More Clinton supporters to defect?

I found this on salon.com today:

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2 008/03/03/pew/index.html

"Monday, March 3, 2008 19:06 EST
Quarter of Clinton supporters would vote McCain over Obama
Interesting result from a recent survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press: If their favored candidate is not the Democratic nominee, a quarter of Hillary Clinton's primary supporters would defect and vote for John McCain in November, while only 10 percent of Barack Obama's supporters would do the same.

This discrepancy seems to be explained by Pew's demographic breakdown of the potential defectors, as the groups most likely to jump are also Clinton's bases of support: "One-in-five white Democrats (20%) say that they will vote for McCain over Obama, double the percentage who say they would switch sides in a Clinton-McCain matchup (10%). Roughly the same number of Democrats age 65 and older say they will vote for McCain if Obama is the party's choice (22%). Obama also suffers more defections among lower income and less educated Democratic voters than does Clinton."

Here's another interesting thing -- the Clinton campaign is promoting this stat, both in an e-mail from spokesman Phil Singer and in an item on its "Delegate Hub" Web site."

Feel free to discuss.  :)

Tags: clinton, general election, mccain (all tags)

Comments

96 Comments

Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Don't believe it.  At the end of the day, 90% of her supporters will vote for whatever Dem is in the race at that point.

And why not?  Obama or Clinton would actually represent their issues, whereas McCain is the polar opposite of what they fought and worked for.

I think that there's a huge amount of angst coloring those projections at the moment.  Grain of salt and all that.

by Cycloptichorn 2008-03-04 10:37AM | 0 recs
Not only that, but

no one interviewed me or any other Hillary supporter I know for that story.

by KnowVox 2008-03-04 10:42AM | 0 recs
Clinton supporters will defect

Believe it. If someone is voting for Hillary on the "experience" issue, then McCain is a suitable 2nd choice.

by grlpatriot 2008-03-04 10:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton supporters will defect

if experience is really counts, why bother with Hillary in the first place?  McCain beats both Barack and Hillary hands down for experience.

by the mollusk 2008-03-04 11:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton supporters will defect

Because most people, even those who consider experience very very important, don't vote solely based on the stat.

by frankies 2008-03-04 11:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton supporters will defect

so what would be some of the other areas of overlap between Hillary Clinton and John McCain?

by the mollusk 2008-03-04 11:36AM | 0 recs
McCain Clinton ticket?

Will Hillary vote for McCain? She seems to be moving toward him based on her support of his experience over Obama's. Would she accept a VP spot on a McCain ticket? They are good friends and can work together.

Don't be so shocked. McCain considered being Kerry's VP so he may be open to the possibility as it may be his only chance at being president. Hillary could make a deal that gives her more power than that of a senator.

by ImpeachBushCheney 2008-03-04 11:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton supporters will defect

If someone was voting for HRC on experience, I'd assume that they were a Dodd, Biden, or Richardson voter earlier (due to the fact that they were all vastly more experienced than Hillary) and thus not a significant percentage of the electorate.  

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-04 11:36AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Deny this at your own peril. It's too much going on in the world for a someone that's not too far from being a rookie... We live in a world where we have serious problems to face, but we can overcome it with the right set of skills being available in the office of the president.

Clinton supporters are not arbitrary democrats, but if you put Obama--at the top of the ticket--you will break the coalition, considered the Democratic Party. Do...that...at your own peril...

by Check077 2008-03-04 11:08AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

We vote on issues and values, which until lately, have been best represented in the Democratic Party. We have managed to keep the liberal, or progressive wing at bay, but--if you push it--you will find out that Obama will need a lot more independents and republicans to push him over the top in November 2008.

by Check077 2008-03-04 11:11AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

And you don't think that this would also be the case with Obama voters?

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-04 11:37AM | 0 recs
This Reagan Democrat disputes your optimism

Reagan was estimated to receive 25% of the Democratic vote in 1980 (probably more in 1984) and I was among them both times.  I've always believed that many old school Democrats will be receptive to McCain if the McGovernite wing of the party rises again and insists on nominating an uber-liberal neophyte darling.

by lombard 2008-03-04 11:16AM | 0 recs
Re: This Reagan Democrat disputes your optimism

Probably.  At the same time, these polls also show many independents crossing over to Obama if he's the nominee, and always enough to make up for the loss of any 'old school' Democrats.

And by the way, uber-liberal?  That's one of those characterizations and perceptions that will be up for changing and shaping between now and the fall.  Just like McCain's supposed 'maverick' and independent qualities.  

by Brillobreaks 2008-03-04 11:24AM | 0 recs
not always enough

That is why Clinton does better on some GE polls.

Obama's advantage with Independents will become much smaller (or disappear altogether) as the election approaches.  Independents are very fickle and McCain is more immune to the currently poor GOP branding than just about any other Republican.

by lombard 2008-03-04 11:57AM | 0 recs
Re: not always enough

He's immune?  Why?  Because he hasn't been running for office.  Most independents have only this memory of him from past elections, you don't think his strong support of Bush and Iraq aren't going to affect those voters?

by Brillobreaks 2008-03-04 12:11PM | 0 recs
Re: This Reagan Democrat disputes your optimism

I love how Obama's both an Uber liberal and a Crypto Republican, can you people who dislike the man at least agree on which side he's on?

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-04 11:38AM | 0 recs
Excellent point

This is an excellent point, and one which should be answered, though I'm not holding my breath.  This is one of the fracture points at which all of the Obama-hate collapses under its own weight.

For me, coming from South Dakota, it's astonishing that slamming George McGovern is considered a valid debating point at a Democratic blog.

But leaving that aside for the moment, which are we?  Far-left McGovernite ultra-liberals, or stealth Republican trolls?  Because we're constantly being told both.

by Progressive Witness 2008-03-04 12:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Excellent point

You're not backing Hillary, so who cares? :p

by mattw 2008-03-04 12:04PM | 0 recs
People may oppose him for different reasons

And I'll oppose him for mine.  I'll welcome all of the opposition whether from the left, right, or center if it helps to stop him (and his supporters) this Spring or in the Fall.

Is that a definitive enough statement for you?

by lombard 2008-03-04 03:34PM | 0 recs
Almost, but not quite.

1)  Which is Obama?  A too-left McGovernite, or a trojan Republican?  'Cause I keep hearing both from y'all, and it can't be both.

2)  Why do you hate him so much that you'll work with the Right to bring him down?

by Progressive Witness 2008-03-05 06:23AM | 0 recs
Re: This Reagan Democrat disputes your optimism

and your Reagan Democrat anti-Obama vote wouldn't have anything to do with the racism that defined the Reagan Democrats, right?

by thereisnospoon 2008-03-04 11:39AM | 0 recs
Re: This Reagan Democrat disputes your optimism

Careful.  We don't actually talk about that sort of thing around here...

by Brillobreaks 2008-03-04 11:43AM | 0 recs
Your usual sneering bile, I see

by lombard 2008-03-04 11:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Your usual sneering bile, I see

it's a simple fact: Reagan Democrats were motivated by race more than anything else.  This is well known and admitted by political scientists on both sides of the aisle.

Saying that you're a Reagan Democrat voting for McCain over Obama is basically a Venn diagram that screams racism to any objective observer.

by thereisnospoon 2008-03-04 07:23PM | 0 recs
How the hell do you know this?

Judging by prior comments from you, I'd guess you were not even born or in diapers when Reagan was elected.  I don't doubt that a few researchers could manage to spin something about race from Reagan's victory.  I can assure you that neither anger nor resentment against African Americans played any visible role in Reagan's election.  I never remember race being an issue in that campaign.  Anger and resentment against Iran, on the other hand, probably played an essential role.

You have a lot of misinformation and unwarranted resentments about the past and people who are older than you.  Every time you open your mouth you make that plain  

by lombard 2008-03-05 09:38AM | 0 recs
Re: How the hell do you know this?

i actually read books and other things like books.

Reagan's campaign had nothing to do with race, huh?  Shows how much you know.

by thereisnospoon 2008-03-06 02:31PM | 0 recs
Too bad wisdom and maturity can't be read

by lombard 2008-03-06 04:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Too bad wisdom and maturity can't be read

wisdom?  sigh.

That you think Reagan didn't race-bait heavily in both his campaigns and during his presidency shows just how clueless you are, no matter how many years you may have under your belt.

by thereisnospoon 2008-03-06 06:07PM | 0 recs
Where you still in diapers when Reagan was elected

Because your knowledge of him and what motivated people to vote for him appears to be second hand and way off the mark.

by lombard 2008-03-04 11:53AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Wait, I thought the Clintonite line was that Obama supporters weren't real Democrats, but now her campaign is trumpeting the fact that more of her supporters won't vote for the Democratic nominee?

by KCinDC 2008-03-04 10:40AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

The campaign isn't "trumpeting" this.... the source is some obscure Salon poll.

by KnowVox 2008-03-04 10:43AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

The Pew poll is not an obscure poll.  It is one of the most respected polls out there.

by mainelib 2008-03-04 10:49AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

As usual, Obamabots miss the point. The Clinton campaign is NOT trumpeting this.

by KnowVox 2008-03-04 11:13AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Did you not read the post?  Yes they are.  

by Brillobreaks 2008-03-04 11:15AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Did you not check the source? It's not coming from the Clinton campaign.

by KnowVox 2008-03-04 11:19AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

The diary claims: "the Clinton campaign is promoting this stat, both in an e-mail from spokesman Phil Singer and in an item on its "Delegate Hub" Web site."  Is this not true?

by Steve M 2008-03-04 11:21AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

No. DelegateHub isn't encouraging HRC supporters to jump ship and vote for McCain. The actual text reads:

Pew Survey: `The "defection" rate among Obama's supporters if Clinton wins the nomination is far lower.'

http://www.delegatehub.com/

by KnowVox 2008-03-04 11:32AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

So Obama voters are true Democrats while Hillary gets the GOP types.

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-04 11:39AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Barack and Michelle said that BHO votes would not move to HRC if she is the candidate. So who has the real democrats.

HRC gets more democratic votes than BHO who gets a bigger percentage of the republican/independent votes

by indus 2008-03-04 01:00PM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

I don't believe the diarist claimed that Clinton was encouraging supporters to vote for McCain.  The claim was that the Clinton campaign is trumpeting this particular stat, plain and simple.

by Steve M 2008-03-04 11:49AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

The Pew Research Center is not an obscure pollster, and this story is currently the first thing listed at delegatehub.com. Also, as mentioned, a campsign spokesman sent out an e-mail about it.

by KCinDC 2008-03-04 10:51AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Ah, well, I am consoled by the fact that most of the polls in 1992 at this point were projecting either Bush or Perot...

We know how that one worked out

by Wiz in Wis 2008-03-04 11:14AM | 0 recs
Obama isn't the Democratic party

The party was around long before Obama and will be around long after.

by lombard 2008-03-04 11:18AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

I am not sure about the validity of the poll.  I don't think it makes Democrats look good at all.  But I do wonder about the older, white Democrats having a problem voting for a black man.  I grew up in Texas and people like my grandfather would never even consider it.  

by JustJennifer 2008-03-04 10:44AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Interesting. Aren't you just as concerned about older, white men having a problem voting for a woman?

by KnowVox 2008-03-04 11:15AM | 0 recs
Re: were the Obamas being "racist"too?

You don't need to spam this comment throughout the diary.

by Brillobreaks 2008-03-04 12:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Which is easier?

The question is which task would be simpler?  Obama convincing base Dems who have doubts about him to come home, or Hillary trying to convince Independents who already have hardened negative attitudes to change their minds.  I think the answer is obvious:  Obama.

by upper left 2008-03-04 10:46AM | 0 recs
wrong question and answer

This election is going to be a base election.

The Dem base is bigger than the Rep. base.

Hillary will just need to mobilize the same people who voted in the primaries to vote for her.

Same with Obama.

The problem is, with all of his advantages, so far, he can't win the big one.

NH, Cal, and now tonight.

You can spin all you want, Ohio is what matters.

With all the time from Wisconsin, and all the money, and the momemtum of 11 straight wins, if he can't win Ohio.

As Dr. Lee said, "something wrong".

by yellowdem1129 2008-03-04 10:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Right question, right answer

You dismiss independents at your peril.

Dems are no where near 50%.

This is about base turnout, and about crossovers.  Obama will bring far more AAs and young voters to the polls than Hillary, and he will be able to bring far more indies and disaffected Repubs. All of these voters will help down-ballot Dems.

The vast majority of down-scale and older Dem voters will come home to Obama as they get to know him better.

Obama beats McCain by nearly twenty points in trial heats in Iowa were the voters know him best.

by upper left 2008-03-04 11:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Right question, right answer

This is my sense as well, irregardless of the polling from this week.  People keep talking about how many Democrats might jump ship, but they ignore that most of these same polls show a huge gap between Obama and Clinton's appeal to independents.  They also ignore any questions of who might actually show up and show up in larger numbers than before.  

by Brillobreaks 2008-03-04 11:31AM | 0 recs
Re: wrong question and answer

Wait now NH is a big one? Wow, we just keep on moving thoose goal post don't we.

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-04 11:41AM | 0 recs
I will vote for the dem nominee but

think about it, you have a sizable part of the Dem party + many in the media openly saying, that if Hillary doesn't win both Ohio and Texas she should drop out.

But that would mean, that:

the candiate a majority of dems voted for lost.

Obama couldn't knock her out, the way every other race has ended.  People get out of primaries because the people won't vote for them.

But IF Hillary wins Ohio, that means Dem voters in the most crucial swing state rejected him.

Think about that.

by yellowdem1129 2008-03-04 10:46AM | 0 recs
Re: I will vote for the dem nominee but

It's all about delegates.  That's the point.  The Clinton campaign said they'd be tied in pledged delegates by now.  

by mainelib 2008-03-04 10:50AM | 0 recs
are you serious?

It's never been, and never will be about delegates.

Texas will  prove "elected delegates" have little relation to voters.

It's about public perception of the winner.

Howard Dean when he dropped out in 2004, it wasn't the delegates, it was because he was going to get blown out in state after state.

No one can claim to be the dem nominee and can't win Ohio. It doesn't make sense. I challenge you to explain to me if Clinton somehow wins Ohio and Penn.

How could Obama claim, "but I have more delegates"?  

The 3 most important states in GE:
Florida, Penn., Ohio.

No one on anyside would dispute that.

If, and I say if, things go as they seem, Hillary will have won all 3.

No way she loses the nomination.

by yellowdem1129 2008-03-04 11:00AM | 0 recs
Re: are you serious?

And again, just because one of our candidates won or loss a state in the primaries, doesn't mean that they'll win or lose that state in the general.

by Brillobreaks 2008-03-04 11:08AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

I will vote Democrat no matter what.  I do think there is still a lot of racism amongst the older white voters however - especially in areas where there are heavy AA populations.  It's a shame and thankfully it is changing as new generations come along but it is still a factor.

by JustJennifer 2008-03-04 10:51AM | 0 recs
It's about experience

It's not racism, it is "experience". If the matchup is Obama v McCain. People will vote for McCain on "experience" not because Obama is biracial. There are a lot of Democrats that like McCain.

by grlpatriot 2008-03-04 11:03AM | 0 recs
Re: It's about experience

It's both.  It's also a whole host of other factors.  Ridiculous to assert that all these 'defectors' are voting that way for the same reason.

by Brillobreaks 2008-03-04 11:10AM | 0 recs
Defectors' motivations

It's also ridiculous to assume that when people don't vote for Obama, it is because they are racists. I felt the tone of some comments here moving in the direction.

by grlpatriot 2008-03-04 11:30AM | 0 recs
Re: It's about experience

If it's about experience, Hillary loses. Even arguing she has more experience than Obama is questionable; it's almost purely a rhetorical invention. Obama has more years in elected office and is her match in activism. If you want to stack Hillary's 8 years looking over Bill's shoulder against McCain, I think you set the Dems up for failure.

I can accept some level of experience because of Hillary's involvement with Bill's presidency. But I think when he's evaluating troop deployments into Kosovo, I don't think Hillary is sitting at his right hand while the Joint Chiefs brief him, and so I think the thing people envision with respect to "Experience" here - foreign policy/security experience - is the area where Hillary's time as First Lady makes the least amount of difference, and I think McCain will point that out too.

by mattw 2008-03-04 12:11PM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Here we go again. Those do not vote for Obama are automatically racist. Oh! Also old people suck. Typical ageism and reverse racism. God! What is happening to our party?

by praxis1 2008-03-04 11:30AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Old people do not suck and everyone is not a racist.  It is a fact that older people may tend to be a little less tolerant, especially in the bible belt.  I don't see how anyone can dispute this.

by JustJennifer 2008-03-04 11:38AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Your facts sounds like "prejudice" and "stereotypes" against older people in the bible belt. Please do not overgeneralize your annecdotal cases. It is really dangerous.

by praxis1 2008-03-04 05:30PM | 0 recs
Democrats United

We're all Democrats here.

I support Hillary, but will try my best to elect Obama if he's the Democratic nominee.

I hope other Hillary supporters will do the same, as I hope Obama supporters will vote and support Hillary if she's our party's nominee.

by Sieglinde 2008-03-04 10:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Democrats United

I want a Democrat to win in the fall and I could vote for either Hillary or Obama - at least in theory.  The problem is that at this point, a Clinton win almost certainly means something very bad, negative, and divisive for the party.  Either an Obama bombshell, an Obama implosion, or some very questionable backroom dealing at the Convention.

There just isn't a good way for her to win at this point.  Either it's very bad or she just doesn't win.

by the mollusk 2008-03-04 11:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Democrats United

Bad, negative, divisive ... love your Republican talking points.

If you feel so bad about a Hillary candidacy, go vote for McCain.

by Sieglinde 2008-03-04 11:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Democrats United

Okay.  Can you explain to me how Hillary wins the nomination at this point?

by the mollusk 2008-03-04 11:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Democrats United

Simple: by getting the most delegates.

Last I checked, Obama hasn't reached the magic number yet.  Try not to spread the O-rrogance around here too much.

It's why we have elections.  It's why OH and TX and RI and VT are voting today.  It's why people are now talking about PA.  It's why Hillary is still fighting for every vote.

by Sieglinde 2008-03-04 11:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Democrats United

Do you know what it would take at this point for her to win the most delegates?  Or are you just hoping she can, while ignoring any and all math?

by Brillobreaks 2008-03-04 11:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Democrats United

Listen, if it's all been determined, then why even bother to vote?  The odds are against Hillary, but it's not insurmountable.

Depending on the results tonight, and the irresponsible actions of the media beast (as it now shifts its gaze to St. Obama, watch out!), the storyline next week can be so different it might even surprise me.

Do you remember what happened leading to New Hampshire?  and what happened that night?  The future is not set in stone, my Obamacrat friends.

You talk about the delegate math-- I'm willing to bet my iPod (yikes!) if any one of you Obamacrats can do it without referring to Kos or whoever else's numbers you want to believe.

The most important math is the delegate count that's already been determined.  And last I checked, folks, Obama ain't over the top yet.  Hold the confetti, our girl is just warming up.

by Sieglinde 2008-03-04 11:59AM | 0 recs
Here Ya Go.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/29/d elegate.counter/index.html

Plug the numbers in yourself.  I'd be interested in seeing any scenario you come up with.  

by Brillobreaks 2008-03-04 12:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Here Ya Go.

Are you serious?  Is this the Obama math you're all so crazy about?  Making up numbers, and coming up with scenarios?

My math training (and I have a Ph.D in science, and I do simulations for a living) tells me that there are a whole lot of possible scenarios that one can come up with. (Specifically, you multiply the the total number of delegates plus one of all 17 state variables, i.e., 142 x 194 x 13 x 159 x ... you get the picture.)  Now, some of those scenarios are near impossible (e.g., Clinton gets 0 delegates from TX, etc..), but there's a significant number of them that are plausible in this universe.

But the bottom line: if one bases their "predictions" on half-baked assumptions (like polls and momentum and blog chatter), then ... uhm, have you heard of "Garbage in-garbage out"?

by Sieglinde 2008-03-04 12:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Here Ya Go.

One can make educated guesses about these things, though I guess you'd dismiss them as nothing more than "half baked assumptions".  

I'd love to hear what you consider plausible though.

by Brillobreaks 2008-03-04 12:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Here Ya Go.

Lets switch on tell me how BHO wins the 2021 delegates. So it is goes to the convention both of them will be short of 2021 with BHO slightly ahead in the delegate count ( by 100). SD will play a part. And then Dean has to decide about FL and MI.

There will be a compromise. Dont know what it is

I will be voting Democrat no matter what. I spoke to my neighbours last week and they said they are considering voting for McCain if it is BHO( they have voted democrat in the last 5 GE). They are in Bayarea, CA - Asian orgin ( very liberal). Maybe things will change when they look at the candidates.

by indus 2008-03-04 01:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Democrats United

Are you forgetting Florida & Michigan, or you really think we have only 48 states.

by rolnitzky 2008-03-04 11:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Democrats United

CNN has Obama up by 153 pledged delegates w/o Michigan & Florida.  Let's say they seat those delegates with no revote.  Assuming that the delegate count proportionately reflects the popular vote (poor assumption, I know), Hillary would pick up around 65 pledged delegates over Obama (this also assumes that the "Uncommitted" delegates from Michigan vote for Obama), leaving her about 88 delegates short.

To make up that kind of shortfall, she would need to run the table from here by big margins and would need substantial support from the superdelegates.

At this point, an Obama implosion of the magnitude necessary for Hillary to win around 75% of the remaining votes would in fact be bad for the party.

That was my point all along.  Nothing against her.  Math just isn't on her side anymore.

by the mollusk 2008-03-04 12:12PM | 0 recs
You don't appear to get the point of the post

An Obama win will also be divisive.  A significant minority of Dems will walk if he gets the nomination.

by lombard 2008-03-04 11:22AM | 0 recs
Re: You don't appear to get the point of the post

There's a lot of time between this poll and the supposed walking.  

by Brillobreaks 2008-03-04 11:27AM | 0 recs
Re: You don't appear to get the point of the post

Right now, Obama wins the general and hillary doesn't. I'm at least as willing to give credence to that as I am to a poll about supporting the other candidate asked during the "heat of battle". This primary has been hotly contested, and I'm sure plenty of people are so in love with their candidate they can't imagine switching.

I'd say history shows we're more in danger of running a "status quo" candidate now than we are of running an "experienced" one. Ask Gore and Kerry, who both had great claims to experience, if it helped them.

Obama is bringing millions of new voters into the party.

by mattw 2008-03-04 12:15PM | 0 recs
We'll see if he gains more than he loses

by lombard 2008-03-04 01:02PM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

This is pretty strong evidence of who is running the more divisive campaign, but more to the point, it's also pretty strong evidence against the argument that we need to nominate Obama because of all the new voters he would bring into the process.

If 90% of Obama's supporters will support the Democratic nominee no matter who it is, that's a good argument for taking them for granted, just as Obama wants us all to take for granted that Hillary's supporters would vote for him.

However, I don't really like this sort of argument as it effectively punishes people for being good Democrats.

by Steve M 2008-03-04 11:06AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

I think its because there isn't this "hate" for John McCain. Many Democrats like him and respect him. At the end of the day though, I think Democrats will step in line.

by falcon4e 2008-03-04 11:06AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Many people also have a somewhat skewed opinion of him.  They remember him from the last time he ran, not from the stuff he's done inbetween then and now.  The whole 'maverick'/independent thing.  Yet he's run very hard to the right trying to get the nomination, has supported Bush on Iraq, and is significantl weaker on economic issue than just about anyone else around.  

by Brillobreaks 2008-03-04 11:14AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Obviousely, we are to the left of mainstream, after all we are blogging on liberal blogs.

Obama allways claims he is reaching out to more voters.
This Pew poll shows that many Clinton supporters, many of them Republicans, but some Dems too may defect to McCain, that's really scary for our party if Obama wins.
Yes he has Republican support in Virginia, but we are never going to win in VA.

HRC makes states like FL, OH, TN and yes Texas more competitive for us.

by rolnitzky 2008-03-04 11:12AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

I'm a Clinton supporter, and if Obama is the nominee, I will vote for him because I care about the Supreme Court. However, if Obama is the nominee I believe there are many Latinos, Asians, and Veterans who will switch to McCain. (Along with many of his indy and GOP "supporters" who were never really planning on voting for him.)

by LakersFan 2008-03-04 11:15AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

People, its March, not October

We have no idea how this race will pan out. We don't even have a clear nominee yet.

Suggesting that either Obama or Clinton is fatally flawed based on data this far out is stupid. It would be like deciding where to go to eat before half of the restaurants were even built.

At the end of the day, the majority of Dems will vote their party, and younger voters will probably show up too. Fearmongering, on either side, is pointless.

by Wiz in Wis 2008-03-04 11:18AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

If so, it certainly reveals what the Clinton campaign stands for.

by Drummond 2008-03-04 11:21AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

It reveals what Obama stands for, The democratic party less 10%, no way to win an election.

by rolnitzky 2008-03-04 11:22AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

If 10 percent leave, then there is no party.  

by Drummond 2008-03-04 02:32PM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Ever heared of the term Reagen-Democrats.
According to this poll, you can copyright the word McCain-Democrats if Obama wins.

You can say those Democrats were not 'real Dems' whatever they are they gave us 20 years of Reagan-Bush.

by rolnitzky 2008-03-04 11:21AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

I'd rather coin the term Obama Republicans. I'm sure Hillary lovers here don't want to acknowledge it, but there are a ton of examples out there of Republicans excited about Obama. I'm sure some small number of the crossovers are making mischief, but not most.

by mattw 2008-03-04 12:18PM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Obama has the support of many moderate Republicans, including some party leaders here in Humboldt County.

by Drummond 2008-03-04 02:33PM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

This kind of poll really doesn't make sense at this stage of the primary. We are in an intense and at the moment quite negative battle between two Democrats, whereas McCain is under the surface. A lot of supporters of either candidate will say they won't vote for the other one just because they are mad. Clinton supporters seem to be more mad right now. Most of them will come around once a nominee is chosen.

The experience argument is unreal and we all know it. It's a talking point. Sen. Obama is experienced enough to be President and he has a lot of people in the party who will back this up for him, including Hillary Clinton once she drops out. In turn, he would defend her on her Iraq vote and foreign policy if she was the nominee. Both of them will help healing the party once the nominee is chosen. As divisive as the campaign may be right now, there is a lot of time to heal wounds.

by marcotom 2008-03-04 11:35AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?
Kerry barely carried PA and lossed OH & FL by very litle.
There is no way you win elections by losing any 2 of the above.
Hillary's strength in winning those states is an asset to the party.
by rolnitzky 2008-03-04 11:50AM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

Obama isn't Kerry, and 2008 isn't 2004, or 2000 or 1992.  More importantly, Hillary's doesn't have any strengths in these places, they haven't won yet.

by Brillobreaks 2008-03-04 12:01PM | 0 recs
Re: More Clinton supporters to defect?

But she'll lose the independents.  Most everybody outside of the Democratic Party hates her.  With a passion.

by Drummond 2008-03-04 02:33PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads