Advertising

The Seattle Times Company

NWjobs | NWautos | NWhomes | NWsource | Free Classifieds | seattletimes.com

The Seattle Times

Politics & Government


Our network sites seattletimes.com | Advanced

Postman on Politics

Chief political reporter David Postman explores state, regional and national politics.

E-mail| About the blog | From the archive| RSS feeds Subscribe | Blog Home

May 9, 2008 11:37 AM

Why some Clinton voters may not back Obama come fall

Posted by David Postman

I wondered yesterday why so many Hillary Clinton supporters in Indiana and North Carolina said they wouldn’t vote for Barack Obama if he were the nominee. What I really wondered was if race was a factor in that.

Well Jed Lewison has a pretty good explanation of the phenomenon. The one-time aide to Sen. Maria Cantwell pushed himself away from the Vegas poker tables long enough to send me an explanation of the role of the “McCain Meddlers.”

From the exit poll, 1 in 8 Indiana Clinton voters and 1 in 6 North Carolina Indiana voters will not vote for Clinton even if she wins the nomination. These are the “McCain meddlers.”

If you factor them out (also subtracting the McCain meddlers who supported Obama), Obama wins Indiana by 3 and North Carolina by 22.

So what Lewison is saying is that no one should draw too much from the fact that Clinton supporters say they won’t back Obama, because a chunk of them aren’t really Democratic supporters.
And as he writes at The Jed Report:

By the books, there's no taking away Clinton's Indiana victory, but it is worth remember that it was only made possible by voters who have no intention of voting for a Democrat in the fall.

He explains his methodology here.

Digg Digg | Newsvine Newsvine

Submit a comment

*Required Field



Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Posted by usedtobeademocrat

3:54 PM, May 09, 2008

As a lifelong Democrat and Clinton supporter, I don't buy it. Sure there was Operation Chaos and the McCain Meddlers -- any open primary is going to have that kind of effect (and Democrats have done the same thing in open primaries and voted for a Republican they had no intention of supporting later).

I won't vote for Obama because I have serious reservations regarding both his character and experience. For me, it's another George W Bush gamble. I think Obama should have spent more time in the Senate and built a list of accomplishments before attempting a presidential run. He's just too much of a gamble.

Posted by Greg Rodriguez

5:51 PM, May 09, 2008

As an avid Clinton supporter, and national delegate, I believe these numbers will come down. I remember the Dean people in 2004 saying they wouldn't vote for Kerry I don't know one that didn't.

I will support Obama wholeheartedly if he becomes our nominee. He is qualified and capable-just was not my forst choice. Any Democrat who thinks voting for Mc Cain is safer might as well work to ammend the constitution and give Bush another term.

Posted by JimD

6:27 PM, May 09, 2008

That's one probable component among many others, including those who simply believe Clinton and McCain - in that order - would make better Presidents than Obama.
I still think you're looking for a simple, single explanation to a complex situation, Postman. And you probably won't find one in the network sponsored exit polling of these activists who vote in the primary.
The rubber meets the road in November when the general masses have to decide who THEY want at that time after everything that will occur between now and then.
Democratic loyalists and the newly-minted youth vote will certainly vote Obama. But we've screwed ourselves with a candidate the majority public won't buy - yet again - if we don't significantly increase Obama's base of support to include Clinton's hard-won (yes) white middle-class. Let's hope enough of them can be convinced to vote for the most liberal and freshman senator with no significant legislative accomplishment under his belt, with an apparent disdain for folks who embrace guns, religion and traditional patriotism, and flipped five times on his Wright response before finding a version that stopped the bleeding.... And there's much more coming in the months ahead that won't have a thing to do with his race.
McGovern, Hart, Gore, Kerry... Isn't one definition of insanity the act of repeating the same mistake over and over while expecting a different result, or something to that affect?

Posted by Jake

8:14 AM, May 10, 2008

Postman,
"What I really wondered was if race was a factor in that."

This is the reason BO will never be elected. The press would never be able to ask him a pointed question without be labeled a racist.

Let anyone ask a question about BO and out comes the race card.

He will never bring this country together when he speaks the race card daily.

Posted by James

11:39 AM, May 10, 2008

So what Lewison is saying is that no one should draw too much from the fact that Clinton supporters say they won’t back Obama, because a chunk of them aren’t really Democratic supporters.
And as he writes at The Jed Report:

---------------------------------------

I think it's very difficult to draw too many conclusions about how Clinton supporters will vote in the national election based on exit poll data from Indiana and NC. Ohio, for example, is not Indiana and the demographics there include a large chunk of so-called Reagan Democrats who voted for Clinton but who may not be so eager to support Obama for a variety of reasons. Another issue may be Clinton supporters turned off by her treatment in the press and by Obama zealots. This isn't to say they'll vote for McCain, but only that they may not vote. I don't think anyone has a clear understanding of this yet, despite the army of democratic strategists (how could there be so many???) who argue otherwise.

Posted by JimD

1:07 PM, May 10, 2008

jake,
Are you talkiing about the same Barack Obama who's running for president? Except for his big race speech a few weeks ago in response to Rev Wright, he rarely - if ever - speaks of race. Reporters ask him questions daily, which he answers. He's NEVER pulled the "race card" and simply doesn't talk about race unless someone else brings it up - which is rare except in reference to provacations from the Hillary campaign.
I just don't see any evidence to support your accusation that he uses race to avoid answering questions. It simply isn't true.

Posted by JimD

1:29 PM, May 10, 2008

James wrote:"...Another issue may be Clinton supporters turned off ... by Obama zealots..."
-
I think you nailed a big problem. Many view it as irrational exuberance over his style, manner and transformational quality. Many centrists aren't as willing to take the same leap of faith in the absence of more conventional qualifications, that so many of his supporters have embraced.
And the more they attack Clinton supporters for not sharing this Beatlemania enthusiasm, the more they reinforce the notion that Obama's support is more infatuation than sound political judgement.
Obama needs Clinton supporters to win in November. And I fear many of his supporters hurt that end by making too shallow an argument in too demeaning a manner. Tell us what he's accomplished, what his specific proposals are and how he intends to achieve them. Skip what a good guy and how inspirational he is - we already get that and most of America rightly believes it's not enough to be POTUS - even if he is black.

Posted by jake

3:44 PM, May 10, 2008

JimD,
Postman brings up the race card and too many of his followers bring up the race card. He gives a code word every time he opens his mouth. Terrorist back him when McCain brought it up all hell breaks lose.
Time for you to open your ears and eyes.
The media made him into something he isn't because of guilt.
Hillary has more balls then he.

Posted by JimD

12:16 AM, May 11, 2008

Jake wrote: "He gives a code word every time he opens his mouth."
Such as? Give just one example.

Jake wrote: "Terrorist back him when McCain brought it up all hell breaks lose."
All hell? More like some chuckling over the stumbling of a confused old man, who obviously IS "losing his bearings" if he believes anything Hamas says, or thinks they should govern our election. McCain clarified his remark, as he should, and it had obviously had nothing to do with Obama's skin color...jeeezz.
Think about it Jake - Bush/McCain refuse to have any dialogue with our enemies - an unprecedented foreign policy marked by clear failure on virtually every level. You want more of that?

Posted by jake

8:31 AM, May 11, 2008

JimD,
Let’s see his list of backers who hate America are Rev.Wright, his wife, Farrekan, Hamas, Al-Qaeda, lets not for get Maxine Waters. I’m sure you can add a few more to the list how do you negotiate with terrorist whose objective in life is to die. Oh here is a news update for you Jimd President Bush he’s not running.
For you to even bring up stumbling of a confused old man is disgusting JimD!

Who would say or repeat something like that about a man who spent 5 years as a POW?

You need to apologize, as BO should have.

Posted by JimD

9:10 PM, May 11, 2008

Jake,
Hate America? His crazy Reverend is also six-year Marine. You think retired Marines hate their country?
And his wife NEVER said anything about hating America....
I think you're getting your facts from a less than fair and balanced source.
And you still haven't said where Obama's "pulled the race card," - because of course, he hasn't.
McCain makes this ridiculous claim that Hamas supports Obama - factually untrue and over the line politically, as we'd give a rat's azz who Hamas wants to be President even if they could "endorse" a candidate.
And by the way - McCain, Obama and Clinton have exactly the same policy toward Hamas. Identical.
Look - John McCain has to take responsibility for his behavior, and if he stumbles and says stupid things, or shows he's not mentally sharp enough to be President, it's not only fair game, but about all we have to go on with any of the candidates.
If you somehow believe it's disrespectful to McCain's service to question the words that come out of his mouth, you're in for a rough ride the next few months.

Posted by jake

10:13 PM, May 11, 2008

JimD,
I'll bet your born after BO so you too would never know about Lee Harvey Oswald ex marine killed JFK (he was our President for a few hundred days) And hated American so what's your point?

If you think Wright is crazy and you only known about him for a month then what would you think of BO and his wife hearing him for twenty years?

The rest of your claims is BO BS.

You sure make us laugh!

God Bless you for your humor.

Posted by JimD

12:30 AM, May 12, 2008

Well Jake -- you said McCain deserves special treatment because he's a Vietnam Veteran.
You said Obama (and I) should apologize for saying he's "losing his bearings" because he was a POW - as if being a veteran makes him above reproach.
Now you're saying some veterans are psychopaths?
You flip-flop more than McCain.

"If you think Wright is crazy and you only known about him for a month then what would you think of BO and his wife hearing him for twenty years?"
I think most churches are a lot more than just the pastor. If you read this church's web site, there's more activities and community work than any one person could ever participate in.
Pastors come and go. The CHURCH is forever.
I really don't care if the pastor of his church said "God damned America" with 911.
Falwell said the God damned America with Katrina.
Who cares whether they think God damns us with disasters?
Look -Obama has both a Princeton and Harvard degree. He was a constitutional law professor.
I don't think you have to worry about what he heard from his preacher.
He's was exposed to a lot worse when he studied case law...lol

Posted by jake

8:27 AM, May 12, 2008

JimD,
lol, You should read what you say before sending your a charm JimD.
Have a great day.

Posted by P

12:52 PM, May 13, 2008

How could anyone vote for a man who doesn't even know how many states there are in the United States? Was that Sen. Obama's "senior moment?"

Besides the fact that Sen. Obama is not qualified for the post, if it were not for HIS race he wouldn't be in THIS race at all. Geraldine Ferraro was absolutely correct about this fact.

Sen. Obama doesn't stand a chance of winning in November. He knows it, and I suspect many of you do, as well.

Posted by JimD

9:52 PM, May 13, 2008

P,
I actually think he has a pretty good chance of winning - so disgusted are most of us with politics as usual and the prospect of the ultimate insider, McCain, continuing the same basic policies that got us into this mess.
When we might otherwise look to experience and proven leadership as important criteria, many Americans are willing to take a leap of faith that he can run the country simply because they can't imagine anything worse than the way its been run the last few years. And frankly, if he runs it anything like he ran his campaign, he'll be a great POTUS.
After all - we gave it to a very green GWB who had a lot less personal accomplishment than Obama.

But -- there's a long time between now and November...time will tell.

Posted by John

1:54 PM, May 14, 2008

JimD,

Wrote” When we might otherwise look to experience and proven leadership as important criteria, many Americans are willing to take a leap of faith that he can run the country simply because they can't imagine anything worse than the way its been run the last few years. “
Your correct on this since the Democrats took control of the country it’s been awful.


After all - we gave it to a very green GWB who had a lot less personal accomplishment than Obama.

I’ll give you 3 weeks to come up with just one accomplishment that effected the lives of Americans in his district?

John

Posted by JimD

2:45 PM, May 14, 2008

John,
You miss my point - that an apparent majority of the country is willing to elect someone who's relatively unknown and unproven, over the more tried and true candidates who's experience and expertise hasn't resulted in them getting it right anyway.
If the option is more Bush agenda in the form of McCain, what have we got to lose?
Many believe superior judgement trumps experience.
And to the extent that many politicians manifest their experience by making the same mistakes over and over, Obama's thin resume is an asset for a change-hungry electorate.

Posted by john

7:13 PM, May 14, 2008

JimD,

This election is the first I can remember that both parties have been picked by the Media very scary.

Make no difference who wins this country is screwed.

By the third year of his term you’re going to be asking what happen, how could we be so blinded by the media.

This is assuming where still around :)

Posted by JimD

4:24 AM, May 15, 2008

"...This election is the first I can remember that both parties have been picked by the Media very scary..."

Funny - I've heard that excuse for decades.
Is this your first election?

Posted by John

9:03 AM, May 15, 2008

imD,


Funny - I've heard that excuse for decades.
Is this your first election?

Excuse? Let's look at obama we know nothing about him yet the media pumps him up for his greatness.

Funny why have all the women stopped fainting with the weather getting warmer ?

This guy is wolf in sheep clothing.
McCain isn't any better except you you where he's been and going.


Recent entries

May 14, 08 - 11:41 AM
McCain's straight talk. Really

May 13, 08 - 10:59 AM
McCain promotes nuclear power in North Bend visit

May 13, 08 - 08:00 AM
McCain in state today to continue green talk

May 12, 08 - 04:12 PM
After school special: What's a superdelegate?

May 12, 08 - 10:35 AM
McCain wants cap & trade, more nukes in energy plan

Advertising

Marketplace

Advertising

Advertising

Categories
Calendar

May

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Browse the archives

May 2008

April 2008

March 2008

February 2008

January 2008

December 2007

Advertising

Buy a link here