Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Campaign Myth 1: McCain Voters for Gore

Democrats eager to tamp down talk of disappointed primary voters bolting to John McCain point to the "fact" that a majority of McCain's own backers threatened to vote for Al Gore when George W. Bush secured the Republican nomination in 2000.

But the numbers of crossover voters frustrated by the nominating process was actually far less than that.

In Post-ABC and Pew national polling as the 2000 GOP primary wound down, more than seven in 10 Republicans who supported McCain also said they would back Bush over Gore in the general election. That is far lower than the 93 percent who backed Bush on Election Day, suggesting some bluster in the heat of battle, but nowhere close to a minority of voters.

The source for the mischaracterization appears to be the report from a March 2000 Pew poll, which states "Gore leads Bush by a 51%-44% margin among voters who say they backed McCain during the primary process."

Those data are not what they seem.

Pew asked all respondents, not just Republican primary voters, whether at "any point in the presidential campaign, did you want John McCain to win the Republican nomination?" And 88 percent of Democrats who wanted McCain said they would vote for Gore, as did 54 percent of independents. Just 14 percent of Republican McCain supporters said they would back the Democratic candidate.

To get the 51 percent figure for Gore, Pew then looked just at only those Democrats, Republicans and independents who "strongly" wanted McCain at some point in the primaries. But that is not a meaningful figure for understanding potential Republican defections; many of these voters did not vote or could not vote in a GOP primary in 2000.

There is also an oft-misunderstood related data point from the 2000 exit poll. In that poll, 37 percent of McCain supporters said they voted for Gore. But again, these were not necessarily GOP primary voters; instead, they were those who considered themselves his "political supporters," a far larger group.

By Jon Cohen  |  June 6, 2008; 6:00 AM ET
Categories:  Campaign Myths  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: New Exit Poll Tables
Next: SCOTUS Gitmo Ruling


Gee -- Pew Research used slanted numbers to produce a biased report. I am shocked!! What's next, ACORN registering dead people to vote for democrats? laundering soft money run hate filled attack ads? The WaPo using Raising Kaine as its primary source for news in Va? It's just sooooooo difficult to believe any of these nonpartison unbiased organizations would deliberately abuse their positions to engage in unethical conduct to elect democrats.

Posted by: Woodbridge VA | June 6, 2008 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Yuh? This time the cross-over voters are angry women, blue collar workers and Hispanic people who were robbed of our candidate. Students and rich people voted Obama as well as African Americans. I will vote for McCain as are all of my friends and I have nver voted Republican in my 58 years. Obama did not win one big state - only small states which for the most part go Republican anyway. HOw can he possibly win in November? answer: he cannot.

Posted by: Carol O'Connor | June 6, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Hillary fans for McCain in '08: he gives us no Choice!

Posted by: steve boyington | June 6, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

"Carol O'Connor"... that's pretty rich... as in Archie Bunker? Methinks you're not a democrat at all. I liked Hillary fine... but in the booth I decided for Obama. And I know that all MY friends voting in the primary felt the same way. We would be happy with either candidate. I would have voted for any of the democratic candidates. It was an embarrassment of riches!

Posted by: KristianJL | June 6, 2008 10:41 AM | Report abuse

You might also want to write an article about this site's poll. This site holds a Vice President Poll every week, so you can see what America thinks. Just visit:

They started a VP poll last week, and the results from that poll have just been posted. This poll is honest and represents all of America.

Posted by: gramens | June 6, 2008 10:43 AM | Report abuse

Yeah,Woodbridge, when it comes to dishonesty it sure is a one way sreet. The GOP would never consider any type of scheme that wreaks. Come on, lets understand that ugliness works both ways.

Posted by: DEA | June 6, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Keep believing that Obama supporters!

I know many women who jumped out of the Republican party to vote for a woman.

They are now Mccainiacs!

Posted by: gmcc | June 6, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

I still cannot believe it:
feminists for a candidate who has a strong record against women's rights. From the chat with Slate yesterday:

"Meghan O'Rourke: I share your puzzlement. The idea that women who care about equal rights -- let alone hard core feminists -- would switch over to McCain seems crazy to me. I do wonder whether such a cross-over would *actually* happen. I think there's been a lot of threatening rhetoric about changing over, sure. But when push comes to shove, and women start tolook at McCain's record on women's rights -- and if the media begins to write more assiduously about McCain and women -- then they may think twice.

And you're right: crossing over in anger at Obama is not very logical. There've been moments when I thought Obama could be more sensitive to gender than he has been -- more sensitive to the fact that women really warm to the notion of a female president. But compared to McCain? Come on."

Posted by: wow | June 6, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Can a die-hard Clinton supporter please explain to me what makes McCain so appealing other than "not Obama"?
Are you really willing to risk, for instance, turning over Roe vs Wade when McCain selects the next supreme court member out of some sort of misguided support of Clinton?
I believe that Clinton would have made a great president, I hope that Obama will make a great president, but I know for certain that the last thing this country needs is four years of McCain.

Posted by: please explain | June 6, 2008 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Wow, a right-wing reader in Woodbridge, Va? Do you really want to go toe to toe with corruption, abuse, unfair attack ads, shadowy funding groups? Swift boaters, Fox News, Jack Abramhoff, Cunningham, Craig, RightMarch, Washington Times, the K Street Project, 9 Billion in unaccounted petty cash in Iraq, Halliburton, Black Water, Disenfranchised Florida voters, Supreme Court handing Bush the election, False Patriotism Attacks, Growing Income gap???

Let's compare the record.

Posted by: Brad | June 6, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Anyone who voted for Hillary, then defects and votes for McCain out of spite, deserves what they get: 4 more years of the same, only this time with a decidedly anti-feminist tilt.

Come on, people. Hillary and Obama are pretty darn similar when it comes to the issues. If you thought she had the best ideas and plan for this country, then the next-best choice is clearly Obama. Any crossover to McCain is just out of anger and disappointment...which I understand,'s hoping these people cool off and start thinking rationally by November.

Posted by: cynic | June 6, 2008 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Nice one Brad! Educate yourselves people, it's not like the government is running anything anyways. CorpSA. Follow the money and you will find out who really is in charge. $6 Dollar gas, food shortages, the destruction of the middle class. Wall Street needs a real watch dog and that is not McCain.

Posted by: Matt | June 6, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse

if you were going to vote for hilary, but now you are voting for mccain then you are racist and probably sexist, no ifs ands or buts about it. You are the epitome of everything wretched and disgusting in this country.

Posted by: Mohamad | June 6, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Why is so much time and effort wasted promoting these leeching pollsters who only detract from our election process? I don't really give a rat's patoot what the pollesters dream up as important. They have one purpose and that is to perpetuate their own scam of making people turn to them for instruction. If one can't find enough info to backup their voting decisions, they probably shouldn't vote.

Pollsters, talking heads on TV, and lobbyists should all be disregarded and replaced by reading material. Politicians shy away from written communication because it can be reviewed and questioned. Polls are blameless and TV is forgotten by the next commercial. Take a month off and learn to read.

Posted by: roneida | June 6, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

If you believe this war was a mistake and that we should bring the troops home, then voting for McCain is NOT supporting our troops.

Obama has a strong record on women's rights. The next president will probably be appointing a nominee to the Supreme Court and, feminists, do you really want McCain appointing someone who DOES NOT SUPPORT ROE v. WADE?

If you are voting on issues and positions, then Obama and Clinton are nearly identical and in diametric oppostion to McCain's. Or is the fact that you don't want to vote for Obama because you are a racist? Or were you simply supporting Clinton solely because she was a woman?

Get over your anger and do the right thing. Vote for the Democratic ticket.

Posted by: catpurrson | June 6, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

I supported Senator Clinton in the primary process because her views are closer to center than those of Senator Obama. And I believed that I knew her story.

I still have concerns about Senator Obama's story and his radical-left ties. Hank De Zutter's article "What Makes Obama Run?" from 1995 in the Chicago Reader is insightful into Senator Obama's development as an activist, politician, and person, and the piece sheds light on the debate over the importance of his ties to Reverends Wright and Pfleger. The article "Obama's Radical-Left Ties Broad and Deep" by Stanley Kurtz analyzes the De Zutter's original. Everyone should read both.

Posted by: Cornelius | June 6, 2008 11:41 AM | Report abuse

My parents were strongly for Hillary Clinton. My brother and I were strongly for Barack Obama. But all four of us said, right from the beginning, that either one would be much, much better than four more years of the Republicans.

We're all on the same team now. And we'd all be on the same team if Hillary were the nominee.

The important thing is to keep John McCain away from the White House, with his extreme temper, his gifts to lobbyists, his tax cuts for the very wealthiest, and his steadfast, long-term commitment to keeping American troops in Iraq for years and years to come, regardless of the costs.

Posted by: Steve Nesich | June 6, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

It is all but obvious, save the most dimwitted, that Clinton was pandering to the lowest form of the American public, racist white trash voters.

I see we have a few on this board, good to see you representin' ... but seriously.

What is the point of getting all fired up about candidates that differ only by degrees that didn't get nominated from those that did ?

Posted by: ByeByeClintons | June 6, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

It seems really pathetic that Clinton supporters would "walk to McCain" rather than support Obama. What has Obama done to offend you? He's been far more cordial than Hillary has. The voters spoke, plain and simple. Hillary and her supporters had this belief that she was entitled to the Democratic nomination and when reality hit home, I guess it was unbearable for some. Give us a break, cool your emotions, and let rationality enter your brain again. I'm not a Democrat but McCain's devotion to the terrible invasion/occupation of Iraq is frightening and we can't have him continue that travesty. Obama shares many of Hillary's policy positions and is even clearer on the need to end the Iraq occupation and focus on the homeland again. I'm not usually one to be inspired by a politician but Obama is an exception. So, Hillary supporters, swallow your pride and think about the issues that matter.

Posted by: Justin | June 6, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

As the great Archie Bunker would say,"... vote GOP and by the way, there Carol O'Connor, stifle yourself."

Posted by: tanaS | June 6, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Here's a thought, if you are disgruntled about HRC losing the Democratic Presidential Nomination because you think women have been disenfranchised on some level, don't threaten to vote for McCain, do it! Spare us all the stupidity of your arguments against Obama, just vote for his opponent. I know you can't really believe that you are going to change someone's mind with the arguments you are making so spare us all the idiocy! The truth is that after all is said and done you are really just part of the lunatic fringe, and subject to vote on a whim and not principle. Therefore no one ever really relied on your vote from the beginning.

Posted by: Harvey | June 6, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Obama is skillful with words but a good speech on cake does not put bread on my table.

The press keeps going goo goo gaa gaa over Obama and his silver tongue. American voters need in-depth reports on his records and his agenda. The media needs to apply the same standard on him as on Bush. Obama is no baby wearing diaper and running for presidency is no beauty baby contest.

Posted by: FloridaCounts | June 6, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

I for one, am sorry your candidate lost. But if it makes you feel any better, I would have voted for her had she won.

Posted by: Franklin | June 6, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Carol O'Connor (in addition to a talented actor) was a liberal, who grew up in a liberal household. I don't like seeing his name disrespected.
People can pretend to be what they're not-- for example, Obama can pretend to be moderate, and McCain can pretend to be a "Maverick". He's a strong liberal, and he's a down the line conservative. We've seen what conservative leadership has done to our country. The choice is not hard.

Posted by: actor not his character | June 6, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

I have a message for all you angry female Hillary supporters who want to vote for John McCain: PLEASE DO. DO NOT vote for Obama. Apparently, you practice that 'cut off my nose to spite my face' philosophy and I for one, want to help you. You became a democrat in the first place because you did not feel like the republican polices were beneficial to you but none of that matters now because you hate Obama so much. Apparently, things like healthcare, jobs and reasonable gas prices do not mean anything to you anymore so please VOTE for McCain. I'll even suspend my donations to the Obama campaign this month and contribute to John McCain's campaign to help you out. I know that punishing Obama is more important than 'stupid' economic issues so please vote for McCain. I know you wont be happy until you lose you jobs to overseas markets, have to pay $10 dollars per gallon at the pump and are no longer covered under any insurance policy, all in the name of punishing Obama, so please vote for McCain. Let me know what I can do to help punish this 'Obama', who will go on to future successes, whether he wins or not. PLEASE LETS PUNISH OURSELVES BY PUNISHING OBAMA AND VOTE FOR MCCAIN. I can't wait (ah,ah)!!!

Posted by: Page | June 6, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Okay, people. This irrelevant personal attack stuff is what Obama rejects. I hate to see Obama supporters attacking other people, groups or opinions. He is a uniter, and if you've read his Audacity of Hope book you will understand that his motive is finding something for everyone, and the art of the compromise. The other party prefers to take away peoples rights and then ridicule them for objecting. If we are interested in uniting our country, we will start with changing how we talk to one another. A good place to start is right here.

Posted by: Peaceman | June 6, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

Bush's approval ratings are at historic lows, and many are calling for impeachment. In hindsight, many feel differently about the war though they supported or enabled it in the beginning when Bush was pushing the war, saying we were threatened by IRAQ. Most knew we were not.

Now that we have McCain saying that IRAN is threatening us and pushing for war, what will we do? If this country does not have the wisdom to elect Obama, perhaps it deserves a continuation of the myriad of problems we are facing because we elected Bush, twice.

I don't think Clinton supporters can stomach McCain, even with the disappointment of losing the nomination. Don't believe the polls.

Posted by: Brian | June 6, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Four words for those Hillary supporters who would rather vote for McCain than Obama: "More Right Wing Judges". Obama doesn't thrill me, but the GOP candidate could be Jesus Christ himself and I wouldn't vote for him just because of the judgeship question.

Posted by: Mike | June 6, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Obama supporters, you go right ahead and keep believing that those "angry women" and "red necks" will come around in November and vote for the spare change candidate.

Keep being disrespectful. Keep playing the race card. Keep up the smug and superior behavior. Keep closing your eyes to Obama's flaws. Keep trashing Clinton. Keep trashing McCain. Keep posting those formulaic comments that begin, "I'm a 72 year old, white woman." Keep drinking that Kool Aid.

And keep your violence and your anger and your disappointment under control in November when you don't get your way.

Posted by: Lynn | June 6, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse got a better idea? McCain?

Posted by: cynic | June 6, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Lead, follow, or get out of the way please. Our common economic, human, transportation, political, technologic, and every other kind of infrastructure is falling apart. We need to pull together. The Republicans had at least 4 years of control over all three branches of government and did nothing for the common good. Developing countries are leapfrogging us because they have learned from our mistakes. Something we haven't shown a capacity to do. Europe is enjoying the stability that comes with a strong infrastructure foundation. We are arguing about petty things. Bush and McCain are fiddling. We need Democratic control. Please stop the rhetoric and do something constructive.

Posted by: IndianaJerry | June 6, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Being a supporter of Sen. Clinton does not mean I have to follow whatever candidate the DNC pushes. It's my vote, my choice. It's not a vote against Sen. Obama, but a vote AGAINST THE DNC who FUBAR the nominating process.
Sen. McCain isn't scary to me, hell his own RNC tried their hardest for him not to be their candidate.

Posted by: NanFan | June 6, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

NanFran- Are you FOR anything? Your logic is a bit strange. The RNC cut the Michigan and Florida delegates in half too.

Posted by: IndianaJerry | June 6, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Can a die-hard Clinton supporter please explain to me what makes McCain so appealing other than "not Obama"?
Are you really willing to risk, for instance, turning over Roe vs Wade when McCain selects the next supreme court member out of some sort of misguided support of Clinton?
I believe that Clinton would have made a great president, I hope that Obama will make a great president, but I know for certain that the last thing this country needs is four years of McCain.

McCain is known - Obama is the unknown.
With McCain - Roe v Wade will not change. It will remain intact. Not even a remote risk. We know that Clinton would be a great president. We do not hope that she would. The last thing that this country needs is a president who will make our country unsafe. McCain will see to it that we are not at risk.

I have already changed my affiliation from Democrat to undecided. Maryland doesn't give the option to choose independent. I do not want to be affiliated with the new Obamocrat party. Hillary IS the best candidate for president.

McCain 2008

Posted by: di54 | June 6, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Justin
What has Obama done to offend you?
Posted by: ByeByeClintons
It is all but obvious, save the most dimwitted, that Clinton was pandering to the lowest form of the American public, racist white trash voters.
This is insulting and has not stopped since the beginning of the primaries.
I will no longer be associated with such blatant disrespect.

Thank you Lynn!

Say NO to disrespect - Say NO to arrogance - Say NO to Obama

Posted by: di54 | June 6, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

What has Obama done to offend?

Ask Lawrence Wright, his 20-year spiritual mentor.

Obama's failure is certain.

All that remains to be seen is whether it happens in 2008 or 2012.

To placate his get-out-of-Iraq-now supporters he will have to do just that: scram out fast and leave Iraq to bloody chaos.

That will pin him with a shamer-of-America label and will doom him politically.

But - poor wretch! - what is the alternative? Stay in Iraq and completely disillusion all the brain-dead folk who have voted him into office.

Ahem ! Some choice.

Next problem: the economy.

To please his followers he will have to spend spend spend, in a dire econoimc situation.

That will send the economy into a deep deep mess of overspending and deficit.

But if he doesn't - again, he loses his supporters.

So talk-your-way-out boy Obama has had it.

All Hillary has to do is keep cool and wait for 2012.

There is a short-term way of analysing things and a longterm way. I am opting for the latter.

Posted by: Ganpat Ram | June 6, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

I was a double crossover voter in the 2000 election. I knew Bush would be the type of "leader" that he has become so I switched primaries to vote for McCain in 1999 (legally, of course). It didn't do a bit of good nor did my vote for Gore that November. I wonder, what do those who made the threat to vote for Gore think now in the face of the Bush years? Is McCain still a strong candidate in their minds? I once liked McCain but I watched him change for the worse over the past seven years and I could never vote for him again. Likewise (and to show that I am no Kool-Aid drinker), I liked Lieberman at one time but I watched him change for the worse and I have lost all respect for him. If Obama wins in November and McCain and Lieberman shift their beliefs yet again, then it will be clear to me that they are sycophants that blow where the political wind takes them. I don't want elected leaders like that. Compromise is one thing but this type of change is a sign of someone who cannot be trusted.

Posted by: mattr | June 6, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

are any statistics of those who were Bradley supporters who crossed over to support Nader when Democrats picked Al Gore, then a corporation friendly, Republican-light candidate?

Posted by: against the DLC | June 6, 2008 2:12 PM | Report abuse

No, Mohamad...not racist, or sexist, just deeply disappointed and a bit angry at the treatment we feel Hillary received at the hands of the press. I have gotten to the point where I can't stand the word "liberal" and I probably am one!

Posted by: drcl | June 6, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

Can a die-hard Clinton supporter please explain to me what makes McCain so appealing other than "not Obama"?
Are you really willing to risk, for instance, turning over Roe vs Wade when McCain selects the next supreme court member out of some sort of misguided support of Clinton?
First..not every woman supports abortion and Roe Vs Wade will be overturned sometime in the future. It is unconstitutional ruling. Having said that..Clinton women supporters are right to ask themselves to support Obama or McCain. It is their choice. Clinton supporters are welcome to join the McCain camp. But it is entirely their choice. It is not always the issues that drive the support. In fact, Clinton and Obama policies are almost identical. Everyone supported their candidates because they liked certain qualities in them not just on issues.

Posted by: VirginiaGuy | June 6, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

I would vote for experience. Obama is a product of the Chicago Democratic machine and the machine has done a fine job getting him the nomination. I doubt seriously if he is up the pressure of being Commander in Chief. He talks a great game but can he deliver? I doubt it.

Posted by: RonNV | June 6, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

Pollsters...pollsters..pollsters...did they every predict the right way? Why do people believe other than every talking head (Chris Mathews leads the pack) can put spin on their candidate. Anyways, we will have to wait at least one month to see how the polls move. If Obama starts pulling ahead of McCain, that is a good sign for him. But if both are still neck-to-neck, this might tilt over to McCain. Obama has to pull ahead in the next month else it shows the voters are still not taking him at this word. McCain can always attract the Clinton supporters.

Posted by: VirginiaGuy | June 6, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

I would vote for experience. Obama is a product of the Chicago Democratic machine and the machine has done a fine job getting him the nomination. I doubt seriously if he is up the pressure of being Commander in Chief. He talks a great game but can he deliver? I doubt it.


If he was able to, as "a product of the Chicago Democratic machine," defeat the well-established Clinton machine that dominated the party for so long and actually ran the COUNTRY for eight years, what makes you think he's not up to the pressure of being Commander in Chief? He beat the best.

Posted by: freeofmsg | June 6, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Next, we should talk about how many Republicans are planning to vote for Obama. McCain is a worthless excuse for a candidate. Even Republicans know we can't keep going the way we're going.

Obama 2008

Posted by: DLW | June 6, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

A commentator on NPR yesterday invoked Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, who divided the grieving process into 5 stages. Sen. Clinton's fans are absolutely entitled to their grief, and right now they're at stage one. Let them have their anger.

Posted by: Lonely Pedant | June 6, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Hi, I'm a dittohead Limbaugh listener. He told me to go online and claim to be a Clinton supporter who will now vote for McCain.
He promised me a year's supply of Oxycontin so I'm just following orders.

Posted by: dittohead | June 6, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Whoa, mule!

The WP says all Democrats who vote for McCain will have their subscriptions cancelled!

So there!

Posted by: DaTourist | June 6, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

"Obama has a strong record on women's rights."

Obama has a strong record on something? I thought he had a bunch of "present" votes on women's issues.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 6, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Whoa, mule!

The WP knows everything and says Hillarycrats will not and cannot possibly vote for McCain!

Oyez! Oyez! Oyez!

Posted by: DaTourist | June 6, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Well, Hillary Clinton is now the conservative face of the Democrats, and conservative or moderate Democrats could very plausibly vote for Captain John McCain (USN, Ret.), a black shoe Navy man not entirely unlike plain shoe Democrats.

Posted by: DaTourist | June 6, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

I've voted Republican every time since 1988. But I had to step away from the kool-aid. The reality is, if you're for the type of government conservatives say they are government, less intervention in foreign affairs, no nation-state building, and fiscal restraint...these Republicans have been the worst ever. They've worn out the military and pursued a needless conflict. The only thing they've done well is reduce taxes on the highest wage earners, and regulation on business financials. The result is, we've seen scandal after scandal where businesses have cheated their workers--and the general public. Now Hillary supporters want to move over to McCain? That would rightfully get Hillary herself upset. If those supporting Hillary move to McCain, you'll get exactly what you deserve...which is more of the above "Republican" traits.

Obama says he's going to spend a lot of money, and by gosh, I believe him. At least it would be here for American citizens, vs Iraqis who take our money (for doing nothing), then try to kill American servicepersons.

It's time to build roads to nowhere in America, vs building them in Iraq.

Posted by: pga6 | June 6, 2008 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Whoa, mule!

The WP sez that Hillarycrats will roll over and submit to the Obamaniac bullies without so much as a whimper, much less a bang.

Does the WP know something about moderate Democrats moderate Democrats don't know? Maybe! The WP knows everything!

Posted by: DaTourist | June 6, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

There is not, nor has there ever been, a Clinton "machine". Bill ran as an outsider against the extreme left-wing that since 1968 has made up the core of the activist Democratic party machinery. This wing resented much of the 8 years Bill was in charge. Most of the more moderate elements of the party have been pushed aside since 2000. If Hillary supporters want to show their displeasure, they should become involved with the Democratic Leadership Conference, and replace Howard Dean and the rest of anti-Hillary party leadership. Harold Ford for chairman!

Posted by: Herodotus | June 6, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Obamaniacs may have their mouths stuck on the big Iranian water pipes, but the WP's got its collective mouth stuck on the Poll!

Obama sucks Kools and WP editors suck polls!

Yes, they do both suck a lot!

Posted by: DaTourist | June 6, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Any true Republican will vote for Bob Barr on the Libertarian ticket. He's a true knukel dragging, Coolaid drinking, wingnut. Dems should help him get on the ballot in every state and finance him like the Hypublicrits do Nader.

Posted by: Go Wingnuts! | June 6, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Hillary did all she possibly could to save the Democrats from Obama, but the DNC had already stack the rules in Obama's favor, so that an affirmative active candidate had to be nominated no matter how many contested elections Hillary won.

It's too late to save the Democrats from Obama, but it might not be too late for Hillary in 2012 if she does not get stuck too close to the Obama defeat in 2008.

Let Hillary lay low in Election 2008, and Hillary can graciously pick up the shattered pieces on November 5, 2008.

Posted by: DaTourist | June 6, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Hillary has nothing to prove in Election 2008.

Let Obama win, or go back to Chicago and shut up.

Get humping, Obama! No excuses! No alibis!

Posted by: DaTourist | June 6, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

All PATRIOTIC AMERICANS must unite with Obama to put and end to our national nightmare. We must have no more regimes who answer "SO" in responding to the will of the people. We must bring back the constitution!

Posted by: Goast of Thomas Payne | June 6, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

It is all but obvious, save the most dimwitted, that Clinton was pandering to the lowest form of the American public, racist white trash voters.I see we have a few on this board, good to see you representin' ... but seriously.
Posted by: ByeByeClintons | June 6, 2008 11:48 AM ******* YOU are a perfect example of a brainwashed bamabot. Simply because I won't vote for a man who has manufactured his whole life & CLAIMS to be halfwhite/halfblack (50%white, 43.75%ARAB, in the world this kind of heritage turn into halfblack? yes I guess I'm too dimwitted to see, duh!) has radical muslim-marxist-communist Spiritual Advisors.& associates...hates our Flag, national anthem...sits for 20 yrs in a church full of screaming hate-filled, people & practicing muslims shouting "God d America & God d whitey all around him (but of course, he didn't hear any of that or did he? he kinda now remembers some lil bits of it & you call us dimwitted???)bama is the one who has dredged up the (what you call)the lowest form of the American public, racist white (don't forget the blacks now)..trash voters, let's see also all those young ones who've been living off their parents for years..who've never ever experience life..except for the college/university life that they have made up......oh yes & all those "Angry White/Black Men" who "will never vote for a woman"!......So you call me filthy names because I tell the truth about this so-called messiah of yours (why do you allow this shameful person insult Jesus?) You talk the talk can you walk the walk???? I'm here & if you don't like it tough! Just remember whenever you have nothing intelligent to say & start calling names.. that it only shows who you truly are & what you stand for....

Posted by: CarolTate2 | June 7, 2008 2:11 AM | Report abuse

PAGE WROTE:all in the name of punishing Obama, so please vote for McCain....CAROL WRITES:[GEEZ thank you so much for giving me permisson, how magnanimous of you?].......PAGE WROTE: Let me know what I can do to help punish this 'Obama', who will go on to future successes, whether he wins or not.....CAROL WRITES:[DON'T THINK SO "I will stand with the muslims if the political winds go awry" "you will never have the chance to vote for me again"]....PAGE WROTE: PLEASE LETS PUNISH OURSELVES BY PUNISHING OBAMA AND VOTE FOR MCCAIN. I can't wait (ah,ah)!!! Posted by: Page | June 6, 2008 12:12 PM..... CAROL WRITES:[geez & you bamabots call us dimwitted. Do you realize how stupid & childish you sound? typical bamabot]

Posted by: CarolTate2 | June 7, 2008 2:35 AM | Report abuse

I still cannot believe it:
feminists for a candidate who has a strong record against women's rights. From the chat with Slate yesterday:******

At least McCain won't make us wear burkas!...or kill us in the streets like bama's family!!!! Barack Hussein Muhammud Obama (50%white, 43.75%Arab, 6.25%black)

Posted by: CarolTate2 | June 7, 2008 2:41 AM | Report abuse

......Obama says he's going to spend a lot of money, and by gosh, I believe him. At least it would be here for American citizens, Posted by: pga6 | June 6, 2008 5:02 PM ******** REALLY? last time I looked he sponsored & is pushing his Global Tax bill thru congress.....this is where he gives the U.N. the right to tax Americans extra billions (mandatory not optional) of $ to feed & help ALL the people of the world. While the leaders of these countries put the billions of foreign aid we already give in their pockets & then sit in the U.N. & along with bama says its the U.S.'s fault they're starving & we should pay for it! WE HAVE NO SAY SO IN THE MATTER... But of course, bamadude is trying to hide this bill from the U.S. people...tell your congress people to send this bill to the paper shredder! Sure bama intends to spend trillions of dollars but not one red cent will be for the benefit of the American people......go read his "Bama-spend-a-rama" his proposed budget. You can find both on the net...bama can't hide these nor can he flip flop on what he supposedly meant when he wrote them up & sponsored them!....What do you think of your golden boy now.....where did all that honesty & integrity go to all of a sudden. But what do I know? I'm just an Angry dimwitted, white trash Hillary supporter.. bama throws up smoke screen after smoke screen to hide what he's really doing & who he really is & you bamabots just march in line saying Yes Master, Yes Messiah......

Posted by: CarolTate2 | June 7, 2008 3:05 AM | Report abuse

To compare cases like Bush versus McCain in 2000 with Obama versus Clinton 2008 shows a lot of either ignorance, wishful thinking or more probably, the author trying to help Obama to retain Clinton votes.

In the Bush / McCain race, there were no RACIST NOR SEXIST involved and the mass of their supporter were not fanaticized. Now, mainly thanks to the insidious campaign of Hillary, these issues even if existing from the beginning on, were blown into high gear and now, many older white people, the low educated / low income white and Latino voters do not want a black president, fanatic women are convinced that Obama and the DNC robbed Hillary from a sure victory using sexist reasons and even more important, many of the women supporting Hillary were not Democrats, but as said, simply fanatics.



Posted by: Caminito | June 12, 2008 7:01 AM | Report abuse

Correction of my post 7.01 am, last line:

P A S T !! (not "FACT" !!)


Posted by: Anonymous | June 12, 2008 7:04 AM | Report abuse

John Mc Cain, Bush, and Cheny are members of a wicked gang of neocons who have damaged the economy of this country and started unnecessary wars that cost us billions of US$ and thousands of the lives of our young and brave soldiers. They have lied to all Americans about WMD in Iraq and unfortunately got us stuck in a quaqmire with no way out in the near future.Nobody can trust or tolerate such wicked clowns for another presidential term under any circustances. The proper place for John Mc Cain is a suitable oldman house, not the White House nor even the Senate.

Posted by: SAM | June 17, 2008 7:38 AM | Report abuse

Quit dissing Chi-town. We are gods when it comes to politics. And that's not an exaggeration. In 1960 we brought 40,000 dead people to the voting booths who cast votes for JFK, giving him the presidency. Hillary never had a chance. Neither will McCain. Chicago politics rule!

Posted by: WindyCity | June 17, 2008 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Not all democrats are pro choice. I voted for Senator Hillary Clinton because she was the best candidate. Experience matters.
I agree with Lynn, di54, and the Virginia Guy.

Posted by: mmarii | June 18, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company