Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Republicans ARE causing mischief in Democratic primaries
(Cross-posted at The Jed Report.)
According to the Mississippi exit poll, 13% of voters in today's primary were Republicans -- and 78% of them voted for Hillary Clinton.
Do the math and 25% of Hillary Clinton's support came from the GOP. That should be enough for a delegate or two, perhaps more.
These are people who will never, ever vote for Hillary Clinton in the general election.
Simply put, Republicans are gaming the Democratic primary.
Now that John McCain is the nominee of the GOP, Republican participation in Democratic primaries is skyrocketing -- and they are voting for Clinton.
Through Texas, on average 1.8% of voters in Republican primaries were Republicans who supported Hillary Clinton.
In Texas, 4.1% of voters were Republicans who supported Hillary Clinton.
Today, 10% of voters were Republicans who supported Hillary Clinton.
Again, she will not win these voters in November. They are purely screwing with our process.
This is a major issue -- and it needs to be addressed.
This is the Limbaugh strategy in action.
Comments (23)
This needs to get out there!! The pro-Clinton MSM are muzzling stories like these which should make headlines. :( Democrats ought to know what's coming at them.
March 11, 2008 10:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I sent this e-mail to the DNC:
"Rush Limbaugh is cynically tilting the vote talies for HRC. This is obvious from the Mississippi voting. The areas where HRC did well were overwhelmingly Republican in previous elections, as per John KIng on CNN. The number of HRC voters who said in exit polling they were distrustful of her further illustrates the trend. Bill Clinton went on the Rush radio show prior to the MS primary. No wonder Obama's percentage of white voters was alarmingly low. Rush is polarizing the Dem Party and tilting the election to HRC.
What do you intend to do about this? Many voters are excited about Obama's candidacy, volunteering, donating money. It is not fair to these voters for their votes to b e watered down by the Limbaugh Republicans voting for HRC as they see her as more divisive and easier for MCCain to beat in the general.
The longer this is allowed to drag on, the worse it will be for our party's chances in November, damaging the down-ballot candidates unnecessarily. Also, the DNC is being deprived of donations as long as we are ponying up dollars to fight a fellow Democrat.I'm sure you guys are following all this. Please do something! Now!"
Write or call the DNC and tell them that this cannot be permitted to go on.
http://www.democrats.org/page/st/contactissues
March 12, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great idea!
Contacting the DNC:
Mailing Address:
Democratic National Committee
430 S. Capitol St. SE
Washington, DC 20003
Main Phone Number: 202-863-8000
For questions about contributions, call 877-336-7200
Email form at: http://www.democrats.org/page/s/contact
March 12, 2008 7:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am not sure why there is not more attention on this increase. Be interesting to see how many Republicans changed over for the closed vote in Penn.
As for Mississippi, I bet that Gerald(ine) was spot on. All those happy white republican voters helping the black man get to the top because he is black.
March 11, 2008 11:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
The upshot: Nearly 4 out of 5 neocons choose Clinton.
March 11, 2008 11:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
That and the fact that she somehow claims that all those Dems who voted for her (HRC) in the primary will for some reason prefer McCain in November. Really the 'rationales' for explaining HRCs support are rather tortured.
March 12, 2008 12:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, get this out there. Show the math, since the media has shown that they can't do math.
Republicans made up 10% of Hillary voters. (13% GOP voters x 78% for Hillary = 10%)
Hillary only received 38% of the total Mississippi vote. Thus, the 10% of GOP voters who voted for Hillary made up 25% of the vote.
I heard that if Obama had gotten to 62% instead of the 60% that he got, he would have gotten 2 more delegates, so these Republican voters may well have given Hillary more than just a couple of delegates.
March 12, 2008 12:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
lol... you people are so funny..when they voted for OBAMA you had nothng to say. read it and weep.
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.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23394070/
March 12, 2008 2:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
True, "strategic" Republican votes have gone in both directions.
But it's clear that most of this vote went for Clinton in Mississippi. For me, the most telling exit poll number is that, of the 50% of voters that think Clinton is untrustworthy, 23% of them still voted for her. So, 11.5% of the total vote (which is about 30% of Clinton's vote), came from people that don't trust her.
Here are the exit polls I'm citing:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21225989/
That's a rather awkward statistic... Why would genuine Clinton supporters not trust her?
There is some of this on the Obama side too, but not nearly as much. Of the 29% of voters that think Obama is untrustworthy, 8% voted for Obama. So, 2.32% of the total vote (which is about 4% of Obama's vote), came from people that don't trust him. Again, I would think these people are not genuine supporters -- i.e., "strategic" Republican voters.
One also sees evidence of strategic Republican voting for Clinton in how favorably Clinton voters view McCain...
March 12, 2008 3:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
What is funny is the inability to distinguish between an earnest Republican vote for Obama and a Limbaugh vote for Hillary, just so that Democrats lose the general election. Ok, it is not funny. It is pathetic and so win-at-all-cost.
March 12, 2008 4:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
I blogged on this earlier. In comments, I belatedly linked to evidence straight from the horse's mouth.
The undeniable fact is that crossover Rebublican support has dramatically swung to HRC since Limbaugh suggested it (conveniently right after McCain stopped needing those votes in the GOP primary).
March 12, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Glad to see this up. I had similar thoughts.
Naturally, there will be some people who cross over to "prevent" Obama and others who cross over to "choose" Obama.
I have not seen evidence that Hillary can attract longtime Republican voters. If there is evidence, I'd like to see that, in terms of reputable polling. (Paging FlyOnTheWall!)
Otherwise, what we've seen in Mississippi is white republicans crossing over to vote for Hillary - a strategic maneuver, not a presidential preference.
We must remember that each state is different. Different demographics. And different in terms of what kind of choice any voter might be making. And where in the primary process.
What is most interesting to me is that in spite of the mischief-making, Obama won decisively!
March 12, 2008 8:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
GOP'ers are now only causing mischief if they are voting for Clinton. Of course that was not a problem in the caucus or open primaries when Obama was adding 3-5% to his totals from GOP'ers in the early states.
Remember KOS and the leftist/socialists wanted to vote for Romney in Michigan to cause GOP problems? What goes around comes around...anyway I'm happy to vote McCain in the General if not Hillary. NO OBAMA on the ticket, please. The over 50 age group votes and we (non-African Americans that is) will never be voting for Obama.
March 12, 2008 8:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
And the 20th century Democratic party makes one last appearance.
The bus is headed the other way. Try to keep up.
March 12, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly, and now that the Republican nominee is set we'll see this sabotaging crossover in every state where it can happen. I think it was a significant factor in Texas and Ohio.
March 12, 2008 8:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is party politics. The Democrats do it and so do the Republicans.
One way to avoid cross-party voting in primaries is the caucus system. I guarantee that few members of the opposing parties would make the effort to show their faces there.
I guess another way is to have closed primaries, and making it more difficult to change party affiliation.
And the final way is to get rid of primaries altogether, and let the public vote for their favorite in the general election. Of course this could be very expensive for the candidates unless we have public funding of presidential elections, which I am all in favor of.
March 12, 2008 10:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Assuming this is even true -- a lot of Obama's supporters haven't been Democrats, they've been independents.
Now the solution to this is for the national party to tell all the state parties that only registered Democrats should vote in Democratic primaries. People could still game the system by switching registrations but they're unlikely to go through all the trouble.
Thing is... if all of our primaries were run without Republicans and Independents, Clinton would probably be the front runner, so Obama supporters would probably not want that.
March 12, 2008 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hard to say whether or not that would be true, but your point is valid. Complaining and writing the DNC won't change the playing field, and the rules can't be changed at this point. In some cases I'm sure there are legit Repubs crossing over for O, and in other cases, in deep red states like MS and TX, e.g., some Repubs are gaming their votes. All's fair as long as primaries are open.
Just another sign that we have an ugly primary season on our hands, with Limbaugh's agitating and reports that Dems were suggested to cross over and vote for Romney.
March 12, 2008 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fair enough. I think even Atrios jokingly encouraged Dems to cross over and vote for the Mittster.
March 12, 2008 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great catch. I noted that too, and have been fretting about it since the exits in Texas. I think someone at the WSJ did a quick article on this, but it has not been picked up by the broadcast media as far as I know. The scariest thing about this is that, if true, Rush et al have more persuasive and motivating power with their listeners than I had previously suspected.
March 12, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can not speak for all Texans or even Republicans but many fo my family members who live in Texas either voted for McCain, Huckabee or Obama. I saw little cross voting going towards Clinton but the stories from other polling stations were quite different. I there is anything to be happy about at the moment in Texas it is that fact that Democrats have seen gains in the Texas state elctorate over the past two years and it looks as if the gains will be supported by more in their favor come November. This elections has been great for one thing in particular despite whatever shenanigans the Republicans are trying to pull and that is the fact the Democratic support in all states is robust. This most likely because of many Americans hatred or tiredness of current Commander, al hail Bush, and his utter failure to guide this country in any truly positive direction. Let's see what he has done, Education or NCLB is contentious with Teachers, Parents and students, the military is stretched but proud to do their duty(I am sure they can not wait for the time off after 2009 roles around), the justice system looks like a good ol' boys network, Oil prices have sky-rocketed making our misguided (put all of your eggs in one basket mentality) policies which lack diversity seem that much more pronounced in every sector of our lives, FEMA is a mismangaed nightmare offering little emergency managment, the CIA has a reputation of torturious now added to its dark background, the presidents email policy looks like it was designed and maintained by the mostignorant over-payed IT person in our country, etc.
March 12, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm more and more inclined to believe this, based on a mailing I just got from Mitch McConnell with the "New Republican Agenda Survey." (I can't even begin to guess why I'm on this list, but anyway).
And here's what it says:
"But let me be perfectly frank . . . if we fail to get our Grand Old Party back on track, if we fail to unite Senate Republicans behind a new conservative agenda . . . WE WILL HAND CONTROL OF THE U.S. SENATE AND THE HOUSE AND EVEN THE WHITE HOUSE TO HILLARY CLINTON, NANCY PELOSI, TED KEENDY AND THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS FOR A GENERATION OR MORE!"
Notice any name missing that they're NOT raising as the Great Satan? Strikes me that they really, really want to go against Clinton - that's who they think will energize their base (to oppose her, obviously). Obama - is not even mentioned.
March 12, 2008 9:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are some republican who genuinely support Clinton. Probably just a couple of percent but some of the support is legitimate, i.e. they would vote for her in the general election.
The Rush Republicans are another issue though. Looking at earlier votes it does look like over 5% of the votes in Mississippi were Rush Republicans. The way delegate math works they can probably swing a couple delegates per state so if this keeps up that might be a 10 or 20 delegate swing.
I don't expect them to alter the result but it does help keep things interesting longer even if she has virtually no chance at the nomination. Basically Clinton is like the vulture circling overhead waiting for something to happen to Obama.
March 12, 2008 10:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment