|
|
|
|
April 22, 2008
how many buts does anyone need?
For some time now, I've been trying to figure out what would motivate a Republican to cross party lines and vote for Hillary even if he thought that Hillary would have a better chance of beating McCain than Obama. I have tended to assume that hatred of McCain or wanting the GOP to lose would be the only possible reasons, but it finally dawned on me that there might be an additional reason. There may be Republicans who don't mind having McCain lose to Hillary if that were the price that had to be paid for preventing the possibility of an Obama presidency. Thus, this group may be voting for Hillary for entirely different reasons than commonly believed -- i.e., not to save the Republican party from defeat, but to save America from Obama. While this might be a form of strategy, is it reasonable to call it a Republican strategy? Does anyone know of any crossover voters thinking this way? I don't think I'm just imagining them as there's this bumpersticker: Wherever they are and whoever they may be, if Obama's the nominee at least McCain won't have to worry about them sitting it out. It has to be remembered, though, that in politics, nothing is permanent. Rick Santorum, for example, was long known as an "Anyone But McCain" man. Until yesterday, that is. Now he's explaining "Why conservatives should support McCain." Why? Because McCain is not only Anyone But Obama, he's also Anyone But Hillary! posted by Eric on 04.22.08 at 03:33 PM
Comments
Me too, Phelps. I'm not disturbed by another Clinton administration except for the dynastic issue. That part is unfortunate, but it's not enough to turn me against her. Instead I will have to be satisfied with hoping for different choices next time around. tim maguire · April 22, 2008 05:01 PM If she gets in, next time around will be 2016. (Of course, I was already sick of the Clintons by 1996.....) OTOH, if Obama were to somehow win, he'd be much more likely to be a one term president. Eric Scheie · April 22, 2008 05:06 PM You vote for Hillary to keep the primary battle going. The assumption is that Obama will be the nominee regardless. It's the battle, that you want. Ron Hardin · April 22, 2008 06:02 PM The Emproer Has No Clothes Why does the media ignore the obvious racism involved in the Democratic nomination process. Is Hillary Clinton being a racist for not competing in those southern states with large Black populations? Or is Sen. Barack Obama riding to the nomination on a tide or Black Racism, or both? Why do we not see similar divisions in the black populations as we see in other populations when the black votes are considered during the Democratic primaries? Ed Campbell · April 26, 2008 12:34 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
April 2008
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
April 2008
March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSALLAMERICANGOP See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Worse than Jeremiah Wright? As bad as David Duke?
not difficult, just hard A bitch who prefers a cackling tone... Lest We Forget Wing nut joins the ring nuts. (A classical advance in science!) It Is To Laugh What Is It About Obama? Bob Barr's borderline Libertarianism Satan weighs in Hillary's health plan?
Links
Site Credits
|
|
My current ranking is Hillary > McCain > Obama.