56% of Hillary's NC supporters won't vote for Obama over McCain

Perhaps the only disturbing news for Obama in the survey is that most Clinton voters (56%) say they are not likely to vote for the Illinois Senator in the general election against John McCain. A month ago, 45% of Clinton voters said they were not likely to vote for Obama against McCain.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c ontent/politics/election_20082/2008_pres idential_election/north_carolina/north_c arolina_democratic_primary



Display:


Re: 56% of Hillary's NC supporters won't vote for (2.00 / 0)

They will when they find old grandpa will drafft their sons/daughters for the 100 year war.


McCain: The Past, Obama: The Future
by KathyM on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:59:45 AM EST

No they won't - you simply... (2.00 / 1)

refuse to think and listen to how strongly people feel about not voting for your candidate.


by Shazone on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:18:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No they won't - you simply... (2.00 / 1)

Strong enough that they're willing to sacrifice Roe v. Wade, the lives of our troops, and the economy. Doesn't say much for them as Democrats I guess.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:42:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Wouldn't it be ironic (2.00 / 1)

if Roe were finally overturned because Hillary's (largely) female supporters threw a hissy fit in November?

I say they should go ahead. Tell your daughters that coathanger abortions are in their future because you just love Hillary so much.

We'll see how that conversation goes, and how much of Hillary's reputation survives a McCain Presidency.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:58:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wouldn't it be ironic (2.00 / 0)

Yep. That would be ironic. The ridicule Nader Dem supporters got after 2000 would pale in comparison.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:07:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Women throwing Hissy Fits? (none / 0)

Yup and that HISS WILL BE HEARD AROUND THE WORLD.

Your comment is so demeaning - that you just help us hissy-fit ladies be more determined!

Thanks for the help!


by Shazone on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 02:25:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ha. (none / 0)

Demeaning. Right. Said the poster who wants to vote for McCain because she thinks the republicks aren't really serious about that overturning-Roe stuff.

Like I said, you go right ahead and vote for McCain.  See if that turns into a non-demeaning experience for you and all the women of this country.

Make my day. Vote for McCain.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 03:47:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Some of them were Democrats (none / 0)

before anybody ever heard of Roe v. Wade. That says a lot for them, IMO.


by georgiapeach on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:21:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No they won't - you simply... (2.00 / 2)

I think it will be up to the winning primary candidate to mobilize his/her voters for the GE.  They really are the only two people who can make a dent in getting their angry and upset supporters to vote for "the other guy" after having invested so much for the other primary candidate.


by mady on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:49:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No they won't - you simply... (2.00 / 1)

I meant the losing candidate to mobillize his/her voters to vote for the party's candidate.


by mady on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:54:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Wouldn't it be the responbility of the... (none / 0)

winning candidate to convince voters - all voters - to vote for him/her?

Strange way to put it.  Oh...I get it.  Then when BO loses the GE you will still/again blame Hillary for losing.


by Shazone on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 02:27:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think both HRC and BHO would disagree (none / 0)

I recall seeing something from Hillary last week about how important it was to vote democratic regardless of the candidate. While I haven't heard Barack say that, I suspect that he would if he were not in the lead. It would be presumptive for him to comment on that yet.


by professor on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 03:14:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wouldn't it be the responbility of the... (none / 0)

Did you look at my correction below the original post.  You are right, it is the wrong way to put it, which is why I corrected it.


by mady on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 03:28:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I am listening (2.00 / 1)

I haven't been on MYDD very long but I for one do believe you and the others here who say they won't vote for BHO if he is the Democratic party nominee. And I have no doubt that you reflect the views of some number of the Democratic party.

While I support BHO,I think I am beginning to get a better sense of where HRC or "I am leaving " supporters are coming from. If I honestly believed that a candidate was dangerous because of inexperience or any other reason,I would be as unyielding. I can vote for HRC if she is the nominee because while I don't prefer her I don't believe she will cause the down fall of the republic.


Ida B. "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"--F.D.R.
by Ida B on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:08:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

56% Dems (none / 0)

mighty comfortable people; their cost of gas, food (and foreclosure) must not be effecting them;

do you think Bush/Cheney will have bombed Iran for McCain's campaign by October?

are they thinking McCain will give them back their civil liberties;

polls are bogus;


by dearreader on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 03:59:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 56% Dems (none / 0)

It's 56% of Hillary's 33% of voters polled in this poll.  So that's about 18% of Dem primary voters.


by Chicago Lulu on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 04:20:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

brilliant (2.00 / 1)

thinking that idiotic rhetoric takes the place of common sense is a winning tactic on the Obamablogs, but it won't convince GE voters.  They know there is no one hundred years war and that McCain is no more likely to draft their sons and daughters than anyone else is.

You really do not help Obama with this nonsense.


DON'T COUNT THE VOTES, DON'T COUNT THE VOTES.... Obama and the Obamaettes... spring 2008
by TeresaINPennsylvania on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:28:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

No. (none / 0)

The Army is already shrinking, because re-enlistment and recruiting can't make up the loss from soldiers leaving, through de-enlistment or outright desertion.

So yeah, a draft is a real possibility.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:36:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No. (2.00 / 1)

Actually, no, the Army has ADDED 17,000 troops since last year. The Marine Corps has ADDED 9,000 troops. This is at the expense of the Air Force and the Navy, which has lost about 23,00 troops total since last year. But, this is part of a restructuring to meet the needs of the Iraq War. The fact is, we have added 3,000 troops total since this time last year. Our military may be stretched thin, but we ARE meeting our recruitment levels.

So, nice try at fear mongering.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 01:01:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks for the heads up (none / 0)

I hadn't read that anywhere. Interesting.


by professor on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 03:20:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks for the heads up (none / 0)

I should have provided the link:

http://siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/personnel/MI LITARY/Miltop.htm


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 03:25:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That compares, however (none / 0)

to an Army recruiting goal of an additional 35,000. The Army is under strength.

But I love how Hillary's defenders are now carrying water for the Bush DoD. That's just awesome.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 03:51:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That compares, however (none / 0)

God, your bias is blinding your judgment and intelligence. It is sad.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/03/ar my_recruiting_031008w/

This is not about a Bush policy, this is about getting it RIGHT. The Army and the National Guard has met it's recruiting goals every month this fiscal year despite the fact that you said they are not. I'm not playing politics with the military, YOU are, and it is very disrespectful.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 05:07:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That's because (none / 0)

the recruiting goals themselves were set lower, in line with expectations. My dad's retired military, I follow these things rather closely.

Here are two links you should read: one, two.

As to disrespectful, please. The only thing that's even remotely disrespectful is to whitewash the severe degradation of the U.S. military.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:34:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's because (none / 0)

Those articles are a year old.

My dad's retired military, I follow these things rather closely.

Then you should know recruitment goals varies from month to month. For example, December has low recruitment goals, as low as 700 for the Army, while January are relatively high, as high as 8,000. I think you could figure out why.

Once again to prove you wrong, using January as a point of reference, goals for the Army went from 8100 in 2006, 8350 in 2007 and 8600 in 2008. All years their goals were met

Why don't you just admit you were wrong and avoid the constant barrage of facts. No one here is going to think of you any less. Continue this quest for ego and they will.

The only thing that's even remotely disrespectful is to whitewash the severe degradation of the U.S. military.

Well I don't know where you are getting this from considering I never once said the military is in tip top shape. In fact, in my original post, I said it was stretched thin.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:05:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

draft real (none / 0)

possibility; if Iran is bombed by Bush and McCain wins he will start draft; if Iran is bombed by Bush and Obama wins and Iran with the region going up in flames Obama will HAVE TO start draft;


by dearreader on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 04:02:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: brilliant (2.00 / 0)

True. They'll use robots for the indefinite occupation or Iraq and the invasions of other scary mooslim countries.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:43:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: brilliant (2.00 / 0)

Again, Theresa, why the hate? You are dehumanizing those who disagree with you, calling them idiots. I've never done that to you. I'm certain your reasons for supporting Clinton are as heartfelt and deeply set as mine for Obama, and it would be wrong of me to say otherwise. You have every right to be proud of her and your support for her. But you have no right to demonstrate this hatred towards other people.


Serious question- Is This Snark?
by ragekage on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:12:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's 18% not 56% (2.00 / 1)

The poll shows 56% of the 33% supporting Hillary in this poll will not vote for Obama.  That makes 18% of those polled - slightly lower than shown in other polls.  So - nothing to see here - move along ...


by interestedbystander on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:20:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 56% of Hillary's NC supporters won't vote for (none / 0)

Fear mongerer?

And before you even question it, your are fear mongering. You are saying vote for Barack or get drafted into the military. It is no different than vote for Bush or face terrorist attacks.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 02:06:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh (2.00 / 2)

and Obama leads Clinton by 23, 56-33 in this poll.

I wonder why you didn't post that???


by fladem on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:59:59 AM EST

Re: Oh (none / 0)

The point is that McCain wins North Carolina anyway- check out the polls:
McCain 51, Obama 42- Rasmussen 3/20

So, forget the Primary, look to the General.  We will lose this state, and that portion of the poll reflect the larger disaster for the Democratic Party.  I said in post below, I think we're in trouble.  
I am a Clinton supporter first, Obama supporter second.  If he wins the nomination- I want him to WIN THE GENERAL!! I'm just afraid that unless he does something to win over these Democrats, we're not likely to.


by easyE on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:10:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oh (2.00 / 1)

We'll get it done. Your concerns are definitely valid, though, but once we can get this primary fight behind us, we'll get it done.


Serious question- Is This Snark?
by ragekage on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:11:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Don't count on us Hillary .... (none / 0)

supporters fainting dead away and waking up to love Obama.

"Ain't gonna happen".


by Shazone on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:19:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Don't count on us Hillary .... (none / 0)

Oh well. You reap what you sow.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:44:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually, the same thing can be said about... (2.00 / 1)

you and your candidate.

And that's what we Hillary supporters are fighting against...we TRULY believe that Mr. Obama is not qualified for the job of POTUS.  And we have just lived through 8 years of hell for this country by another person who actually had more qualifications than BO (he actually was a governor of a very large state) and is a disaster.

We love our country and want ONLY THE BEST for it.

That is NOT Barack Obama.  So, YOU will reap what YOU AND HE have sown.

That is truly sad.


by Shazone on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:56:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Really? (1.66 / 3)

We love our country and want ONLY THE BEST for it.

Not if you're willing to see John McCain as President you don't.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:00:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

With all due respect...we see Obama as.... (2.00 / 1)

worse for the country than McCain.  And we ARE Democrats...but we are Americans first.

I marched for pro-choice in the 60's and throughout my life.  I do not believe that this country will do away with abortion rights - those rights may change for a period of time, but they will not disappear.  

I hate to see the Supremes continue their conservative bent...but even that will eventually end when the newbies die out and are replaced, hopefully by liberal brethren.

And the war....well, from the sound of it, Obama is moving toward 100 years in Iraq, too.  Every week his campaign lies about getting out on Day One is moving further and further out - so you can't tell me that he will end this conflict any sooner than McCain.

I am "old" according to you Obamaphiles (62, BTW, ain't old!).  And I had to fight in my generation.  It looks like you kiddies will have to fight for yourselves.


by Shazone on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:22:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With all due respect...we see Obama as.... (2.00 / 1)

I'm an attorney. The lunatic conservatives on the bench are young. They will be replaced with two more young lunatics. Those people will be on the bench the next 20 years. It will take a generation or more to undue the harm they're doing and will do. Roe will die. Civil rights will die. McCain will start more wars. Your comments about Obama are irrational and fact free and clearly stem from something other than thoughtful analysis.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:26:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm an attorney, too. So is my husband. (2.00 / 1)

And as I said, now you will have to fight as we did in our lives.  It must be generational.

Good luck with that.


by Shazone on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:31:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm an attorney, too. So is my husband. (none / 0)

I sue the government regularly so I'm in the fight. Too bad you're not.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:32:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

HA! I'm an immigration attorney. (2.00 / 1)

You want to compare fights?  Try asylum law.


by Shazone on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:54:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: HA! I'm an immigration attorney. (none / 0)

Yeah I'm an immigration and civil rights attorney. So sure, I'd love to compare fights.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:55:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sounds to me like you two should team up! (2.00 / 1)

I hate it when I hear people that should be on the same team go at it like this. I don't begrudge either party, but it does show just how contentious this race has become.

I'm not sure why Shazone thinks that McCain is better than Obama with regard to things like civil rights, but let's just hope that there are fewer people who think that way come mid-summer.

It's not just the SCOTUS and Roe, it's also the outrages in the justice department. It's habeas corpus. It's torture and Gitmo, ... Regardless of who the democratic nominee is, I'll trust him/her a lot more than I will a weak GOP candidate whose desperate for right-wing support.


by professor on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 03:34:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sounds to me like you two should team up! (none / 0)

"It's not just the SCOTUS and Roe, it's also the outrages in the justice department. It's habeas corpus. It's torture and Gitmo, ... Regardless of who the democratic nominee is, I'll trust him/her a lot more than I will a weak GOP candidate whose desperate for right-wing support."

Agreed.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 03:44:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With all due respect...we see Obama as.... (1.50 / 2)

I really wish all the crap that Shazone was spewing all over this blog made sense. Vote for McCain and shut up already. You're not a Democrat, you're a Hillocrat.


I will vote for Barack, I will vote for Hillary, I will vote for Obaminton or Clintobama, how about you?
by AnyDem2008 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 01:02:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't plan on voting for McCain... (2.00 / 1)

I will vote for Hillary - no matter what.

Thank God for #2 pencils!


by Shazone on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 01:59:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't plan on voting for McCain... (none / 0)

Such an idea is the same number as your pencil.


Voting for John McCain is not God bless America.
by SFValues on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 02:45:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't plan on voting for McCain... (none / 0)

"I will vote for Hillary - no matter what"

Wow, I'm so glad to see Shazone up here holding down the fort.

I just spent the day canvassing 127 homes in Philadelphia where every single Democrat who identified for Hillary told us they were going to vote for McCain if Hillary didn't get the nomination. And only two out of 127 identified for Obama, one of those was just leaning" Obama. Yet another big swing state that could go McCain in November, that's the news. Those voters were certain they would never vote for Obama, and totally unapologetic about it. As one said, "I'm CERTAINLY not going to vote for Obama", more or less implying that it was not an idea to even be considered. In almost 40 years of electioneering I have never seen so many Democrats completely unwilling to vote for a Democratic nominee, and so outspoken about it. They seemed to be compelled to add that information, thought we certainly were not asking them about it. It seems to be a problem we are seeing all over.


by 07rescue on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 12:37:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Go right ahead. (2.00 / 1)

No, seriously, you go right ahead and vote for McCain.

I do not believe that this country will do away with abortion rights - those rights may change for a period of time, but they will not disappear.

You know, that's not what I was told when I was on the steering committee of the NYC anti-Alito/Roberts efforts, together with NOW, NARAL, PFAW, and the other orgs.

But hey - I'm a gay guy. Pregnancy will never be a part of my life. I don't really need to care whether they're legal or done with coathangers.

And as opposed to you, I'll also never have to explain myself on choice. I've always voted pro-choice. Always will, because it's a core value of mine.

So yeah, you go right ahead and vote for McCain. Odds are, you'll find out just how wrong you are. That other people, young women like you once were, will pay the price, not you, makes your stand even more glorious and noble.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 01:38:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: With all due respect...we see Obama as.... (2.00 / 1)

Well I guess you fought your fights and don't have to worry about the long term consequences of your vote so screw the younger generation.

Hey I am in my 30s with no kids so I guess I can sympathize your not caring about leaving a better world for your children or grandchildren.

I can't stand Hillary anymore (used to love her) but there is no way I would vote for McCain over her in the general.  I guess I just care more about the future and you care about the past.  Fair enough in my view.


Tony Romo for Secretary of Awesome
by kasjogren on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 01:46:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Actually, the same thing can be said about... (none / 0)

If you think McCain is more qualified then the deaths that occur from his warmongering are on your head. The women who die from illegal abortions, their deaths are on your head. The earth dying because the GOP doesn't believe in global warming and won't do anything about it is on your head. If you wanted the BEST for your country you'd never let McCain get elected.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:04:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thank you for your kind words. (none / 0)


by Shazone on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:23:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thank you for your kind words. (none / 0)

There will be no kind words.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:27:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Don't count on us Hillary .... (2.00 / 1)

I agree, Shazone, that for me--an obama supporter--to ask that would be foolish. After all, I think you'll find that many, if not most Obama supporters (myself included), don't necessarily faint dead away with our love for Obama. On the contrary, I think he's a good politician and a good Democrat, just as I think HRC is a good politician and a good Democrat.

I'm not hoping that you fall over yourself with love when/if he gets the nomination, rather, I'm hoping that you'll be open to seeing him as I do, the best choice (and, what's more, a good choice) considering all the options.


"Don't let it end this way; tell them I said something." -the last words of Pancho Villa
by shef on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 01:14:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't see (2.00 / 1)

a snowball's chance in hell of Obama's winning NC.

The more troubling thing about the 56% statistic is not even so much about NC -- where, as I said, Obama has no chance anyway -- but what it suggests about the hardening of Clinton supporters against Obama more generally. My guess is that the Clinton voters in NC are not terribly different from those in the Appalachian region, and perhaps not so different from Clinton supporters in the Rust Belt.


by frankly0 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:23:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't see (2.00 / 1)

No, he likely won't win North Carolina, I was more referring to the fact of the supposed divisiveness we'll face in the fall.

It's getting worse on both sides, however, and I think both our candidates would do well to address that issue and try to head it off. We won't win without each other's support; it's an all or nothing kinda thing. Clinton runs into the same problems if she'd the nominee, too.


Serious question- Is This Snark?
by ragekage on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:37:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Appalachia is not the rustbelt (none / 0)

Comparing Clinton supporters in Michigan to those in North Carolina or West Virginia is a HUGE stretch.

And we as Democrats need stop framing each other as losers.  Being a Democrat kicks ass.  Any Democrat not named Kucinich can win the general election and win big.  Period.


by nrioq on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:37:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Its relevent information (2.00 / 0)

North Carolina would be a very difficult state for a National Democrat to win.

I am worried about the GE, but not based on this poll.  Niether Kerry nor Gore were competitive there.


by fladem on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:21:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I am in PA, not NC (2.00 / 3)

and I have voted for every democrat in every race I could since 1976.  
He can not win me over.  I would rather risk 4 years of McCain than to vote for a democrat who won the nomination by painting good people as racists, who is currently campaigning against the Democratic party On my TV (his "both parties suck" commercial is a gigantic turn off to me) and who used and allows his wife/surrogate to use sexist dog whistle talking points against the first woman with a chance to win the White House.
I also do not want to reward the media for their part in this fiasco.  I have had it and I WILL NOT vote for this guy unless he admits and apologizes for the racism and sexism (to say nothing of the "democrats suck" rhetoric) he has injected in to this race.
DON'T COUNT THE VOTES, DON'T COUNT THE VOTES.... Obama and the Obamaettes... spring 2008
by TeresaINPennsylvania on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:35:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I am in PA, not NC (2.00 / 0)

Teresa, there's just so much fail in that comment, it's hard to know where to start. You're the product of a personality cult- the Clinton personality cult- and you're proving it's got you hooked way more than anything Obama's got. I understand you feel strongly because you're a woman, but blaming Obama for everything that's gone on in this campaign is a work in cognitive dissonance. Not to mention if your Democratic party affiliation stretches so far back that you voted for Carter over Reagan, Dukkakis over Bush, etc, that you're so willing to give it up and vote for McCain over Obama, it seems like you never had more than a shaky and uncommitted relationship with this party in the first place. Otherwise, you might try to fix what you perceive as wrongs, rather than give up entirely.

If this is how you feel, imagine how African Americans feel. Your likely comment here would be, yeah, but they're wrong and I'm right. Think about that for a second, and realize this isn't black and white (no pun intended), and you're trying to see it as that.


Serious question- Is This Snark?
by ragekage on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:50:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I am in PA, not NC (2.00 / 1)

It's no cult. Obama isn't qualified to be President. The Rezko trial is also showing him to be part of a corrupt machine. Read Levine's testimony for more. Why not just pluck any state senator out of any legislature and run them for President? That's pretty much what you guys are advocating. Maybe experience doesn't matter to Obama supporters but it matters to a whole lot of voters out there. Next time you go in for surgery, make sure you ask for an electrician to do the work.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 01:16:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Kennedy, Dodd and Leahy seem to disagree (2.00 / 1)

You're entitled to your opinion, but I happen to agree with the lions instead of you. He's qualified enough to do the job.

I also think HRC is well-qualified (maybe more so than BHO) and would happily vote for her despite the fact that she has been in elected office for less than eight years. And you know, I suspect that Kennedy, Dodd, and Leahy would agree with me there too.

Then again, I really would vote for a yellow dog before I'd vote for a continuation of the GOP disaster. That's not a knock on either candidate, but just how I feel.  


by professor on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 03:56:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kennedy, Dodd and Leahy seem to disagree (none / 0)

Well then Bush was "qualified enough" too. You see where that inexperience got us haven't you? Having a left wing version of Bush is really not any better imo.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 02:59:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oh (2.00 / 1)

Does Hillary win NC?


by Destiny on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:46:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

No (none / 0)

In fact downticket losses in NC will be devastating if Clinton is the nominee.


by parahammer on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 02:24:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oh (none / 0)

We haven't won NC since 1976. Bill Clinton never won NC. No way is NC a must-win state for the Dems, though I bet we will be fairly close this year as the state is demographically changing and Obama will turn out blacks at an enormous level. Problem is: this is the state that voted for Jesse Helms five times.


by elrod on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:51:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Don't be so sure that they'll come home to Obama (2.00 / 1)

I really believe that unless some serious uniting happens, Democrats will lose big in November (I think it could only happen with a unity ticket- as awful as that may sound to a lot of people).
Obama is behind McCain now.  With Clinton Dems turned off, I think a large portion will convert to McCain- especially if this nomination isn't resolved in a way that appears "fair" (whatever that means).  Michigan and Florida might just be the spark that ignites the explosion.  If an agreement isn't forged before superdelegates flood to Obama, I believe there will be a revolt.  Even if you lose 5% of Democratic Voters- Obama is doomed.  This is a disaster people, I'm surprised that more people aren't concerned.  I think the "Party Elders" are seeing it- and that's why Dean is freaking out right now- trying to forge some deals.
by easyE on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:06:11 AM EST

Re: Don't be so sure that they'll come home to Oba (2.00 / 0)

Nonesense. You are gagging for her to be placed in VP. Thats a decision only Obama will make.

He will win the general election. I will bet my house on it.


McCain: The Past, Obama: The Future
by KathyM on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:15:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Thank you. You get it! (none / 0)

And you're right.


by Shazone on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:20:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

So? (2.00 / 1)

Clinton voters won't vote for Obama, Obama voters won't vote for Clinton. Should we ask them both to quit and ask Al Gore to take the nomination to bring the party together?

The fight is going to continue until there is a winner. The longer it goes on the more polarized supporters get. Not much to be done about it until the primary is decided. Once that happens and all the fire, vitriol and piles of campaign dollars are turned on McCain we'll see how strong a position the Republicans are really in.

When unemployment hits 6% and the surge fails to deliver anything it promised months after it was supposed to have ended let's see how popular a 3rd Bush term will look.


by hankg on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:29:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Although he probably won't get much.... (none / 0)

remember Nader is on the ballot, too.

I'll be writing in Hillary if BO gets the nomination.  But others who won't be able to write in will go to Nader - if he only gets 1% that will kill BO, too.


by Shazone on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:22:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Although he probably won't get much.... (2.00 / 2)

he nader vote won't be nearly as damaging as the Reagan democrats who will vote for McCain.
Just wait until the GE when Obama is painted as a Chicago style politician who took money from Rezko in return for favors (he did actually, so that is fair game) who sat in a "blame whitey" church that seems more concerned with grievances against "the man" than the love our brothers and sisters in Christ and whose wife is only proud of American now because her husband is winning the nomination.....

The Reagan democrats who have not heard all of this so far, will go screaming to McCain.


DON'T COUNT THE VOTES, DON'T COUNT THE VOTES.... Obama and the Obamaettes... spring 2008
by TeresaINPennsylvania on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:59:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Although he probably won't get much.... (none / 0)

Heh. Comedy.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:02:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama supporters seem to forget (none / 0)

that Reagan Dems voted for Reagan precisely to avoid politicians just like him. Obama is a redux of George McGovern, possibly, because he will be associated with radical views, as McGovern was "acid, amnesty, and abortion." If Obama had as much as Dick Morris-ed the guy by throwing him under the bus, he'd be a much safer bet. Instead, he is still saying he is a good man. All you have to do it play a clip, and then play a soud byte of Obama saying "he's a good man" and repeat it. The Obama supporters talk about him getting the Reagan Dems, but don't they realize who the Reagan Dems are voting for? HILLARY! And I don't think she's that good a candidate. I'm talking electoral college tho, as both will prob win the popular vote. But we can't be a regional party. We need not just Gore/Kerry states, but Clinton/Gore '92 and '96 states, like West Virginia, Missouri, New Mexico, Tennessee, Arkansas, Nevada. There's a reason those states could vote Dem in two straight elections yet all switch to George Bush two times, except NM which barely went Gore(btw he won in such big margins even no perot, the GOP had no chance in those states, not to mention his non-factorness). I just cannot see Hillary Clinton winning those states like her husband did. But there is no way in hell Obama will either. His whole candidacy will be Ohio. If he can pull off Kerry PLUS Gore, and get Ohio, which he's more likely to get than Florida, he is President. It will be close because Obama will get 60 percent in New York, California, Massachussetts, Rhode Island, get close to that in the rest of the northeast, get mid 50's west coast, skate by in the rust belt, and get demolished in the south.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:28:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama supporters seem to forget (none / 0)

He'll get VA, CO, MO, IA, plus all of the blue states. What's that get him in numbers?


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:30:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Iowa, maybe (none / 0)

but Virginia, which hasn't voted Democrat since 1964, and was one of the few southern states which didn't vote for Jimmy Carter, but since we've been doing 45% in two and three man races since 1996. the closest we came to winning it was in '96, when Dole only beat us by two points there. But now that McCain probably won't put Romney on the ticket, due to the far right, they may be able to mobilize the base. he will probably put Mike Huckabee on the ticket, which is doom for us there. It also Pat Robertson's home state.

I just can't see Colorado going for Obama, its too white and close to Arizona. Gore and Kerry got blown out of the water in those states. Missouri is a maybe, Gore came close, Clinton got it both times by large margins. And Bush WAS the toughest opponent we will face for a long time, who had charisma, insane fund raising abilities, and could mobilize the religious right in a way McCain will not do, as Dobson hates him, along with Robertson and the rest. use this, its got the same allocations http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/pol itics/2004_ELECTIONGUIDE_GRAPHIC/ and if he can get Kerry plus Iowa and Missouri, he gets exactly 270. Maybe, but those states have been close in the last two elections. But I do think Hillary has a better chance in Ohio.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 01:08:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama supporters seem to forget (none / 0)

You need to get more current. Obama gets about 39% of the vote in MO. It's no longer a viable state for him.

And we haven't seen any recent polling in VA or CO have we? The Wright debacle has cost him in MO and probably will cost him CO and VA.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 01:21:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama supporters seem to forget (none / 0)

You need to get current. The MO poll was taken in the height of the Wright controversy. Every poll taken then had him down - and since then much higher.


by elrod on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:54:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

HRC voters are NOT Reagan Democrats (none / 0)

There are two different types of voters that we associate with "Reagan Democrats." First, are moderate suburbanites angry at stagflation, Iran/hostage and Carter's general impotence. Those voters came back to the Dems with Clinton in 1992 and have stayed ever since. Many are now actually core Obama supporters today, located in wealthy suburbs like northern Virginia.

The other are largely-racist, culturally reactionary union voters in places like Warren, Michigan. Most of these voters supported George Wallace in 1968 and 1972. They voted for Reagan because they believed the whole "welfare queen" racist lie. In the 1980s, they got older, got laid off or retired. They voted for Perot in 1992 and probably 1996 and then Bush in 2000 and 2004. They vote on culture issues and tell you that they voted Democratic "before the blacks and gays took it over." They don't like either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.

If you think anybody who still thinks of himself/herself as a Democrat TODAY would avoid Obama because of his "radicalism" then you're crazy to think the same voter wouldn't avoid Hillary Clinton. For 15 years the right-wing has turned Hillary Clinton into a leftist drag queen. Voters scared off by Obama's pastor are not likely to be reassured by Hillary Clinton. Ignorant bigots are ignorant bigots and they aren't voting for any Democrat.

Hillary Clinton's voters are not "Reagan Democrats." They're just - as a general rule - older, whiter and largely-female Democrats. They probably never supported Reagan. Many are arch-feminists.  This notion that Obama wins all the liberals and Clinton the conservatives is just not true in any of the exit polling.

Most of the "Hillary or I stay home" voters are just angry that she might not get the nominee. This happens every cycle. 55% of McCain 2000 GOP voters vowed they'd stay home if Bush were the nominee and vice versa. Yet, the party unified after it was over. I suspect that will happen this time too.


by elrod on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:08:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

people who'd vote McCain (none / 0)

are probably a good bit Reagan Democrat. and I doubt that people in Warren, michigan voted Perot ever. They def voted Bush and Dole, as Perot was a social liberal on abortion and gay rights http://ontheissues.org/Ross_Perot.htm . Especially if they went for Wallace. I think there is a chance of losing voters because both of them are gonna be spun as radicals. there is a chance that this year, we are crowbarring defeat from the jaws of victory.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 03:05:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Although he probably won't get much.... (none / 0)

First, the the Clintons had their name attached to sketchy dealings in Arkansas and shook off accusations.  Note, I am not accusing the Clintons of anything, I love the Clintons and what they have done for our country (I just prefer Obama), I am only pointing out that some people tried to destroy them with similar accusations that anti-Obama people are making now.

Second, as a former member of an African American church and being a member of an African American family (note, I am White), I can say that resentment against Whites runs deep.  I think you would honestly find this sentiment in most Black Churches.  Does this make it right?  No, but please understand that 1/5 of blacks are in poverty, AIDS and drugs are destroying the Black community, and a sickening number of Black men will spend a good chunk of their life in prison.  This fuels resentment.  Blacks tend not voice this around Whites because they don't want to be labeled as "militant" which happens often.

Third, churches like Trinity fight things like poverty, gun violence, and are generally opposed to the war in Iraq.  I ask you to please look past Wright's inflammatory comments and look at the common ground you share with this Church's overall mission.

Fourth, Micheal Obama said "For the first time in my life, I am REALLY proud".  Not that she has never been proud.  You are misquoting her and if read this comment and continue to misquote her, what you are doing is dishonest.

I think both Clinton and Obama are great candidates.  I hope Obama wins, but will support Clinton if she gets the nomination.  I ask you to please give Obama a second look.


by nrioq on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 01:00:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I can't speak North Carlonia voters - (none / 0)

I know so little about the voting patterns there. Well, actually nothing. But I'm a Hillary voter from Illinois - and I can't imagine not voting for Sen. Obama in the GE should he be the nominee.

I don't think Sen. Obama wants Hillary on the ticket - and he should have some say. Plus his  followers who see Hillary as responsible for Iraq and several other disasters won't go for it.   Frankly, I don't know how this will turn out.  Maybe a third party?

 


by Xanthe on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:27:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Don't be so sure that they'll come home to Oba (2.00 / 0)

Clinton supporters. To me it sounds like you are trying to blackmail and hold hostage the general election if you don't get your way with Hillary. I'm sure that you don't mean to sound this way but it sure comes across that way.


by Destiny on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:49:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Let them. (2.00 / 3)

If Hillary supporters want to finally destroy the republic by helping out McCain, let them go right ahead.

If they think they can blackmail and intimidate their way out of a loss, let them go down that road.

If they want lasting, historical infamy for giving Bush a third term, by all means, step right up. See what a fat lot of good that does Hillary; do these people really think handing the election to McCain is going to create good will for the next round, in 2012?

Ha. No.


"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis
by MBNYC on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:29:33 AM EST

Re: Let them. (2.00 / 1)

Exactamundo.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:45:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Congratulations (2.00 / 2)

Hillary supporters -- your dedication to returning this country to the rule of law is amazing.  Enjoy your cheerleading of Democratic voters who will sit on their asses in November or vote for McCain.  I hope it ratifies your hatred of Obama.  


by gchaucer2 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:34:02 AM EST

As there is little difference (1.00 / 2)

between Obama and HRC policy-wise, those "Dems" who refuse to vote for Obama will be derided and blamed - forever - for all that comes from a McCain victory should that occur.

Books will be written about it. Historians and political scientists will argue over why the people were such idiots. Nothing kind will be said and, as our planet melts under global warming and more war, they will secure a place in history as some of the biggest assholes on the planet.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:51:50 AM EST

don't be so dramatic (none / 0)

Obama is not that big an improvement over McCain, who BTW agrees we need to do something about global warming.  Obama is so busy kissing the collective asses of the Republican party, including all the Reagan worshipers, that I am not sure there is much difference if he or McCain win in November.
Currently in PA he is running a commercial that blames both parties for the gas crisis and claims he is the one who will solve the problem because he doesn't take money from big oil.
What a crock.  He takes as much oil money as Clinton does and while he has been figuring out how to sell out the democratic party to win indy voters (voters for Obama, NOT the democratic party or our ideals) Clinton was actually working on trying to solve the problem and get people some relief at the gas pump.
DON'T COUNT THE VOTES, DON'T COUNT THE VOTES.... Obama and the Obamaettes... spring 2008
by TeresaINPennsylvania on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:11:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: don't be so dramatic (1.00 / 1)

Comedy. Thanks. You don't follow politics too much huh?


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:14:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: don't be so dramatic (2.00 / 1)

But you're wrong. He takes less money from them than Clinton does (50% less, in fact). And if you think Obama and Clinton are so far apart, perhaps a careful analysis of their respective policy platforms versus McCain's would be in order.

Someone said if you think Clinton and Obama were different, they're nothing compared to McCain, and you'd better vote Democrat in the fall if you care about that. Who said such a crazy thing? Hillary Clinton. Or are you going to ignore that one?


Serious question- Is This Snark?
by ragekage on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:16:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Reminds me of Bush v. Gore election (none / 0)

People said the same think about Gore and Bush in 2000, "What's the difference between Gore and Bush?"  So many people said there are no differences between the two.  I think that's bogus.  The last seven years attests to that.  Who doesn't wish we had had a Gore presidency.  I think the same thing is happening right now.  People are saying the same thing right now about Obama and McCain.  I don't get it.  Obama shares almost all of the same policy goals as Clinton.  

Here is another thing to think about.  If Clinton gets the nomination, I bet Obama will vote for her.  Likewise, I think she will vote for Obama if he gets the nomination.  If what people trust is Clinton's judgment or Obama's judgment, why aren't we listening to their judgment that we should back the Democratic candidate?


by nrioq on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 01:17:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: don't be so dramatic (none / 0)

Can I suggest you go and find a site more suited to your views?


by interestedbystander on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 02:19:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 56% of Hillary's NC supporters won't vote for (none / 0)

I've always suspected a good number of Hillary's "supporters" plan to vote for McCain (or whomever the GOP would be) regardless.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:06:22 PM EST

56% of 33% in a Southern State . . . (2.00 / 1)

where these numbers have typically been higher than in the rest of the country anyway. So about 18% of the projected likely electorate says they won't vote for the potential nominee of the party? What percentage of dems in NC have historically voted repub for president? Since dems dominate the state on the local level, I would say overall 18% of dems in NC voting repub in a GE is about what we would expect anyway.

As another posted said of at DKos, "color me unconcerned."


by Davidsfr on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:12:04 PM EST

Re: 56% of Hillary's NC supporters won't vote for (2.00 / 2)

Do I like these numbers?  No.  But it is 56% of 33%.

So, although I think Obama winning North Carolina is along shot, I still think he has a better shot than Clinton.  

But even if Clinton wins, should we even bother?  YES!  I think we need to try to win every state.  Whoever is the nominee, that candidate will raise so much more money than John McCain.  If we (meaning Democrats) have the money, I see no reason for us not to do a full court press.  Advertise everywhere, mobilize everywhere.  It's a no lose situation.  Even if we don't win the state's electoral votes, we at least boost the down ticket candidates and further strengthen the Democratic Party.


by nrioq on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:21:23 PM EST

Re: 56% (2.00 / 1)

These are troubling statistics given the most recent national number of Hillary to McCain deserters is now close to 30%. To it's credit, the number of Obama to McCain deserters was around 19%, which is still high and still extremely troubling.

The key to getting these voters to not cross over will be good will--from either party to the other person's supporters, and I think a dream ticket may be necessary. The Obama supporters mantra of "We don't need them" or "they'll fall in line" is not sufficent to get this done--and that arrogant attitude is one of the reasons there are so many deserters. In all fairness, Clinton will need Obama voters in November to carry her to a victory as well. The idea that "well, if they want to throw the US in a toilet by voting McCain, then we DON'T NEED THEM" is elitist and will cause a general election loss for Senator Obama, by Dukakis-esque numbers. Making an argument based on issues is rather pointless as well, because if we were all voting based on who we truly believed would fully be behind what we think is right, I would have a preference of 1)Kucinich 2)Gravel 3)Nader.

All I'm saying is think about it---the current attitudes I'm seeing from mainly the Obama camp are going to result in the mass desertions that are currently happening and ultimatley will cause a huge electoral loss--no one can lose 30% of the base and expect to win a general election, especally since the GOP is so good at having thier supporters fall in line to vote for whomever the nominee is.


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:25:47 PM EST

Re: 56% (none / 0)

No one said "we don't need them". The fact is, if people would rather vote for the McCain they should. But they shouldn't pretend to be for Democratic values while they do it as McCain will most assuredly destroy them.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:28:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 56% (none / 0)

56% of 33% is 18% - do you understand that, because it has been posted several times in this thread, but you continue to say 56%.


by interestedbystander on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 02:21:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 56% (none / 0)

Yes, I do understand that, because I know how to read when it says 56% of HILLARY supporters. I would appreciate it if Obama supporters such as yourself stop insulting my intelligence, considering the reply I made was mostly discussing a national poll where close to 30% of nationwide Clinton supporters would not vote for Obama.

And even if you want to start talking about 18%, I think it's going to be a bit tough to win a long term red state in November while lose a fifth of the base. Good luck with that though; after all, you don't need us Hillary supporters. <snark>


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 04:02:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 56% of Hillary's NC supporters won't vote (none / 0)

I am beginning to believe that Obama will have to suck it up and pick Hillary as his VP.  The problem is that Hillary has an experience problem now.  Her sniper story has hurt her.


by Spanky on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:26:03 PM EST

Re: 56% of Hillary's NC supporters won't vote for (none / 0)

its not a surprise they would vote for mccain, but dont complain with whatever mccain does, it will be on your hands, but as bill said he is a moderate, i guess a economic plan for the rich and being in iraq  for 100 years and appointing more pro-life judges is moderate


by nj49ers83 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:43:52 PM EST

And I am one of them. (none / 0)


Reasonable people can disagree.
by mnicholson0220 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:47:46 PM EST

Re: And I am one of them. (none / 0)

Then take your ass to Red State Michelle Malkin and meet your new friends.


by elrod on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:13:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Put your money where your mouth is.... (none / 0)

$100 says a whopping majority of Hillary's (non-Limbaugh) supporters will vote Obama in the GE.


by dystopianfuturetoday on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:50:03 PM EST

56% of Hillary's NC supporters (none / 0)

I find it amazing that polls say that Clinton appeals to older voters, yet so many on this site act like children.

Give me what I want or you'll be sorry!

As I've said before, in this primary Clinton has lost my respect but in a head-to-head race against McCain she will never lose my vote.


Voting for John McCain is not God bless America.
by SFValues on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 12:53:29 PM EST

Re: 56% of Hillary's NC supporters won't vote for (2.00 / 1)

I find it truly saddening that Democrats will not allow other Democrat to express their freedom of speech and freedom of expression. If people want to vote for McCain, let them. I'm sure they have a legitimate reason to do so. But, don't tell people they are not Democrats because they won't vote Democrat. Last time I checked, there was no rule that said you have to vote Democrat no matter what in order to be a Democrat. So shut up and let people express their right as a citizen of the United States to vote for whoever they want to vote for. Enough of this bullying.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 02:03:27 PM EST

that sure is politically correct (none / 0)

but here, at a liberal blog, we are united, and express desire to get as many people to vote our way by any means necessary, and of course, legal. We MUST adopt the tactics Republicans do, because they win. If it takes telling people that they are bad Americans for voting GOP like they do to us, so be it. As long as we get 270 electoral votes.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 02:19:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: that sure is politically correct (none / 0)

We MUST adopt the tactics Republicans do

I happen to agree with that.


Restore America's Strength.
by RJEvans on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 03:24:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 56% of Hillary's NC supporters won't vote for (none / 0)

I think that the sad and disturbing thing about that number is that it shows that 56% of Hillary's N.C. don't support the Democratic Party.


by Kysen on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:27:07 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.