Exit poll: Among Democrats it was 51-48 but Obama won rethugs 70-30

[jackson_dem]

Democrats: O 51, H 48
Rethugs: O 70, H 30
"Independents": O 62, H 34

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/index.html#WIDEM

4 points of Obama's 11 point margin came from rethug support alone, then there are "independents".

[Colobo]

1. Wow! He beat Hillary in every group!

[Darth_Kitten]

9. How good is it that right-wingers are only choosing him to oust Hillary?

Why do they even get a say.

Americans, you make things so difficult sometimes.

[cali]

38. rethugs were 9% of the total.

They didn't decide this race. At all.

[jackson_dem]

50. They accounted for one-third of Obama's margin

Then there are rethugs who register as independent but vote consistently rethug...

[I Vote In Pittsburgh]

47. Hmm... reminds me of..

[LordJFT]

131. Obama won among dems too in case you missed it

[jasmine621]

123. This is the story within the story. nt

[PretzelWarrior]

2. so you're saying he won over all of them? Cool.

[Renew Deal]

3. Great news.

The same would happen to Hillary in the GE.

[I Vote In Pittsburgh]

4. 18-29 year olds 71% for obama

Beautiful...

[Darth_Kitten]

22. Hit 30 and hope deflates.........

and life suddenly gets a lot harder.

[anamandujano]

32. Hit 30 and bullsh*t detectors are working at last.

[Critters2]

102. Exactly. I voted for Reagan when I was 18. Then I grew up. nt

[I Vote In Pittsburgh]

42. Good

I won't hit 30 till Obama finishes his second term, so this doesn't bother me at all :toast:

[anigbrowl]

51. 38 Obama supporter agrees, still likes Obama

[tammywammy]

93. He won ever age group except 65+

18-24 (9%) C 26% O 73%
25-29 (7%) N/A N/A
30-39 (12%) C 37% O 63%
50-64 (31%) C 44% O 55%
65 or Over (20%) C 58% O 41%

[tammywammy]

5. Republicans only 9% of total vote

[Barack_America]

12. Shh. He doesn't want people to know that.

;)

[jackson_dem]

"Independents" 28%

90% of "independents" consistently vote for one party.

People who honestly admit to being rethugs were 9% but they accounted for one-third of Obama's victory margin because they voted for him so overwhelmingly...

We shouldn't have rethugs and "independents" who voted for Bush twice, Dole having anything to do with choosing the Democratic nominee. We need to change the rules for 2012.

[tammywammy]

21. I'm an independent

:shrug: And I never voted for Bush. Most the people I know aren't actually affiliated with either party.

[Darth_Kitten]

30. uh?

this is democractic underground?

[tammywammy]

39. Yeah and so?

Should I leave? Have I ever supported voting for anyone other than a democrat on here? Have I espoused any view that's not considered progressive or democratic?

[Renew Deal]

134. Many states don't allow you to register by party.

So it's actually common. In fact, there's a lot of states where it's politically beneficial be an independent. Just look at NH.

[Zhade]

135. And non-Dems are welcome. Read the fucking About section.

NT!

[jackson_dem]

36. yet you post here

You are an example of an "independent" who is effectively a supporter of one party who just doesn't formally affiliate with a party. Most vote consistently for one party.

[tammywammy]

45. So then how many of those "independents" (as you refer to them)

Are consistently democrats or republicans? BTW, most of my friends consider themselves independents and 99% of the time vote straight democratic.

[jackson_dem]

54. About 90%. Very few are true independents

So the real rethug turnout was probably 22% and it was going 70-30 for Obama.

[Barack_America]

64. Do they not vote in the general election?

Do they not decide elections?

You really want as your nominee the candidate who loses the independent vote? How does this statistic make her the stronger candidate?

I'm dying to know.

[jackson_dem]

106. Yeah, half of them will vote for McCain and 85-95% of the rethugs will vote for him

[Barack_America]

110. Is that what the head-to-head polls suggest so far?

Be honest.

Who is winning those polls and what role are Independents playing there? You follow this shit. I know that you know the answer to this question.

[jackson_dem]

111. Rethugs, yes. Indies very close. Obama has only a 4-5 point lead in those polls

It isn't as if he is leading by 11 like "new" candidate Bush was at this time in 2000. When Obama gets attacked by rethugs, as Hillary as been for 16 years, that 4-5 point lead will go away like Dukakis, Bush 00', and Kerry discovered.

[Barack_America]

119. And Hillary?

C'mon, you don't really think that she's still the stronger candidate, do you?

Before these primaries, I went on record here saying that the irrational Hillary-hatred is strong in the Midwest. I said that men certainly would not vote for her. That Independents would not vote for her in the Midwest. That her lead among women would not hold in the Midwest. This has all happened. These sentiments will not be undone should she be the Democratic nominee. People in the Midwest will simply vote for McCain.

Have I not earned your respect by now for you to believe me on this?

[tammywammy]

72. So, you're saying

of the 28% identified as independent, 22% of that was republican and 78% of that was democratic.

[jackson_dem]

105. No

I added the 9% rethug vote to the "independents" who are actually rethugs (if you assume, as an educated guess, that 45% of them are rethugs).

[cali]

121. stab in the dark. you don't have a clue

what the "real rethug" turnout was. not. a. clue.

[NJSecularist]

133. That's some pretty fuzzy math

Not to mention dishonest. :thumbsdown:

[Cheeseburger Walrus]

67. To what do you attribute the source...

...of your statistics. Perhaps you should get back to the trail of tears with these weak apologetics?

[tammywammy]

82. Um, it's in the exit polls

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/#WIDEM

[Cheeseburger Walrus]

114. Oh, TammyWammy...

I meant to respond to another JacksonDem quote, "90% of "independents" consistently vote for one party." I think, bearing in mind that I am number one at number two, I should remind you that we are all just a flush away from the next exit poll. Welcome to politics, TammanyWammy.

[DemGa]

6. Repugs are throwing it to Obama.....strategy.

[scheming daemons]

Except he WON among Democrats...... nice try.....

...

[jillan]

19. by 3% - wow -

[scheming daemons]

After all you Hillary supporters said he'd LOSE if it was only Democrats....

.....so he blew all your theories away.

You can't spin this.

The only group that Hillary won was uneducated, post-menopausal, white women.

That's it.

It's over.

[anamandujano]

41. If it were only Democrats, his delegate number would fall badly.

[NashVegas]

61. Which He Wouldn't Have, But Thanks to All the Republicans Giving Him Momentum

Best of luck.

[tammywammy]

15. Then wouldn't more of republicans have voted than just 9%?

[jackson_dem]

23. 9% is triple the number that usually votes in Democratic primaries....

[tammywammy]

26. Did they have overall higher turnout?

[anamandujano]

58. Thanks for bringing your knowledge to this. I appreciate it.

[DemGa]

33. Because large numbers won't turn out for a strategy vote

Do you really think Repugs will vote Obama in the GE? That's some kind of idealism.

[Kaylee]

7. Forget Republicans....look at Independents!!!!

That is where the GE will be won.

[NJSecularist]

8. And... what's your point?

That Obama is building a large coalition?

[jillan]

10. I'm not surprised.....

the Repugs want him.

[scheming daemons]

11. So Obama won among Democrats! Cool..... completely blows your themes from earlier today out ....

...of the water.

[Darth_Kitten]

17. Won? Seems like a statistical dead heat?

Later......

[scheming daemons]

25. Um... "statistical dead heats" refer to polls.... when it comes to actual VOTE COUNT

... there is only WINS and LOSSES.

This wasn't a "sampling" of voters in Wisconsin.... it was ACTUAL voters.


Obama won all groups..... Obama WOULD HAVE won a closed primary of JUST Democrats.... Your memes have been exposed.

[Darth_Kitten]

44. OOOO, my memes have been exposed.....

I'm such a skanky old broad.

[jackson_dem]

46. This is a poll, not an actual vote count

With the poll being so close you can't assume anything. 70-30 is clear, 51-48 isn't. For all we know Hillary could have won the Democratic vote today.

[Mass]

49. It is impossible to know what is the % on Republicans. The MOE is way too large.

Who knows. They may be actually voting for Clinton.

The numbers for Democrats are much more reliable.

1400*9% = 136.

MOE of a sample of 135 = ~8 % (otherwise said unreliable).

[jackson_dem]

56. It is 70-30 for Obama among rethugs in every state

The margin is so large, so consistent it is obvious what is happening.

[anigbrowl]

57. For all we know, aliens stole her core voters

Let's face it, neither scenario is very likely. Your candidate looks to have lost by a significant margin no matter how you slice it.

[RummyTheDummy]

13. Thanks for posting...

I know you're a Clinton supporter so they can't be pleasant to look at.

[Straight Shooter]

14. Do they ever ask if this is a primary-vote situation only for the Repubs?

I am wondering if the pollsters are being deliberately disingenuous. Of course, people will lie, but maybe some won't and they'll come out and say McCain is the presumptive nominee, anyway, so I'm voting for *insert name here* but in the GE I will let Reagan's ghost guide me.

[RunningFromCongress]

16. And that will make the GE a blow out...45 states is my estimate

[Mass]

18. He won Democrats - Or are Democrats not important either for the Clintons.

[jackson_dem]

In the exit poll by 3. That isn't statistically significant

70-30 is clear cut, though...

[I Vote In Pittsburgh]

20. Education was insignificant in this contest

So much for the media meme of Obama only appealing to educated voters.

Obama won 58% of college educated voters, 54% of non college educated voters.

[KittyWampus]

24. why did you put Independants in quotation marks? God what assholes.

[NJSecularist]

28. This is standard fare for jackson_dem

[jackson_dem]

40. Because almost all "independents" consistently vote for one party

"Independent" is a label that makes them feel good but doesn't describe their true political leanings.

[Warren Stupidity]

55. bullshit. plain and simple bullshit.

[jackson_dem]

66. Get real

There is no sudden rise in "independent" thinking after over two centuries in American history. It is a chic label to have. "I think for myself! I am an independent!". When it comes to the voting booth almost all of them consistently vote for one party.

[LTR]

127. Got proof for this stuff?

I'll have you know I voted straight ticket in only one election - 2004.

In over 20 years of voting in elections, I've voted for Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Reform party, Grassroots Party (pro-marijuana) and various others. For many years, I considered myself to be an independent, though I have drifted more Democratic in the past few years. I know many independents who vote across party lines. Hell, practically all of the ones I know do.

Just because you make shit up does not make it true. I swear, some of the people posting in GD-P have no grasp of reality.

[Straight Shooter]

115. Not bullshit. I've been an independent since I first started voting.

I have voted for Repubs at the local level if I know they're good people (yeah, it's rare), but consistently vote for the Dem in presidential elections or sit it out if I don't like either. In other words, I didn't vote for GHW bush because he's a waste of skin and oxygen, but I didn't vote for Bill Clinton either because I just didn't care for him.

I have only cast votes for Carter, Gore, and Kerry. The Kerry vote was because of the Supreme Court issue, not for the candidate himself. Howard Dean I would have gladly voted for, or Wes Clark.

[Warren Stupidity]

118. The 'one party' the OP refers to is the Republican party.

If you read his other posts he is quite clear that 'independents' (he always puts that in quotes) are in fact stealth republicans. I too, like you, am an unenrolled (independent) voter who consistently votes Democratic.

[Straight Shooter]

122. But you're now agreeing with his premise that independents still represent one-party voters.

I have never seen any statistics to indicate whether independents tend to vote Repub or Dem. Now, that would be very interesting. It would certainly help us to understand these numbers a little better.

I don't like cross-over voting of any type. In Oregon, you must be a registered Dem or Repub and you can only vote in your party's primary. Even in the other states in which I lived, it never occurred to me to cross over and vote for anyone other than whom I support. It's basically dishonest. No way on God's green earth would I ever go to a caucus, I hate crowds and noise. :)

It's finally beginning to sink in how much our system needs to be repaired.

[Warren Stupidity]

130. No you are misunderstanding his argument.

Here is an example of what he means: "We shouldn't have rethugs and "independents" who voted for Bush twice, Dole having anything to do with choosing the Democratic nominee. We need to change the rules for 2012."

He is attempting to argue that independent = republican. It is a dishonest argument and he is deliberately stating it in a way that is oblique enough to confuse people.

In my state (NH) the independent (unenrolled) voters like me decide the elections. Very few Democratic enrolled voters vote Republican and very few Republican enrolled voters vote Democratic. Instead both groups pretty consistently vote their enrolled party. Elections are decided by shifts in the unenrolled independent voters. NH has swung from a sure Republican state to a swing state and now to a swing state leaning Democratic because of the shifting allegience of independents. This is simply the complete contrary example to the OP's thesis that a) independent voters consistently vote for one party and b) that one party is the republican party. Neither fact is true.

His argument has been (quite tediously for quite a while here) that Obama's victories are unfair because it is really just Republicans (and their secret army of independent voters) that are choosing Obama for us so that we will surely lose in November. It is a shit argument devoid of any facts to substantiate it.

[Straight Shooter]

139. To tell you the truth, I'm misunderstanding a lot tonight, LOL!

Is New Hampshire typical of independent voting, though? Do independent voters in Wisconsin, or Texas, or wherever, do they typically vote the trend of the state? I'm probably asking questions that would require more research than either one of us is willing to dig into.

I don't think jackson_dem is saying Obama's victories are unfair. One of his posts on this thread he states with certitude that Obama did win "fair and square." I think what he's saying is that the well is poisoned and we can't trust the results. That's my take on it, anyway. But he still cites the Dems voting as a majority for Obama. Stats are stats.

For what it's worth, I would be extremely antsy if Hillary were winning with Republican support, also. I'm extremely suspicious of the GOP and their motives. The expression "too good to be true" comes to mind.

As for November, it's going to be an uphill battle against the steely-eyed patriarchal warrior (as the media is beginning to define him), even if he does look like he's got one foot in the grave.

[Zhade]

137. You're clueless. I'm an independent, and both candidates aren't liberal ENOUGH for me.

Your "analysis" is a joke.

[LadyVT]

27. Uh huh...that's what we keep pointing out, but we're singing to the wind

[cali]

29. Repukes: 9% of total vote

Your post is lacking in the most basic honesty. He won. Get over it. You're grasping at non-existent straws. Just lame.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

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

[Warren Stupidity]

59. Which, according to the math means it didn't matter.

So your are off to your fallback position: it was those darned independents. Shamelessly dishonest.

[cali]

60. Nope. My math's just fine.

He still would have won by a healthy 8 pts. Not one of your lame predictions has come true. Not one. Keep up that winning streak. It's awfully entertaining to see someone make one huge error after another. Love it.

[jackson_dem]

68. And "independents"?

[cali]

75. lame and lamer

If you're suggesting that all those independents voted for Obama and that they're all going to vote for McCain in November, that's as off as all your other poor predictions. The fact is, and it's obvious to anyone who bothers to apply the most basic common sense, we don't win in November without indies. Period. And putting independents in quotation marks is simply childish. Grow up.

[Mass]

31. Clinton supporters to voters: you do not matter. We do not care. Except if you vote for her

Guess what, it does not work. In fact, it makes her lose more and more. Obama won women, Democrats, low income people, because they all realize it is all about her, not about people. Her excuses are so lame.

[liberalhistorian]

34. Newsflash: We NEED

republicans in order to win in November, it's just that simple. That's why we need a candidate who has wide crossover appeal, which Obama does. I know people IRL who I never thought would vote for him, but they respect and admire him and feel that he knows how to talk to them as well as his base. You cannot disdain half of the country's population, that does NOT, and has NEVER, won us any elections. Period.

[napi21]

35. I hate to say this, but did it ever occur to you that the Rethugs are

voting in the Dem Party primary to disrupt the Dem election? Eother that, or to get the candidate they want to run against elected as our nominee? Most of them don't like their candidate, but they can at least get a Pub back in the WH if they get a Dem candidate they think wan't win. The thought of this scares me to death! I also wouldn't be at all surprised that they'd do that!

[anamandujano]

48. That is what has been making me sick for a couple of weeks since

I got clued in.

[anigbrowl]

70. Jackson_Dem says Republicans make up 4% of Obama's margin

of victory, that is 9% of the votes as a whole. Hmm, that means he still beat Clinton by about 9%. Sounds good to me.

[napi21]

120. IF it's only 4% I don't care. The real problem is that I don't trust polls!

They've bee sooo wrong, how do we know it's only 4%?

I'm not so much concerned about beating Hillary. I actually think that's a done deal. I'm concerned about November! If there are more than 4% of the Pub vote influencing the Dem Primary, THAT'S a problem!

[thesubstanceofdreams]

37. Bottom line: he won fair and square n/t

[anamandujano]

53. Just like Bush in 2004, according to Obama.

[Warren Stupidity]

52. Republican (9%) 30% 70% N/A

9% of the respondants identified themselves as Republicans. 2.7% of the total vote consisted of Republicans voting for Hillary, 6.3% of the total vote consisted of Republicans voting for Obama. The margin of victory right now appears to be 11%. The 3.6 point difference in Republican votes for Obama did not alter the outcome, even if one accepts the theory that all of these votes were from people who intend to vote Republican in November.

A much more interesting number is the much larger turnout for the Democratic primary than for the Republican, continuing a trend seen in almost every state across the entire primary season. Regardless who wins in the end, we have an excellent chance of a strong victory in November.

edited out awful typos.

[jackson_dem]

62. Then there are "independents" who are in reality rethugs

28% claim to be independents. If we say 45% of them are rethug, with 45% being Democrats, and 10% being real independents, then 22% of the vote came from rethugs and it went 2:1 for Obama...

[Roland99]

65. That's a very ignorant and arrogant statement.

[jackson_dem]

73. It's reality. Most of them vote consistently for one party. How "independent"

[NEDem]

76. Seriously dude, she lost

You're looking really desperate

[jackson_dem]

79. And? Did I say she didn't lose?

[NEDem]

91. This grasping at non-existent straws

is quite pathetic really.

[Roland99]

80. Well, it appears that "one party" is the Democratic Party! And you're bitching??

:eyes:

[jackson_dem]

92. Not in November

Get real. Half these "independents" will vote for McCain in the general and 85-95% of these rethugs will. They should have nothing to do with selecting the Democratic nominee.

[Roland99]

94. OMG! Hi, Kreskin! Ladies and Gents, I present to you, The Amazing Kreskin!!

[jackson_dem]

103. Contrary to the Church of Obama doctrine politics didn't start on Feb. 10, 2007

[Warren Stupidity]

69. Did you type that with a straight face?

I'm just wondering 'cause I actually burst out laughing when I read it.

[Roland99]

63. That means Obama can pull votes from McCain in Nov. while still pulling in more Dem votes! Win/Win!!

[Barack_America]

71. What part of "he won Democrats" do you not understand?

What exactly are you bitching about here? What is your basis for complaining about the Republicans and Independents participating when he would have won without them?

[Warren Stupidity]

74. He has nothing else to go on about.

It seems even he can't manage the "he cut her off" idiocy.

[cali]

78. It's the long goodbye of

all those who try and diminish each and every win by Obama. They contort themselves completely to do it. It's actually pretty funny at this point.

[jackson_dem]

84. He won fair and square. Who is saying otherwise?

[cali]

95. oh, please. n/t

[Barack_America]

96. You are! By complaining about Independent and Republican participation.

By insisting that a 3% lead in Democratic voters is not statistically significant.

You are "saying otherwise" in every other post in this thread.

Are you okay? Seriously. I don't get where you are going with this at all.

[jackson_dem]

81. He did? 3 points in a poll is not statistically significant

We won't ever know who won the Democratic vote because the stupid rules allow rethugs and indies to vote.

This backs up what Taylor Marsh showed. Obama does far better with rethugs and indies than Democrats. That is where his national vote margin comes from.

[Barack_America]

87. I don't see the margins of error for that poll.

It is possible that they sampled enough people to make a 3% difference statistically significant. At worst, he tied her. And yet, you would still argue that she's the stronger Democratic candidate, even though she soundly loses every other demographic?

It just doesn't make any sense.

What exactly ARE you arguing here?

[jackson_dem]

97. 600,00 votes so far. They sampled enough of that?

There is never a margin of error listed for an exit poll. It is always low but you never have 0% error. 51-48 is not statistically significant.

She lost Wisconsin. This is more evidence that shows the influence non-Democrats are having in choosing the Democratic nominee.

[Barack_America]

108. And why would we want to choose a Democratic nominee who can't win Independents?

Obama has shown that he can win Democrats. At the very least he tied her on that tonight. She has yet to show that she can win Independents.

Please tell me how that makes her a stronger candidate for the general election.

[jenmito]

88. Hillary would never win a GE. Good thing we probably won't have to find out.

:hi:

[Roland99]

89. Tell that to Al Gore and John Kerry.

BTW, we're talking votes, not a phone poll.

But, go ahead and keep grasping for wet paper straws.

[jenmito]

77. THANKS FOR THE INFO! He beat her in nearly EVERY SINGLE DEMO!

:hi:

[trayfoot]

83. And you think winning repubs is his appeal?

Not really......it is a campaign strategy used by both parties in open states to choose the weakest candidate on the opposing side. Drawing pubs is highly suspect to me. Don't take me wrong, I am not committed to either one - I've just worked in politics for a very long time, and I am NOT impressed by Obama's drawing of republican votes. In fact, it should really make people wonder why this is so!

[RestoreGore]

117. I agree...

It is then a false inflation of numbers that may come back to bite him on the butt if many of those Republicans only voted for him wanting to set it up to see McCain beat him. I know independents who are going to vote for McCain. So how many who voted in democratic primaries did so for that reason? I thought these were Democratic primaries... if so only democrats should bw allowed to vote in them.

[Warren Stupidity]

85. Democrat (63%) 48% 51%: Obama won the Democratic vote.

He beat Clinton 51-48 among Democratic voters. Your theory is shit.

[jackson_dem]

100. You asked the million people who voted?

51-48 has no statistical significance.

[Warren Stupidity]

107. Again you made me laugh!

You are on a roll tonight!

You are now arguing against the validity of the numbers you used in your OP.

[JackORoses]

86. I hate to break it to you, but he will beat her by more than 11 points

[book_worm]

90. And Hillary loses among all groups.

[Mz Pip]

98. So even if the

Repugs hadn't crossed over, Obama still would have won. :shrug:

Works for me.

[xultar]

99. remember the post about the duers rethug family voting in

the dem primary cuz they wanted Hillary to win the nom so she could lose the ge?

but now crossover is good. I don't get it. What has changed?

[Lone_Star_Dem]

112. Crossover voting sucks if they're doing it for that reason.

At least that's my opinion. To be fair, of the 9% of crossover R-voters some of them may be simply disgusted with their parties choices though. Not all of them though, some are jerks trying to jack with the primary results.

It's not a very substantial margin really when you consider that Hillary has 28% of the 9% and Obama has 72% it becomes a non-factor in end result of the primary. Thankfully. It would just caused more bickering between the two sides supporters if it were close enough to have tossed the race one way or the other.

[totodeinhere]

101. But Obama still won the Democratic vote.

Just like he has in almost every other caucus and primary that he has won. But having said that, we need those repukes and indies to win in November. So it's the best of both worlds.

[jackson_dem]

104. False. He has won 4 states without winning the Democratic vote

And his national popular vote margin comes from rethugs and independents.

[totodeinhere]

113. No, true.

According to a quick glance at the NYT page that I am linking to, Obama has won in 18 states so far. So if he won four states without winning the Democratic vote, then he still won 14 states with the Democratic vote. Isn't 14 out of 18 most states?

As far as the national vote goes, I repeat, he needs votes from those groups to win in November.

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/index.html

[loveangelc]

109. that bodes well for him in Texas :)

[Hawkeye-X]

116. You don't get it do you? It's over. Take a good hard look at your

candidate. See who she is. See what she is made out of. She has no chance at all. Think of Hillary as another Gravel. Seriously.

[Occam Bandage]

124. So, Obama won Democrats. Great!

[miceelf]

125. Next time someone complains

about what bullies Obama supporters are and how ingracious they are in victory, just pull this thread out. It's really telling. You are trying to spin a clear victory by obama into some kind of defeat, because he won independents IN ADDITION TO winning democrats.

In a primary. In a state with 6% African American population.

He won 56-40 among "very liberal" voters.

[RBInMaine]

126. Good ! It shows the cross-over appeal needed in the general.

[stillcool]

128. Yeah!!! Blow out in the general!!

I can't wait for those debates!!

[Endangered Specie]

129. The sound you hear, is the worlds smallest violin, playing for you...

:nopity::nopity::nopity::nopity::nopity::nopity::nopity:

You've done nothing but prove Hillary can't beat Obama in ANY political spectrum.


You can whine, bitch, and moan, but that doesn't change the results, what category HAS Hillary won??

[Cheeseburger Walrus]

132. Sour grapes

make boring, bitter company. Support the nominee and be done with it.

[mtnsnake]

136. If he gets the nod the Obama people will wonder where all the Republican support went, come November

Good post, jackson. Thanks for the stats. They are very revealing and something to be concerned about.

[HeraldSquare212]

140. Whereas Hillary will wonder now. Yeah, that's a great strategy.

[Pushed To The Left]

138. Some of those Republicans despise McCain

and may be willing to vote for Obama in the GE. Republican and Indepedent support is not a bad thing to have!