Operation Chaos and Dem Defections

The premise of Rush Limbaugh’s much criticized Operation Chaos is that prolonging the Democratic primary battle helps the GOP. Is it working? Consider a Gallup poll that reports:

A sizable proportion of Democrats would vote for John McCain next November if he is matched against the candidate they do not support for the Democratic nomination. This is particularly true for Hillary Clinton supporters, more than a quarter of whom currently say they would vote for McCain if Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee. ...

As would be expected, almost all Democratic voters who say they support Obama for their party’s nomination also say they would vote for him in a general election matchup against McCain. But only 59% of Democratic voters who support Clinton say they would vote for Obama against McCain, while 28% say they would vote for the Republican McCain. This suggests that some Clinton supporters are so strongly opposed to Obama (or so loyal to Clinton) that they would go so far as to vote for the “other” party’s candidate next November if Obama is the Democratic nominee.

What is motivating these Democrats? Why is McCain their second choice? Granted, John McCain long has been many (most?) Democrats’ favorite Republican, but one would think that real Democratic Party loyalists would prefer any Democrat to any Republican, even John McCain. One can only assume that the premise behind Operation Chaos was correct and that the longer Obama and Clinton continued to battle the angrier some pockets of their supporters become with the other side. Of course, it is a very long way to November. It is entirely possible that the Democrats will come together after they finally settle on a candidate, especially if they have a successful convention. (Of course, one still hears grumbling in some parts of the Democratic net roots that their convention this summer ought to look a lot like Chicago 1968, which would be all the good.)

It is interesting, however, that at this point the Republicans seem to pull together—albeit somewhat begrudgingly—behind McCain, while it’s the Democrats that are so sharply divided. Six months ago the conventional wisdom assumed it would be the other way around.

Posted on Wednesday, March 26 2008 | Permalink

I think it’s due to the mutation of “Bush Derangement Syndrome” to “Opponent Derangement Syndrome,” or ODS. This phenomenon appears to be largely limited to those on the Left. I’m not a huge fan of McCain, but there’s no chance that I will not pull the lever for him come fall. And that would apply no matter who the Republican nominee was. Not true for those on the Left. Anyone who is stupid/evil enough to support someone other than My Guy (or Gal), is an Enemy of the State.

Posted by  on  03/26  at  02:12 PM

I think this reflects more of the perceived ideological differences between Clinton (perceived by most as a left-moderate, probably closer to a down-the-middle moderate in reality) and Obama (perceived by most as a left/liberal, probably closer to a left-moderate in reality) than it does party loyalty. Those Democrats on the right will consider voting for someone they perceive as a moderate out of party loyalty, but not those they perceive as a liberal. See, e.g., the “Reagan Democrat” phenomenon. If given a choice between a perceived conservative and a perceived liberal, ideology will probably trump party loyalty for many Democrats.

Of course, living this close to Chicago, I’ve already voted. Several times.

Posted by C.E. Petit  on  03/26  at  03:16 PM

Just a note of interest. The name BARAK means “FLASH OF LIGHTENING”. The name is of HEBREW ORIGIN. The Bible speaks of BARAK (a valiant man) AND DEBORAH,( a prophetess) who delivered Israel in a time of trouble against overwhelming odds ( See the Book of JUDGES in the OLD TRSTAMENT chapters 3 and 4 ).
On the question of Barak and Hilary or Hilary and Barak being on a joint ticket ,a good idea but is it really a workable good idea , I mean who will take first place and who will take second ?.
A joint ticket is out of the question . Let each candidate stand or fall on their own election mandate.
THe next American President needs a clear majority mandate to rule with confidence and certainty and good sound judgement.
If it is Hilary,so be it. If it is Barak, so be it, if it is John McCain , so be it.
Let the people vote. That is Democracy. When the chips are down Americans will make the right decision.
Just don’t move the goal posts or change the rules by changing horses mid stream.
America is a great country and who ever of the three is elected, will make a good President. God Bless America. Errol Smythe.

Posted by  on  03/26  at  04:10 PM

Are you really giving credit for this to Rush Limbaugh?

He couldn’t determine his own party’s nominee!!

Posted by  on  03/26  at  04:51 PM

I seriously doubt this poll.  Remember all the conservatives who were saying they would never vote for McCain?  Come november, Democrats will vote Democrat.

Posted by MikeS  on  03/27  at  12:51 AM

It’s one thing to tell a pollster how you’d vote eight months down the road, and another thing to actually do it.  And I don’t think it’s Limbaugh deserves the credit.

However, it is also true that the negative attacks between Clinton and Obama have helped McCain far more than they’ve helped either of the two Democrats.  And Clinton and Obama are spending every dollar they raise, while McCain is able to horde his money.

Posted by  on  03/27  at  01:49 AM

The poll is probably accurate, but it’s a temporary phenomena.  Right after Hillary drops out the D party will unify behind Obama, just as R’s unified behind McCain.

Get used to saying “President Obama.”

Posted by  on  03/27  at  04:47 PM

Premises in russia presently, on surprise, cost(stand)s much cherish than in developed country of the Europe

Posted by Eduard  on  03/28  at  06:39 AM
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Introduction


Recent Punditry Entries


Hot Topics on Food & Wine

Hot Topics on Law & Business


Punditry RSS Feed

Flickr

Archives

My Books



Blogroll