More than two million angry Democrats are rejecting Sen. Barack Obama as the likely Democratic nominee for the presidency this year, according to a new protest organization…
The voters who still are supporting Clinton are doing everything they can to make sure that doesn’t happen, raising an estimated $10 million since Independence Day to retire her debt…
“We’re letting the Democratic National Committee and other party leaders know that PUMA/Just Say No Deal members are serious. We’re not going to take this lightly and we’re prepared to vote for John McCain if need be.”
Karl Rove is awesome! I mean, surely this mess is his doing, right? Right?
{ 13 comments }
I know you’re probably just being snarky, but for anyone who takes it seriously, it’s virtually certain that this isn’t really a group of millions of Clinton voters.
Perhaps. But, if a group really did raise $10 million for Clinton’s debt, it’s a group to be watching. So, even if there’s not a group of 2 million Clinton supporters, money speaks.
Additionally, this group has appeared on CBS, FoxNews, CNN, MSNBC, and more.
There is some snark in this post on my part, but probably not where you think it is.
Well there will be Hillary supporters who switch to McCain, no question, and they’ll largely be either angry women or centrist Democrats who no longer trust Obama, but, I would doubt they’re going to be *that* big an impact, at least not enough to overcome all the surly "I hate McCain" Republicans.
If nothing else, $10 million to reimburse Clinton for the money she spent on her own campaign is $10 million that won’t be donated to various Democrats’ general election campaigns.
Groups like this appear every election. "Democrats for McCain" and "Republicans for Obama" will be active, if not now then soon.
So, Hillary supporters abandoning the party isn’t as big a concern for that party as the GOP with Republicans not liking McCain? Where do you get that?
It’s plain to see that Republicans that dislike McCain do so because they think he’s too far left. They’re not going to turn around and vote for a guy even further left. And Hillary supporters that refuse to vote for Obama do so not because they dislike his policy, they feel they got cheated and would rather see a Republican in the White House than Obama to teach the party a lesson.
It’s frickin’ apples and oranges.
And as Maniakes points out, it’s $10 million not in Obama’s coffers. If "Republicans for Obama" is going to pop up, its got a lot of work ahead of itself already to be as influential as the opposite number is.
No, I think it’s pretty clear that Democrat disdain for Obama outshines that any Republican has for McCain by leaps and bounds.
It’s not apples to oranges, it’s McIntosh to Granny Smith; similar but not exactly the same.
The big problem for Republicans is surliness. Their problem is petulent voters who will stay home and not vote at all, or do something like vote U.S. Constitution or leave the top of the ballot blank, just because McCain’s not one of them.
Although, as usual, I do find that people who talk that way often change their tune by the time November comes around.
$10 million is a fair chunk of change, but both McCain and Obama seem to raise 2-3 times that amount every month. So the real question is, where is this middling-sized sum going?
Yes, damn those Republicans that vote for the candidate they want rather than party! Boo! Hiss!
I refuse the accept the idea that voting for the candidate you want over party allegiance is a character flaw. And your use of the words "surliness" and "petulant" paints it as such.
People talk for soldiers laying down their lives for our right to vote. I’d like to think they did so for our right to vote for the man we want, not against the man we don’t.
Well I’d say Democrats who refuse to vote for Obama are the same.
You have a right to vote for whoever you want, or to not vote at all. But I think it’s pretty childish to refuse to vote for someone who is broadly in tune with your values just because they aren’t exactly what you want. Party politics requires compromise; well really, all politics do.
Who is this "you" you speak of? Do you mean me specifically? Or do you mean some vague "you" that you (meaning you, Dean) can’t identify anyone bodily but you know their true motivations better than they themselves?
Either way, what qualifies you to speak for the heart of any individual Republican that doesn’t vote for McCain?
This is something you do a lot and it gets real annoying.
Can’t someone just disagree with you on something without you saying they’ve not done enough research, talked to enough people, or are just plain childish, or whatever other label you want to attach to them?
You can’t just live with someone disagreeing with you. You have to use words like, "childish," "petulant," or "surly." The latter you’ve used twice on this thread alone! And let’s not forget old stand-bys like "silly" or "fool."
You have to look down on people that disagree with you it seems sometimes. You have to belittle them or bring into question the very way they process or respond to information. They’re not just wrong. They’re fools. They’re not doing it differently because they earnestly feel they must. No, they’re surly.
It’s, well, childish. And, frankly, beneath you.
Mmm. Perhaps a valid criticism. I’ll think on it; for years now I’ve struggled with my tendency toward quick temper and contempt.
The "you" was a generic one though. I’ve said many times, people have every right to vote for whoever they want, and also have every right to refuse to vote. Indeed, I’ve even said that I think it’s wrong to browbeat and pressure people into voting. If they don’t want to vote, or don’t give a damn about politics, then they damn well shouldn’t vote, and no one should make them feel bad about it. People did indeed die for the right to vote, but ultimately I think they died for the freedom to choose, or not choose, as they saw fit.
On the other hand, I think that if people participate in politics and recognize that parties and compromises are inevitable, and regularly vote in a party’s primary, it is petulent and selfish to just run away when the party doesn’t pick exactly who you like. I also have to be blunt: while I often defend Evangelicals, and count many of them as friends (and relatives), they honestly appall me when they demand that one of theirs be put into office. They aren’t a majority of Christians, and they aren’t even a majority of Protestants, nor were they a majority of the people who founded this country, nor do they get to unilaterally decide for the rest of us what counts as Christian values or what this country stands for. They aren’t even a majority of Republicans. Their demand to control the party and the country by having someone perfectly in tune with all their values and beliefs is deeply disturbing to me. I’m sorry if that offends you, but it’s what I’ve always felt. If nothing else, it shouldn’t be news to you; I was saying things like that to you the first time we even HAD a theological discussion.
I would never refuse to vote for someone because I strongly disagreed with major portions of their theology. I just wouldn’t. In fact, if I were to do this I couldn’t have voted for Bush. So while I’m sympathetic with the religious right’s general goals on some things, I’m not sympathetic to the entire movement and never really have been. Nor has that changed much, although like I say I struggle to find more gentle ways of expressing my disapproval. I’m not very good at this, it’s a major failing for me and has been all my life. I come much too quick to sarcasm and to snap judgments. I actually don’t even like speaking of “the religious right” really, as I’m not sure they entirely exist, at least not as the monolithic phalanx they’re so often portrayed as. But I’ve known just too many people who behave in the ways that the critics of the religious right–the sane ones–describe. It’s real enough, and it’s not something I can ever be a part of or wholeheartedly supportive of. And these are folks I think are being very foolish to refuse to vote for McCain just because he ain’t one of them.
And to get back to the point that started this: do you honestly think that the angry Hillary supporters who refuse to vote for Obama will outnumber the angry Evangelicals who refuse to support a non-Evangelical like John McCain? I don’t think they do, but I could be wrong.
Don’t underestimate how big the "Just say no deal" or PUMA movement is. I have been very involved and from what I have seen, this is a massive movement. Of course, with Obama being the media darling, this isn’t being reported, but it is the 800lb gorilla in the room, and we aren’t going away.
If anything, we hope to take the Presidency away from Obama. He doesn’t deserve it, nor is he qualified.
Hmmm, I need to ask a question of you smart folks on this site. For years I have had to mutter about the fact that I am voting of the "lesser of two evils" as the story goes. This year I like both candidates. How do you decide then?
Comments on this entry are closed.