Absolute Zero

afferty: Republicans voting for Hillary Clinton? Posted: 02:13 PM ET
A republican supporter of Hillary Clinton holds a sign during a campaign rally in Westerville, Ohio





FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
There's no doubt the 2008 campaign has been full of twists and surprises, and here's one more: Republicans are coming out in huge numbers to vote for Hillary Clinton.


That's right. About 100,000 Republicans came out to support Clinton in Ohio. 119,000 voted for her in Texas, and 38,000 in Mississippi.
The Boston Globe reports on why this is happening: Some Republicans are supporting Clinton hoping it will prolong her bitter fight for the nomination with Barack Obama. Others think Clinton would be an easier opponent for John McCain to beat in November. And still others are voting for Clinton because they want to keep her in the race to expose more information about Obama ahead of the general election.


Consider this: up until recently, Obama was getting a lot more support than Clinton was from Republicans in the primary contests. At the time, many traditional GOP voters said they liked Obama and were willing to cross party lines. But, once McCain sealed the deal with his party's nomination, things started to change.



http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/20...llary-clinton/

__________________
http://outsidethewalls.com/

Gaddabout

Or perhaps they remember Bill Clinton being a better Republican-type president than GW Bush.

__________________
Before I saw him, I could figure things out. He was the first guy I saw close-up and just didn't get what he was doing. Josh Freese on Vinnie Colaiuta

LoyaltyisaCurse

So Republicans vote in the Dem primary in hopes of having Clinton be the winner so McCain can win?!

This is not what primaries are for. This is an outrage...

__________________
"Going from the Raiders receivers to Larry Fitzgerald is like trading a Spam dinner for a well-aged T-bone steak." --Dan Hanzus

When I play rock, paper, scissors, I keep a glass of water in my hand and when my opponent throws down I throw the water in his face and say "Water". Beats all three, scissors can't cut-it, paper dissolves and the rock sinks. Plus it usually surprises the hell out of them.

LoyaltyisaCurse

If all those Pub votes were taken away, I wonder what the results would've been in Ohio and Texas...

__________________
"Going from the Raiders receivers to Larry Fitzgerald is like trading a Spam dinner for a well-aged T-bone steak." --Dan Hanzus

When I play rock, paper, scissors, I keep a glass of water in my hand and when my opponent throws down I throw the water in his face and say "Water". Beats all three, scissors can't cut-it, paper dissolves and the rock sinks. Plus it usually surprises the hell out of them.

Djaughe

No change.

Both Ohio and Texas are "semi-closed" primary states. Meaning only unaffiliated voters (i.e. independents) can vote in either party. I'm generalizing a bit - because each state has their own rules.

__________________

Absolute Zero

I'm not sure what significance this is since you can change your affiliation to vote in the primary.

In Ohio, Hillary still would have won the popular vote but Barack would have picked up more delegates according to this site: http://vote.sos.state.oh.us/pls/enr/f?p=152:14:0; and http://vote.sos.state.oh.us/pls/enr/f?p=152:5:0

In Texas, don't forget that Barack actually won the most delegates when you combine the "two step" primary and caucus.

However, this did cost Barack the primary according to the raw vote totals since he lost by a mere 102,000 votes roughly . http://enr.sos.state.tx.us/enr/mar04...x=0&y=0&id=945

In Oregon, we start voting by mail around May 1st. The Republicans have already put out a call for Repubs to change their voter registration before April 29th so they can vote for Hillary in our closed primary. http://www.blueoregon.com/2008/03/reinhard-oregon.html

Its really pretty incredible that the Repubs would want to run against Hillary that bad that they would be switching parties to vote for her in the primaries to bring it about.

It also explains quite a bit about why Hannity, Limbaugh and FOX are pushing the story on Barack's pastor on a daily, hourly basis. They want to pick their opponent, that being Hillary.

Just like how Nixon helped smear Ed Muskie in 1972 so that he could run against McGovern.

__________________
http://outsidethewalls.com/

Djaughe

These articles are making it sound like a Repub. could just simply walk up and pull a Demo. ballot and vote for Hillary.

I suppose going through the paperwork to change affiliation is not a big deal...but I doubt 100,000 repubs decided to turn in their redcard just to throw their vote away. Maybe more like 15,000...but thats just a guess of Limbaugh die hards with no data.

BTW - none of the links you posted shows any data supporting the numbers in the articles. Not even any numbers regarding how many changed party affiliations. Where are they coming from?

__________________

Absolute Zero

How else do you explain so many Repubs voting for Hillary? They abhorr her.

The links just show overall vote totals. I'm sure that the Boston Globe and CNN did their own research though. You'll have to ask them.

__________________
http://outsidethewalls.com/

Djaughe

CNN is piggy backing off the Globe's cherry picking of the exit polls – it would have been more informational to know what the gender and race of the republican participants were to give you a better answer.

You are also stereotyping republicans by generalizing the "abhorrer" part.

Believe it or not - there are GOP women out there that would vote for Hillary simply based on gender.

__________________

Duckjake

In Texas all you have to do is show up at a voting location of whichever party's primary you want to vote in with your voter registration card. There are no party affiliation requirements at all.

__________________
Forget the pay. Can the guy play.

Djaughe

__________________

RedStorm

This is why I like closed primaries. Each party should be selecting their own candidates. I would not want anyone affecting the choice for my party unless they were serious about supporting the candidate they vote for in the general election.

__________________
Yeah, Stormy's probably on to something. - Rivercard

Sense MAKER!!!
Blasphemer!!!
Burn him!!!!

He speaks in tongues of logic and common sense, this troubles us and must be dealt with swiftly. - conraddobler

LoyaltyisaCurse

Agreed...It seriously makes me sick to my stomach that people from one party vote in anothers simply to get the desired match up so the candidate they reall support can have the better chance to win. Even if it is not correct, it is still nefarious and a usurptation (is this a word?) of the voting process.

__________________
"Going from the Raiders receivers to Larry Fitzgerald is like trading a Spam dinner for a well-aged T-bone steak." --Dan Hanzus

When I play rock, paper, scissors, I keep a glass of water in my hand and when my opponent throws down I throw the water in his face and say "Water". Beats all three, scissors can't cut-it, paper dissolves and the rock sinks. Plus it usually surprises the hell out of them.

Djaughe

Open primaries provide a type of litmus test for the electability of a candidate among undecideds and independents.

Without the independents being allowed to vote we'd be looking at the partisan hacks of the party such as Hillary vs. Romney.

__________________

RedStorm

True. That is the flip side. But, the primaries are not about litmus tests but a party picking the best candidate that represents their opinion.

__________________
Yeah, Stormy's probably on to something. - Rivercard

Sense MAKER!!!
Blasphemer!!!
Burn him!!!!

He speaks in tongues of logic and common sense, this troubles us and must be dealt with swiftly. - conraddobler