On Dennis Miller's radio show a Repub called in to say he & his friends are voting Obama in TX (read

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

So that McCain, in his words, will face the "weak" candidate. This guy asked for Miller's opinion (even though he had decided) and Miller said to vote for Obama, just so Hillary could go take care of her family and be normal for once in her life (I am paraphrasing, but this is essentially what he said).

The large number of Republican voters supporting Obama does worry me because it does not seem to be sincere, as was apparent with the caller.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. How often do you listen to Dennis Miller?

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

8. I listen to get irritated and if NPR is discussing something tedious n/t

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

9. Uh huh.

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

17. Yeah, "Uh-huh." I happen to be a donor, "Uh-huh." What is with these sarcastic creeps on DU?

[CitizenRob]

44. On DU you're not allowed to hear other view points.

As happy as I am that DU exists, some of it's users are a little too creepy lockstep for me.

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

96. I agree. And the animosity directed at those who ask questions is disturbing...n/t

[lapfog_1]

113. You listen to Dennis Miller, you have a post count below 100

and you just happen to post something which is very snarky about Obama... something which, as yet, is unproven by anyone, but repeated often by Hillary supporters.

Again, I'll ask YOU what I ask everyone else that posts this...

Fact. Reported in the MSM by multiple sources. Nationwide polling indicates that in a GE between McCain and Obama, OBama wins by anywhere from 6 to 9 points. Same polling shows McCain beating Clinton by 4 to 6 points.

Why in the hell would they want to start in a 10 to 15 point hole by selecting Obama to run against?

Hillary, rightly or wrongly, is the single most polarizing figure to the republicans (both moderates and extreme) running this year. I see it even within my own family. Obama does not elicit that reaction.

In my own family of about 13 voters of voting age, if Hillary runs she will get 1 (me), if Obama runs he may well get about 6 to 8(me and most of my nephews and nieces and their spouses). Anecdotal evidence to be sure, but there it is.

So why is it that Dennis Miller and the rest of ultra conservative land WANT TO FACE Obama, unless they really just want McCain AND Hillary to lose! McCain because in four years they can run a "real" conservative, a Trent Lott or Newt Gingrich... and Hillary because she is Hillary.

Other than that far fetched explanation (which would be fine by me!), I just don't see it.

Edit to add... P.S. Welcome to DU (I think)

[KAZ]

55. Donated? To who? Dennis Miller? Just askin.

[KAZ]

80. What, post and run Fitzbot?

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

97. I posted this message hours ago. The my wife and I ate dinner & started watching Miami Vice on dvd

(old episodes from the 80s) I can't say that I miss the 80s really.

[SammyWinstonJack]

120. I love old Miami Vice dvds I have the whole collection!

:hi:

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

93. Nope, NPR, last pledge drive. Can't live without "All Things Considered."

[Reterr]

59. The person you are responding to

almost never posts anything useful. He once mocked a long-time DUer who said she was a rape-victim, by replying sarcastically with this: "hugs emoticon".
He isn't a real Obama supporter/real liberal/actually anti-war/for civil rights or anything of the sort. I have never seen him display the slightest evidence of any compassion on here and so I doubt he actually cares about any of those issues. He just enjoys a good fight.
He is amusing in his own way, but don't let him get under your skin. He is the type of person who is happiest if he is riling someone up, while pretending he actually cares about anything.
It gets cliche and boring after a while, but don't let him bother you :hi:.

[Reterr]

53. You are a cliche and a boring one at that.eom

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

92. Who is a cliche? Who once posted with emoticons? I am totally confused

but maybe that is because I was watching old episodes of Miami Vice with my wife. The 80s...bad clothes, bad hair, even worse dialogue.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

108. They were referring to Bornaginhooligan

Just ignore him Mr. Fitz.....

[BigDaddy44]

40. May i see your papers comrade???

How about answering the substance of the comment instead of questioning the motive? I think its a legitimate concern that republicans could be attempting to influence who our nominee is. Its not the first time this has been brought up.

[lapfog_1]

114. Brought up mostly in the last few days

and always by a "concerned" person.

Now being accepted as FACT and a reason why Obama is winning the open primaries and caucuses by huge margins (can't explain DL though).

But I don't accept it.

Give me one logical reason why. I've asked on a number of threads and haven't yet received even one reply.

Why? When national heads up polling shows Obama beating McCain by 6 points or more and Hillary losing to McCain by 4 points or more. Why start out in a hole?

[Purveyor]

41. A local station put Dennis Miller on a couple of months ago. All this oaf does is laugh while

attempting to talk throughout the entire show. Not that his is saying anything funny, he just laughs.

I couldn't even stand to listen for the first 30 minutes, let alone hear if the content was any good.

I suspect like many of the Dennis Miller ventures, this too shall quickly pass.

[rug]

65. I routinely listen to Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin on WABC. Your point?

[Canuckistanian]

83. So do I

I try not to miss a minute of their shows.

It lets me know EXACTLY what the "other side" is thinking (even if it takes a while to figure out if there's any actual THINKING involved).

Their mental faculties are truly astoundingly lacking.

But it makes a GREAT foundation for refuting their ridiculous claims with actual FACTS and REASON.

[The Doctor.]

88. TRAITOR!!!!

:spank:

LOL... JK. Rush is actually very adept at what he does. I've forced myself to listen to him on and off, and without a doubt, he's an expert at manipulating opinion.

His techniques are very simplistic, but unfortunately... so are his listeners.

[Canuckistanian]

90. He's entertaining

Just not the way he'd hoped.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

109. I watch - mainly when there's some Repub scandal going on to see them squirm.

It's fun....

[shadowknows69]

2. They're making an incredible tactical error with that

Obama will tear McCain up in a debate. No contest.

[formernaderite]

61. let's hope so

the one thing I noticed in the debate last night, is that Obama loooked really young next to Hillary. He got my vote in the primary, but it struck me since Edwards left that both of them leave much to be desired. Obama on the stump alone...is amazing. And maybe it's my age ( i'm a geezer) but I did kind of wonder watching the debate...how he'll fair next to a mature guy in the fall. Hopefully the lighting will be unkind to Mcinsane.

[knixphan]

68. Obama will smoke McCain.

It's like the LeBron James vs. the Charlton Heston of linguistics.

[goldcanyonaz]

3. You must have misunderstood, they're all voting for Hillary.

:rofl:

[matcom]

4. the more repukes who think Obams is "weak" against McNuts the better

[Cha]

48. Hehe..

There's so much delusion out there ..might as well take advantage of it.

[ret5hd]

5. Your deep concern is duly noted.

On edit:
P.S. : While you are here and so obviously deeply interested in us, please consider a donation.
:rofl:

[blogslut]

6. So what?

My brother will be voting in the Repub primary and Democratic in the G.E.

Welcome to Texas, ya'll.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

7. The Republican vote in these open primaries is in the single digits to begin with.

And Clinton gets about a third of it so the overall effect is marginal. Obama does really well with independents, who are most likely not engaging in any kind of strategy.

[jasmine621]

64. In some cases, coupled with the Independents it would be the margin of a win. nt

[mrreowwr_kittty]

99. Yes, but not an indication of a strategy.

The independents are voting for Obama because they like him. That's the point I'm making. I think most of the Republicans want to vote for Obama too.

[cali]

10. I. will. type. this. real. slow. just. for. you.

some. repukes. are. voting. for. obama. because. they. think. he. is. the. weakest. candidates. some. are. voting. for. hill. for. the. same. reason. others. are. voting. for. obama. because. they. intend. to. vote. for. him. in. the. general.

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

21. And the reason for your sarcasm? I happen to have an Ivy League Ph.D., so I don't feel the need

to insult posters by claiming that they are slow or stupid for trying to start a discussion. But whatever, if you feel an uncontrollable urge to insult and belittle, then this says very little for your maturity or your intellectual sophistication, Cali.

[cali]

27. This is hardly the first time you've posted this kind of concern

nonsense. And you should put your excellent education to use, and learn about the demographics of the vote. Your posts are one note exercises in simplistic thinking.

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

33. Um , right. I post because I am concerned. It is a worrying trend that has not been debunked

and I heard it on CNN the other night as well. What I am worried about is if anyone is seriously considering this in the Obama camp and whether these Republicans will actually vote for Obama in November as "Republican Obama-ites." The possibility that Repubs are "mock" voting for Obama gets flamed by the Obama supporters on DU rather than debunked in a rational way, which is what I am still waiting for -- I'd like to see some hard facts about just how many Republicans have voted thusly (how many Independents, etc. -- how many "day of" registered voters turned up, and so on)

[kristopher]

43. Fitz's concerns are legitimate and should be addressed without the crap.

Mr. Fitz I understand your point and share your doubts. However, the available evidence (to me) suggests that, as many here say, there is little to worry about.

Now, I could be wrong, but here is my take on it. I've posted this a couple of times, so I apologize to those who have seen it. The take away is that the trend away from the Republicans was obvious and this "cross over" meme is a smoke screen by the Limbaugh type talking heads to confuse the issue. It serves to mask this shift under the cover of a "secret movement". This, in turn, bolsters the diminishing relevance of the heretofore talk radio king makers. Their failure to install their anointed Romney as the party's delegate is a severe blow to their existence and they are trying to leave it behind them.

Will some dittoheads cross over and vote for Obama? Yes they will.

Does that negate the well documented shift in voter preference away from the Republicans? Not one bit.

Here is the longer version:

Defining "post-partisanship" for the skeptics of Obama

Originally posted Sun Feb 17th 2008, 09:05 PM
Most of the criticism of BO seems to be grounded in the belief that the "change" he speaks of is an overly optimistic chimera that causing his supporters to lead the Democratic Party down a path to certain defeat in the elections. They've seen the power of the Republican slime machine destroy our hopes time after time. The other day there was a popular post on DU (I'm sorry I don't have the original URL for credit) that asked a question which got to the meat of the issue.

This was my response. I decided to repost it after a 4 hour chat with my neighbor. She is a 6o+ year old widow who must work, is active in her fundamentalist church, and who voted for Bush in the last 2 elections. She has come to the conclusion that her support of the GOP has not been positive for either her, her faith, or the nation. She strongly questions whether the social issues that motivated her decision making are really things that can be addressed through government action. She asserts that the economic failures of the Republicans (jobs, health care, stagnant earnings, etc) and their cynical use of the religion have turned her unequivocally away from the Republican party. She spoke of Edwards' message regarding the emphasis Jesus placed on the poor and meek.

Initailly I thought she was pulling my leg and following Limbaugh's advice to push for Obama, but after speaking as long as we did, I simply don't believe that is the case. She argued pretty passionately against the actions of the GOP; she seemed genuinely and extremely offended as she echoed many of the criticisms of David Kuo.

There was only one qualification to her position - No way would she support Hillary. She says she will vote for Obama if he is the nominee, but if Hillary wins my neighbor says she will stay home and not vote.

Anyway, that conversation leads me to repost this. Thanks again to the person who posed the original question.


"He's an icon of "post-partisan" politics which, to me, is as ridiculous as concept as any I've ever heard. On one side we see a group of people who are consumed by greed and a thirst for power, who despise the poor, gays, women, and minorities, who'd like nothing more than to hand all the power in this country over to a handful of powerful men who'd love to forge another gilded age, who think America has the right and the duty to use everything up to and including military force to push its will on the rest of the world. On the other side you have those who believe in America as a symbol of freedom, hope, and justice. Those who would like to judge people by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin or who they happen to love. Who believe women are as worthy of respect and admiration as men, and who believe that America is a more potent force for democracy and justice throughout the world as an example of such things rather than a military power devoted to spreading them through the force of arms.

How does one reconcile these two sides? Where is the path to "post-partisanship" there? Which side is most willing to compromise, and what would each be willing to sacrifice to move beyond partisanship? When I ask this question, I find myself in fear of the answer."

The answer actually is extremely simple (that doesn't mean easy) - no reconciliation is necessary.

The two sides you describe are NOT defined by their political labels of Republican/Democrat and they are NOT defined the ideological labels of conservative/liberal. Perhaps the problem is the term itself as the post "partisan" label clearly leads us to think along the lines I've just rejected. What Obama is seeking to do is reach the voters that have been hoodwinked since the Reagan era into voting against their self interests by those "people who are consumed by greed and a thirst for power". They have successfully exploited fear of "the poor, gays, women, and minorities and despair for nearly thirty years. Now we have an orator who seems to be able to reach through that armor of carefully crafted negativity and touch the part of people that recognizes the concept of fairness, justice and the golden rule.

The "base" of the traditional Republican party has traditionally been the moneyed interests that tried to install Romney as their tool of administration. The paid hate mongers lined up behind Romney yet failed totally to move over 70% of their voters in the desired direction.

The other parts of their "base" were acquired as a reaction to Civil rights legislation and the economic turmoil ensuing from loss of US control over world oil supply in the 1970s. Some of those truly are hate-filled souls that can never be reached. But it has been 44 years since the Civil Rights Act, and the generation that placed racism over all other considerations of self interest is gradually dying off. True, many of the younger generation has followed in their footsteps but to hold onto the numbers they need for control the "people who are consumed by greed and a thirst for power have had to expand the range of people eligible to be hated to include "the poor, gays, and women".

However, the colossal ineptitude of the Bush administration has laid bare the truth of this malignant brotherhood for all its members to see. The co-opted are starting to wake up (ex: David Kuo) and recognize the cynical manipulation for what it has been. Look at the protest vote for Huckabee. It shows that nearly 50% are not timidly toeing the line they are being fed.

Does this mean that the "people who are consumed by greed and a thirst for power" are going to experience an epiphany leading them to suddenly begin working for the betterment of all?

Not for an instant does Obama or this supporter believe that or make any such claim. If you actually listen you will hear him speaking to those who have been deluded into voting against their own interests through the manipulation I spoke of. As far as I can tell, he basically makes two claims:

1) The "people who are consumed by greed and a thirst for power" can be successfully opposed by reaching out to those who have been manipulated into pledging partisan loyalty that does not serve their interests, and

2) Even if they can be reached, the struggle to right our course is going to be extremely difficult.

There are still going to be those who base their political actions on hate.

There are still going to be those who fail to recognize they are being manipulated to act against their self interests.

But Howard Dean recognized the dissatisfaction that was building. He saw the disillusionment that was spreading like ripples from the center of the most corrupt power grab in this nation's history. In response and against great opposition from the DLC, he implemented
his 50 state strategy. Without that, I believe Obama would already be another also ran. Dean saw the changes in the electorate prepared Democrats to capitalize on those changes. Obama is simply the person best equipped to bring in the haarvest.

At least, that's how I interpret things.

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

98. Thank you for your post -- excellent and thoughtful. n/t

[lapfog_1]

115. What evidence do you have that it IS happening?

Why does it have to be "debunked"?

First start out with why republicans think Obama is the weaker candidate? And what evidence do they have to prove that point (poll numbers, something, anything)?

[Kahuna]

34. With all that education you should have been able to figure it out for yourself.

Yes?

[Exilednight]

39. Bush has a Masters from an Ivy League school, what is your point? I'm not trying...

to be sarcastic, I just don't understand what your education has to do with the discussion.

[thevoiceofreason]

46. Hey ya'll -- we got us'n a real live intylekchall librul

Cali is just fine. Back off.

[CitizenRob]

47. People are leaving DU for other Dem forums because of the DU-lemming phenomenon.

I personally hate when these DUers start stabbing people in the back for so much as admitting they occasionally listen to right wing talk to hear what the other side is thinking.

I too occasionally listen to the righty talk shows because I want to know my enemy. Give me Randi Rhodes or Stephanie Miller anyday... but don't you dare call me a Republican.

[knixphan]

agreed

First rule. Keep enemies closer, yes?

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

102. Maybe you could let me know about some of these other forums?

DU has devolved into some real nastiness.

[Binka]

129. Ivy League? And a Piled High and Deep

Ah Jesus. Go play with yourself. We don't fucking care. People with a fucking ounce of class do not need to post their academic credentials.

[UALRBSofL]

36. cali, you have to admit republicans are cross voting for a reason

You know in Wisconsin 7% of the vote was republicans and Obama got 70% and Clinton got 30%. That is a pretty substantial percent of votes when the vote is close. :)

[thevoiceofreason]

50. But Wisconsin wasn't close

Hillary, in 2d place, beat both McCain and Huckleberry combined.

[Bucky]

11. Obama is only weak if you analyze the polls using Republican math

[CitizenRob]

49. Republican math...

Black + Dem = zero

[lapfog_1]

116. Would that be the same math that Rove used in 2006? - n/t

[tularetom]

12. Dennis Miller has a radio show?

And people actually listen to it?

And you worry about the opinion of somebody that would call in to a Dennis Miller radio show?

They're not gonna vote. They'll be lucky to find the polling place.

Seriously, Dennis Miller has a radio show?

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

16. Who? n/t

[Blue-Jay]

13. Yeah, OK. I farted a rainbow-colored lemur today.

He jumped around, flung some poo, and then pumped up my front driver's side tire. All in all, it was a pretty good day.

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

14. Well his comments about Hillary also bugged me because it sounded like "go home, little woman"

but maybe I was in a prickly mood anyway, as Dennis Miller has the maturity of a twelve-year-old.

[stahbrett]

15. They may think that they can beat Obama, but that doesn't make it true

Classic example in reverse - the Democrats were hoping and praying that the Republicans would nominate the weak former actor from California in 1980, instead of one of the "heavy-weights" from Washington. Well, Reagan was so weak he barely won 44 of 50 states! Obama may not win 44, but my prediction is that his victory will be considered a true landslide with a actual mandate.

[liberalnurse]

18. That is so true..........

It is a logical strategy since McCain already has his Nomination in the bag. So, why waste a vote, put it to good use.....a repug vote for the weakest opponent, runt of the litter to face in battle. That would be Obama.

[JimGinPA]

26. More Logic Euthanasia From The liberalnurse...

Hillary has lost the last 11 straight contests, wasted all her campaign money and is losing super delegates by the boatload so somehow that makes her the stronger candidate?!?



:crazy:

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

35. Hey, I didn't say his comments made sense. n/t

[Cornus]

54. That would NOT be Obama

I know it's just your opinion, but ALL indications are that HRC would be the weaker candidate.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

19. That reminds me of the old Eddie Murphy joke from 1984.

A bunch of white guys decide to get wasted and go vote for Jesse Jackson as a goof. The next day they shit their pants when they wake up to the headline showing a victorious president Jackson.

[COFoothills]

20. Dude...

...Dennis Miller?

Really?

[LadyVT]

22. Yes, we have been pointing this out for a couple of weeks. In WI, also...

This is being written about and talked about on radio ever since McCain looked to lock up the nomination. He doesn't need their vote, so they are free to do what they can for their candidate by trying to knock out the candidate they think is his most serious contender: for the vast majority of the Republicans, that's HIllary.

That's part of why so many Democrats are concerned about the election if Obama is the nominee, you see. Because then, of course, the Republicans who have voted for Obama will vote for their own candidate. And the Republicans who registered Independent in those states where only Indeps. and Demos could vote in the primary will vote McCain.

It's very logical. Of course... that means Obama has a good chance of losing. And that's even without the bad feelings over the primaries amongst Edwards and Clinton supporters, and without one single big, negative news story on Obama that gets legs between now and November.

[MadBadger]

23. And we've been pointing out that some repukes in Wisco did the same thing for Hillary.

[jackson_dem]

104. But Obama won rethugs 70-30 in Wisconsin

[Justyce]

30. It's a good argument for a single national primary day. nt

[CitizenRob]

51. If we had a single national primary day Hillary would be our nominee

And we'd be stuck with that turkey. McCain or Huckabee would be the next President. That's what would have happened this year.

[Justyce]

118. We'll never know though, will we? We could've gotten

Biden, Edwards, Kucinich, Richardson, etc., if the people were allowed to vote for who they really wanted rather than believing months of media hype and having all but these two candidates dropping out. Would you also support this type of system for the general election? It would be disastrous, just like the primaries are IMO.

[adoraz]

24. the hilarious thing about this...

is going by the polls, Obama has a better shot.

I won't complain though, the more Obama support the better.

[Danger Mouse]

25. They call Obama 'weak' and they support MCCAIN?

Obama referenced McCain's '100 years of Iraq' comment at the debate last night.
I was VERY glad that he did...it's the line that will ultimately RUIN McCain's chances of ever being POTUS.
Nobody, outside of the craziest freepers, wants us to be in Iraq for 100 years.

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

28. Yeah, plus they seem to forget McCain's temper issues. Can't wait to see him blow up

in one of the debates. Hee hee.

[Danger Mouse]

37. and not only THAT, but this so-called 'maverick' spent 7 years cozying up to Bush...

at nearly every opportunity.

[Kahuna]

29. The mischief-makers are splitting their votes between Obama AND Hillary. It's

a wash.

[HeraldSquare212]

31. Eh, some Reps are trying to be cute, but they can't all get behind the same candidate

so they just cancel each other out.

[sendero]

32. He's pretty stupid..

... the polls say otherwise.

[HawkerHurricane]

38. I believe I heard the same caller

And he was voting for Senator Obama (and The Menace was agreeing with him) not because he thought Obama was the weaker candidate, but because he hates Senator Clinton that much.

This is the disadvantage of Senator Clinton: Not that she'd be a bad President, but she creates this irrational hatred (call it Clinton Derangement Syndrome) among the 20% hardcore of the Republican Party.

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

103. This was probably the same guy -- he was weirdly confident about things

but then again he calls in to Dennis Miller...

[AZBlue]

42. Why the f are you listening to Dennis Miller if you post on DU??!?

[CitizenRob]

52. I like to know my enemy.

Thankfully I don't commute in a car anymore so I don't have the opportunity to listen to right wing talk.

You know what though, I used to like listening to right wing talk on long drives. It would get me so angry I wouldn't have to worry about falling asleep.

[AZBlue]

58. I tried it once and almost had an accident because I was yelling so much.

I had to give it up for everyone's safety.

[CitizenRob]

60. haha, I too have had to change the channel for safety reasons.

[my3boyz]

45. Yeah..let them underestimate Obama! YOu see what happened

to Clinton when she underestimated him. No, he has not won yet but he is quite a bit ahead of her and he has a lot of momentum.

[ronnykmarshall]

56. Oh fuck him.

Asshole wants to jump on the bandwagon because his RW ass kissing has been the death of his shitty carrer.

He go to hell.

[nookiemonster]

112. Absofuckinglutely in agreement.

Call me cold, but I'd like to see this little swarmy bastard crash and burn. He's a fucking joke.

[Raine]

57. ReTHUGs are STUPID

especially if they think that Obama is the weaker candidate. Let the reTHUGS help us pick the stronger candidate, the joke's on them. :evilgrin:

[DemGa]

62. Of course this is their strategy

They might hate Hillary -- but they also fear and respect her -- they KNOW she is the stronger candidate by far.

Freepers are laughing their ass off at this Obama-fad because Dems might do what they could not: Defeat Hillary. Repugs commence the scathing attacks on Obama -- McCain runs as a four-year "placeholder" for his VP to run in 2012. The Repug base gets motivated. What a fvcking mess and disgrace.

[apocalypsehow]

63. The day before yesterday we got a similar breathless update from a Sean Hannity "listener" (who

said he only tuned in because it's important to "know your enemy"); and then there was the OP who gave us the mood of the crowd over at Free Republic (more touching "concern" about who they think our nominee should be); and finally, the topper, was the swell fellow who posted Karl Rove's very own list of talking points about who our nominee should be. Now we get to hear what another right-wing asshole thinks about the Democratic nomination - and who the nominee should be. And this latest OP quoting a right-wing assholish source (yours) suggests - wait for it, wait for - that "supporting Obama does worry me" for reasons that can, at best, be called vague.

It is a curious phenomena, all this overwhelming "concern" about Senator Obama's potential nomination....

[kristopher]

67. Stop being an ass.

Mr. Fitz I understand your point and share your doubts. However, the available evidence (to me) suggests that, as many here say, there is little to worry about.

Now, I could be wrong, but here is my take on it. The take away is that the trend away from the Republicans was obvious to them and this "cross over" meme is a smoke screen by the Limbaugh type talking heads to confuse the issue. It serves to mask this shift under the cover of a "secret movement". This, in turn, bolsters the diminishing relevance of the heretofore talk radio king makers. Their failure to install their anointed Romney as the party's delegate is a severe blow to their existence and they are trying to leave it behind them.

Will some dittoheads cross over and vote for Obama? Yes they will.

Does that negate the well documented shift in voter preference away from the Republicans? Not one bit.

[apocalypsehow]

69. Boy, that's a scintillating bit of repartee! Let me guess: you're tuned into the pulse of right-wing

America, too, and they're also assuring you that Senator Obama spells doom, doom, doom for our party in November, huh? Is that it? More touching "concern"....:rofl:

[kristopher]

77. You guess poorly. I just don't like people who try to shut down dialogue

Read the body of the post before you respond. You'll do better.

[apocalypsehow]

78. My "guess" was spot-on. No one was trying to "shut down" anything - that advice you're

handing out might best be applied to yourself.

[kristopher]

82. Let's review

Fact: The OP (and many others) have heard the likes of Limbaugh urging his listeners to go out and vote for Obama. I have heard ofit, and tuning into his show, I heard it myself. If you are denying they are making this exhortation, you are wrong, and I'm sure if you knowhow to google, is an easy point to confirm on youtube. I'd do it for you but I have dialup.

Please explain how your response, in any way, helps to address the inescapable fact that other Democrats have heard of this and are concerned about it? I really want to know.
As I see it the facts and logic are on the side of an easy explanation that favors Obama and points out the weakness of the Republican slime machine.
Now, maybe I'm missing something, but providing that simple explanation beats the hell out of calling people you don't know names and blindly accusing them of working for the Republicans. But I'm open to the possiblity that you know better, so lay it out, please. I mean, you are on the Democratic side of the aisle, right? Presuming you are, help us understand how you know these ppeople deserve the insulting manner you display in your posts.

For your convenience, I've included your reply to the OP:


By apocalypsehow: The day before yesterday we got a similar breathless update from a Sean Hannity "listener" (who said he only tuned in because it's important to "know your enemy"); and then there was the OP who gave us the mood of the crowd over at Free Republic (more touching "concern" about who they think our nominee should be); and finally, the topper, was the swell fellow who posted Karl Rove's very own list of talking points about who our nominee should be. Now we get to hear what another right-wing asshole thinks about the Democratic nomination - and who the nominee should be. And this latest OP quoting a right-wing assholish source (yours) suggests - wait for it, wait for - that "supporting Obama does worry me" for reasons that can, at best, be called vague.

[apocalypsehow]

91. Let's do an actual review.

My position is that folks who immerse themselves in right-wing cesspools, pick up their talking points, and then come gallivanting onto DU to regurgitate them out of "concern" are of one of two things:

1. Special pleaders who dislike the current candidate who seems to be well on the way to winning the Democratic nomination, or...

2. An altogether different species of "concerned" poster.

"I mean, you are on the Democratic side of the aisle, right?"

Well, I'm not the one peddling right-wing talking points on a progressive discussion board while pretending we've got to gush over their "exhortations" and ponder them together with solemn gravity as if they - Hannity, Limbaugh, Miller, et al - were doing us some kind generous favor. So, as regards that question, it might better be directed elsewhere....

[kristopher]

95. You are lying about the OP

And totally mischaracterizing the content of the discussion. If you don't like talking about what the opposition is doing, and if you haven't sense to understand that your interest do not define the universe of interest for all supporters of Democratic candidates, then there is nothing I can do to help you.
Goodbye.

[apocalypsehow]

101. Ah, I'm telling some truth alright - and when I hear squealing of the nature I've heard so far from

posters like you, I know I've pretty well nailed it all the way around.

I have, of course, "mis-characterized" nothing: I have stated opinions, and responded to silliness masquerading as "content." But if it makes you feel better, you go right on thinking that way.

"then there is nothing I can do to help you. Goodbye."

Promise? Your "concern" is, as always, touching, but I think I'll make do. You head right back over to those right-wing cesspools you're apparently so fond of monitoring, and have at keeping up with what "the opposition" (uh-huh) is babbling about....

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

105. I am neither of these. Sorry to disappoint; n/t

[apocalypsehow]

107. "Sorry to disappoint"? LOL. Trust me, your "concern" doesn't "disappoint" me in the least....

n/t

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

110. Admirer of The Lizard King, "what" "is" "with" "the" "quotes?"

"I" "don't" "really" "get" "it."

[apocalypsehow]

106. By your own quoted words, incidentally, you rendered THIS post false here:

"Fact: The OP (and many others) have heard the likes of Limbaugh urging his listeners to go out and vote for Obama. I have heard ofit (Sic), and tuning into his show, I heard it myself."

By your own statement in the post below that I have generously re-quoted here, you have rendered your own statement false. Rarely is it that easy: guess I didn't "guess poorly" after all, eh?

:rofl:

[Little Star]

66. Go read Free Republic. This is the plan. Every where possible

vote Obama in the primaries, then vote McCain in the GE. Karl Rove is not dead! "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer".
It's sort of like gathering intelligence. Keep right on listening to Miller, we can learn a lot! Gather all the goods you can and sound the warning! :thumbsup:

[onefreespiritedchick]

71. Agreed

The other reason they plan to vote for Obama is to take out Hillary. A ridiculous notion, but not with those people.

[Political Heretic]

86. FR isn't representative of anything.

I'm sure the radical fringes of conservative politics are crafting masters plans to win - but this year that fringe is smaller than ever before.

What's more, the biggest mistake of candidates facing Obama has been to underestimate him.

[OnionPatch]

70. Well, my conservative friends,

the few of them that there are, must have misunderstood the plan. A bunch of them aren't even voting in the primary. They are planning to vote for Obama in the GE. Hmmm, what sort of strategy is that?

[lapfog_1]

117. A far fetched one

one that says

1) I can't vote for McCain because he isn't a "true conservative"(tm).

2) I can't vote for Hillary because we hate with a passion all things Clinton.

3) I'll vote for Barack in the Primary to beat Hillary, and in the GE to beat McCain... and after 4 years when the economy REALLY goes into the shitter, we will nominate someone like Newt Gingrich and take over the entire government. (betting that Obama can't do anything to fix up things)

That's the only explanation I have for why they would want Obama now. But I don't believe it.

[OnionPatch]

121. The ones I know who support Obama are not rabid right-wingers.

They aren't even registered Republicans. They don't like to affiliate with a party, but they've tended to lean conservative in the last few election cycles. (Mostly because of things like taxes and guns.) I consider them conservatives, not Republicans. I've yet to meet a rabid right-wing Repub who wants to vote for Obama, you are correct there. But I think what I'm seeing, at least, is the moderate/independent vote swinging to Obama.

[lapfog_1]

122. Yes, but the most recent net accusation/explanation

is that there IS a VWRC and the marching orders are to vote (in open primaries) for Obama and then "come home" to McCain in the GE. This is what is being pushed in thread after thread here to explain why Obama is kicking Hillary's ass in 11 straight primaries, coupled with an accusation that Obama and Obama supporters know this is true and condone it.

Which is why you see threads that say "A friend forwarded me an email from Republican HQs that says I should vote in the primary for Obama" or "Dennis Miller said on his radio program that his listeners should blah blah blah" or there is this photocopied flier the encourages Republicans (and others) to vote for Obama.

And the many threads that I've seen in the last 24 hours that explain that's its OK for Hillary to poach pledged delegates, use any means to seat her delegates from FL and MI, and if she still doesn't have the majority of pledged delegates, why it's just fine with the poster to use pressure on the super delegates to vote for her and overturn the will of the people! Because, you see, it's not the will of the DEMOCRATS, just some "up to no good" trickster republicans.

And that is the real danger, using this bullshit story to justify the "do anything, say anything" attitude of the Hillary campaign.

And if they still can't win, then it's the excuse they will use for losing. Not that their candidate has some issues (like she voted for the f'ing war), not the her campaign has to be the most inept Presidential Campaign since Ross Perot, but it's all the fault of the crossover Republicans.

[BootinUp]

72. Of course its not sincere. nt

[knixphan]

73. the right wing also has a stronger belief in bigotry

...In their minds Obama's unelectable, just as Bush is 'compassionate'. Their strategies are no longer relevant.

For once, let them react to US!

[Cheap_Trick]

74. Dennis Miller USED to be funny

then he sold his soul for a pitcher of kool-aid. Now he's just pathetic.

[robbedvoter]

76. HE was never funny - but he had better writers. Having lost them - empty gasbag

[robbedvoter]

75. We see testimonials of this daily here - and somehow it's celebrated by BO camp

The least of it - these voters won't be here in GE. The worst - GOP manipulating our primary.

[stillcool]

79. I'm really surprised...

that so many see the incredible turn-outs (record breaking) in state after state as a GOP plot to choose the Democratic candidate. I guess all those people don't count either.

[Voice for Peace]

81. My sister's a Republican who will vote for Obama because she likes him

better than McCain, strongly dislikes McCain.

If people are voting for Obama because they think McCain can beat him, they're underestimating The People

[Political Heretic]

84. You're first mistake is trusting anything Dennis Miller or his callers say...

...or treating it as "representative" of anyone.

[Mr.Fitzgibbons]

100. Oh, I know, and he irritates me with his inane little "smart guy" references

to obscure filmic moments and so on. But for the three minutes I tuned in today I was surprised by the discussion and by this caller, if anything just for this guy's bizarre confidence about matters.

[Political Heretic]

85. PS - my mother and father's first primary and general votes since leaving the GOP (2005)

...will be for Obama. After spending the last two years lamenting how duped they have been for much of their life, they really believe in the leadership quality, vision and message of change that Obama is offering.

[yellowcanine]

87. You are worried about a guy who asks Dennis Miller how to vote?

Dennis Miller doesn't know shit from shinola. So you have to figure someone asking HIM knows even less. I see no reason to concern myself with the political savvy of people like that.

[lapfog_1]

123. It's a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy

using Dennis Miller's listening audience. An audience of what... 300? 500?

[Infinite Hope]

89. Or a Hillary supporter pretending. n/t

[LadyVT]

94. This is coming out more and more; do a search on it

[lapfog_1]

125. Just keep telling yourself that this is true..

a VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY!

Because it can't be that Democrats (not good ones, anyway) aren't voting for Hillary.

Nor can it be that her campaign is the most inept since Ross Perot ran for President.

Yeah, it's all those dirty trickster Republicans... that's got to be the reason!

Because they WANT to face Obama in the fall because they LOVE a good challenge! You see, national polls right now show Obama beating McCain by minimum 6 while McCain beats Hillary by 4, so they really want to start at a 10 point deficit! Yup, that's logical.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

111. Here's a site that has Repubs talking about voting for Obama

It looks like a mixed bag....

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080210224930AA7UC6F

[lapfog_1]

127. Reading through a couple of pages

it appears there are more people claiming to be Democrats who will vote for McCain in the GE if Obama wins the nomination... interesting that all of those "Democrats" were people with female icons and names.

There were a few self identified Republicans voting for Obama in the primary and in the GE.

Only one poster said that they were voting for Obama in the primary so McCain could win in the GE.

Only one.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

119. the Obama peeps don't fucking give a shit

[whatchamacallit]

124. I don't know about you, but I've got better stuff to do than worry about what some troglodyte says

on the Dennis Miller show.

[marshall]

126. Everyone I know in Texas is voting for Obama

That includes both Democrats and Republicans. The Democrats like him, the Republicans figure he is easier to beat and their own primary is decided so they are crossing over.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

128. In Texas, The Republican Crossovers Are Going To Help Obama Immensely.

In fact, in the end of it all, the republican feigned support could end up being the final nail in Hillary's coffin, due to how much tighter they will end up making the race there when the votes come in.