Texas GOP voters rush to oppose Hillary

[gabosaurus]

Someone e-mailed me this link. It seems Republican voters want to make sure Hillary does not win Texas. Among non-Democrats, Obama is favored four-to-one over Hillary.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hotstories/5569829.html

[theHawk]

Someone e-mailed me this link. It seems Republican voters want to make sure Hillary does not win Texas. Among non-Democrats, Obama is favored four-to-one over Hillary.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hotstories/5569829.html

Not sure why that is the case. I'd vote for Hillary because I'd rather see McCain verus Hillary than Obama.

A Hillary nomination would piss off alot of the youth vote and blacks as well. That coupled with Nader running would give McCain a good shot at winning.

[Dilloduck]

Not sure why that is the case. I'd vote for Hillary because I'd rather see McCain verus Hillary than Obama.

A Hillary nomination would piss off alot of the youth vote and blacks as well. That coupled with Nader running would give McCain a good shot at winning.

In Austin it's basically anyone but Hillary--even among the democrats

[gabosaurus]

Good point, Dillo. My best friend Beth said that Obama held two massive rallies in Austin. But that Hillary didn't campaign in Austin because she knows the city despises her.

[JohnDoe]

I don't think republicans should have one single iota of a say in Who the Democratic Party picks for a Candidate and it is essencially CHEATING in my opinion to try to influence it....

This is what happens when the republicans have a winner already i suppose....the citizen repubs have no say so in their OWN party's candidate so they decide to influence the Democratic one imo... :(

And visa versa would happen probably if the Democratic candidate had been chosen already.... i suppose....:(

jd

[Dilloduck]

I don't think republicans should have one single iota of a say in Who the Democratic Party picks for a Candidate and it is essencially CHEATING in my opinion to try to influence it....

This is what happens when the republicans have a winner already i suppose....the citizen repubs have no say so in their OWN party's candidate so they decide to influence the Democratic one imo... :(

And visa versa would happen probably if the Democratic candidate had been chosen already.... i suppose....:(

jd

you mean this is ANOTHER thing that ain't fair ?? :poke:

[JohnDoe]

you mean this is ANOTHER thing that ain't fair ?? :poke:


yep, i see being Fair, as being Just, and being Just as Godlike! :D

jd

[nevadamedic]

no matter who gets the nomination were going to win. It will just be more fun and a lot easier with Hillary. With Obama we have to try to fix all the people he has brainwashed and are believing his massive con. Republicans are pulling for Hillary. In fact several I know are donating money and helping with her campaign as we will walk all over her in the general election.

[JohnDoe]

no matter who gets the nomination were going to win. It will just be more fun and a lot easier with Hillary. With Obama we have to try to fix all the people he has brainwashed and are believing his massive con. Republicans are pulling for Hillary. In fact several I know are donating money and helping with her campaign as we will walk all over her in the general election.
Personally, I think it will be alot easier for you all to win if Obama is the nominee.... unless he's ready for the onslaught of ridicule from the republicans making him out to be a Muslim, which is a lie, making him out to be someone who does not respect the flag, which is a lie, making him out to be a socialist, which is a lie, and a communist, which is a lie, someone who went to madrasas radical schools all his life, which is a lie.... and so on and so forth....oh yeah, that he is weak on foreign policy too....that will be slammed.

Hillary would hold up to the republicans onslaught of swift boating much better than Obama....unless he gets a little more experience at it...which looks like might be coming now...but we will see....

jd

[nevadamedic]

Personally, I think it will be alot easier for you all to win if Obama is the nominee.... unless he's ready for the onslaught of ridicule from the republicans making him out to be a Muslim, which is a lie, making him out to be someone who does not respect the flag, which is a lie, making him out to be a socialist, which is a lie, and a communist, which is a lie, someone who went to madrasas radical schools all his life, which is a lie.... and so on and so forth....oh yeah, that he is weak on foreign policy too....that will be slammed.

Hillary would hold up to the republicans onslaught of swift boating much better than Obama....unless he gets a little more experience at it...which looks like might be coming now...but we will see....

jd

Actually none of what you said is a lie. He was a Muslim, He does not respect the flag, he is a socialist and has strong ties with the socialist end of the Democratic Party, he went to radical schools for several years. This guy is a disaster and a compulsive liar.

[glockmail]

I don't think republicans should have one single iota of a say in Who the Democratic Party picks for a Candidate and it is essencially CHEATING in my opinion to try to influence it.... Its up to the State Parties to make thier own rules. All the Texas Democrats have to do is change the rules to let only Democrats vote in the Democrat primary.

[avatar4321]

i keep hearing about GOP supporting Hillary. The point is to keep this division up as long as possible.

[JohnDoe]

Actually none of what you said is a lie. He was a Muslim, He does not respect the flag, he is a socialist and has strong ties with the socialist end of the Democratic Party, he went to radical schools for several years. This guy is a disaster and a compulsive liar.He was not a muslim, he does respect the flag....was taught that you put your hand over your heart on the pledge, and you stand up straight on the anthem....the picture that is floating around on Obama not with his hand over his heart was when he was standing for the national anthem, AND I was taught the same edicate....in youth.... he is not a Socialist and does not have STRONG TIES with the socialist party....the school he went to in the Muslim country that he lived for a while was NOT A RADICAL Muslim school but a school that accepted children of all religions of which he went to it for a couple of years when VERY YOUNG before going to Catholic Schools....

Just a bunch of lies Nevada....swift boating.

You could nail Obama better if you focus on his lack of foreign policy experience imo....at least that would be somewhat true...

jd

[avatar4321]

He was not a muslim, he does respect the flag....was taught that you put your hand over your heart on the pledge, and you stand up straight on the anthem....the picture that is floating around on Obama not with his hand over his heart was when he was standing for the national anthem, AND I was taught the same edicate....in youth.... he is not a Socialist and does not have STRONG TIES with the socialist party....the school he went to in the Muslim country that he lived for a while was NOT A RADICAL Muslim school but a school that accepted children of all religions of which he went to it for a couple of years when VERY YOUNG before going to Catholic Schools....

Just a bunch of lies Nevada....swift boating.

You could nail Obama better if you focus on his lack of foreign policy experience imo....at least that would be somewhat true...

jd

Once again, Swiftboating is telling the truth about someone.

And simply calling socialist policies non-socialist, doesnt change the fact that they are indeed socialist.

[Psychoblues]

I live and vote in Mississippi. I could tell you very much about the efforts of the pukes to avoid Hillary and endorse Obama. But, that might sound racist, mightn't it? The trips up, cowgirls, Obama can beat mcCain by 20%!!!!!!!!!!!!

[stephanie]

Personally, I think it will be a lot easier for you all to win if Obama is the nominee.... unless he's ready for the onslaught of ridicule from the republicans making him out to be a Muslim, which is a lie, making him out to be someone who does not respect the flag, which is a lie, making him out to be a socialist, which is a lie, and a communist, which is a lie, someone who went to madrasas radical schools all his life, which is a lie.... and so on and so forth....oh yeah, that he is weak on foreign policy too....that will be slammed.

Hillary would hold up to the republicans onslaught of swift boating much better than Obama....unless he gets a little more experience at it...which looks like might be coming now...but we will see....

jd

I love how the Democrats accuse the Republicans of spreading all of the above things, when it is the Democrats themselves(Clinton) that is spreading it...I guess it's a way to pretend they have clean hands or something... they like to PRETEND their the party that NEVER PLAYS DIRTY...

And how do you know all those things about Obambam are lies??????
Nobody ever heard of him until now.....What do we really know about him..??

[JohnDoe]

I love how the Democrats accuse the Republicans of spreading all of the above things, when it is the Democrats themselves(Clinton) that is spreading it...I guess it's a way to pretend they have clean hands or something... they like to PRETEND their the party that NEVER PLAYS DIRTY...

And how do you know all those things about Obambam are lies??????
Nobody ever heard of him until now.....What do we really know about him..??
Just a little research Stephanie and you can find out the truth on everyone of those accusations...it is not hard to decipher the BS going around, I gotta keen eye for it too! :D Timing is how you can tell also....most of the rumors regarding him were out there on the right side of the aisle LONG before the Hill Camp mentioned them...but you are RIGHT, Hill's camp definately tried to use them against him too, but not very effectively because many of the accusations are probably appealing to many of the Obama followers on the left.....the Republicans WILL BE much better at it, and Obama could be crushed from lack of experience on how to handle it all.....but it may also backfire and it gets more Dems than ever at the Polls, so ya never know!?!

:cheers2:

And a top of the morning to you Stephie!

jd

[stephanie]

Just a little research Stephanie and you can find out the truth on everyone of those accusations...it is not hard to decipher the BS going around, I gotta keen eye for it too! :D Timing is how you can tell also....most of the rumors regarding him were out there on the right side of the aisle LONG before the Hill Camp mentioned them...but you are RIGHT, Hill's camp definitely tried to use them against him too, but not very effectively because many of the accusations are probably appealing to many of the Obama followers on the left.....the Republicans WILL BE much better at it, and Obama could be crushed from lack of experience on how to handle it all.....but it may also backfire and it gets more Dems than ever at the Polls, so ya never know!?!

:cheers2:

And a top of the morning to you Stephie!

jd

I enjoyed your pleasant reply dear.....top of morning to you too...

The research on Obambam is he IS more liberal than the Shrill(and I choke as I say that),
I believe he is a TRUE BLUE SOCIALIST(but so is the shrill), dare I say she is not as bad as him(slap me)...
.Some of his past stuff is now coming out and I think it will hurt him...

I'm sorry but I feel his church is the one thing that people need to focus on...
It is not inclusive....it is almost like the KKK.....agree or not, but that's how I see it......

We will see....eh....:cheers2:

[jimnyc]

I don't think republicans should have one single iota of a say in Who the Democratic Party picks for a Candidate and it is essencially CHEATING in my opinion to try to influence it....

There are/were a handful of candidates that are running to become the next President of our country. Why shouldn't I have an opportunity to pick who I feel is better from both sides? Whoever gets the nod will be my President as well as yours. Because I'm a republican, and candidates are democrat, I should never have a say in who I feel is best to run our country? And I don't see why it matters that the gop field is already decided. Nobody can know that ahead of time and it could very well have been the other way around.

Allowing EVERYONE to have their say about the candidates is fair. Following the rules set forth can hardly be considered cheating.

My first choice to have been the next President was Fred Thompson, but I should certainly have a say in ALL the candidates IMO.

[JohnDoe]

There are/were a handful of candidates that are running to become the next President of our country. Why shouldn't I have an opportunity to pick who I feel is better from both sides? Whoever gets the nod will be my President as well as yours. Because I'm a republican, and candidates are democrat, I should never have a say in who I feel is best to run our country? And I don't see why it matters that the gop field is already decided. Nobody can know that ahead of time and it could very well have been the other way around.

Allowing EVERYONE to have their say about the candidates is fair. Following the rules set forth can hardly be considered cheating.

My first choice to have been the next President was Fred Thompson, but I should certainly have a say in ALL the candidates IMO.
Good morning Jim!
What are the rules set forth in Texas?

And if the rules are okay for republicans to choose a Democratic Candidate in the Democratic Primaries in Texas, as has been implied, but Republicans are not allowed to do such if living in another state, how is that fair?

I hate the way each state has a different process in choosing the nominee for a federal election, but i suppose that is one of the things that comes with being a Republic.


Allowing EVERYONE to have their say about the candidates is fair.

Jim, are you suggesting that in every state of the united states that republicans should be able to vote in the Democratic Primary and Democrats should be able to vote in the Republican Primary? Maybe i don't understand?


**This is the part that I am VERY UNEASY WITH and appears to be manipulative and cheating:


An American Research Group poll released Monday showed Obama leading Clinton, 71 percent to 25 percent, among Texas independents and Republicans who are likely to vote in the Democratic primary.

There is scattered evidence across the state that some Republicans may be voting Democratic, at least for a day. In one precinct in the suburban Houston neighborhood of Kingwood, where 82 percent of voters cast ballots for President Bush in 2004, Democrats were outvoting Republicans 4-to-1 last week in early voting.

jd

[jimnyc]

Good morning Jim!
What are the rules set forth in Texas?

And if the rules are okay for republicans to choose a Democratic Candidate in the Democratic Primaries in Texas, as has been implied, but Republicans are not allowed to do such if living in another state, how is that fair?

Don't know the specific rules, nor do I care to look them up. I'm just stating that allowing citizens to have their say about ALL of the candidates running to be leader of our country is hardly unfair.

It's up to other states to set up similar rules. But if a state doesn't allow republicans to vote in democrat caucuses, and doesn't allow the democrats to vote in republican caucuses - then it's fair to both sides.


I hate the way each state has a different process in choosing the nominee for a federal election, but i suppose that is one of the things that comes with being a Republic.

While I'd rather they were all the same too, would you have the government decide how the individual states vote?


Jim, are you suggesting that in every state of the united states that republicans should be able to vote in the Democratic Primary and Democrats should be able to vote in the Republican Primary? Maybe i don't understand?

jd

I don't see why not. Everyone voting should have a say about every candidate that is running. Just because I want Fred Thompson to be our next president doesn't mean I can't have a say in who I think is better qualified to run our country between Obama and Hillary. I think it's silly to say that because I have an (R) next to my name that I'm disqualified from having a say in who might potentially be our next leader.

[JohnDoe]

Don't know the specific rules, nor do I care to look them up. I'm just stating that allowing citizens to have their say about ALL of the candidates running to be leader of our country is hardly unfair.

It's up to other states to set up similar rules. But if a state doesn't allow republicans to vote in democrat caucuses, and doesn't allow the democrats to vote in republican caucuses - then it's fair to both sides.



While I'd rather they were all the same too, would you have the government decide how the individual states vote?



I don't see why not. Everyone voting should have a say about every candidate that is running. Just because I want Fred Thompson to be our next president doesn't mean I can't have a say in who I think is better qualified to run our country between Obama and Hillary. I think it's silly to say that because I have an (R) next to my name that I'm disqualified from having a say in who might potentially be our next leader.

This is HOW it was at one time in our Country when voting for President and I think I agree with you in spirit on what you are saying!

Before the 2 Party system that we are in now, people ran for President and everyone had a choice in who they voted for....

As example, in one race, the top 4 nominees for President all came from the same Party....it didn't matter back then, it was who got the most votes in the Primary of ALL the people....

And in the Presidential Election, it was who got the most votes, ended up being President and who got the 2nd most votes was our Vice President....

If the President and vice president came from 2 different political parties, so be it!

This is quite interesting to read about....I just started getting in to it this past week!

Anyway....your sentiments regarding us having a say in all who are running for president is the exact thoughts of our founding fathers too, imo.

jd

[Abbey Marie]

JD, there were other states last month or so whose primaries allowed crossover voting. Many people think that Dems voted for McCain in those states to help defeat the more conservative Republican candidates. Were you outraged then?

[JohnDoe]

JD, there were other states last month or so whose primaries allowed crossover voting. Many people think that Dems voted for McCain in those states to help defeat the more conservative Republican candidates. Were you outraged then?

I am not aware of these States that you are speaking about....the only one that was evident, in a rush to vote for McCain where there were a great deal of Independent Voters that rushed to vote for him, like in New Hampshire.

There is also a difference early on in the Primary, when candidates have not been chosen yet from either side of the aisle imho, the way our 2 party system is set up. I seriously doubt thousands upon thousands upon thousands of Texas republican voters would have given up their one chance to vote in the Primary for a republican candidate if all of the republican candidates were still on the ticket running, as it was the case in the early primaries, and if it had not already been determined that McCain was their already chosen candidate.

Early on in the process, even if a registered democrat and not an Independent, you get one chance to vote in a primary and one chance to make a difference and forfeiting your Democratic or republican vote in the early primaries means you have made a choice to do such out of your conviction imo, verses doing such because there is no choice left in your own party's primary or doing it just to disrupt and dilute the votes of actual Democratic Party member's votes in their own primary.



If there is such a case early on with Democratic voters doing as you suggest, voting for MCCain and giving up their own chance to make a difference on the Democratic side, then although i have stated why i believe it is a little different, I honestly would probably still be upset, and feel shorted if I were a registered republican.

jd

[avatar4321]

Let me see if I understand this:

When Democrats vote McCain in on the Republican side, it's perfectly alright.

When Republicans vote on the Democrat side using the same rules, it's some unfair conspiracy.

Now I am all for only seeing Republicans vote for Republicans and Democrats vote for Democrats. I am just sick and tired of people saying its alright when Democrats do it, but it's somehow infair if Republicans do it when everything is legal about it.

[nevadamedic]

He was not a muslim, he does respect the flag....was taught that you put your hand over your heart on the pledge, and you stand up straight on the anthem....the picture that is floating around on Obama not with his hand over his heart was when he was standing for the national anthem, AND I was taught the same edicate....in youth.... he is not a Socialist and does not have STRONG TIES with the socialist party....the school he went to in the Muslim country that he lived for a while was NOT A RADICAL Muslim school but a school that accepted children of all religions of which he went to it for a couple of years when VERY YOUNG before going to Catholic Schools....

Just a bunch of lies Nevada....swift boating.

You could nail Obama better if you focus on his lack of foreign policy experience imo....at least that would be somewhat true...

jd

You really are dense. I have some really nice oceanfront property in Arizona that I would be happy to see you too.

[JohnDoe]

Let me see if I understand this:

When Democrats vote McCain in on the Republican side, it's perfectly alright.

When Republicans vote on the Democrat side using the same rules, it's some unfair conspiracy.

Now I am all for only seeing Republicans vote for Republicans and Democrats vote for Democrats. I am just sick and tired of people saying its alright when Democrats do it, but it's somehow infair if Republicans do it when everything is legal about it.Presumptuous dude aren't ya?

Let's see a quote, from any Democrat saying this is alright to do.... start with Democrats posting on this site....

I am sick and tired (play on your words) of you always trying to put some ''bash Democrats'' in to all of your posts.... you are free to do such, but at some point, you begin to look childish and just plain silly Avatar.

I have never defended Democrats for doing such, and I have not seen any Democrats defending Democrats for doing such.

It is possible that I have missed such and if this is the case then I apologize for getting "snappy" with you...

jd

[Gaffer]

Like the general election the primaries should all be held at one time. That way there is no influence over the elections by previous primaries, as we have now.

[avatar4321]

Presumptuous dude aren't ya?

Let's see a quote, from any Democrat saying this is alright to do.... start with Democrats posting on this site....

I am sick and tired (play on your words) of you always trying to put some ''bash Democrats'' in to all of your posts.... you are free to do such, but at some point, you begin to look childish and just plain silly Avatar.

I have never defended Democrats for doing such, and I have not seen any Democrats defending Democrats for doing such.

It is possible that I have missed such and if this is the case then I apologize for getting "snappy" with you...

jd

Just check any of the threads I started on Democrats crossing over and voting for our nominee.

If you think speaking the truth is childish, then Ill take that as a compliment.

[Abbey Marie]

Just check any of the threads I started on Democrats crossing over and voting for our nominee.

If you think speaking the truth is childish, then Ill take that as a compliment.

Thanks, Av. I wasn't feeling well enough to go searching right now.

[JohnDoe]

Just check any of the threads I started on Democrats crossing over and voting for our nominee.

If you think speaking the truth is childish, then Ill take that as a compliment.
I did a search on cross over voting and came up with one thread that you started and i went through that thread and there were no Democrats defending cross over voting as you claimed...

maybe you could back up what you said better than me? you can modify the search to other words that you think you may have used other than "cross over voting".....you can give these words to me and i will continue to search for it, so you don't have to also....

or just chalk it up to it not being the case?

jd

[5stringJeff]

Since small-government conservatives are going to abandon McCain and Dems are likely going to win the general election, four years of Obama seem much more palatable to me than four years of Hillary. He's naive; she's dangerous.