster, said some Republicans were calculating: “What do we need to do to draw the contrast between the Republican nominee and whoever the Democratic nominee will be post-Labor Day?”

Which makes it impossible, he said, to know how much Republican support Obama actually enjoys.

“That’s the $64,000 question,” he said.



But please DO go on with your bad self...

:eyes:

[kristopher]

33. Actually my opinion on the crossover for Obama is based on the people I've talked to

I live in a solidly Bush county in a blue state. The population tilts toward agricultural, religious, and nearing retirement. I'm seeing a solid rejection of Bush and the Republicans. The children of the Dems who shifted to Repub because of civil rights legislation and many of those who shifted because of religious fundamentalism are waking up to the fact that the Republican policies are not serving their interests. Especially disenchanted are the "values voters". I don't hear much about it on the net, but from my neighbors I'm hearing the same things David Kuo said about the Republicans = and they are done with them. I believe this is a significantly underrated motivator. What I'm also hearing from the neighbors is that it's Obama by default. Many of this crowd were as indoctrinated into the anti-Clinton camp as it was possible to be.
Now, there may be something come up that disqualifies Obama in their minds and they end up sitting home, I can't read the future. But as of now, these people are going to vote for Obama.

[Window]

14. K/R.

:kick:

[niceypoo]

22. Supporting Hillary is a CONSPIRACY!!

:rofl:

[HughMoran]

23. Clinton ran about EVEN with Obama among Republicans in both states ( Ohio & Texas)

So both got EQUAL numbers of Republican voters - seems like the Republicans are not influencing the voting much now, compared to before March 4th when Obama got 57% & Clinton got 25%. It seems Obama has benefitted more than Clinton and that Hillary mey have been the nominee if it weren't for Republcans.

Seems this could be spun differently depending on one's BIAS!

[rinsd]

31. Obama got more GOP votes in TX but in OH they were even.

[Froward69]

24. And yet the Hillbots

refuse to accept this fact. Somehow they have convinced themselves those votes would be there in November.
It is a Dirty shame they/Hillary cannot accept this, and bow out gracefully.

[Yurovsky]

25. Pro-war GOP voters picking McCain & Hillary ...

they want to ensure that the bloodshed continues and Haliburton et al continue to profit.

This is no accident. They are following the marching orders of Reich Fuhrer Limbaugh, plain and simple.

For crying out loud ANN FUCKING COULTER said she PREFERS Hillary to McCain.

:puke:

[PatGund]

27. It's not a surprise

The GOP has been gearing up to run against Sen. Clinton for over three years now. Why else does Faux news and the rest of the right-wing media try to sell her as the inevetable choice of the Democratic party?

Simple. They know she polarizes their base and people will come out not to vote for McCain, but to vote against Sen. Clinton.

[JerseygirlCT]

32. Another reason I don't understand open primaries. Want a say?

Join the party.