A disturbingly plausible allegation

Overheal

The Boston Globe wrote:

For a party that loves to hate the Clintons, Republican voters have cast an awful lot of ballots lately for Senator Hillary Clinton: About 100,000 GOP loyalists voted for her in Ohio, 119,000 in Texas, and about 38,000 in Mississippi, exit polls show.
A sudden change of heart? Hardly.
Since Senator John McCain effectively sewed up the GOP nomination last month, Republicans have begun participating in Democratic primaries specifically to vote for Clinton, a tactic that some voters and local Republican activists think will help their party in November. With every delegate important in the tight Democratic race, this trend could help shape the outcome if it continues in the remaining Democratic primaries open to all voters.
Spurred by conservative talk radio, GOP voters who say they would never back Clinton in a general election are voting for her now for strategic reasons: Some want to prolong her bitter nomination battle with Barack Obama, others believe she would be easier to beat than Obama in the fall, or they simply want to register objections to Obama.
"It's as simple as, I don't think McCain can beat Obama if Obama is the Democratic choice," said Kyle Britt, 49, a Republican-leaning independent from Huntsville, Texas, who voted for Clinton in the March 4 primary. "I do believe Hillary can mobilize enough [anti-Clinton] people to keep her out of office."
Britt, who works in financial services, said he is certain he will vote for McCain in November.
About 1,100 miles north, in Granville, Ohio, Ben Rader, a 66-year-old retired entrepreneur, said he voted for Clinton in Ohio's primary to further confuse the Democratic race. "I'm pretty much tired of the Clintons, and to see her squirm for three or four months with Obama beating her up, it's great, it's wonderful," he said. "It broke my heart, but I had to."
Local Republican activists say stories like these abound in Texas, Ohio, and Mississippi, the three states where the recent surge in Republicans voting for Clinton was evident.
Until Texas and Ohio voted on March 4, Obama was receiving far more support than Clinton from GOP voters, many of whom have said in interviews that they were willing to buck their party because they like the Illinois senator. In eight Democratic contests in January and February where detailed exit polling data were available on Republicans, Obama received, on average, about 57 percent of voters who identified themselves as Republicans. Clinton received, on average, a quarter of the Republican votes cast in those races.
But as February gave way to March, the dynamics shifted in both parties' contests: McCain ran away with the Republican race, and Obama, after posting 10 straight victories following Super Tuesday, was poised to run away with the Democratic race. That is when Republicans swung into action.

Conservative radio giant Rush Limbaugh said on Fox News on Feb. 29 that he was urging conservatives to cross over and vote for Clinton, their bête noire nonpareil, "if they can stomach it."
"I want our party to win. I want the Democrats to lose," Limbaugh said. "They're in the midst of tearing themselves apart right now. It is fascinating to watch. And it's all going to stop if Hillary loses."
He added, "I know it's a difficult thing to do to vote for a Clinton, but it will sustain this soap opera, and it's something I think we need."
Limbaugh's exhortations seemed to work. In Ohio and Texas on March 4, Republicans comprised 9 percent of the Democratic primary electorate, more than twice the average GOP share of the turnout in the earlier contests where exit polling was conducted. Clinton ran about even with Obama among Republicans in both states, a far more favorable showing among GOP voters than in the early races.
Walter Wilkerson, who has chaired the Republican Party in Montgomery County, Texas, since 1964, said many local conservatives chose to vote for Clinton for strategic reasons.
"These people felt that Clinton would be maybe the easier opponent in the fall," he said. "That remains to be seen."
Wilkerson added, "We have not experienced any crossover of this magnitude since I can remember."
In the Mississippi primary last Tuesday, Republicans made up 12 percent of voters who took a Democratic ballot - their biggest proportion in any state yet - and they went for Clinton over Obama by a 3-to-1 margin.
John Taylor, the GOP chairman in Madison County, said he toured various precincts and witnessed Republican voters taking Democratic ballots to vote for Clinton.
"Some people there that I recognized voting said, 'Hey, I'm going to vote in this primary this year, right now. But don't worry, in November I'll be back,' " Taylor said. "They were going to do some damage if they could."
Another popular conservative radio host, Laura Ingraham, who had also encouraged voters to cast ballots for Clinton, crowed about her apparent success the day after Ohio and Texas voted.
"Without a doubt, Rush, and to a lesser extent me, had some effect on the Republican turnout," Ingraham told Fox News. "When you look at those exit polls, it is really quite striking."
Some political blogs have suggested that the influx of Clinton-voting Republicans prevented Obama from winning delegates he otherwise would have, by inflating Clinton's totals both statewide and in certain congressional districts. A writer for the liberal blog Daily Kos estimated that Obama could have netted an additional five delegates from Mississippi.
It is also possible, though perhaps unlikely, that enough strategically minded Republicans voted for Clinton in Texas to give her a crucial primary victory there: Clinton received roughly 119,000 GOP votes in Texas, according to exit polls, and she beat Obama by about 101,000 votes.
Not everyone casting ballots for Clinton did so primarily to sink her, however. Brent Henslee, 33, a Republican who works at a radio station in Waco, Texas, wanted to keep Clinton in the race to expose more about Obama, whom he sees as more "fluff than substance."
"I'm not buying into all the Obama-mania, is the main reason I did it," he said. "A lot of these people don't know a thing about this guy and they're crazy about him. And I thought that maybe keeping Hillary alive will just shed some more light on the guy."
Of the nine remaining major contests, four - Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Oregon, and South Dakota - have "closed" primaries, which means only Democrats can participate.
If Republicans and conservative independents continue their tactical voting, it may be more likely in Indiana, Montana, and Puerto Rico, which allow anyone to vote, and possibly in North Carolina and West Virginia, which open their primaries to Democrats and independent voters.
"If you are a Republican you could pull a Democrat ballot and vote for the Democrat presidential candidate you think will stand the least chance of beating McCain in the fall general election," the assistant editor of the Greene County Daily World, in southwestern Indiana, wrote in a blog post earlier this month.
Meanwhile, Clinton, despite trailing Obama in delegates, is projecting confidence about her chances as the nomination race careens toward the April 22 Pennsylvania primary. The morning after her big wins in Ohio and Texas, she was asked on Fox News whether she had a message for Limbaugh.
"Be careful what you wish for, Rush," she said with a grin.

it would certainly explain her comeback after everyone predicted her demise.

bonkey

Overheal wrote: »

it would certainly explain her comeback after everyone predicted her demise.

I would have said that an equally plausible explanation was that the predictions of her demise were as premature and sensational than the predictions that it was all over for everyone else at the start and that she was the only candidate.

If you look at the Dem states, for example, where delegates are proportionally awarded, you can have a situation where one of the candidates gets one or two percent more than the other in the popular vote, but where both end up with exactly the same number of candidates.

Is this reported as a draw? Nope....its reported as a victory (significant or not, depending on the size of the state) for whoever got the higher percentage of hte public vote.

Imagime if Man.U were playing Chelsea, the score finished 3-3, and you see a review of the match claiming a decisive victory for Chelsea, because they had possession of hte ball 52% to ManU's 48% and had a few hundred more supporters present.

That's the accuracy with which wins and losses have been reported in the Primaries, and consequently, any claim of someone being 'finished' is a mix of wanting to be the first to predict it and a partially-self-fulfilling prophecy.

Right now, no matter what happens, we're effectively looking at a draw which will be decided by super-delegates rather than by any direct voting by party members. Had those GOP party-members not given Hilary a tiny (in the overall scheme of things) boost, y'know what...we'd still be lookihg at the same outcome - the decision being made by the superdelegates.

Its no more or less over now than it ever has been. Claims of anyone's demise have been premature....but the media need to circus the whole thing up as much as they can to sell copy.

Manic Moran

Though absolutely there is some cross-voting going on, I'm not convinced it's of such a scale to make the difference. Bonkey's post is probably more on the money as to a root cause.

NTM

ghostdancer

Clinton's Republican vote increased dramatically since Limbaugh started his "Vote Hillary" plan.
I also remember one of the exit polls from either Ohio or Texas saying that something like 20% of people who voted for Clinton would not be happy with her as President, up from something like 8% in previous polls, and compared to about 5% for Obama.

lostexpectation

republicans dislike of clinton is pantomine like, they can hardly not dislike obama and his policies more

Manic Moran

His policies, no. They are no less distasteful than Hillary's. The difference from their perspective really lies in the person. The general impression appears to be that, misguided though Obama may be in terms of his policies and philosophies, he's at least a genuine person who believes in his policies and that he can do well by the American people. The perception of Hillary is that she is a person who wants the power for power's sake and believes it is her entitlement. As a result, goes their thinking, Obama is the lesser of two evils.

So why vote for Hillary and not Obama? Because they are still hopeful of a McCain victory in the General and believe they have a better than even chance of doing it with Hillary in the opposing seat. The possibility of a divided Democratic convention (Particularly one which results in violence) would be particularly satisfying for them as well.


NTM

Denis Irwin

Not surprised at this coming from the Republicans seeing as they basically stole the Presidency from Gore in Florida in 2000.

lostexpectation

still seems like they think _others_ will dislike hillary more and that's what important to them, and they would hate obamas shady policies.

Ive actually noticed this on fox news over the last month and a half..I have never seen them come out with anything remotely favourable regarding clinton until now,and now you've got the likes of sean hannity etc coming out pro clinton, pointing out what she could use to her advantage..They have been mentioning repeatedly that a lot of republicans are going to vote for her as a protest vote of sorts..There is the point that after the 20 year anti-clinton campaign they've been running, they may have a chance of beating her as opposed to obama, as we all know there's no chance in hell of mccain beating obama(or if he did, the voting irregularities in the swing states would be just too blatant)..A lot of people hate her after said campaign, more so than Bill too..The republican party has a view of politics as war..They will use any means necessary to destroy their opponent..This is pretty much the age old divide and conquer strategy..A divided democratic party with Hillary as the candidate is the only chance they've got..

Manic Moran

as we all know there's no chance in hell of mccain beating obama(or if he did, the voting irregularities in the swing states would be just too blatant)

I wouldn't go that far. As it stands, Obama has the advantage between the two of them right now, but I don't believe it is so overwhelming as to indicate that the only possible cause for a McCain win is skullduggery: McCain is a strong candidate on his own merits. I seem to recall Clinton having a rather serious lead over Obama in the polls seven months ago, and there's that much time until the General election. Chickens, hatching.

NTM

ghostdancer

Superhands

excellent pie charts / graphs there

there's certainly a shift since Wisconsin

I wouldn't read too much into Mississippi (racial dynamics probably explain the high number there, very few blacks are republicans and nearly all whites voted for Clinton) but the figures from Ohio and Texas are striking

Overheal

So, more condemnation for our political system, anyway. Its bad enough you have to worry about electronic rigging without the voters adding to the problem themselves. -_-

I hope both of them cop on; decide for one of them to pull out (my choice would be hillary) and have that person run as the VP. An Obama/Hillary ticket would certainly nip the issue in the bud.

Superhands

btw the next primary in Pennsylvania is closed so Republicans can't vote in it

ghostdancer

they most certainly can vote in it, as long as they register democrat before March 24th.
and i'm sure for those that would vote in the primary if it was open, this won't be that much of a problem. I'm sure Rush has been shouting about this date in between his borderline racist and xenophobic rants.
they can change their affiliation back the following day, in plenty of time for the General.

lostexpectation

so that graph says they've all been voting for obama, scratch that theory

Manic Moran

they can change their affiliation back the following day, in plenty of time for the General

You don't need to change your affiliation back for the General. Unless PA has some really screwy laws.

NTM

ghostdancer

You're quite right.
I was just out of bed when I posted that, brain obviously hadn't fully kicked in

ghostdancer

The Boston Globe wrote:

"Be careful what you wish for, Rush," she said with a grin.

..........

http://www.alternet.org/democracy/80392/

Will Rush Limbaugh Be Indicted for Voter Fraud?

By Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet. Posted March 21, 2008.

As Ohio election officials investigate illegal crossover voting in the 2008 primary, questions arise on Limbaugh's role.

As the board of election in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, where Cleveland is located, launches an investigation into illegal crossover voting in the state's 2008 presidential primary, a big open question remains unanswered: Will county officials go after the ringleaders of apparently illegal electioneering where thousands of Republican voters swore -- under penalty of law -- allegiance to the Democratic Party in order to vote for Hillary Clinton?

In case you missed it, Rush Limbaugh, the nation's top-rated talk radio host, was urging Republicans in Texas and Ohio to skip their party's primary on March 4 and instead cast a vote for Hillary Clinton in order to prolong the fight between her and Barack Obama. And that Tuesday, as media in both states reported, thousands of Republicans did just what Limbaugh and others had suggested -- they changed parties to vote for Clinton.

"I want Hillary to stay in this, Laura," Limbaugh told Laura Ingraham on Feb. 29, near the start of his Hillary crusade. "This is too good a soap opera. We need Barack Obama bloodied up politically, and it's obvious that the Republicans are not going to do it and don't have the stomach for it, as you probably know."

And on Wednesday, the day after the Ohio primary, Fox News asked Clinton if she owed Limbaugh a thank you. "Be careful what you wish for, Rush," she replied. Later that day, Limbaugh played the Fox tape on his show and said, "How do you interpret this, folks? She could have said thank you. She could have said thank you! In fact, I was expecting in her victory speech last night to be thanked.

"I helped give Mrs. Clinton the biggest and happiest moment and night of the campaign season so far, maybe her life, and she tells me, "Be careful what you wish for, Rush"? Why, that sounds like a threat, does it not? I've got a Democrat presidential candidate threatening your host. Why, I am stunned! After all I did ..."

While this all makes for great talk radio and sounds like fun, there is one catch: What Limbaugh encouraged Republican voters to do in Ohio was a fifth-degree felony in that state, punishable with a $2,500 fine and six to 12 months in jail. That is because in order to change party affiliation in Ohio, voters have to fill out a form swearing allegiance to that party's principles "under penalty of election falsification."

On Thursday, March 20, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported that the "Cuyahoga County Board of Election has launched an investigation that could lead to criminal charges against voters who maliciously switched parties for the March 4 presidential primary." According to the report, "One voter scribbled the following addendum to his pledge as a new Democrat: "For one day only."

"Such an admission amounts to voter fraud," the report continued, attributing that conclusion to BOE member Sandy McNair, a Democrat. The report said the four-member board -- two Democrats and two Republicans -- had yet to vote on whether it would issue subpoenas, although Ohio's secretary of state, Democrat Jennifer Brunner, is empowered to cast tie-breaking votes when the BOE is deadlocked.

In 2008, 2.22 million Ohioans voted in the Democratic primary, compared to 1.27 million in 2000, according to unofficial results released by Brunner's office. In contrast, 1.01 million Ohioans voted in the 2008 Republican primary, compared to nearly 918,000 people in 2004.

Both Ohio's secretary of state and attorney general, both Democrats, were reluctant to embrace the prospect of voter fraud prosecutions.

"Secretary of State Brunner has not been contacted by anyone regarding the prosecution of alleged improper crossover voting," Brunner spokesman Jeff Ortega said. "Prosecution of such activities is the exclusive domain of the county prosecutor or the Ohio attorney general."

"We will not make a blanket statement that we would never pursue a case such as that, but it would be our position that a case such as that would be very hard to prosecute," said Ted Hart, spokesman for Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann, who added that a senior attorney in his office said it would be difficult to ascertain voters' motives on particular days. "The county prosecutor would have the first right of refusal."

But Michael Slater of Project Vote, a nonpartisan group that designs voter registration drives for low-income people, said GOP meddling in the Ohio Democratic Primary was a clear-cut example of fraudulent voting, which is how Republicans have defined the issue in recent years, as GOP advocates have urged state legislatures and Congress to adopt anti-fraud measures such as tougher voter ID laws.

"Here we have a real instance of spurring people on to engage in illegal election activities with a real intent to affect the outcome," Slater said. "That is voter fraud. People were encouraged to break the law. They had to declare allegiance to a political party and sign a document under penalty of perjury. Intent is what matters in voter fraud."

For years, Republicans have literally made a federal case of voter fraud. The Bush Justice Department fired U.S. attorneys who would not prosecute cases of people who GOP politicos believed were impersonating voters to help Democratic candidates.

Voting rights groups such as ACORN, or the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, which registers millions of low-income people in presidential election years, have been prosecuted by U.S. attorneys for voter fraud -- even after ACORN followed the law and alerted the FBI about mistakes made by its volunteers.

After 2004, Republican-controlled legislatures in Florida and Ohio passed laws, now overturned, curtailing voter registration drives under the guise of fighting voter fraud. Meanwhile, numerous states have passed new and tougher voter I.D. laws, all aimed at stopping people who purportedly were impersonating voters.

"I think this is Rush and others inspiring people to commit voter fraud," Slater said. "They should be brought under investigation."