The 2008 presidential field at-a-glance - Page 23

PeppyGPhiB · #**331** 03-04-2008, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by srmom

The word on the street here in Texas (at least at my primary voting spot) is that MANY republicans are voting for Hillary to keep her in the race. The line to vote democrat was twice as long as the repub line, and there were neighbors who I know are not dem leaning who were in it.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Just a question about this. Is this even possible? In Texas do people have to register by party? I live in a state where party registration is not required, so the Democratic party does not honor our primary votes in assigning delegates - they use our state caucus instead, because people attending those proclaim to be Democrats and may be identified publicly as such. They do this so they can avoid the very situation you describe; they only want Democrats choosing the Democratic party nominee. If you must register by party in Texas, are you saying that people registered as Republicans can still vote Democrat? (in some states where you register by party, I think you're only offered the ballot of your party) If so, why does the Democratic party accept the primary vote in Texas, but not in some other states?

bluefish81 · #**332** 03-04-2008, 07:46 PM

Don't most states let you switch your affiliation the day of the vote? They could switch to Democrat and then switch back to Republican I guess. I'd be curious if they'll all come back for the caucuses since Texas is doing the primary/caucus thing and there are delegates up for grabs in both parts of it.

UGAalum94 · #**333** 03-04-2008, 08:17 PM

I don't know how this works in Texas, but in Georgia you declare which party's primary you are voting in the day of the election and you get that ballot. (and the DNC still counts Georgia primary votes; you don't have to be registered any other way than general voter registration*.)You only get to vote in one, of course, but if it's worth it to you to vote against Hillary in the Democratic primary rather than for a Republican or against Huckabee rather than for a Democrat, you can do it. (Republicans "crossing party lines" was said to have played a role in Cynthia McKinney not being elected the last time she ran.)

Even if you have to register as a member of the Democratic party in advance in Texas to vote in the Democratic primary/caucusy thing they've got going on , if you really thought it was important, I can see people doing it. It's not as if a party representative can see into your heart to judge why it is that you want to vote Obama or Hillary.

And in the general, everybody gets the same ballot, so you wouldn't have to switch back until the next time you wanted to vote in the Republican primary.

* I can see why it would be a little weird for any person to be able to pick a given party's candidates, but for so long it was the case in most of Georgia that all the locally elected folks would be elected in the Democratic primary since no one ran as a Republican, but many of the same people wouldn't really support the Democratic candidates at the national level. Having an easy open primary was probably the most authentically democratic thing to do in terms of allowing the most people to vote.

DaemonSeid · #**334** 03-04-2008, 10:55 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/huckabee

nittanyalum · #**335** 03-05-2008, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/huckabee

FINALLY. (re: Huckabee)

Clinton's cleaning up in Ohio!

texas*princess · #**336** 03-05-2008, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by srmom

The word on the street here in Texas (at least at my primary voting spot) is that MANY republicans are voting for Hillary to keep her in the race. The line to vote democrat was twice as long as the repub line, and there were neighbors who I know are not dem leaning who were in it.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

I heard that Republicans were "crossing party lines" to vote for Obama since they didn't like Hillary... lol who knows which one or if both were true.

In Dallas, there was a record turnout... Largest since sometime in the 80's.

It looks like Hillary took Ohio, Texas & Rhode Island.... no word on the Texas caucus (sp?) winner yet....

(p.s. I love that in Texas you can vote "twice"... we call it the Texas Two Step

)

DaemonSeid · #**337** 03-05-2008, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by texas*princess

I heard that Republicans were "crossing party lines" to vote for Obama since they didn't like Hillary... lol who knows which one or if both were true.

In Dallas, there was a record turnout... Largest since sometime in the 80's.

It looks like Hillary took Ohio, Texas & Rhode Island.... no word on the Texas caucus (sp?) winner yet....

(p.s. I love that in Texas you can vote "twice"... we call it the Texas Two Step

)

I actually have a friend who is a delelgate captain in Texas that i am interviewing for a podcast tonight....altho you all got the 2 step...she said it wasn't fun at all....hehehe

as a matter of fact..if anyone has time

click the link and vote please

http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/328197

KAPital PHINUst · #**338** 03-05-2008, 11:04 AM

It's down to McCain vs. Ron Paul at the GOP Convention.

This is gonna be good to watch. Make no mistake, McCain has not secured the GOP nomination. Only the delegates themselves can decide the nomination, and until the GOP Convention commences in St. Paul this September, it's still anybody's shot (including those who dropped out--fortunately or unfortunately).

jon1856 · #**339** 03-05-2008, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KAPital PHINUst

It's down to McCain vs. Ron Paul at the GOP Convention.

This is gonna be good to watch. Make no mistake, McCain has not secured the GOP nomination. Only the delegates themselves can decide the nomination, and until the GOP Convention commences in St. Paul this September, it's still anybody's shot (including those who dropped out--fortunately or unfortunately).

srmom · #**340** 03-05-2008, 11:29 AM

In Texas, you just register to vote, not by party. When you show up at the polling place (at least at mine), you go either in the line to the left - which oddly is the republican line, or the one to the right, the democrat line. It's all in the same high school library, but on opposite sides. You can vote whichever way you want, but they fill in your information so that you can't vote in a runoff on the other side.

I doubt very seriously that the delegates of the republican party would deny McCain the nomination and give it to either Paul or one of the others who dropped out. For one thing, for the next few months up until the conventions, the republican party machine will now coalesce behind McCain and his running mate (whoever it will be), and will be running a full assault against the two democrats, Hill and Obama, who will be fighting against each other.

While Hill and Obama are spending their campaign $$$ smearing mud on each other, McCain will be setting himself up as "the statesman" above the fray. It would be better for the dems to broker some deal, because if not, they are going to waste months and money on the fight for the nomination - BUT, I don't see that happening.

ThetaDancer · #**341** 03-05-2008, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SECdomination

Poor Osama Obama!

I don't get it...

DaemonSeid · #**342** 03-05-2008, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThetaDancer

I don't get it...

you don't ?

Seriously?

KAPital PHINUst · #**343** 03-05-2008, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by srmom

I doubt very seriously that the delegates of the republican party would deny McCain the nomination and give it to either Paul or one of the others who dropped out.

I doubt that the delegates would be that naive enough to believe that McCain would have any real chance against Hillary or Obama. But then again, stranger things have happened, and perhaps the GOP will be just gluttons for punishment, because trust, if McCain gets the nomination, expect him to get a severe @$$ whipping by either Hillary or Obama. McCain is Bush^10, only more dangerous and it appears that voters can see right through his facade. Perhaps that explains why his media coverage pales in comparison to Hillary and Obama.