'cuz as Tom Jones once said, "She's a lady"

OP is more than obviously a troll. What would he be doing reading slog?

I suggest you read this piece and ponder its implications.

There was a Replublican in my caucus who was pro-Obama. He wanted to be a delegate, but I was worried he was up to some shenanigans.

After that, read this.

she just rubs people the wrong way. mostly its the great lakes twang. its like fingernails on a chalkboard to southerners.

I'm a big fan of Obama, but will support Clinton if she's the nominee, albeit with less enthusiasm. But if she starts doing stuff like this, I'll seriously rethink that.

My middle brother, who spent most of the Clinton years talking about "Slickwillie" and generally showing him to be a rank-and-file Oklahoma conservative, told me he's voting for Obama.

His wife, who is just as conservative and usually fills in the bubble next to the "R" on her ballot, also says she's all for Obama.

Even my mother, who voted for Reagan twice, both Bushes, and even Bob Dole, said she's considering Obama, if she can get over him being a Muslim. (rolls eyes)

My youngest brother is a lost cause (Giuliani 4-eva for him), but the idea that my red meat Republican family is considering voting for Obama, that just blew my mind.

And Obama only carried on county in the entire state of Oklahoma....

In covering the Virginia JJ Dinner last weekend, where both Obama and Clinton spoke, I was surprised at the number of people I talked to who said the same thing as this person — I'm for Obama; if he loses, I'm voting for McCain.

And this was at a Democratic event.

I don't really buy the "baggage" argument against HRC, but from talking to a lot of young people, early 20s and down, they really seem to actively dislike her for reasons they couldn't always explain.

i'm undecided still if it came down to mc cain and clinton. john mc cain has long been a supporter of indian country that clinton never has. his campaign to prove his conservative creds does have me worried though. however i do think that mc cain would be better for indian people though than clinton. the first clinton did a photo op at pine ridge and we all thought things were going to change...not under that clinton and certainly not under the second bush...we need a leader who understands and supports indian country and who has a lot of experience...which i feel is mc cain every time over the second clinton.

Let me see if I understand the argument here. A vote for Clinton in the primary is, in fact, a vote for Ralph Nader. Is that it?

My own mother was a Romney supporter [shudder] and now, since Romney is out, she will vote for Obama. BUT she will never ever ever, her words, vote for Hillary. I don't get it, and I lived with her long enough to know I shouldn't even try.

Obama and McCain both seem like they would have nice penises.

I see very little difference between the 3 remaining.

McCain is actually the most forthright on foreign policy.
Obama has proposed an increase of spending of 287bl, Clinton 218bl
http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=141

This means more taxes....

I do hope one of the Dems get in exposing what has become the false left/right. Hopefully then the fog lifts on this "Road to Serfdom" (google it) and we can collectively put on the brakes.

I should add that I wouldn't be surprised if I'm the exception here. I wouldn't expect all the young enthusiastic Obama supporters to line up behind Clinton, especially if she starts deploying dirty tricks as described above from here on out. Republicans seem to be more willing to hold their noses in order to support one of their own. I think you'll see them line up behind McCain after they've had their time of grumbling.

This post is very timely. I just spoke with my 86 year old Republican mother who lives in the South and voted for Bush both times. She is now, and i quote, "so proud of Obama" and she is considering voting for him. Likewise with my other conservative southern Republican relatives. They are ready for change. BUT..they vilify Hillary because of Bill. They will never get over the Clinton/Lewinski deal. And Hillary is too much of a man for them. It's weird.

For me it has to do with her sitting on the board of Walmart for six years, her corporate ties in general, and the sleazy conservative-in-liberal-clothing politics I recall from her husband's terms in office. Of course I would never vote for McCain... I guess I would hold my nose and vote for her, or go Green.

I should say: No one in my family will vote for Hillary. They all hate her. Think she's manipulative and faker than Dubya.

My late father really hated her, thought she was just using Bill and turning a blind eye to his infidelity in Arkansas because she knew he could be president and could use him to make herself president.

And a few sexist things thrown in there, too. It was Oklahoma, after all. But my father told me that before he died in *1994*.

BTW, CNN is reporting that Hillary won New Mexico.

Seriously, Erica, were you in a coma during the 90s or something?

Even I, who caucused for Hillz, realize that she is (wrongly, perhaps, but that doesn't make it less true) hated by a lot of people. All many people have seen of Obama is a few more-or-less inspiring speeches. Plus he has an approach like Norm Rice or Ron Sims - unconfrontational on racial issues. The minute he starts talking about race, he'll become the new Al Sharpton and all those Obamakids will drop him like a rock.

Why McCain?

Because of two things:

1. He's a hero. Seriously, he is.

2. They don't know how conservative he is, because the MSM hasn't told them, and compared to the ultra-radical neocons they're used to, he appears moderate. Even though he isn't.

Sad, but true.

Because I'm a moderate and I believe John McCain is the more competent politician. Because I consider myself a feminist, and as such I refuse to vote on the basis of a person's gender. Because I don't think we should base our votes on a person's spouse. Because I don't think her health care plan will work. Because I don't like that she cries when she doesn't win.


However I will probably vote for her anyway, because I value my reproductive rights much more than I mistrust and dislike Hillary. Call me ignorant and mutinous all you like. I shouldn't have to vote for someone just because they're NOT an evil gross icky Republican.

Why would someone support Obama but turn to McCain if Hillary gets the nomination? I do not know, I would vote for Hillary but certianly will not give money to her campaign or do the yard sign etc. but if it is Obama I will continue to give money to him and visually support him.

But people forget that back in 1992 and 1996 Bill Clinton did not win a clear majority of the popular vote (they were pluralities he won) AND we liked Bill not Hillary. It has nothing to do with her being a woman (I hoped and thought Ann Richardson of Texas would have been the first female president myself). She has an element that turns people off but it would help if she held political office BEFORE Bill was President...perhaps.

I saw Hillary speak at a small event a few years ago. There were maybe 200-300 people in attendance. She struck me as incredibly cold, wooden, and insincere.

ECB has this bizarre notion that people connect with Obama solely because of his policies. She completely fails to understand the nature of politics. People don't elect a policy to office, they elect a person. Obama is more personable than Hillary, obviously so. Even Hillary's supporters recognize this in him, which is why they try to discredit him on policy.

It's the wrong strategy. You can't reason with emotion, and Obama connects with people on an emotional level. He makes people feel like it's possible to overcome the challenges that we face as a nation. Whether you agree with him or not, that is extremely powerful, and is not something that should be squandered because it's Hillary's "turn", which is how it comes across when people say "8 years of Hillary, 8 of Obama".

People don't want someone cold, they don't want someone calculating. They want someone who can inspire them to believe that our nation can once again live up to its promise.

HRC supporters may roll their eyes at that kind of talk, but all it does is make you look mean and petty. People need to believe in something, and HRC offers nothing to believe in.

Crap. That should have been addressed to Jonathan (@20 above). Usually only Josh or Erica write something that 'duh.'

@11

no. it would be a vote for hillary.

Here's a great example:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8525.html

So now, despite her documented history of kowtowing to these very same corporate interests (including supporting that terrible bankruptcy bill (which she later said she was glad didn't pass - so why the fuck did she vote for it?)), we're supposed to believe she's going to take them on?

How can anyone believe her?

She's not trustworthy, she comes across like someone who will do anything to get elected.

She's repellent.

If she gets the nomination, I sincerely hope Bloomberg runs as an independent, because I really don't want to vote for McCain.

Though I would still vote for Clinton if I have to, I think for a lot of it is that Obama is someone different, someone with new ideas and a new feeling. Clinton does not bring the excitement. Since I was in Kindergarden, it has been Bush or Clinton, I am ready for someone else. If HRC had not been married to Bill, she would not be where she is, a corporate lawyer from Arkansas would not have been elected Senator (at least as a Democrat).

People around the country are looking for people that made their own way, Bush is president because daddy was president. HRC will be president because Bill was president (and a lot of people think he should get a third term).

My parents live in the redest neighborhood in the redest part of the state. I have my mom talked into voting for Obama. She also does not like Hillary.

Not so much luck with my stepdad, but he did say that he was going to avoid voting at all this time around because, "They are ALL liars".

That to me is a victory.

FACT: people don't vote on the issues.

FACT: people vote on emotions.

FACT: people vote for the candidate who makes them feel like he or she is aware of them and their problems, and who gives them a feeling of hope for the future.

This isn't new, or surprising. It's always been true. It was true in 1792, and 1980, and now. That's why Obama is surging; he is doing exactly that. That's why Clinton has had success amongst the urban working class and older white women. It's what she needs to do for other groups now. She knows this; she's trying.

But she's never going to reach people who have a strong negative attachment to the Clintons. She just isn't.

But this person is simply reacting the way EVERYONE in America, including the hard core analysts, chooses a candidate: on emotion. Your reasons are not better or more rational than hers.

The original poster of the comment you're quoting explained his position in the original comment thread, and the gist of it was that Obama strikes people as more sincere, more energetic, and as able to explain WHY he takes the positions he does even if they don't quite agree. In case you didn't see the original reply:

"First and foremost, it's because of the reason everyone seems to be tearing him down for. He's an inspirational speaker, and he genuinely seems to believe what he's saying rather than reciting talking points.

Second, it's because the policies I read on his website make sense. He (or his staffers, or whoever) breaks them down in a way that makes them easy to understand, instead of relying on politi-speak. I may not agree with all of them, but I can't say they're not well thought out.

It's also because I think he's the guy with the best shot at winning. I agree with those that say a Hillary vs. McCain general election would be a blowout, simply because her many negatives outweigh his few positives.

In an Obama vs. McCain situation, I think it would be a repeat of the Kennedy/Nixon debates. People will see a young guy with fresh ideas talking about an end to the war. They'll also see a 72-year-old guy who's more of the same, who doesn't understand where new generations of voters are coming from.

Of course, that's just my "guy who thinks he knows way more about politics than he actually does" opinion."

I support Obama. If he loses to Hillary, I'll...face a tough decision. Hillary and McCain are already using the politics of hatred and division.

That said, if (as per the URLs) Hillary wins just by seating Michigan/Florida or otherwise breaking the system to get her way, I'm either staying home or voting for McCain; if she wants to rend the party, she's not doing it with my support.

Better for a Republican to be in office for the next for years--they can clean up their own mess, as a previous Slog post points out--than to have the current, ineffective, spineless, useless branch of the DNC (hello, Congress 2007-2008) in power.

Why would people vote for McCain over Hillary? Well let's see. Hillary is corrupt as Hell (Norman Hsu, Denise Rich), has a long history of betraying progressive causes for political expediency (Voted for the Iraq war, Kyl/Lieberman, sponsored an anti-flag burning law, said that she supported torture) and brings a big ugly 250 pound piece of walking baggage in the form of her husband into the White House where he will no doubt start acting like an ex officio co president and sign more Kazakhastani uranium deals.

Perhaps the policy differences between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are minuscule, but Hillary's history of screwing people over is a lot longer than Obama's is.

Back to Hillary Clinton's vote for the war. Clinton was either a) stupid and trusted George W. Bush's trumped up WMD nonsense, in which case she's unfit to be president, b) too lazy to get off her ass and check the facts herself (she's never answered the question as to whether or not she read the full Iraq 2002 NIE, which included dissents from the Air Force, the State Department and the CIA instead saying that "she was briefed by the administration") in which case she's no better than the current lazy and unmotivated occupant of the Oval Office or c) motivated by political expediency and voted for the war because she wanted to appear "tough", as Lincoln Chafee charged. I think that this quote from Chafee says everything that needs to be said about pro-war Democrats such as Clinton and Feinstein who are now back-pedaling as fast as they can.

“I find it surprising now, in 2008, how many Democrats are running for president after shirking their constitutional duty to check and balance this president. Being wrong about sending Americans to kill and be killed, maim and be maimed, is not like making a punctuation mistake in a highway bill.

“They argue that the president duped them into war, but getting duped does not exactly recommend their leadership. Helping a rogue president start an unnecessary war should be a career-ending lapse of judgment.”

Clinton's vote on Kyl/Lieberman reveals the same problem. It is now obvious to anyone outside of the wingnut-o-sphere that the Bush administration lied about Iraq. Given five years of lies by the Bush administration why would Clinton be willing to believe the administration again about Iran? She's either a neocon hawk or she's just voting like one, and if you want a hawk as president then McCain is a far better choice than Hillary.

If by some chance Hillary Clinton gets the nomination and manages to win against John McCain I predict that the Republicans will take over Congress in 2010, that we will still be in Iraq in 2012, that none of her policies will be enacted because she won't be able to get them through a Republican Congress and that she'll gradually start triangulating and throwing people under the bus just like her husband did back in the 1990s. She'll probably remain pro-choice, that's too large of a bloc of supporters to triangulate herself away from, but that's about it.

Fnarf and "New Family" post for me. Voting for a president is voting based on how a candidate makes you feel, not where a candidate stands on the issues. Plenty of my pro-choice Republican relatives voted for George W. Bush twice, because the Democrats never fronted a Bush opponent that made them feel good or excited. Obama IS excitement.

I'm an Obama voter, but I will never understand the hatred for Hillary Clinton. During the Clinton presidency, she was the one I liked--Bill was the one who I knew was feeding me a line of bullshit, and I knew that when I voted for him, and was reminded of it every time he sold me or my interests or the country out thereafter. I knew that when I rallied to his defense against the vast right-wing conspiracy to bring his presidency down for all the wrong reasons.

Hillary Clinton seemed to be the decent one, just as smart as Bill but without his treachery, and doomed to be in his shadow because of his sleazy charisma. Though I now think she's more like him than I suspected, I don't see her as a villain. She's more of a tragic hero, who in trying to prove her toughness and experience in the job aligned herself with the same pack of Clintonian hacks, warmongers, and backstabbers who ruined his presidency. And now they're ruining her chance to actually prove that she was the better of the two Clintons.

My 4 very conservative friends have all mentioned, in separate conversations, that they at the very least respect Obama, and one even stated he (a super evangelical christian warrior) was considering voting for Obama just to see some change. He said that he realized Obama was probably to the left of Clinton, but that he just couldn't even bring himself to vote for her.

And my friends in the airforce (staunch devotees of Fox News talking points) have both mentioned that while they respect McCain as a man and soldier "he's not a true conservative." And while neither had good things to say about Clinton, they both did say that they liked Obama and he was a great speaker, but that his speeches lack policy details, etc.

But still, I've been surprised to hear ANYTHING positive about ANY democrat from these 4 individuals. And in each case they believe that Hillary is evil (which I have never understood) but they have positive things to say about Obama. It's interesting.

I was just in the coffee shop, where a young guy said he was an Obama supporter, and the older guy there said he was too, but he'd never vote for Sen Clinton.

It's strange how visceral the reaction is, actually. He said he'd definitely vote McCain if he had to choose between her and McCain.

I try not to disagree with people while I'm reading the comics, mind you.

my parent both hate hillary with the power of a 1000 white hot suns. & they have no rationale why beyond BS talking points.

if we want to win, we pick obama. but since we're democrats, we can't make the smart move.

Obama is blowing a Wurlitzer of 120 dB dog whistles -- sweet music to the ears of grassroots righties.

Farther back, the strategic Right is licking it's chops at the tsunami of disillusion and cynicism an Obama administration would foster -- clearing the landscape of progressive lifesigns, and setting the stage for a new conservative epoch.

What's not to like?

Sadly, this pretty much encapsulates Andrew Sullivan's lunatic position, too. (But he gets a pass because Dan Savage is friends with him.)

Why are so many people, like my brother (a former Capt. in the US Army whose politics are moderate-to-slightly-right-of-center, even tho he's gay) supporting Obama this election? The answer is easy...

It's not about the policy differences between Obama and Clinton, it's their approaches to governing that matter most.

Yes, Obama and Clinton are close on most policies and reasonable people can disagree about healthcare mandates, but the reality is, one governs as if she knows everything and if you disagree, you're not only wrong, but an a**hole; while the other listens to those his disagrees with, while maintaining his policy positions and liberal values in the face of those who don't share the same preconceived notions about the nation.

This should be a no-brainer for the Dems, but as others have pointed out, we're Dems and most of us have no brains.

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2008/02/conversation-that-bodes-ill-for-coming.html

It's true: Democrats have no brains, and Republicans have no souls. What a country!

Let me make a leap here and assume that someone living on the Ala./Ga. line who voted for GWB twice is white.

Let me make another proposal that most white people in the deep south are convinced - CONVINCED! - Obama is unelectable.

Is it that some people feel compelled to falsely tell us they'd vote for Barack but they wouldn't vote for Hillary in order for us to bandwagon our support for a person who they secretly believe is unelectable therefore helping the Republican cause?

I've tried to work it out over and over in my head, but I can't find veracity in a statement of support for Barack from someone who voted for GWB even once.

BTW, Lloyd Dangle's depiction of James Carville in the next to last panel is the funniest thing I've seen in ages.

If Clinton was the Dem's nominee I would be tempted to support McCain so he would be stuck cleaning up the Iraq mess and the Democrats would have another shot in four years. But she'd end up getting my vote simply because Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens is a very old man. I doubt he'll make it another four years on the bench. The next Justice needs to be appointed by a Democrat or we'll end up stuck with another young conservative like Alito or Roberts that will stay on the Court for decades.

Wow, I take my wife out to dinner for Valentine's Day and come back to find an entire post dedicated to my very first comment. How cool is that?! A few things:

To answer Jonathan's original question, yep I'm for real. As to why McCain instead of HRC, several people summed it up before me. HRC says she's for and against certain things, but it's been proven she tends to choose what's popular, not necessarily what's right.

@2 (Anonymous) - Nope, not a troll. I'm the real deal. I've been lurking for about a year, but today is the first time I've ever left a comment. Came to The Stranger because of Savage Love, stayed because I enjoyed reading the news from a different point of view. Plus I got addicted to the great arguments. Usually ECB vs. everybody else, but some other good ones too.

@31 (Beguine) - Thanks for sticking up for me when I wasn't around. I appreciate it!

my parents will both vote for obama if he is the nominee. they'll vote for mccain if clinton is the nominee. i don't know why they feel that way, but they do.

me, i'll vote for the democrat, but prefer obama.

Add me to the list of pro-Obama, pro-McCain voters. I moved to Seattle from Texas last year and voted twice for Bush. I caucused here for Obama and intend to vote for him if he gets the democratic nomination. If not, I'll be voting for McCain. Read Andrew Sullivan's blog if you want to understand why many moderate conservatives feel the same way.

Hillary will hand the election to Mccain. So sad.

@44 - Sorry to disappoint, but it's the truth. I'm a gen-u-wine Obama supporter.

You are correct in assuming that I'm white, and you are correct in assuming that A LOT of people down here think Obama's unelectable. I'd just be happy to prove them wrong. Another expectation dashed: my mom (a middle-aged white woman, up until recently Hillary's bread and butter) voted for him too.

I'm flattered that you think I'm devious enough to work out a complex plan to support the least-electable Dem just so a Republican can win. However, Georgia doesn't need my help in electing McCain. They'll probably take care of that without me.

The simple truth is that I like Obama, can't stand Hillary and consider McCain the lesser of two evils if he runs against her.

Its like a breath of fresh air, this blog. All these people who believe *all* of it.

I think I will be giving the "Stranger" a miss until all this bull is over, since either way, the same people will run the US after this election, and will run it in exactly the same way.

Alll of you. Just try not to elect another chimp. Goodbye.

I would vote for McCain if Obama won the nomination, and I'm a delegate for Hillary. Ponder that.

My entire family (inlcuding most of my extended family) once voted Republican. Since Bush and the war they have taken a turn to the left. They are excited about voting for Obama, but many have told me that they will vote McCain if he runs against Hillary.

I like Hillary and Obama, but support Obama for this reason. Too many moderates and conservatives hate Hillary. I don't get the hate - but I do see that there is one issue that keeps them from taking a second look at Hillary. For my family, the war has been the biggest issue driving them to the left. Her war vote is a big deal. Her inability to address the vote keeps it a big deal. In McCain, they see politician that is willing to work across the aisle to pass legislation he believes in, even if they don't always agree with him. I think that people that refuse to get this are the crazy, irrational, cult-like followers.

I'm surprised that this blog - it's political - has only now just received evidence that Republicans and Independents like - and vote for - Obama. This is really old news. I can see why you'd be completely baffled as to why, because you [by which I mean this blog's posters and commenters, from where I sit] don't get out much, in the sense of really wanting to know what makes people who aren't like you tick, but I'm still surprised that you didn't know this phenomenon existed. Google "republicans for obama".

Georgia Guy @47... "HRC says she's for and against certain things, but it's been proven she tends to choose what's popular, not necessarily what's right."

If this is really your problem with Hillary, why don't you have the same problem with McCain? I loved him in 2000, but he has practically sold his soul to get the Republican nomination in '08. The Straight Talk Express is a thing of the past.

Julie @ 56 - I do have the same problem with McCain. Especially since yesterday, with the way he voted regarding torture.

I don't want to vote for him, but I REALLY don't want to vote for Hillary. Who knows, though...after yesterday I may just flip a coin if it comes down to the two of them.

@57 - the torture vote was really the last straw in what I see as McCain's long, sad decline over the past few years. I really have been depressed by it -- I think has traded his principles (including, presumably, one you would think would be extremely personally important to him -- anti-torture) for the nomination.

I would have voted for him in a heartbeat in 2000 (well, maybe if Bill bradley had been the Dem nominee, I would have had a tough decision). But, even if I hated the Dem nominee in '08, there is no way I would vote for him.

I like McCain for the same reason I like Obama; both seem to genuinely feel their policies. Many Sloggers may vehemently oppose any kind of war, and thus hate McCain, but I believe he voted for the Iraq war because he is rather hawkish, and this is not a deal breaker for me... as opposed to Clinton, who claims dove to get votes. Give me a politician who has policies I disagree with but seems honest and thoughtful about them over a politician who will say anything to get elected.

And I cannot STAND Bill. Hilary's wooden and stiff personality combined with her history of riding her husband's coattails propels me towards Obama and McCain, policies or not.

Furthermore, I am a recent graduate of the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire. Obama is actually coming, in person, to our campus on Saturday. Hilary... sent her daughter on Wednesday. What message does this send about how important the voters are to the nominees? I will cast my vote for someone who actually seems to care ABOUT my vote.

PS: I find it ironic that many Sloggers are lamenting how they would have voted McCain in 2000 when he was more moderate, but has since "sold his soul" to conservative right-wingers. Yet the majority of the political rag has argued that McCain was far more conservative in the past and has since mod-ered up a bit. Curious.

@60, for me it's more a lamentation that McCain wasn't the nominee in 2000. McCain, as conservative as he is, has always been a little bit outside his own party (and that's a good thing). Could have helped before, but it's too late now. We need a total reversal of course.