Operation Malfunction: In PA, Party switchers leaned toward Obama, exit polls show.

[Maddy McCall]

Party switchers lean toward Obama, exit polls show

Highlights of exit poll data in the Pennsylvania Democratic presidential primary Tuesday:

FINALLY, THE MAIN EVENT

After a six-week lull since the last Democratic primary, Pennsylvania voters were so eager to participate in the hotly contested battle between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama that 9 percent of those voting Tuesday had changed their party registration since the start of 2008 to be eligible to vote in the Democratic race. The contest was open only to registered Democrats. About half the party-switchers had been registered Republicans, while the rest had been unaffiliated with either party, and even more were voting for the first time in Pennsylvania.

Most of those new Democrats were mobilized to come out for Obama, and they were nearly one-fifth of Obama's supporters. Even the former Republicans favored Obama over Clinton, largely invalidating rumors that Republicans would vote strategically in the Democratic primary in support of Clinton, hoping she would be easier to defeat in November.

*********************************

Oops! Forgot the link: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hIfAwkkooVUzxAU-nYymJicF5kXwD907BUP00
So what was different in Indiana? :shrug:

[Stop Cornyn]

1. Just goes to show you that lots of those party switchers hate Hillary more than they like Rush...

[Maddy McCall]

3. Spin, baby, spin.

Expectable.

Republican support for Obama = good.

Republican suport for Clinton = Limbots = bad!

Does that logic make you dizzy sometimes?

[PoliticalAmazon]

36. There are some GOPers who have switched to supporting Obama....

A caller on Stephanie Miller Show this morning talked about how she, a white woman, had been so impressed by Obama that she voted for him in the Dem primary in Indiana, even though she is a Republican. She sounded very genuine.

[JackORoses]

2. Indiana was an Open Primary

Much less effort required of the Limbaugh Army

[Maddy McCall]

4. Faulty logic.

1) No proof that Republicans who crossed over in Indiana were "Limbaugh Army."

2) No proof that Republicans who crossed over in Indiana actually voted in mass for Hillary.

[anigbrowl]

9. CNN's exit polls show otherwise. Large numbers said they would vote for McCain

about 1/6th of Dem primary voters, in fact. And Hillary won those votes by a large majority.

[Maddy McCall]

13. Where's the proof that they were Hillary voters? These people who said they'd vote for McCain.

And that these future McCain voters voted for Clinton.

[dbmk]

24. Its as proofy as it gets

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5869508&mesg_id=5869508

You can of course dismiss the validity of exit polls (which would go against the established perception). But particularly on this question I fail to see why people should lie.

[anigbrowl]

38. Because the only exit-polled people who voted in the Democratic primary.

Anyone who voted in the Republican primary wasn't asked all the other questions.

[onenote]

10. nothing faulty about it.

Its a lot easier to decide as a repub to vote in the Democratic party for kicks when all you have to do is ask for a ballot rather than, some time in advance, change your registration.

Much more likely that someone who goes to the trouble to change their registration in order to vote in a primary actually supports the person that they are voting for.

[Maddy McCall]

15. So? That doesn't prove that they voted for Hillary.

Dr. Eldrich at DU is a registered Republican who supports Obama.

You don't think that some Republicans support Hillary for the same reasons that Eldrich supports Obama?

[onenote]

23. not sure I'm following. The issue was comparing PA and IN

Not sure where Dr. Eldrich lives. If he/she lives in PA and supports Obama and wanted to vote for Obama in PA, he/she had to change parties. If he/she lives in IN...well, they wouldn't be a 'registered' Repub since there is no such thing in IN.

The point is that it is likely that the vast majority of the voters that went to the trouble of switching party registration, in advance, so that they could vote in the Democratic primary in PA, probably supported the candidate they voted for in that primary. Whereas, in IN, it was much easier for someone who self identifies (but doesn't have to register) as a repub to vote in the Democratic primary just for grins and giggles since all it required them to do is ask for a ballot. I'm not saying that there were no self-identified repubs who voted for HRC or BO because they actually support them, just that there is more chance of mischief making voters in IN than in PA.

[dbmk]

25. Yeah, but why would they then say that they would vote against her in Nov, if it came to that?

Pretty sure the likes of Dr Eldritch would answer Obama/Obama.

[JackORoses]

29. according to Exit Polls, 80% of those who will vote for McCain in the Fall chose Hillary

That demonstrates that they are Limbaugh Army since they will be voting McCain.
It also shows that they voted overwhelmingly for Hillary.

[LisaM]

5. Or, that Obama's policies appeal to them more

Or that they won't vote for a woman.

I can't speculate on the reason party-switchers went to Obama over Clinton, and I suspect there is more than one reason anyway. But based on the anecdotal evidence here alone, I thought it was nonsense to imply that it was Hillary Republicans were voting for.

If true, we need to beware, because 1) the DNC only has about 1/6 of the money that the RNC has right now, AND 2) we can't count on a huge coattail effect for downticket races.

[David__77]

6. This has all been so dramatic.

It's very interesting. I guess there are some Republicans and independents who like Obama, and for various reasons dislike Clinton. Anecdotally, I know of two such people, both of whom voted for Bush in 2004, but are "libertarian-minded." They are vaguely "anti-feminist," but only in the identity politics sense of the term. On the other hand, there are traditional Democrats who dislike Obama as "insubstantial" and like Clinton as an intelligent and proven leader. I am hopeful that these different segments can be unified and that this base can in turn be expanded.

[onenote]

7. one difference is that there is no party registration in Indiana

and the primary was completely "open" -- you didn't have to go through the formality of changing registration to vote in the Democratic primary. Much lower threshold for mischief makers.

[Maddy McCall]

8. See response to Jackwhatshisname above.

[onenote]

11. see my response above as well

[jillan]

12. CNN said that the reason Hillary won Indiana is because she won the Democrat's vote.

The Limpo factor had no effect on the outcome.


That's according to CNN....

[Maddy McCall]

17. Interesting.

But that'll be discounted by the Obots with the right-wing "Clinton News Network" excuse.

[dbmk]

21. Nah - again we default to the math

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5869508&mesg_id=5869508

[dbmk]

20. BS

Hillary gained 50k+ votes from the voters that would not vote Dem under any circumstances come November.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5869508&mesg_id=5869508

[ShortnFiery]

14. Like your tragic heroine, your quest is seemingly never ending.

May you find peace. :hi:

[Maddy McCall]

19. Like usual, your post indicates an inability to discuss the topic at hand.

What else is new?

[JoFerret]

27. A refusal to look at the data

is plain blindness.

[datopbanana]

16. How many times do people have to ask this

BO won repubs since the BEGINNING. HRC has only won/narrowed the gap in repubs since the McCain secured.

[dbmk]

18. Correction

Using CNNs exit polls from PA:

Given a McCain-Clinton matchup in Nov:

10% of the voters that voted would vote McCain. Of those 31% voted for Hillary:

2306664 total voters. 230666,4 would vote McCain in the GE. Of those 71506,584 voted for Clinton

Given a McCain-Obama matchup in Nov:

15% of the voters that voted would vote McCain. Of those 10% voted for Obama:

2306664 total voters. 345999,6 would vote McCain in the GE. Of those 34599,96 voted for Obama.


Result: Of the voters that would not vote Democratic in November under any circumstances, Hillary had 2/3.

[dchill]

22. What was different in Indiana?

Ed Rendell is not the governor of Indiana. But he IS the governor of Philadelphia.
:)

[gcomeau]

26. There's a difference...

...between republicans voting democratic in the primary who intend to also vote democratic in the GE, and republics voting democratic in the primary with the full intention of voting McCain in the GE.

We know, every one of us, that there is plenty of the latter going on among the "Clinton republicans" and plenty of the former going on among the "Obama republicans". The Indiana exit polling bore that out once again, Clinton had a large chunk of voters who said that given a matchup between her and McCain they were voting McCain. And that's just the ones who admitted it.

Those aren't democrats thrilled about their nominee saying that. "Woohoo! Go Clinton! I can't wait for her to run against McCain so I can loyally cast my democratic vote against her!" Those are the republican crossovers only voting for her to extend the fight. It's been happening ever since McCain clinched the Republican nomination.

[Blue-Jay]

28. Invalid comparison.

In PA, one has to actively change party registration. You know...paperwork and stuff.

In IN, one only needs to sign the book, and mark a box next to D or R. Much easier, and you can do it when you walk in.

That said, I doubt the Limbaugh factor had much to do with the final results anyway. I'm sure that there were a few people following El Gasbag's orders. There were probably a lot more crossover Republicans who voted for the person they thought would be easiest to beat in November. Obviously, not all of them came to the same conclusion. I'm also sure that a good percentage of crossover Republicans were likely just fed up with the Republican Party, and decided to vote for who they thought would be the best president.

[AllentownJake]

30. You fought the good fight

The difference is she won by 1.5%. It's over. It's time for you to put down your sword.

[MadBadger]

31. Its not that Repukes voted for her, its the exit poll question about voting in the GE

[dcindian]

32. Gross conceprtual error

Can't compare real party switchers to ditto heads.

[dogday]

33. Some on this board can trust these republicans, I think EarlG's post

said it all... Don't trust any of them....

[Faryn Balyncd]

34. There is ALL THE DIFFERENCE in the world between a Susan Eisenhower and a Rush Limbaugh . . . . .

. . . . and between thoughtful former Republicans who will vote Democratic in NOVEMBER, and "Operation Chaos" Dittoheads whose stated intent is to vote in McCain in November:

Why I'm Backing Obama


By Susan Eisenhower





Forty-seven years ago, my grandfather Dwight D. Eisenhower bid farewell to a nation he had served for more than five decades. In his televised address, Ike famously coined the term "military-industrial complex," and he offered advice that is still relevant today. "As we peer into society's future," he said, we "must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow."

Today we are engaged in a debate about these very issues. Deep in America's heart, I believe, is the nagging fear that our best years as a nation may be over. We are disliked overseas and feel insecure at home. We watch as our federal budget hemorrhages red ink and our civil liberties are eroded. Crises in energy, health care and education threaten our way of life and our ability to compete internationally. There are also the issues of a costly, unpopular war; a long-neglected infrastructure; and an aging and increasingly needy population.

I am not alone in worrying that my generation will fail to do what my grandfather's did so well: Leave America a better, stronger place than the one it found.

Given the magnitude of these issues and the cost of addressing them, our next president must be able to bring about a sense of national unity and change. As we no longer have the financial resources to address all these problems comprehensively and simultaneously, setting priorities will be essential. With hard work, much can be done.

The biggest barrier to rolling up our sleeves and preparing for a better future is our own apathy, fear or immobility. We have been living in a zero-sum political environment where all heads have been lowered to avert being lopped off by angry, noisy extremists. I am convinced that Barack Obama is the one presidential candidate today who can encourage ordinary Americans to stand straight again; he is a man who can salve our national wounds and both inspire and pursue genuine bipartisan cooperation. Just as important, Obama can assure the world and Americans that this great nation's impulses are still free, open, fair and broad-minded.

No measures to avert the serious, looming consequences can be taken without this sense of renewal. Uncommon political courage will be required. Yet this courage can be summoned only if something profoundly different transpires. Putting America first -- ahead of our own selfish interests -- must be our national priority if we are to retain our capacity to lead.

The last time the United States had an open election was 1952. My grandfather was pursued by both political parties and eventually became the Republican nominee. Despite being a charismatic war hero, he did not have an easy ride to the nomination. He went on to win the presidency -- with the indispensable help of a "Democrats for Eisenhower" movement. These crossover voters were attracted by his pledge to bring change to Washington and by the prospect that he would unify the nation.

It is in this great tradition of crossover voters that I support Barack Obama's candidacy for president. If the Democratic Party chooses Obama as its candidate, this lifelong Republican will work to get him elected and encourage him to seek strategic solutions to meet America's greatest challenges. To be successful, our president will need bipartisan help.

Given Obama's support among young people, I believe that he will be most invested in defending the interests of these rising generations and, therefore, the long-term interests of this nation as a whole. Without his leadership, our children and grandchildren are at risk of growing older in a marginalized country that is left to its anger and divisions. Such an outcome would be an unacceptable legacy for any great nation.

Susan Eisenhower, a business consultant, is the author of four books, most recently "Partners in Space: US-Russian Cooperation After the Cold War."


www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/01/AR2008020102621_pf.html

:kick:


:kick:


:kick:

[Faryn Balyncd]

35. The "Republicans" (and formerly Republican-leaning Independents) for Obama are in it for the GE .

[JuniperLea]

37. I don't trust these guys as far as I could throw them...

And lint doesn't travel far.

I smell a big rat playing a big game.

[LoZoccolo]

39. This is a lame gloss-over of the additional fact that more Hillary "supporters" in this primary...

...have no intention voting for her in the general.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5870101&mesg_id=5870101

Nice try; thanks for playing!

[nomorewhopper]

40. this just proves that obama will win red states

moderate repubs love him

for real.