Dick Morris urges Republicans in Texas to throw the election and vote for Obama

[cd3dem]

Just heard him speak on Hannity and Colmes asking republicans to cross over and vote for Obama. Please don't attack me for watching FOX, I like to see what they are up to.

How do Obama and Clinton people feel about this?

[David Zephyr]

1. Well, as an Obama supporter I think it stinks! Hopefully, the Huckabee factor will prevent it.

I think that Huckabee's challenge in Texas is now so great to McCain that few in the GOP will throw away their votes.

[Hobarticus]

6. Huck is mathematically eliminated....

GOP voters have nothing to lose by voting for Obama there.

[FrenchieCat]

38. Well, In Ohio, they are saying to vote for Hillary.......

so, I guess it makes them even!

Ohio Republicans pulling for Clinton to win

If she's Dems' nominee, GOP faithful think she'll unite GOP

One of the worst-kept secrets of the Ohio presidential primary is that Republican Party leaders have a candidate they are rooting for on the Democratic side.

Her name is Hillary Rodham Clinton; and they believe that if she wins the Ohio primary and goes on to become the Democratic nominee, she will be the one who unites their dispirited and divided party and gives them their best chance of keeping the White House this fall.
<>
'HIGH NEGATIVES'

To hear Republicans tell it, they're rooting for Clinton.

"There is no doubt about it," said John Becker, a Clermont County Republican who represents much of southern Ohio on the Ohio Republican Party Central Committee. "There is nobody who can consolidate and energize the Republican Party like Hillary Clinton. It will get the people out and the money will flow."

Part of it is that Clinton has what pollsters call "high negatives."

more.....
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080214/NEWS01/802140346/1056/COL02

[goldcanyonaz]

40. Pulling for her and voting for her are 2 very different things. Where does your article show voting

[FrenchieCat]

46. They are saying to vote for her......

http://www.nelsonguirado.com/index.php/asymmetric/2008/02/09/should-republicans-vote-for-hillary-clin

Freeper Call To Action: VOTE FOR HILLARY (Primary), DESTROY THE DEMOCRAT PARTY
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1971534/posts

[nonconformist]

52. Did you even read that Freeper thread you linked to?

Most of them are saying they're voting for OBAMA.

[goldcanyonaz]

54. Just posting the same thing. Defeat the "empty suit". Houston, we got troubles!

[polpilot]

78. Dick Morris? Are you kidding me? Isn't he the cartoon character? Ann Coulter wannabe?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

142. Is possible to comment on the idea and not the messenger? yikes

[goldcanyonaz]

53. Try reading past the OP of a thread and read how they want Obama "the empty suit" to run against MAC

[blm]

112. Baloney - Morris knows damn well Dems view anything he says with suspicion so this is meant

to trigger Clinton supporters into their expected reaction.

Jerk knees, jerk. Morris lies and knees jerk - as expected.

[catgirl]

87. It was mentioned on CNN- republicans may vote for Hillary

and Dick Morris saying "throw the election"...is supposed to
cause dems to band together and go against the message.
It's a typical Rovian tactic. They want Texans to vote for HRC.

[Jabberwocking]

140. DICK MORRIS IS JUST PROMOTING OBAMA b/c of his ANTI-HILLARY MOVIE THAT'S OUT

First off, I'll establish myself by stating that I'm a proud Republican voting for McCain in the Texas primary. However, let's not be delusional about the fact that Mr. Obama is going to simply smash HRC into refried beans in both Texas and Ohio. He's raised over 40 million since Feb 5th, has opened up over 10,000 new campaign offices all over Texas and Ohio, has ads running nonstop 40:1 in his favor, and has a never ending supply of Obamaniacs dialing the phones for him daily. He has agrandmothers donating wads of cash from their cookie jars and supermarket clerks handing over paychecks like their money was as meaningless as a box of used Trojans. Our party continue to underestimate Mr. Obama and as a result he continues to win, and win big. Nevertheless, I certainly hope McCain and the Republican party do not stoop to the level of HRC's mudslinging tactics, those of which she will apparently be stepping up in the coming weeks. Hillary will not only ruin her reputation by doing so but she's going to have the democratic party so deeply divided that McCain, if he keeps a low profile for now, will ease into the White House uninterrupted. B/C you simply don't attack Barakc Obama. You don't attack Gods. It just doesn't work. Sure, 'swift boating' a guy like John Kerry or Al Gore is easy. It even makes sense to do so given that their personalities exude a wimpy weakness that rubs a subconscious disdain into the back of our skulls. But more importantly, Mr. Kerry and Mr. Gore lacked that celebrity, star quality; that likability factor that Mr. Obama oozes from his pores in unquantifiable proportions.

So despite what we Repubs would like to believe, Obama has Messiah status unlike anything I've ever witnessed; and worse, he's just being himself. That's probably his secret. There is nothing forced, manipulative or corrupt about who he is or what he represents which is why, even I, find myself routing for this man from time to time. I truly believe he is devoid of the typical self-exalting, Napoleonic Narcissism that most politicians are genetically predisposed with; of course he is some altruistic, egoless Saint, but he does intend to what's best for the people of this country. Of course, I just can't vote for him b/c I don't agree with democratic policies. But I do enjoy watching him b/c rarely to you come across a politician with such a heterogeneous mixture of genuine authenticity, political talent, and raw intelligence that legitimately understands the political and psychological climate of the average American voter(in every state and not just the democratic one's with lots of delegates). Even more impressive is that Mr. Obama is the only candidate that is not in debt(raised over 200,000 million from what i've heard) and has crippled the most powerful political machine like it was as simple as a game of Go Fish.

Like JFK and the old Bill Clinton of 92, Obama can do know wrong at this point. And if he does; he will be readily forgiven for his sins. So this idea that Republican's will switching over to Democrat to vote for Hillary(b/c she's the lesser threat to the party) is ludicrous balderdash that is clearly being been propagated by the media for ratings; a cerebral sodomy of sorts to keep the fish on the hook. One would have to really be motivated about a candidate to switch parties and frankly, McCain isn't providing enough incentive to do so. All of the Republican candidates have been rather disappointing which is why our voters have been apathetic at the poll, when compared to a democratic force which has outnumbering us 2:1. Our parties only hope for winning the General is to hope that HRC keeps going negative and eventually destroys the democratic party in the process. I actually believe this will happen. Otherwise, I agree with Dick Morris, Obama is unstoppable.

As for Dick Morris, he certainly isn't trying to pull any Rovian tactics. The guy is as money hungry as the rest and is simply trying to promote the anti-hillary movie that he helped create. It's called Hillary The Movie. Check it out at http://www.hillarythemovie.com/(read about it and take note of who's in it: Dick Morris). Morris is a flip-flopper that has hated the Clinton's forever, long before Bill Clinton tackled him in the White House kitchen and half Nelsoned him into a headlock, along with Peter Paul. Clinton vs. Peter Paul is in the California Courts today I might add. Despite the fact that Obama is the stronger candidate, most Republican want the Clinton's ousted. Why? Too much power. Here's an example of the power that the Clinton machine has: The New York Times, a newspaper which not only endorsed HRC but is also manipulated by her, strategically printed the McCain sex scandal last night to minimize the media attention drawn to Hillary's Feb 21 'Paul v Clinton' court battle today. I won't reveal my sources but I happen to know that this is true!

BUT WHY IS DICK MORRIS RIGHT ABOUT OBAMA IN TEXAS?

Regardless of whether his movie makes the rounds in Texas, Dick Morris was correct in stating that Hillary doesn't stand a chance. It will be an Obama landslide. Why? Although HRC originally believed she had strong political ties in Texas b/c of her past, this is proving to be false as 7-8 of the largest Texan newspapers have endorsed Obama as well as the many high ranking political figures, once in support of HRC, that have now flopped over to the Obama campaign. The only thing Texas offers HRC is a high percentage of Latino voters in the six districts in Southern Texas. The caveat in Texas is that Latino voter turnout has been notoriously low in past elections(not the case in California which is the only reason HRC took the state). Therefor, even if Latinos voters came out in buckets on March 4th, and she won the Lat vote by 85% margins, the democratic party would still only award 4 delegates per district. This is not gonna happen given that George Lopez, a God among the Latinos in Texas, endorsed BO. Also take note that the average age of the Latino voter in Texas is 25 years old(an age group tending to favor Obama) while the Latino voters in California were much older.

Imagine there's a Senate District with 4 delegates. Here's how many delegates a candidate would get, based on voting percentages:

Voting % -- # of Delegates
0.00 - 14.99% -- 0 delegates
15.0% - 37.5% -- 1 delegate
37.51% - 62.5% -- 2 delegates
62.51% - 87.5% -- 3 delegates
87.51% - 100% -- 4 delegates

So unless Clinton wins 62.51% of the votes, she will split the vote with Obama. This is not good for Clinton. Why?

The African American vote. Their voter turnout has been strikingly high in past elections. It will likely be much much higher in this year's election. Thus, the democratic party has awarded African American rich districts with far more delegates: Austin(8 del), Houston(7) and Dallas(6) being some of the bigger names. Obama has been winning the AA vote by 90% margins in many states which means he'll probably take the majority of the delegates in these districts(you need at least 15% of the vote in a district to even compete for delegates) HRC may get a whopping O count in parts of Texas that offer a significant number of delegates. So even if Clinton were to win the popular vote, Barack's delegate count could be substantially higher; the outcome of some strange demographics and a strange delegate system that clearly favors Obama. Seems undemocratic to me but that's how the dem's system works. Also note that Texas has one of the larger AA populations in the country.

Now, here's something that is rarely mentioned: the Homosexual vote. I know why politicians don't go after this population more but they should b/c studies show that at least 10%% of the world is gay; that's not including those that are bisexual. This is a massive demographic. Houston Texas(with a large AA pop and 7 delegates up for grabs) has one of the largest homosexual populations in the country. One can imagine the percentage in Houston is in the arena of 20% to 50%. The homosexuals heavily favor Barack as do the African Americans. Barack could take all 7 delegates in Houston but a 5 to 2 outcome is more likely. Still, a 3 delegate gain is huge in s tight race like this.

And on top of that, white males in Texas are favoring Obama 8:1??? So I guess our country isn't as racist as Bill O'Reilly and his 'lynching party' would like us to think. O'Reilly is a disgrace to the Republican party and should be severely chastised for his racial slurs. Search lynching party on You-tube if you haven't seen the video of him attacking Michelle Obama. It's comments like these that will drive more Republicans away from our party.

What about women? Wisconsin women split the vote 50:50 and I'm guessing we'll see a similar trend in Texas.

Oh wait...Texas also has a caucus which HRC is trying to dispel as a myth; apparently it doesn't exist and everyone who wants their vote to count needs to vote in the primary. Yikes, but worse than the fact that it exists is that voters can vote in both the primary and the caucus. 67 delegates up for grabs. The actual results won't be announced until June?? So even if Clinton somehow wins the primary and declares victory, Obama could dominate in the caucus and end up winning instead. Too confusing but we all know how Mr. Obama does in caucuses where, according to Bill Clinton, only wealthy political activist types who don't really need a president typically vote.

And the tip on the iceberg for Mr. Obama is that he is now favored to win the blue-collar vote(once thought to be strung up on a shoelace according Mr. Clinton)too. Mr. Obama has now been endorsed by the three most powerful unions in the country with over 4 million members combined(these unions, unlike Nevada and California unions that had only a days notice, will have three weeks to get there act together).

Even worse for HRC, and the reason I'm now certain that she's going to loose Ohio, is that Jim Hoffa, head of the Teamsters Union, the most powerful union in the nation, has said that he's already sending out his "boys" to ensure an Obama win in Ohio and Texas. Hoffa is notorious for swaying close elections in his favor and he says he doesn't mind breaking of few bones in order to do so.

So Republicans, be worried, because it's Obama that we'll be facing. Count HRC out!

[0007]

103. Oh my goodness gracious! Isn't education wonderful?

[cd3dem]

47. than Hillary Clinton should sweep the rest of the primaries by a land slide!

[ZinZen]

133. The GOP has a lot to lose

if McCain continues to "win" by 40 to 50% to Huckabee. Pat Buchanan stated correctly that McCain as the frontrunner should be winning these primaries by 70%. So if the GOP wants to vote for Obama they must also accept it will hurt McCain going into the GE.

[Hobarticus]

138. How a GOPer votes today has nothing to do with the GE...

That's the problem with these open primaries. You can be a registered Republican, change your registration, and then do it again for the GE.

Anyone claiming these votes are automatically votes for Obama are fooling themselves. They may not be doing this to skew the results and get Obama because they perceive him as beatable, but a lot can happen between here and November, and they can change back in about thirty seconds. Hell, they don't even need to...even as a registered Dem I can still vote GOP.

There's a lot of dangerous navel-gazing going on about these crossover votes. I wouldn't be so sure of them just yet.

[theHandpuppet]

2. This is why I'm reluctant to support open primaries

I've seen firsthand how crossover voting can be used to manipulate elections.

[cd3dem]

50. We need election reform big time!

[grantcart]

64. In California since the advent of the open primary for the democrats

they have continued to grow and consolidate their power. The republicans who have a closed primary have declined in numbers every year. While not the only factor it is a fact that allowing people to jump in and vote in your primary helps encourage them to vote for you in the general. There is very little evidence that 'strategic' crossing over by one party over another to sabotage elections has ever taken place.

[Jamastiene]

73. Precisely.

That's what I've been saying for a while now.

[democrattotheend]

92. I think independents should be allowed to vote

in Democratic primaries, but not registered Republicans. Too much opportunity for manipulation.

If we are going to let Republicans vote in our primary, at least have a system like New Hampshire, where they have to register as a Democrat at the polls. That probably deters a lot of hardcore Republicans from crossing over.

As for states that don't have party registration at all, GRRRR! Not only does that create potential for interference (though the Virginia exit polls don't suggest that that happened), but it makes it much harder for campaigns to target voters. I have worked on a few campaigns in Virginia, and when we start canvassing, we have to go to every single door because we don't know what party people are. Not that party registration alone is a perfect indicator, particularly in the Deep South, but it does make things a lot easier.

[goldcanyonaz]

130. In Arizona you MUST registar for one party or the other 1 month prior to the primary's.

[liberalnurse]

3. I has been happening all month....

The Obama boost in the past few states like Virginia...a win from cross-over votes by GOP.

[stahbrett]

4. First, I don't think it'll be a determining factor...

Second, there's really nothing wrong with it - if the state Democratic Party didn't want to allow non-Democrats to vote in the Democratic primaries, then they should prohibit it.

[LiberalFighter]

34. The DNC cannot unilaterally prohibit non-Democrats from voting in primaries.

There has to be a state law specifying who is permitted to vote.

It would be easier to conduct caucuses which are solely conducted by the local party.

But then you have the situation of determining the criteria of who is a Democrat and who isn't.

[cd3dem]

62. the democrats have hearts.. the republicans do not...

[Jamastiene]

74. Sounds easy enough to determine.

:D

[NJSecularist]

5. Dick Morris is a piece of fucking shit.

God, I hate that man. He could be on fire right in front of me and I wouldn't do anything to extinguish the fire.

Profiting off of criticizing the president who gave you your first big break makes me fucking sick.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

14. well I have seen some Obama supporters posting his crap here and even praising the fucking guy

and that's no jive!

[scheming daemons]

55. and you guys are promoting and praising right-wing hit sites in other threads...

....

:shrug:

[cd3dem]

16. He was full of anger and venom...

I would hope other stations would steer clear of the guy!

[emilyg]

44. Amen.

[Carolina]

88. and to think HRC once hired him

She knows how to pick 'em: Morris, Wolfson, Penn...

[CyberPieHole]

114. She did? What did she hire him to do? Could you please elaborate? I'm on the edge of my sofa. nt

[Carolina]

116. be a consultant on 1996 presidential campaign

crafting those techniques we've come to loathe: triangulation, third way, etc.

[CyberPieHole]

119. HRC hired him? Really? Wow, and I thought Bill Clinton was President at the time...

I guess she was President and SHE hired Dick Morris.:crazy:

[Carolina]

118. also see my follow-up post downthread

[CyberPieHole]

120. You wrote that HRC hired Dick Morris...HRC did no such thing.

[Carolina]

122. yes, she quietly brought him in to Bill's inner circle

he (DM) said so himself!

No, it's not in the Wiki piece. But that's what came out when his own toe-sucking scandal came to light

[CyberPieHole]

124. Dick Morris "(DM said so himself!" Well, then stop the presses because it must be true.

:eyes: You wrote that HRC hired him. She did no such thing. Stop with your lies. Is the Obama Cult based on lies?

[Carolina]

126. Whatever, I lived it and

remember the interviews, etc. I was an ardent supporter od Bill's then and thought: why would she and he hire HIM.

You didn't remember the brouhaha from that time which is why you asked. DUH!

Anyway, believe what you want. I don't give a rat's ass because, in the end, they are all birds of a feather: Clinton, Morris, Wolfson, Penn

Truth hurts!

[CyberPieHole]

136. The only one's who are birds of a feather are BH Obama and the Syrian born Rezko...

:hi:

[maximusveritas]

7. I've heard talk of them doing the opposite

Voting for Hillary to keep the race going.

Morris just hates the Clintons, so he wants to see them lose. And I know there are many Republicans who feel the same way.

[Alhena]

8. The Survey USA Texas poll showed most Republicans favoring Obama

[ElsewheresDaughter]

9. been trying to tell folks about this Rove/Krystal/PNAC tactic for months...this is why .............

we need CLOSED Primaries and Caucuses only

[goldcanyonaz]

13. Yep, but we will all be the fools come November. I don't believe for a minute that they hate MAC.

[cd3dem]

61. Where would the Lou Dobbs Independents vote?

[ElsewheresDaughter]

65. in the GE like they do in NY....not the Primary

[robbedvoter]

10. Nothing that has not been done in every open primary so far...

[ElsewheresDaughter]

68. in every red state that Obama has won that had an OPEN Primary or Caucus ...YES

[goldcanyonaz]

11. This has been their agenda since Iowa, they're just now coming out front with it. instead of using

their blogs.

That's why I love Arizona, no open primary. You must be either Dem or Rep and can't just play the switch hitter on primary day.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

67. yup that's why I love NY for its CLOSED Primary

[GoldieAZ49]

12. yesterday, I would not have cared for the idea,

but after the crap the clintons pulled today, I hope they do just that!!

It will be a way for all those redneck, good ole boys, and cowboys to vote against her without loosing their vote in Nov.

(and McCain only needs more than Huckabee to win all the delegates for the repub side)

[goldcanyonaz]

15. Yep, and all them crossovers like in the other states with vote for the MAC in November.

[LisaL]

17. Of course they will.

Hello, president McCain.

[goldcanyonaz]

19. Yep, and so many here actually believe that the Repugs don't like McCain.

We been snookered.

[LisaL]

24. Obamites go on and on how Obama attracts all those republican

voters. They should wake up and smell the coffee. Even if they vote for him in the primary, they are not likely to vote for him in GE.

[goldcanyonaz]

26. Can't tell any of them that. They actually believe that the Repugs believe in "Hope and Change"

I've been amazed for these past months to read their hailing this supposed Independents and Repugs crossing over. No one I know isn't on to the Repug agenda here.

As soon as our nominee, which appears to be Obama is locked up they will come out in a united front for McCain. Laughing their asses off cuz they got us, yet again!

[LisaL]

30. I am afraid so.

And I don't think they will have to work very hard.

[GoldieAZ49]

33. nope, my mom is republican, I had her watch TV when Obama was on

and talked to her about his message, it is a closed primary here, she didn't even go vote for McCain, she will vote Obama in Nov

My Sister and her daughter were going to vote for Hillary just because she is a woman, they didn't know anything about Obama...I got her the info, she watched him on cspan and on Feb 5th they both voted Obama.

Don't underestimate enthusiasm!

[thoughtcrime1984]

43. You think "they" all move in lockstep, that they all think alike??

C'mon now. I know of a few Repubs that are very interested in Obama, and it is not to be tricky, they are dead serious. McCain is not universally loved by all the Repubs, of course many want him to win because he is Republican, but many see him as a poor candidate, no lie. You can hope and pray that the Dems are screwed over because Obama is preferred by more voters than Hillary, but if he can get past Hillary, he will defeat McCain. Believe it!

[Laelth]

137. They're right. McCain is a poor candidate.

He looks terrible on television, much like Dole in 1996. I think the Republics know they can't win this year. McCain is little more than token opposition. He is a loser. In 2000 McCain lost to the worst President in American history. I don't think he could beat either Hillary or Obama.

Here's why:



:puke:

-Laelth

[cd3dem]

42. He is considered more liberal than Clinton...

[rodeodance]

58. He has fooled many.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

71. as Hunter Thompson would call it......."Hey Rubes"

[Carrieyazel]

60. Right. These Obamites think Dem primaries/caucuses are the same as generals

Obamites, conservative whites do not vote in Dem primaries/caucuses UNLESS they're trying to push a candidate into the general.

Unless you can think of a way to bar conservative Repubs from voting in November, you're fantasies will not come to fruition.

[SammyWinstonJack]

94. Not all of us.

We been snookered.

[cd3dem]

21. We can have cowboy republicans decide our nominee but not Florida & Michigan

[goldcanyonaz]

23. Exactly, Lord forbid actual Democrats decide our nominee. That would just be wrong.

[nonconformist]

48. Good point! nt

[theHandpuppet]

85. BINGO!!!

Scores a bullseye!

[lukebc]

79. hillary cLINTON = WIN ONLY DEMOCRATIC VOTES = PREZ = NO

ALL the cLINTON P-A-I-D S-H-I-L-L OPERATIVES HERE are posting exactly what the *ENTITLED* cLINTON's have been FLOODING other sites with: "only with winning with EACH AND EVERY Democratic voter will hILLARY cLINTON become president of the United States and that "any republican voting for Barak Obama in primaries is nothing but "games" played by the GOP so that the GOP's "ideal" democratic candidate" they will face in November, 2008.

Well ONLY P-A-I-D S-H-I-L-L-S of the cLINTONS would make this incredibly STUPID claim..... cause ANY REAL analysis of electoral histories has ALWAYS revealed that large crossover votes MEAN THAT THE CANDIDATE THAT IS ATTRACTING THE CROSSOVER VOTES IS A CANDIDATE THAT HAS ACROSS-THE-POLITICAL-SPECTRUM APPEAL.

The cLINTON's, BECAUSE THEY *KNOW* THEY ARE ****DESERVING**** AND ****ENTITLED**** TO THE PRESIDENCY OF THE UNITED STATES, are NOT concerned with whether or not they can attract a large number of voters of ANY political affiliation......THEY ARE ONLY CONCERNED WITH "FULFILLING" T-H-E-I-R **RIGHTFUL** AND ****DESERVING**** *****ENTITLEMENT***** OF THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.....BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.....

And they have their P-A-I-D S-H-I-L-L-S HERE TO MAKE SURE OF THAT....

[Adelante]

84. Welcome to DU, lukebc

Calm down now :hi:

[CyberPieHole]

115. Who's sock is this?

[cd3dem]

134. the idea was to cross over in order to throw the election... not b/c of appeal!

Morris was not suggesting people would vote in the GE for Obama... He just wanted to defeat Clinton. I would suggest republicans would do this if their candidate McCain has the nomination sewn up, which he does. They would then be able to vote for the person they felt was the easiest to beat. Obama

[ElsewheresDaughter]

18. you don't yet get it do you...they want Obama because he is the weakest not the strongest...\...

they have an agenda ....they know Obama doesn't have a chance in all those red states where all these repukes crossover voted in the pPrimary BUT will NOT be there in November to vote for Obama in the GE


McCain wins...yay 4 more wars!!

[cd3dem]

29. it is clearly more than bad blood from Morris... it is a good stategy..

and there is so much bad blood between democrats... they have created arguments with the media's poor coverage...

[ElsewheresDaughter]

27. ahh never mind I get it you're a cicada

[Ronnie]

128. We stood in line with some of

"those redneck, good ole boys, and cowboys" and their wives when we voted this morning. If you ask for a Democratic ballot in Texas you are considered a Democrat for a year. Somehow, I can't see them making that switch just to get some kind of misplaced revenge on the Clintons. These are decent people. I'm pretty sure they have no idea who Dick Morris is. I wish I didn't.

[islandmkl]

20. was ann coulter there with whips and boots and dog collars and leashes?

goddam Dick Morris...only Fox would think anybody Left of Lieberman would listen to that toad.

[Melinda]

22. Happened in CA too; I was a poll inspector who took a few dozen new registrations...

from voters AFTER after they had voted in the primary. It worked like this:

CA's democratic primary ballot was available to anyuone registered non-partisan. So the non-partisan came in, asked for a dem ballot every time, voted, and then came back to my table to fill out a new registration card.

HRC carried our precinct. And the peoples of the county I live in loves them some Rush and Hannity.

The republicans didn't allow cross-over voting in the primaries, but they plan to in the General. Is it any wonder I'm against cross-over voting?

[jackson_dem]

25. They know Obama can be "trounced" in the general after they "teach" folks who this mystery man is

That is why rethugs overwhelmingly support him.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

28. They must either have dirt on Obama or have a great plan to beat him.

They do all the opposition research on all the Dem candidates and have a plan months in advance.

This is what scares me about Obama for the nomination. I'm not that crazy about Hillary either but think that Obamas numbers will go down once the Reps and the media gets a hold of him.

Everything is pretty much known about Hillary and she's still ahead. One of the problems that there is about the kid glove treatment he's getting from the media.

[cd3dem]

36. saw an Obama interview with Matt Lauer and he said Hillary has been hard on him

and so he is plenty prepared... should air tomorrow...

[rodeodance]

97. ha ha. that's funny. I will have a good chuckle when I see it.

[MADem]

41. They don't need actual DIRT. They will make it up, and he's unknown.

Google ALEX POLIER.

That little business, a brilliant and dispicable little lie, took a full WEEK of campaigning away from John Kerry.

And there are people who still believe it.

[cd3dem]

56. the swiftboaters are not nice and they do not need to be honest either

[Carrieyazel]

57. Exactly right. Why would Repubes vote for the most liberal Democratic Senator?

Obama has 100% ratings from ADA and other groups. On every key issue he is diametrically opposed to the vast majority of Repubes. They will fight to the death to destroy him. Repubes will have lost all majority political power if any Dem gets in.

[Alexander]

82. Why did Democrats vote for the right-wing Reagan?

Personality. Obama's got it. Hillary doesn't.

End of story.

[Carrieyazel]

111. Liberal Democrats did not vote for him. Centrist Democrats and conservative Dems

who did not like the more liberal direction that the national party was moving took a chance on Reagan and kept him in office in 1984 as well. There are always exceptions of course, but for the most part ideological liberals voted in very small numbers for Reagan. He knew he didn't need them to win; only "Reagan" Democrats who saw him as the lesser of two evils.

[casus belli]

69. One doesn't have to do much scratching to find dirt on McCain.

I think either candidate will do well against McCain, however I will say that the Clintons are despised by the right - and it could backfire on us in the form of galvanizing the GOP base to turn up and vote AGAINST Hillary, even if they despise their own candidate.

[Azathoth]

31. Dick Morris hates Hillary -- he'd pick anyone, including Hugo Chavez, over her n/t

[GoldieAZ49]

35. why does he hate her?

I know he worked for them in past, that he let a hooker listen in on a phone call with Bill. (wikipedia)

Is that it?

[Azathoth]

39. I think he claims Bill physically attacked him way back in 1990

I honestly have no idea what the real reason is. Whatever it is, I would assume it has something to do with Morris' oversized ego.

[blogslut]

32. I don't really care what Dick Morris wants

I care about what the voters want. If weak souls want to follow the orders of Dick Morris, that's their problem.

Incidentally, my brother intends to vote in the repub primary just to screw with the system. He will vote Democratic in the GE. Games will be played by all.

[FlyingSquirrel]

37. I think everything about Dick Morris stinks

And I think the percentage of people who cross over is pretty minimal in any election despite the constant BS about it.

[nonconformist]

49. Democrats in Michigan made McCain win the GOP primary there in 2000

To fuck with Bush. It was an organized effort, I know, I was there. I didn't do it, but nearly everyone I knew did.

[FlyingSquirrel]

63. Well, it's ok when Dems do it ;-)

I'm have to admit I donated money to McCain's campaign in 2000. It's the only time I ever donated to a Repug.

[butterfly77]

121. I did it...

and it was to make Engler look bad too..

[nonconformist]

45. Duh, they've been picking our candidate for us all along!

Logical people wonder why. Fanboys (and girls) just swoon at the trumped up wins.

[Political Heretic]

51. Dick Morris is too much of a moron and asshat to draw any conclusons.

His actions are not generalizable at all - he's a pure fucking clown.

[rodeodance]

59. and his hate of Clintons mirrows many here on DU.

[Political Heretic]

66. There's plenty of hate to go around here.

:(

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[apocalypsehow]

70. What's Jimbo up to these days, by the by?

n/t

[LadyVT]

72. Yeah, of course. Obama's easier to beat.

The "polls" taken now are far in advance of the 1-on-1 matchup Tonight on Larry King, a Republican strategist said as much. She called Obama a "monosyllabic grunter." She said Obama's meteoric rise from a nobody in 2004 to being the front runner for the party in 2008 says something about the Democratic party--that it's willing to risk everything on a monosyllabic grunter who stands for everything and nothing, basically. Pretty harsh stuff.

[FrenchieCat]

75. Why?

Cause he was always against the war, while Hillary was always for it like McCain. That makes him easier to beat?

I don't think so.

[TheDonkey]

77. The few dozen of people who are dumb enough to listen to Dick Morris on FOX will not make a dent

in the actual results.

[PDittie]

80. Here in Houston

the crossover will be minimal, as the GOP has several contested races downballot that will occupy their attention -- county judge, Harris County DA (the Rosenthal mess has four people crowded in to replace him) and CD-22, where no less than ten Republicans are on the primary ballot for the right to lose to Nick Lampson in November.

Can't speak for the rest of the state, but I have to believe that Houston Pukes are more motivated to cast a ballot for Mike Huckabee against John McCain than they are Hillary Clinton, in a different polling place, with none of their other favorites listed.

[Guava Jelly]

81. That would be cool!

A win is a win at this point.

[Perry Logan]

83. It shows you how much they hate and fear Hillary, doesn't it?

[catgirl]

86. It's called reverse psychology

and covering the RW message to vote for Clinton in WI and Ohio
since she'll be easier to beat. I heard this on CNN.

[elizm]

89. Obama does not need Dick Morris....and some Republicans will vote for Obama anyway...

...because they LIKE him.

[marshall]

90. Republicans will indeed decide Texas

It occurred to me that they've got nothing to lose by crossing over, and since the polls are showing an even split it will be the republicans who decide Texas for us. It's a catch 22 for Hillary--many Democrats crossed over in Florida and Michigan to influence the republican primary since they assumed their vote wouldn't count in their own primary.

[democrattotheend]

91. What was his rationale?

Does he think Obama would be easier to beat in the fall?

A lot of Republican strategists have said the opposite...

[Vinca]

93. I suspect Morris has a particular dislike for Hillary that goes beyond

politics.

[tekisui]

95. Whatever, if Clinton was such a strong candidate she would win the Primary.

Clinton supporters are lining up excuse after excuse. It gets old.

Clinton is losing because she has not ran a good campaign. Period.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

96. keyword "Closed" Primary"....Open Primary and Caucus is when reukes can and do crossover vote

[tekisui]

98. I've heard this excuse ad nauseum.

Every candidate is playing by the same rules. This is the process that is used.

If the pukes can organize and cause the defeat of Hillary in the Primary, what in the world makes you think she could survive the General Election, when it is completely open. I just don't buy this argument.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

99. you had better stay in school son

[tekisui]

101. Sound advice.

Indulge me, if you would. If the pukes can potentially cause Hillary's defeat in the Democratic Primary, how could she win the General?

[ElsewheresDaughter]

106. look what Obama did ....

[ElsewheresDaughter]

107. get it ...it's not the repukes that want her out. .it is OBAMA dirty tricks that will giv eMcCain t

[kentuck]

100. One thing we should all keep in mind...

The Republicans want Hillary as the candidate. Got it? Hillary is their only hope of getting out their totally demoralized and apathetic voters. They do not want a charged campaign like Obama's. Got it?

[texas_indy]

104. Your wrong for the following reasons:

1. Texas Republicans really, really, really hate HRC and they can be personally involved in ending her run for president now. Texas repubs have not had such a chance to make a dramatic showing for a long time.
2. They don't really believe Obama can win, and if he does they believe they can beat him next time with Romney.
3. They can take an Obama win much easier than an HR win since they hate her so much.
4. Many of the moderate repubs actually like Obama.



GOBAMA!!

[GarbagemanLB]

102. After all the crap Hillary has pulled....GOOD. I hope this happens.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

105. kick for truth

[HeraldSquare212]

108. If Dick Morris could influence voters, he wouldn't be a commentator.

He'd be running a campaign.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

109. It's a big pissing contest. Barack has it wrapped, so they have to pretend that's what they wanted

all along. Of course, the polls tell a different story in head to heads.

[burythehatchet]

113. You are quite correct. When Limbaugh claims he will support Obama

it is only because he is trying to retain some relevance.

[LTR]

110. Too big a deal is being made of this

Let's be real - how many Pugs are going all the way to the polls for a primary to vote against their party? I highly doubt a substantial number will. Perhaps a few Flavor-Ade sipping political wonks, but really not that many.

There will be crossovers. I know a few Republicans who plan on voting for Obama because they actually like the guy, and would probably even support him in November. Heavens to mergatroid!

I like the idea of open primaries. I feel independents and crossover voters have the right to pick candidates, rather than the party in-crowd clique. Incidentally, in 20 years of voting, and even in primaries, I have never declared myself a member of any political party, though I will most often vote for Democrats. I prefer not to be blinded by party-oriented monochrome politics.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

127. I'm bookmarking this for you come Novemberwhen becuase of your not caring McCain is sworn in

[LTR]

129. Got proof of this?

Or just half-assed conspiracy theories?

I'm saying I could care less. Let the people vote however they want. Hell, I've found myself voting for what I deemed "the lesser of two evils" or voted against candidates. That's my choice.

[Carolina]

117. Hmm... Morris and the Clintons

From Wikipedia:

Morris is best known for his influence over Bill Clinton's presidency. Even though Clinton and Morris came from different ends of the political spectrum, Morris became the president's most trusted advisor, especially in terms of marketing and "selling" policy decisions. A shrewd expert on polls and trends, Morris encouraged Clinton to pursue so-called third way policies of triangulation that merged traditional Republican and Democratic proposals, rhetoric, and issues to achieve maximum political gain and popularity.

The president consulted Morris in secret beginning in 1994.<1> In the words of Clinton's Chief of Staff Leon Panetta, "I always had the feeling that the president wanted to listen to the dark side, even though he clearly knew in his guts where the issues were and what he wanted to do. He always wanted to listen to the Morris voice to kind of say, what are the thoughts of the most kind of manipulative operation that could go on in politics? I want to hear that voice. I want to hear what he's thinking." Clinton's communications director George Stephanopoulos has said that "Over the course of the first nine months of 1995, no single person had more power over the president, and therefore over the government, than Dick Morris, no question about it." Morris went on to become Campaign manager of Bill Clinton's successful 1996 bid for re-election to the office of President of the United States.

[PretzelWarrior]

123. for once I agree with Dick Morris

I don't care about people's motives for doing so....but if we can get Obama a victory in Texas..WOW! It's really looking over for Hillary.

Then, rather than the story line being a fractured party all the way to June convention, we can focus on rallying around Obama and attacking the failed ideas or lack of them coming from GOP and McCain.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

132. shame on you

[kristopher]

125. I heard the same thing on Limbaugh two weeks ago

This is a post I wrote on the 17th that deals with the issue:


Most of the criticism of BO seems to be grounded in the belief that the "change" he speaks of is an overly optimistic chimera that causing his supporters to lead the Democratic Party down a path to certain defeat in the elections. They've seen the power of the Republican slime machine destroy our hopes time after time. The other day there was a popular post on DU (I'm sorry I don't have the original URL for credit) that asked a question which got to the meat of the issue.

This was my response. I decided to repost it after a 4 hour chat with my neighbor. She is a 6o+ year old widow who must work, is active in her fundamentalist church, and who voted for Bush in the last 2 elections. She has come to the conclusion that her support of the GOP has not been positive for either her, her faith, or the nation. She strongly questions whether the social issues that motivated her decision making are really things that can be addressed through government action. She asserts that the economic failures of the Republicans (jobs, health care, stagnant earnings, etc) and their cynical use of the religion have turned her unequivocally away from the Republican party. She spoke of Edwards' message regarding the emphasis Jesus placed on the poor and meek.

Initailly I thought she was pulling my leg and following Limbaugh's advice to push for Obama, but after speaking as long as we did, I simply don't believe that is the case. She argued pretty passionately against the actions of the GOP; she seemed genuinely and extremely offended as she echoed many of the criticisms of David Kuo.

There was only one qualification to her position - No way would she support Hillary. She says she will vote for Obama if he is the nominee, but if Hillary wins my neighbor says she will stay home and not vote.

Anyway, that conversation leads me to repost this. Thanks again to the person who posed the original question.


"He's an icon of "post-partisan" politics which, to me, is as ridiculous as concept as any I've ever heard. On one side we see a group of people who are consumed by greed and a thirst for power, who despise the poor, gays, women, and minorities, who'd like nothing more than to hand all the power in this country over to a handful of powerful men who'd love to forge another gilded age, who think America has the right and the duty to use everything up to and including military force to push its will on the rest of the world. On the other side you have those who believe in America as a symbol of freedom, hope, and justice. Those who would like to judge people by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin or who they happen to love. Who believe women are as worthy of respect and admiration as men, and who believe that America is a more potent force for democracy and justice throughout the world as an example of such things rather than a military power devoted to spreading them through the force of arms.

How does one reconcile these two sides? Where is the path to "post-partisanship" there? Which side is most willing to compromise, and what would each be willing to sacrifice to move beyond partisanship? When I ask this question, I find myself in fear of the answer."

The answer actually is extremely simple (that doesn't mean easy) - no reconciliation is necessary.

The two sides you describe are NOT defined by their political labels of Republican/Democrat and they are NOT defined the ideological labels of conservative/liberal. Perhaps the problem is the term itself as the post "partisan" label clearly leads us to think along the lines I've just rejected. What Obama is seeking to do is reach the voters that have been hoodwinked since the Reagan era into voting against their self interests by those "people who are consumed by greed and a thirst for power". They have successfully exploited fear of "the poor, gays, women, and minorities and despair for nearly thirty years. Now we have an orator who seems to be able to reach through that armor of carefully crafted negativity and touch the part of people that recognizes the concept of fairness, justice and the golden rule.

The "base" of the traditional Republican party has traditionally been the moneyed interests that tried to install Romney as their tool of administration. The paid hate mongers lined up behind Romney yet failed totally to move over 70% of their voters in the desired direction.

The other parts of their "base" were acquired as a reaction to Civil rights legislation and the economic turmoil ensuing from loss of US control over world oil supply in the 1970s. Some of those truly are hate-filled souls that can never be reached. But it has been 44 years since the Civil Rights Act, and the generation that placed racism over all other considerations of self interest is gradually dying off. True, many of the younger generation has followed in their footsteps but to hold onto the numbers they need for control the "people who are consumed by greed and a thirst for power have had to expand the range of people eligible to be hated to include "the poor, gays, and women".

However, the colossal ineptitude of the Bush administration has laid bare the truth of this malignant brotherhood for all its members to see. The co-opted are starting to wake up (ex: David Kuo) and recognize the cynical manipulation for what it has been. Look at the protest vote for Huckabee. It shows that nearly 50% are not timidly toeing the line they are being fed.

Does this mean that the "people who are consumed by greed and a thirst for power" are going to experience an epiphany leading them to suddenly begin working for the betterment of all?

Not for an instant does Obama or this supporter believe that or make any such claim. If you actually listen you will hear him speaking to those who have been deluded into voting against their own interests through the manipulation I spoke of. As far as I can tell, he basically makes two claims:

1) The "people who are consumed by greed and a thirst for power" can be successfully opposed by reaching out to those who have been manipulated into pledging partisan loyalty that does not serve their interests, and

2) Even if they can be reached, the struggle to right our course is going to be extremely difficult.

There are still going to be those who base their political actions on hate.

There are still going to be those who fail to recognize they are being manipulated to act against their self interests.

But Howard Dean recognized the dissatisfaction that was building. He saw the disillusionment that was spreading like ripples from the center of the most corrupt power grab in this nation's history. In response and against great opposition from the DLC, he implemented
his 50 state strategy. Without that, I believe Obama would already be another also ran. Dean saw the changes in the electorate prepared Democrats to capitalize on those changes. Obama is simply the person best equipped to bring in the haarvest.

At least, that's how I interpret things.

[Thepricebreaker]

131. Do it, get it over with so we can Unite the party... This going on for months is bad for us. n/t

[cd3dem]

135. The party will not unite around Obama after the media and republicans shoved him down our throats

[GarbagemanLB]

139. The majority of Democrats and sane Independents plus a few Republicans will. nt

[Catherine Vincent]

141. Republicans in Texas already know that.

"Stop Hillary!" is inbedded in their brains.