[Dan]

there is nothing to write here.

[Dan]

The "not a chance in hell" option is muddy, and I can't figure out how to edit it. I meant that the # or % of D's voting R, will be matched by that of R's voting D. Sorry for any confusion.

[#10]

no, they'll all move to Canada

I suppose there will be a few who do vote Republican, but in a few months time, after the pain of losing has worn off, the "I'm voting McCain" will be about as true as the "I'm moving to Canada"

[GOD]

I think the vast majority of CS (clinton supporters) will jump on the Obama train. I am not too worried about the working class vote that went Clinton, I think they will mostly all come around, and the younger women I think will also support Obama. The only group that I think are going to be hard to get back into the fold are the elderly, especially older women. This is why states like Florida are going to go way of the R this time around. But, the map is changing, and several other R states will go D, like Colorado, New Mexico, Indiana and possibly even Montana and Georgia. It should be one interesting race.

[It's_GO_Time]

My mom swears she isn't going to vote this election because of the way Hillary was treated during her campaign.

Not trying to start a debate if Hillary deserved the treatment or even if she was in fact treated badly . . . only sharing one perspective out there.

[Dan]

Originally Posted by It's_GO_Time

My mom swears she isn't going to vote this election because of the way Hillary was treated during her campaign.

Not trying to start a debate if Hillary deserved the treatment or even if she was in fact treated badly . . . only sharing one perspective out there.

It's interesting how women think how she was treated was any different than that of a man. If anything, they treated her with kid gloves because of the fact she was Bill Clintons wife, and a woman.

[ATLien]

I like turtles.

[maxiep]

I voted "Yes, but not in big #'s". My mom and her friends organized/participated in several Hillary Clinton fundraisers during the campaign season. After she suspended her campaign, a large group of them (women in their 50s and 60s) met and talked about what they were going to do next. It's a small sample group, but not a single one of them was going to vote for Obama. They were more likely to stay home, but some were going to vote for Sen. McCain.

I don't get it, but at least among those hard-core Hillary supporters there was a feeling like Sen. Obama somehow "stole" what was rightfully theirs. According to my mom, there was a real feeling that this was finally going to be the time for a female president. Now, they don't see another viable female candidate on the horizon. A lot of women had been dedicated to the Democratic Party for precisely this moment, and rightly or wrongly, there's a segment out there that feel cheated.

I think that number will decrease as the campaign goes on, but there will be a chunk of voters that either don't vote or vote for McCain out of spite. As William Congreve wrote, "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."

[seifer0406]

For most people that don't have a strong support for a particular candidate, election is always about voting the lesser of the 2 evils. For the people that were supporting Clinton, theres no way that McCain falls ahead of Obama on their evil scale.

They'll either vote Obama or simply won't vote at all. I doubt any of them will turn around and vote for someone that Clinton is clearly opposed of. Some of them might say they'll vote McCain out of anger because Hilary lost the race, but those feelings will simmer down over the next 4 months or so and they will eventually make the most logical choice for them.

[Dan]

Going to vote for McCain instead of Obama because of a perceived slight of Clinton because she is a woman, is a rather ignorant thing for women (or men) to do. It's not like McCain and Clinton are even remotely close to the same candidate. To me, anyone who claims that they won't vote for Obama because he 'stole' the nomination from her, is just talking about sour grapes (and saying that actually adds to the grapes).

If you truly were for Clinton, you would not be for McCain. It's like saying that if you love cats and hate dogs, and in a race of "best pet", you preferred the picture tuxedo cats (Clinton) for the ballot. But it lost and Turkish van cats (Obama) won.

So now all the sudden you decide to vote for the dog on the ballot (which was a Pitbull) because you wanted the tuxedo to win.

It's just dumb. No matter how you spread it. McCain and Clinton (or Tuxedos and Pitbulls) are not even close to the same.

[maxiep]

Originally Posted by Dan

Going to vote for McCain instead of Obama because of a perceived slight of Clinton because she is a woman, is a rather ignorant thing for women (or men) to do. It's not like McCain and Clinton are even remotely close to the same candidate. To me, anyone who claims that they won't vote for Obama because he 'stole' the nomination from her, is just talking about sour grapes (and saying that actually adds to the grapes).

If you truly were for Clinton, you would not be for McCain. It's like saying that if you love cats and hate dogs, and in a race of "best cat", you prefer tuxedo cats (Clinton) but they lost and turkish van cats (Obama) won that you'd all the sudden vote for a pitbull because you wanted the tuxedo to win.

It's just dumb.

Hap, to be fair, it's easy for us as middle aged men to say it's dumb. That being said, I dare you to go to one of these meetings and call these women dumb.

[Dan]

Originally Posted by maxiep

Hap, to be fair, it's easy for us as middle aged men to say it's dumb. That being said, I dare you to go to one of these meetings and call these women dumb.

There's a difference between calling an act dumb (or ignorant as I did also) and saying that they themselves are dumb. I did not call them dumb, but the act of claiming that they are going to vote for McCain almost in spite of Obama, despite the fact that McCain and Clinton weren't at all close in political ideology, and Obama and Clinton were significantly closer, is dumb.

It's cutting on your nose in spite of your face. And in this case could potentially be very dangerous, and if they're truly Clinton supporters and not just "she's a woman, so I support her" supporters, they would be able to see the bigger picture is more important than their own personal hurt feelings about the fact she's a woman and was "slighted". Especially when you take into the account that one could argue that it's even more crazy that a black man won the nominee than a woman, since we've had a female VP candidate before, and never have had a legit black Presidential candidate (and on top of that, I think slavery trumps any wrong-doings that women have had against them as a whole, especially white women).

And if you take into account that one of the candidates is all but being called a secret a terrorist, a(n evil) Muslim, an American hater and not "black enough" by some.

Whats the worst that Clinton has had to deal with? People "saying" she should drop out (which wasn't said by anyone who mattered in the media) because she was mathematically all but eliminated (go figure, they were right) or a joke that she cried earlier in the campaign or that she seemed to have a selective memory?

The women who are claiming this need to realize the reason she lost wasn't because she was a woman, but because she ran a poor campaign from the get go.

I would say the exact same thing about Obama supporters who would change allegiances (Democratic to McCain) if she had won the nominee (legitamately too).

It's holding on to pride that tends to screw things up. This screams it.

So yes it's easy for me to say it (as an older white guy), but sometimes the truth hurts, and in this case it's sour grapes, nothing more, nothing less.

[barfo]

I accidentally voted for two different options, but what I think is that while there will be a small number of Democrats who vote for McCain out of spite, there will be a larger number of Republicans who vote for Obama.

barfo