News Republican Voters Crossover: Who Came Out on Top?

  • Thread starter Thread starter undrcvrbro
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the potential for crossover voting in primaries, particularly among Republican voters who may support Democratic candidates they view as less threatening. Participants reflect on their own experiences, noting that while crossover voting is possible, it has not been significant in recent elections, with reports indicating only about 10% participation in some open primaries. The conversation also touches on the dynamics of the upcoming general election, suggesting that independents will play a crucial role, and expressing skepticism about the viability of a Black presidential candidate in the current political climate. Concerns are raised about the ethics of crossover voting, with some arguing it could lead to sabotage of the opposing party's candidate. The discussion highlights the complexities of U.S. primary systems, where rules vary by state, allowing for different levels of crossover participation. Additionally, there is criticism of voting technologies, particularly Diebold, which some believe detracts from the electoral process's excitement and transparency.
undrcvrbro
Messages
131
Reaction score
0
It's definately a possibility that many of the republican voters who know McCain has their party in a choke hold are crossing over to vote in the democratic primary against whoever they despise more. I know I did. I voted for O'bama, but somehow Clinton came through on top. I guess there's more women over 80 in Ohio than I had thought.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm considering it for the PA primary, but it seems cumbersome and I'm lazy...

I heard on the news today that there hasn't been much crossover vote (10% in one open primary I think), but dunno. The hotter the campaing gets (and the more irrelevant the Republican primarys have become), the more crossover there might be.
 
russ_watters said:
I'm considering it for the PA primary, but it seems cumbersome and I'm lazy...

I heard on the news today that there hasn't been much crossover vote (10% in one open primary I think), but dunno. The hotter the campaing gets (and the more irrelevant the Republican primarys have become), the more crossover there might be.

I think we all realize that regardless, it will be McCain vs. O'Bama, and at this point crossover really can't be too serious of an issue.

In the general election, on the other hand, it's the independents that will win it. I just can't see a plurality of people voting for a black man. I'm sorry. Maybe I'm racist (gasp).
 
Normally, I'd say that the US isn't "ready" for a black president, but McCain shoots himself in the foot on a daily basis. I think people will get fed up with him more than they will be against Obama or Clinton.
 
Yes, agreed McCain has only hurt himself. He'd probably be better off just stopping all publicity towards himself until the generals. He has no need for it.
 
That happened in Fl as well. http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/vote-polls/FL.html" voted in Florida's "closed" Republican Primary. All it took to register as a Republican in that primary was to register as one 30 days before the election. With the Democrat Primary essentially meaningless, it is very likely that there was significant crossover.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thats something I don't quite understand about US primaries.
If you are a member of (say) the republican party - how do you vote to choose the democrat candidate?
Doesn't this just lead to sabotage - couldn't (eg) republicans could vote for a no-hope or joke democrat candidate to wreck the competition?
 
mgb_phys said:
Thats something I don't quite understand about US primaries.
If you are a member of (say) the republican party - how do you vote to choose the democrat candidate?
Doesn't this just lead to sabotage - couldn't (eg) republicans could vote for a no-hope or joke democrat candidate to wreck the competition?

Yes. It happens all the time. It's probably how Bush got elected both times (well, that and Diebold...). And some people think this is ethical. :rolleyes:

It's the American Way.
 
That's the problem with Dielbold - it might be efficent but it does take all the excitement out of an election
 
  • #10
mgb_phys said:
Thats something I don't quite understand about US primaries.
If you are a member of (say) the republican party - how do you vote to choose the democrat candidate?
Doesn't this just lead to sabotage - couldn't (eg) republicans could vote for a no-hope or joke democrat candidate to wreck the competition?
For the primaries, every state is different, but some have "open" primaries that let anyone vote for any party and some give you the ability to change your afiliation a month ahead of the primary.
 
  • #11
mgb_phys said:
That's the problem with Dielbold - it might be efficent but it does take all the excitement out of an election
You're mostly right. In Florida's election in 2000, the problems were almost entirely related to the paper ballots. In fact, I think part of what worries people is that having the ballot be truly secret takes away the potential for ambiguity. There's no wiggle room without chads to argue about and sue over.

But people want drama, so if the results aren't what you are looking for and there isn't anything else to argue about, blame Diebold.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
32
Views
9K
Replies
139
Views
16K
  • Poll Poll
Replies
10
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
78
Views
40K
Back
Top