"It's true that over the last couple of months, polls that asked Clinton supporters whether they would defect to McCain found as many as 30 percent who were willing to do so. But these polls, taken in the heat of a Democratic primary fight, were meaningless. I agree with Kerry's 2004 pollster Mark Mellman, who likens the polls of Clinton's supporters at their keenest moment of disappointment to asking women (or men) in the middle of a heated marital argument about their Valentine's Day plans. In the NBC post-primary poll, tempers were already cooling: Only 19 percent of Clinton supporters said they'd vote for Obama."

Shouldn't that say "McCain" at the end of the paragraph? Otherwise, Obama's support among Clinton voters has plummeted like a stone. Going from 70% to 19% doesn't suggest a cooling of tempers to me...

Yeah, gotta be a typo.

Definitely a typo. I agree with everyone that these numbers will go down, but I think that many of those who are planning to vote for McCain are not doing so out of anger.

There was a woman on TV the other night who was talking about a web site that was put together for Hillary supporters who are going to vote for McCain. She expressed a view that I have said over and over, which was that essentially she felt the difference between Hillary and McCain was much less than the difference between Hillary and Obama. Since her first choice is not available she will vote for McCain.

I think Obama is so far left that to me his views are too extreme. He has no experience that is relevant. B Clinton had executive experience and Hillary has worked on many projects over the years and I have to believe she learned a lot while Bill was president. While some consider Bill a negative, but consider the support he could have provided her. I do not believe for a second she would do what ever he told her. However, given how intelligent he is, I think his advice would very often reflect the correct way to go.

So at this point I cannot imagine voting for Obama. If I owned a business I could not see letting someone with virtually no experience running it. Can't imagine hiring a contractor to work on my house who had little experience but promised that he would change the way houses were built.

I think that the one thing that is lost on people is that change means you are going to get something different (I really dint believe it) but it does not mean it is going to be better. Also promises of doing something like it has never been done before is a crock. Go read some of the Greek novels and you will realize that while technology changes so many of the problems in life have not changed.

People throughout time have tried pretty much everything. If his new idea was so good, a mirror image of his idea would already exist somewhere and it would be clear that it was the way to go. However, the governments that reflect his philosophy are in existence today but are not as successful as what we already have.

He may win but I am confident that either nothing will change, in which case he might stand a chance of being reelected, or he will get the change he says he want and a different Dem will be running in his spot because he would have NO chance of winning.

Hillary Clinton has zero "executive experience".

Sleeping with the President doesn't count.

The only thing that she has in common with John McCain is her skin color. That's why she endorsed Obama.

"I think Obama is so far left that to me his views are too extreme."

Obama's views on all the major issues are so close to Hillary's as to be virtually indistinguishable. You're either a poor reader or a Republican troll.

raptor5618:

There was a woman on TV the other night who was talking about a web site that was put together for Hillary supporters who are going to vote for McCain. She expressed a view that I have said over and over, which was that essentially she felt the difference between Hillary and McCain was much less than the difference between Hillary and Obama. Since her first choice is not available she will vote for McCain.

That woman seems unable to read the candidates' platforms. Stating that Clinton is closer to McCain than to Obama is like placing Iceland in the Southern Hemisphere during a geography test. That woman should vote for McCain, because the perennially clueless have been voting Republican for decades.

You may classify anyone who would vote for McCain that would rather Hillary as clueless or unread or any other negative you chose. But if you are unable to evaluate why they would chose McCain over Obama, you really have not examined the differences between the candidates.

That woman is not alone, and every person who has made that choice has a reason. Some valid, some not so valid but to pass it off as being clueless I think reflects more on you than that woman. When you begin to think that anyone who does not think like you is wrong or not smart enough to understand why you are right, you are more likely to have no judgment rather than good judgment.

As far as Hillary's experience, the fact that she slept with Bill is not proof that she has executive experience although it probably says something about how good she is after the lights go out.

All this talk about how headstrong she is, how determined, how she would do anything for power and then you imply that until she got into the senate she did nothing but screw Bill and make cookies. That just does not make sense.

She worked while in Ark and she took on but failed in changing the Health care system when it was not such a popular idea. And if you are old enough to have heard the term She went to school on him, you also might consider how much she learned about the decision making process while Bill was in office.

While some of their stated policies are similar, well at least the ones that Obama stole from her, the ones that are different, may seem subtly different but when looking at them the differences are vast. I also think that Obama's stated policies and ideas are not as far left as his thinking is.

By contrast I think Hillary, yes pandered to the left, and stated policies that were more liberal than she would ever be in office. Did you know she did work for the Republican party when she was younger. So in my view Obama is more liberal than what he states and Hillary is less liberal than what she states. So yes I still think the way she would run the White House is closer to how McCain would than how Obama would.

The reasons for people deciding to vote McCain are differet for each person. I'm done arguing about it. They either will for whatever reasons, or they won't.

All I can do is put forth my arguments as to why I feel it is a very poor choice, and I won't stop doing that.

Case in point..for a man who keeps saying he's a "maverick" and that he's not a third term of George Bush I offer this.

<link>

raptor, the "clueless" part refers, I'm sure, to your argument that Clinton is more similar to McCain than Obama. Anyone who understands where the candidates stand on all of the major issues would consider that statement clueless. No informed person would make such a statement...it simply is not true.

Vote for McCain if you want, but don't use that as a reason...it doesn't fly. I'm sure you have your reasons, but their stance on the issues isn't one of them.

PS. The only pandering that Clinton did was to the right...not the left. EVERYONE knows that, hell, even the media laughed about it. Sorry, if you want a left female candidate, look to the Republican Party..oops, no...that's the party of white men.

raptor5618:

While some of their stated policies are similar, well at least the ones that Obama stole from her...

Yeah, stole from her...hill-larious