NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20080320/us_time/cangopvotersspoilthedemrace

This is absolutely INFURIATING. Who the hell do these people think they are? If Democrats "crossed over" into the Republican primary season just to keep a fight between two candidates going, Republicans would scream bloody murder.

What these Republicans are doing at Limbaugh and Ingraham's bidding is not illegal. It is, however, certainly and HIGHLY unethical! The way the system is supposed to work, one party picks one candidate, the other party picks another, and then the American people choose between them. This cross-over voting is designed to keep the fighting in the Democratic Party going, to bloody both Clinton and Obama as much as possible. It is a VIOLATION of the spirit of democracy...but then again, the neocons aren't particularly interested in a true democracy, it seems. Power and the Presidency are the ultimate goals, and they won't let a little thing like secular ethics get in the way.

This only makes me more determined as a Democratic voter to defeat John McCain in November. A party that has to stoop to such reprehensible, disgusting electioneering does not deserve the White House.

MARK MY WORDS! This is a pledge, written here for everyone to see, so that if I should renege on it I may be known as a fraud and oathbreaker. I am a strong supporter of Clinton. If Obama wins the nomination, however, I will support him with just as much gusto and just as much enthusiasm as I would Clinton. I call upon ALL of my fellow Clinton supporters to join me in this promise, and indeed all of Obama's supporters. Despite our differences, we CANNOT allow the Limbaugh Republicans to corrupt our democracy like this.

1. Old News.
2. Limbaugh is a loudmouth idiot whom contributes nothing to society. Whats new?
3. Limbaugh has no ethics? Again what else is new? This is a man addicted to perscription drugs who has gone to the Caribbean to indulge in under aged prostitutes.
4. Which are you really more upset about, that he is corrupting the process, or that one of the reasons Hillary won was becauses Republicans voted for her because they can kick her teeth in come November?

1. Old News.
2. Limbaugh is a loudmouth idiot whom contributes nothing to society. Whats new?
3. Which are you really more upset about, that he made the race last longer, or that one of the reasons Hillary won was becauses Republicans voted for her because they can kick her teeth in come November?

1.) I knew of it before, but now it appears that they are having more than a negligible effect on our race.
2.) Oh he contributes something, all right. But it is not a positive contribution.
3.) Arrogance! Every poll I have seen lately shows Clinton as more competitive against McCain than Obama.

This is PRECISELY what the Republicans want. They want us at each others' throats. Divided, we are weakened and McCain wins.

1. Old News.
2. Limbaugh is a loudmouth idiot whom contributes nothing to society. Whats new?
3. Limbaugh has no ethics? Again what else is new? This is a man addicted to perscription drugs and who has gone to the Caribbean to ingulge in under aged prostitutes.
4. Which are you really more upset about, that he is corrupting the process, or that one of the reasons Hillary won was becauses Republicans voted for her because they can kick her teeth in come November?

Bingo.

Aside from the perscription drug abuse - that can happen to anyone. :p And I hadn't heard he was a fan of the prostitutes, but meh.

Nevertheless, I don't regret voting for Hillary. :p

How many people do you think went out and voted for a democrat?

As is, it would be a small percentage of his followers. Not close enough to sway anything, just make the republicans look bad.

3.) Arrogance! Every poll I have seen lately shows Clinton as more competitive against McCain than Obama.


Then you are looking at polls from the clinton campaign, are lying, or havent looked at a poll in a long time.


Im sorry if I find your anger hard to take at face value considering some of the things youve said in the past.


Anyway, on point. Yes, it is irritating. But there really is nothing that can be done.

3.) Arrogance! Every poll I have seen lately shows Clinton as more competitive against McCain than Obama.

By a point or so...

This is PRECISELY what the Republicans want. They want us at each others' throats. Divided, we are weakened and McCain wins.

This is a problem? :confused:

Then you are looking at polls from the clinton campaign, are lying, or havent looked at a poll in a long time.


Im sorry if I find your anger hard to take at face value considering some of the things youve said in the past.


Anyway, on point. Yes, it is irritating. But there really is nothing that can be done.

Do you mean to suggest that I would rather have a President McCain than a President Obama?

What these Republicans are doing at Limbaugh and Ingraham's bidding is not illegal. It is, however, certainly and HIGHLY unethical! The way the system is supposed to work, one party picks one candidate, the other party picks another, and then the American people choose between them.
First of all, I don't understand why the primary system is administered by the government at all. Let the parties run their nominations however they want.

That said, given how the system works, how is having republican voters vote in open primaries unethical? If they're open primaries, republicans are supposed to be able to vote. That's how the system is designed, so one imagines that's how the system is supposed to work.

Do you mean to suggest that I would rather have a President McCain than a President Obama?

I just dont know what your motives are.


But you know what, I guess Ill take your anger to be the rightous anger it seems.


And frankly, if it means having someone as persistant as you on my side come November, I think Im ok with that;)

I just dont know what your motives are.


But you know what, I guess Ill take your anger to be the rightous anger it seems.


And frankly, if it means having someone as persistant as you on my side come November, I think Im ok with that;)

If Clinton loses and Obama wins, then we will be voting together in the November election. I cannot stand the thought of another Republican...any Republican, at this point...becoming President. It repulses me on a level too visceral to describe on a public forum.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20080320/us_time/cangopvotersspoilthedemrace

This is absolutely INFURIATING. Who the hell do these people think they are? If Democrats "crossed over" into the Republican primary season just to keep a fight between two candidates going, Republicans would scream bloody murder.

What these Republicans are doing at Limbaugh and Ingraham's bidding is not illegal. It is, however, certainly and HIGHLY unethical! The way the system is supposed to work, one party picks one candidate, the other party picks another, and then the American people choose between them. This cross-over voting is designed to keep the fighting in the Democratic Party going, to bloody both Clinton and Obama as much as possible. It is a VIOLATION of the spirit of democracy...but then again, the neocons aren't particularly interested in a true democracy, it seems. Power and the Presidency are the ultimate goals, and they won't let a little thing like secular ethics get in the way.

This only makes me more determined as a Democratic voter to defeat John McCain in November. A party that has to stoop to such reprehensible, disgusting electioneering does not deserve the White House.

MARK MY WORDS! This is a pledge, written here for everyone to see, so that if I should renege on it I may be known as a fraud and oathbreaker. I am a strong supporter of Clinton. If Obama wins the nomination, however, I will support him with just as much gusto and just as much enthusiasm as I would Clinton. I call upon ALL of my fellow Clinton supporters to join me in this promise, and indeed all of Obama's supporters. Despite our differences, we CANNOT allow the Limbaugh Republicans to corrupt our democracy like this.

I've heard Democrats I work and associate with encouraging others to do the same (register Republican, and vote for the weakest candidate they think can win the nomination). It's probably been done a lot by both sides, it's just now there's a (semi) celebrity advocating it.

I've heard Democrats I work and associate with encouraging others to do the same (register Republican, and vote for the weakest candidate they think can win the nomination). It's probably been done a lot by both sides, it's just now there's a (semi) celebrity advocating it.

My dad did it. He encouraged me to do it but I felt it best not to. He is however registered as an independent, so does that make a difference? He just going for the "vote the buggers out" approach and so went and voted for the weakest Republican candidate in November with a shot at the nomination (voted for Rommeny)

Quit your bitching, it's not like the Democrats hasve a clean slate when it comes to electiopn fraud. Democrats engaged in voter fraud and intimidation in the 2004 election, possibly more so than their Republican counterparts, and they still lost. This nation has a not so proud history of this sort of thing. Why I seem to remember an election where there were more ballots counted in a state than there were registered voters.

All this does is expose a terrible flaw in democracy and republics. What we need, now more than ever, is a meritocracy. *nod*

"Politician wants his side to win, hopes also for a good position in the new government due to his influence in this shocker!"

This is absolutely INFURIATING. Who the hell do these people think they are? If Democrats "crossed over" into the Republican primary season just to keep a fight between two candidates going, Republicans would scream bloody murder.


Happens all the time. to both sides. primary years see alot of switching of political affiliation. a friend of mine who happens to stand strongly with the democrats is a registered republican for now. its all part of the game we in America tend to play every 4 years called a presidential election. (and a minor game every two years)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20080320/us_time/cangopvotersspoilthedemrace

This is absolutely INFURIATING. Who the hell do these people think they are? If Democrats "crossed over" into the Republican primary season just to keep a fight between two candidates going, Republicans would scream bloody murder.

What these Republicans are doing at Limbaugh and Ingraham's bidding is not illegal. It is, however, certainly and HIGHLY unethical! The way the system is supposed to work, one party picks one candidate, the other party picks another, and then the American people choose between them. This cross-over voting is designed to keep the fighting in the Democratic Party going, to bloody both Clinton and Obama as much as possible. It is a VIOLATION of the spirit of democracy...but then again, the neocons aren't particularly interested in a true democracy, it seems. Power and the Presidency are the ultimate goals, and they won't let a little thing like secular ethics get in the way.

This only makes me more determined as a Democratic voter to defeat John McCain in November. A party that has to stoop to such reprehensible, disgusting electioneering does not deserve the White House.

MARK MY WORDS! This is a pledge, written here for everyone to see, so that if I should renege on it I may be known as a fraud and oathbreaker. I am a strong supporter of Clinton. If Obama wins the nomination, however, I will support him with just as much gusto and just as much enthusiasm as I would Clinton. I call upon ALL of my fellow Clinton supporters to join me in this promise, and indeed all of Obama's supporters. Despite our differences, we CANNOT allow the Limbaugh Republicans to corrupt our democracy like this.

It's our differences that force me not to join in that promise, however much I might find Rush Limbaugh's ideology and commitment to movement conservatism, as well as conservatism in general, repellant. Having looked over my posts from the last five years, I've noted that I've consistently been against Hillary, not because she's a woman or because she's inexperienced, but because I thought she represented the most craven constituency within the Democratic Party: the part that desired nothing more than a continuance of political power, preferably with themselves in charge of whatever the electorate made of the Democratic Party. And you know what? This election, even more than the vote for Iraq, the advisory vote for Iran, or the bankruptcy reform bill have convinced me that I was absolutely right in my suspicions. Clinton has been willing to stoop to the worst form of race baiting, gender baiting, and insults to my intelligence in order to win the nomination for herself, all with the promise that she'd turn these attack-dog antics on Republicans.

Well, you know what? I don't really want to have the biggest attack dog on our side. I don't want to win a 15-round slugfest with Rush Limbaugh. I want clean hands. I want to be able to say, no matter what the outcome, that I was honorable, win or lose, in my conduct, because in the end that's what my liberalism and sense of Christianity commits me to value more than anything else. If that makes me Livius at the end of Fall of the Roman Empire, so be it. I cannot make that promise. I do sincerely wish a Democrat wins in November, and I do sincerely hope that we can undo the damage the Bush administration has done to this nation. But there are Rubicons I will not cross to accomplish that goal, and one of them is that I can no longer in good conscience support Hillary Clinton for the office of President.

Rush's actions are partially justified. Democrats have done this, too, but without the public backing of radio demogogues.

Witness the 1996 Washington Gubernatorial Election. Gary Locke, the consensus Democrat nominee, won the election against batshit-insane conservative Republican Ellen Craswell (wiki link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellen_Craswell) to see her positions on some issues that support my characterization of her). Craswell became the nominee for the GOP because back then Washington had a blanket primary, where you didn't even have to register for any party. The Primary ballot had everyone's name on it.

Some Democrats knew that Locke was sure to win against a nutjob like Craswell, so they voted their ballots for Craswell in the primary to ensure that Locke would face the much weaker Craswell (instead of more moderate Republican Dale Foreman) in November.

I'm not sure that's what an election should be, so I denounce Rush's urge for Republicans to do what they did, but I can't say it hasn't been done by Democrats before.

However, Washington's elections were legally changed to do away with the blanket primary, so that problem was largely solved by having to register with a party to beable to vote in its primary.

It seems childish, though to abandon your principles just to set up a more winnable fight for your man. If you can't win the election agaisnt whoever actual party members and adherents vote for, then the problem is with your candidate, not his opponent. Rush can't stomach any support of McCain, so he'd rather mock-support Hillary just to get McCain elected -- a man Rush can't even stand. Whither principles?

Quit your bitching, it's not like the Democrats hasve a clean slate when it comes to electiopn fraud. Democrats engaged in voter fraud and intimidation in the 2004 election, possibly more so than their Republican counterparts, and they still lost. This nation has a not so proud history of this sort of thing. Why I seem to remember an election where there were more ballots counted in a state than there were registered voters.

All this does is expose a terrible flaw in democracy and republics. What we need, now more than ever, is a meritocracy. *nod*

No, they didn't.

There was a small amount of voter fraud, where people were highered to sign up X number of voters and padded the lists, but when they registered Mary Poppins and Mickey Mouse, those Disney characters never showed up to vote.

To claim that Democrats engaged in election fraud, like sending out junk mail and using the lack of a response to get those people kicked off the voter roles, at anywhere near the same level as Republicans is absurd. It's like calling someone a Nazi for liking Wagner.

It is despicable that republicans would stoop to the same level as democrats.
It is even worse that they seem to be better at it.
ROFLMAO!!!

The best part is - Rush does not even support McCain. He's just doing it to piss off the wacko liberals - and he's doing a find job of it.

I'm starting to like him.

It is despicable that republicans would stoop to the same level as democrats.It is even worse that they seem to be better at it.
ROFLMAO!!!

The best part is - Rush does not even support McCain. He's just doing it to piss off the wacko liberals - and he's doing a find job of it.

I'm starting to like him.

OK, hotshot. When you're done laughing like a hyena at your perceived cleverness, PROVE -- prove OBJECTIVELY AND DEFINITEVELY -- that the Democrats have EVER done this. Otherwise, STFU. I only wish there were someway to charge Limbaugh with interfering with an election so I could have the pleasure of seeing his fat ass thrown in jail.

It's all your opinion and if you want to play it that way, fine. I think you calling a honest reputable person a derogatory name is unconscionable

I only wish there were someway to charge Limbaugh with interfering with an election so I could have the pleasure of seeing his fat ass thrown in jail.

Why? It would give him attention he doesn't deserve.

OK, hotshot. When you're done laughing like a hyena at your perceived cleverness, PROVE -- prove OBJECTIVELY AND DEFINITEVELY -- that the Democrats have EVER done this. Otherwise, STFU. I only wish there were someway to charge Limbaugh with interfering with an election so I could have the pleasure of seeing his fat ass thrown in jail.

Oh my. You live the example!

I should retract my folly. The democrats are the party of virtue and would never stoop to such lows...

(and I said it with a straight face! bwa hahahahahah!)

Michael Moore with interfering with an election so I could have the pleasure of seeing his fat ass thrown in jail.

I have to completely agree with you.

I have to completely agree with you.

ROFLMAO!

It is, however, certainly and HIGHLY unethical!
Explain to me how this is unethical. No one's breaking any rules. I don't understand why you're upset.

I have to completely agree with you.

Screw you. And Mystic Skeptic. I don't listen to Michael Moore. If you're taking your cues from Rush Limbaugh, you have done nothing but prove that you are incapable of thinking for yourself, in which case I pity you. Enjoy your long-overdue exile on my ignore list.

Screw you. And Mystic Skeptic. I don't listen to Michael Moore. If you're taking your cues from Rush Limbaugh, you have done nothing but prove that you are incapable of thinking for yourself, in which case I pity you. Enjoy your long-overdue exile on my ignore list.

OMG! That's too funny!

I find it kind of hard to get outraged over an election tactic that's been done probably forever.

OK, hotshot. When you're done laughing like a hyena at your perceived cleverness, PROVE -- prove OBJECTIVELY AND DEFINITEVELY -- that the Democrats have EVER done this. Otherwise, STFU. I only wish there were someway to charge Limbaugh with interfering with an election so I could have the pleasure of seeing his fat ass thrown in jail.

Uh...not that I want to agree with anything Rush has to say about 90% of the time, but did you not see my earlier post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13543498&postcount=18)?

It's an interesting topic about ... the American election.

We already have a thread about ... the American election.

Those who made relevant points, feel free to re-post them there. Those who were just spamming, go away.

Maineiacs, now that you have adjusted your Ignore list, there should be no more flaming on your part, right? Kontor, cut out the flamebait.