Chaos? Not In Pennsylvania

There was a ridiculous amount of hype about right-wing talk-radio personality Rush Limbaugh's campaign to get conservative voters to switch their party registration and vote in the Pennsylvania Democratic primary for Hillary Clinton.

Limbaugh's line was that Clinton was the weaker Democrat and so Republicans should keep her in the race -- either in hopes that she might somehow become the nominee or that her continued candidacy would undermine frontrunner Barack Obama.

But self-identified conservatives split almost evenly between the two candidates. Indeed, exit polls had Clinton and Obama splitting right-wing votes at a rate of 52 Clinton to 48 Obama -- less than her overall margin.

The ideological measure is the most useful one, since the actual number of voters who told exit pollsters they were Republicans was so small -- 3 percent -- that the polls could not provide credible measures of support levels for Obama and Clinton. Among self-identified independents -- 14 percent of the electorate -- Obama won 55-45.

Among the more than one in 10 Pennsylvania voters had registered as Democrats since the beginning of the year -- some of them Republicans, many independents and political newcomers -- more than 60 percent backed Obama.

And in the traditionally Republican counties around Philadelphia, Obama won some and lost others to Clinton by narrower margins than he was losing statewide. In Montgomery County, for instance, it was Clinton 51, Obama 49. In suburban and exurban counties to the west of the city, such as Delaware, Chester and Lancaster, Obama won by comfortable margins.

Limbaugh-inspired chaos on behalf of Clinton? Forget about it.

Clinton won Pennsylvania with strong support from mainstream Democrats -- union members, low- and medium-income workers, those without college degrees, people who are most worried about the economy.

The 82 percent of primary voters who proudly identified themselves as Democrats chose Hillary Clinton by a 56-44 margin over Barack Obama.

They were deciders, not Limbaugh-inspired agents of chaos. And, interestingly, the vast majority of Clinton and Obama voters say they'll back the Democrat in November. Indeed, the levels of Democratic loyalty displayed in the exit poll numbers were comparable to or better than in many past presidential primary contests.

Of course, there will be partisan cross-over voters this fall. But with more than a quarter of Republicans rejecting the essentially uncontested candidacy of John McCain in that party's primary, there is good reason to believe that whatever chaos there is will merely be a Democratic challenge.

Comments (55)

1. "Operation: Chaos" is about "keeping spirits" up or even trying to prove the still-relevance of the Hard Right.

   Rush comes on, in the Era of McCain, to try to convince his ditto-heads that "they still matter" with a supposed "infiltration" of the Democratic primaries to "cause chaos and hurt Obama".

   In fact, it's merely a way for Rush to keep his base that, despite the fact McCain will soon ignore them, even possibly sell them out....they still "have power".

   Posted by Mask at 04/22/2008 @ 10:13pm

2. BTW, speaking of not-that-relevant groups....where were Cora Currier's "youth vote" that was going to win Pennsylvania for Obama?!?!??

   heheh

   Posted by Mask at 04/22/2008 @ 10:14pm

3. Posted by HAPPY2 04/22/2008 @ 10:28pm

   Ya'll have to forgive HAPP....he's a ditto-head who lives in this weird zone where he actually thinks Rush says what he means, and isn't playing a game for ratings and relevance...

   and where Rush will alter his opening monologue based on an e-mail from HAPPY!!!

   heheh

   Posted by Mask at 04/22/2008 @ 10:32pm

4. that's it!

   you guys must now begin outsourcing your voting.

   sheesh.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/22/2008 @ 11:05pm

5. boink. boink. boink. boink. boink. boink. boink. boink. boink.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/22/2008 @ 11:06pm

6. There was a ridiculous amount of hype about right-wing talk-radio personality Rush Limbaugh

   Same as it ever was...same as it ever was...same as it ever was.

   Posted by Balrog at 04/22/2008 @ 11:19pm

7. "They never came through with what they promised" was a common mantra from disaffected demos of the recent past. "They never delivered universal health care". Even the Norquist inspired plan to strip all elements of the New Deal& more, hasn't shaken them. And these are working class people! Maybe the Jeff's plan to "bleed the beast" or whatever the hell they call it, is more widespread than any of us dare to believe. Watch for sun bonneted burkas in your neighborhood.

   Posted by Sorelish at 04/23/2008 @ 03:12am

8. RE: Chaos? ...

   No that's dangerous that many republicans voted for barack obama in penn. not only that they fear HRC as a fighter for small guys but, rather, they know Mr. Obama could never win tyhe genral election. It's like 2000 when a lot of dem voters voted for McCain in the primaries not because they liked mc Cain, but rather because they feared a Bush administration.

   Posted by HelenDAO at 04/23/2008 @ 03:15am

9. Obama outspent Clinton by a wide margin in Pennsylvania, and still LOST by double digits!

   Through in the popular votes from Florida and Michigan, and Clinton will win the overall popular vote.

   What then? Will The Nation still say Obama has the support of the people, and act as if the popular vote doesn't count?

   Posted by Zeddmen at 04/23/2008 @ 06:48am

10. The fact that kook-left-wing-blogs like you are even commenting on this means that it was a HUGE victory for Limbaugh. He does this stuff for publicity, and you just gave him exactly what he is looking for. You people just don't understand that he is in the business of attracting listeners , not politics. Geesh - another one bites the dust.

    Posted by quarlesc at 04/23/2008 @ 07:58am

11. Posted by ZEDDMEN 04/23/2008 @ 06:48am

    "Michigan"?....the Soviet-style election where she was the only one on the ballot?

    You think they're going to count that?!?!?!?

    Posted by Mask at 04/23/2008 @ 08:59am

12. I don't care who wins the Dem primary but I do care about truth and this article's conclusion about "Operation Chaos" may be true but is founded on faulty data. In order to detrmine the "Chaos" affect you need to see how conservatives would have voted if there had been no "Chaos". Saying conservatives barely gave Clinton a majority and then concluding there was no "Chaos" affect does not account for the possibility that conservatives may have gone strongly for Obama pre-"Chaos". There was a time that Limbaugh was not pushing this "Operation Chaos", how were conservatives voting in those states? That is not perfect but a better indicator of the actual impact then final results. If conservative would have gone hard for Obama before, then "Chaos" had an impact and maybe an important one. I don't have the numbers or the inclination to follow up but I did want to point out that the methodology in this article is all wrong which makes the article useless except as an example of poor thinking.

    Posted by Prof. B. at 04/23/2008 @ 09:03am

13. The author missed the point about the Limbaugh Chaos effect and also has NO real way of knowing who did what or why. The fact that there were a lot of Republicans re-registering as Democrats to vote was to keep the contest going - not to help make Clinton the nominee. The longer it goes without a winner, the harder it will be for the democrats to pull together for the fall. Even Howard Dean is worried about that. It also means that the country learns more about Obama the longer it goes. The story has been written about all the Republicans changing their registration. Will the story be written later this year when they re-register as Republicans? I doubt it.

    Posted by Grandmago at 04/23/2008 @ 09:06am

14. Michigan"?....the Soviet-style election where she was the only one on the ballot?

    You think they're going to count that?!?!?!?

    Posted by MASK 04/23/2008 @ 08:59am | ignore this person

    My mistake. You are alsolutely right. They should re-do the Michigan vote so that Domocrats' votes are counted.

    Unless so-called progressives want to stiffle democracy and not let the people's voices heard properly.

    Posted by Zeddmen at 04/23/2008 @ 09:17am

15. I think that they are some republicans that Obama can get that did NOT change their parties. Not everyone would go through the hassle of changing parties to vote in a Primary but those that went for Ron Paul in the primary I think Obama can get them in the General election. Not voting for McCain and voting for Ron Paul seems to me an Anti war faction of the republican party.

    Carol

    Posted by harriscrl3 at 04/23/2008 @ 09:19am

16. Posted by ZEDDMEN 04/23/2008 @ 09:17am

    Dean splits the difference and figures up some plan to SPLIT the MI and FL delegates to offer NO advantage to Clinton or Obama. Effectively a "wash".

    Anything else he both (A) shows he is powerless and (B) gets blasted for "giving" Hillary states she didn't really earn or cheating Obama states he didn't really get to campaign in.

    So, ultimately...they won't matter.

    Posted by Mask at 04/23/2008 @ 09:42am

17. BTW, here's the delegate count after last night-

    Hillary Clinton---1,584

    John Edwards---18

    Barack Obama---1,710

    Posted by Mask at 04/23/2008 @ 09:46am

18. Why would anyone be truthful with exit pollers? The last election proved that calling an election at 2pm based on exit polls is sheer idiocy. Ah, but calling the MSM idiots is redundant. BTW, why hasn't Obama put Hillary away yet?

    Posted by RedJerseyGirl at 04/23/2008 @ 10:28am

19. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/23/2008 @ 10:19am

    So now you DON'T like "Swiftboating"?!?!??!

    Plus, on a purely non-partisan note, I DON'T think you want to play up an angle of "McCain is handicapped".

    Posted by Mask at 04/23/2008 @ 10:47am

20. Not being able to lift one's hands above their head precludes one from being President of the United States? I guess only if you are a Dem and looking to surrender...

    Posted by RedJerseyGirl at 04/23/2008 @ 10:52am

21. Again, why hasn't Obama put Hillary away yet? No stake through the vampire's heart? No silver bullet cutting down the werewolf? No Messiah to vanquish the unbelievers? Tsk, tsk, tsk and here I thought he was the 'White Knight' come to save the Democrat Party from themselves. And all of us for that matter...

    Posted by RedJerseyGirl at 04/23/2008 @ 11:04am

22. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/23/2008 @ 11:05am |

    Darin, I think everybody has figured it out...you're a MASS of rationalizations ALL of which is based on your partisan politics.

    When it's a Republican...it's "no big deal" (Bush's youthful indiscretions)....when a Democrat...."vital concern over their character" (Obama and "drug dealing").

    When it's a Republican..."Okay, so what? Bush had a cushy stateside post"....when a Democrat..."Kerry ONLY spent 120 days in Vietnam and his Congressional hearing proved he hates America and the country".

    And on and on and on. No doubt you went on and on and on about Kerry marrying Theresa for her money....but it's "completely different" when McCain marries Cindy for her cash that started his AZ political career. Or "Hillary is shrill and might be on her period during an international crises"....but "McCain's temper is just part of his charm".

    We get it.

    Posted by Mask at 04/23/2008 @ 11:12am

23. Instead of worrying about anti-McCain strategy, has anyone answered the question - 'WHY HASN'T OBAMA PUT HILLARY AWAY YET?'. I guess the MSM has to preemptively strike against the RINO to ease the bloodied Dem nominee's entrance into the final showdown. But the question remains as to why Saint Barack has been unable to slay the Beast.

    Posted by RedJerseyGirl at 04/23/2008 @ 11:29am

24. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/23/2008 @ 11:49am

    No, Darin, it's not "discrimination" fair or unfair....it's rationalization.

    Whereby the guys you LIKE, get a pass...for the things you chastise the guys you DON't like for doing.

    So McCain was "only a $100 Million gold-digger, when he left his injured wife Carol Shepp, after having numerous affairs, for the much-younger Cindy...one of the dames he was having an affair with"...and not the despicable Kerry, whose wife, Julia Thorne, amicably asked HIM for a divorce (and was in good health), for a woman he met years AFTER the divorce was finalized, Theresa Heinz?

    Oh, no....it's just at matter of taste isn't it?

    Posted by Mask at 04/23/2008 @ 1:16pm

25. but self-identified conservatives split almost evenly between the two candidates

    This is the flaw in your analysis, John - "self-described" conservatives don't capture the Operation Chaos types who obviously want to be under-cover "liberals" than self-described conservatives.

    You need better numbers than that to make your case that Operation Chaos didn't have an effect in PA!

    Posted by Metteyya at 04/23/2008 @ 1:21pm

26. Posted by METTEYYA 04/23/2008 @ 1:21pm

    As stated above "Operation: Chaos" is merely a publicity stunt by Limbaugh to make it appear as if he and his ditto-heads are still RELEVANT...in an Age of McCain Republicanism, where the Hard Right will be left begging for scraps from the table once the General Election starts.

    Oh...and ratings for El Rushbo!

    Posted by Mask at 04/23/2008 @ 1:53pm

27. Do you honestly believe I'd vote for Obama on the single issue of divorce over taxes, abortion, guns, etc.?----Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/23/2008 @ 2:06pm

    No, but I believe you'd "tangent" OFF of actual issues and into character attacks. Character attacks that if turned around on Republicans (or even shown WORSE in the Republican) you'd excuse out of partisanship.

    See, I think you try to put up their personae of being a "fair-minded guy...not like a PONTI or LVLIB conservative" and that you've "weighed ALL the evidence"..."even considered voting for Obama, but regretably couldn't"...

    But I don't buy it, Darin.

    You play off the same rationalizations and partisanship as THOSE guys, just with a spoonful of sugar.

    If Kerry's "gold-digging" REALLY bothered you...then you'd have a WORSE criticism for McCain and how he dumped Carol Shepp, after cheating on her, and then married Cindy (loaded with cash and political influence in AZ) to jump-start his career.

    Or if Dennis DeConcini, Alan Cranston, John Glenn, or Donald Riegle (or ANY Dem connected with the "Keating Five") were the Dem nominee now...or in the past...you'd be ALL over it, calling their character into question and "doubting that they were innocent"...

    But since it's McCain (also a Keating Five)...nada.

    And there's only ONE explanation for it....party affiliation.

    Posted by Mask at 04/23/2008 @ 2:33pm

28. why hasn't Obama put Hillary away yet?

    A better question is: Why hasn't Hillary, with all her "experience", put Obama away? Why is such a "seasoned" polician having so much trouble with a comparative new-comer?

    Posted by Balrog at 04/23/2008 @ 2:50pm

29. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/23/2008 @ 3:09pm

    Okay, Darin, if you say so.

    I just notice you are quick-nimbled to the keyboard whenever it's something NON-issue related like "mis-spent youth" or "Swift Boating Kerry".

    As for "taxes, the environment, health care, SCOTUS, SS, and Medicaid"...yes, that IS what I'll base it on. And of course "incompetence" and "a quaqmire war"

    Now, granted McCain is SLIGHTLY better than Bush. I have a feeling we'll see a "Read My Lips" moment in St. Paul Labor Day weekend at the Convention...and IF he gets elected, a similar to Bush-41 rejection of that moment when his fiscal boys tell him "what the numbers look like".

    And he wouldn't buy into the "Terri Schiavo" or "stem cells are 'babies'" silliness. Plus, he actually thinks there IS global warming and we're part of the problem.

    But all in all, not worth a "third Bush term" to me...on the war, Supreme Court justices and judges, and whatever "scraps" he'll throw to the Hard Right to "keep them in line" for 2012.

    Plus, the guy's just not that decent a fellow, despite his Media image.

    Whoever the Dems put up...despite their "bitchiness" or "selling blow in Maui"....GOT to be better.

    Posted by Mask at 04/23/2008 @ 3:39pm

30. @ BALROG 04/23/2008 @ 2:50pm The MSM. They have eaten the Clintons' excrement for so long now that they see a refreshing change in Saint Barack. Why, you should ask, doesn't the MSM ask him any really serious questions about his 'associates', his disdain for ordinary people and his seriously beyond Socialist view of our future? The closest thing to that came in the last debate. Boy, he wasn't too quick on his feet without a teleprompter. Comparative newcomer, maybe, but pretty seasoned nonetheless. Don't kid yourself and think Obama is a fresh faced novice. No one wakes up one morning with stars in their eyes and says, "I know! I think I am going to run for the US Senate!" Those people who run are handpicked and groomed. In US politics it the same as it has been for a very long time...it's not what you know, but who you know. (Lord, the Founders must be on rotisseries in their graves.)

    Posted by RedJerseyGirl at 04/23/2008 @ 3:39pm

31. Boy, he wasn't too quick on his feet without a teleprompter.----Posted by REDJERSEYGIRL 04/23/2008 @ 3:39pm

    Hmmm...I heard that EXACT LINE used on a radio show yesterday....'bout noon-ish, big fellow from Missouri, had some run-ins with the law, claims his listeners are NOT "mind-numbed robots"!?!??

    What WAS his name?....something like "Speed" or "Vamanos" or something.

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 04/23/2008 @ 4:22pm

32. Nichols - you have been fooled by Operation Chaos in which they specifically instructed their operatives to LIE to exit poll interviewers as to whether they were a conservative or whether they supported Hillary!

    The transcript below is straight from Rush Limbaugh:

    RUSH: What a night for Operation Chaos, even acknowledged in much of the local media throughout Pennsylvania. The Drive-Bys, you can just... Well, Fox also spent a lot of time talking about Operation Chaos. But the Drive-By Media just know it. The elites in the media are just fit to be tied. They're talking all around Operation Chaos without mentioning it. The New York Times -- which editorialized in favor; endorsed Mrs. Clinton for president, at least for the Democrat nomination in an editorial -- today appears to be pulling back. There is total chaos in the Democrat Party, and I'm going to spell out exactly what that chaos is in mere moments. But first I want to thank and congratulate all of you troops, all of you volunteers in Operation Chaos for a job well done. Once again last night, the exit polls were worthless. The first wave of exit polls at one o'clock had a 17-point Hillary win. The five o'clock, wave of exit polls had Hillary up by four: 52 to 48. When the polls closed at eight o'clock, every Drive-By news outlet said, "It's too close to call." Yet it was Mrs. Clinton by almost ten points at the end of the night, and I think a lot of Operation Chaos operatives actually did yeoman duty in misleading exit pollsters after they had voted.

    One thing that's been noticed is that Obama really does well in the exit polls, but it's just the exact opposite when the votes are counted. So a job well done. Today, I, as C-in-C USOC: Commander-in-Chief US, Operation Chaos; am giving all of you in the rank-and-file an R&R day. You have earned it. You have deserved it.

    BREAK TRANSCRIPT

    RUSH: Let's start with the analysis of what happened by going to an audio sound bite. This is Norah O'Donnell last night on DNCTV, otherwise known as PMSNBC. The statistics here will serve as our transition point.

    O'DONNELL: NBC News poll specifically asked Clinton and Obama voters what they would do if their preferred candidate did not win the nomination, and they were faced with the following choice: Support the other Democrat or vote for John McCain or stay home. First, as you see here, only 53% of Clinton voters said they would vote for Barack Obama. That's stunning! Only 53%. And when you look essentially at Obama voters, 69% said they would vote for Hillary Clinton if she ends up the nominee. And what about those new voters that we were talking about, remember, more than 300,000 new Democratic voters in Pennsylvania today? Check out this number: 29% of those new voters said they would not vote for Hillary Clinton in November.

    RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Operation Chaos. Now, let's review these numbers. Only 53% of Clinton voters say that they would vote for Obama. Twenty-five percent of her supporters say they would vote for McCain. Eighteen percent say they would stay home. Operation Chaos! The Drive-Bys are stunned by this. You heard Norah O'Donnell. She can't figure this out. She said it's amazing! Operation Chaos. As for Obama voters, 69% said they'd go ahead and vote for Hillary if she's the nominee; 16% say they'd vote for McCain; 13 would stay home. Twenty-nine percent of Obama voters would not vote for Hillary, according to these polls. Let's say even 75% of that is true. This portends an ill wind for the Democrats. What about those new voters, some 300,000 new voters in Pennsylvania? Twenty-nine percent said they would not vote for Hillary Clinton in November. Operation Chaos. On Bloomberg News last night, they reported that one in ten voters -- one in ten, 10%! Now, in terms of election numbers, this is a huge percentage.

    One in ten voters say they changed party registration to vote in this year's Pennsylvania primary. Ten percent of the vote is huge. That would be five times the past high for a crossover vote with a closed primary. That's an absolutely huge number -- and once again, ladies and gentlemen, that is Operation Chaos.

    Posted by Metteyya at 04/23/2008 @ 6:05pm

33. If 10% changed their registration to vote in PA as indicated, and the changed registration number has been around 6% this primary season, this ADDITIONAL 4% attributable to Operation Chaos is what accounts for a 9 point victory by Hillary rather than a 5 point victory.

    We all don't like Rush, but Operation Chaos is having a REAL effect on the outcome in favor of Hillary Clinton.

    Posted by Metteyya at 04/23/2008 @ 6:13pm

34. Because Democrats are in love with change for change's sake and anything new always has a huge advantage over anything familiar.

    Certainly a huge advantage over that with which we have been familiar over the last, oh, 7 years or so...

    Posted by Balrog at 04/23/2008 @ 6:28pm

35. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/23/2008 @ 4:40pm

    Is that the plan...let McCain go under in 2012 if he wins THIS year, so you can get the "real conservative" in 2016?

    Posted by Mask at 04/23/2008 @ 8:22pm

36. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/23/2008 @ 7:12pm

    But the other guys don't get to participate....so do they break Left or Right?

    We'll see.

    Posted by Mask at 04/23/2008 @ 8:23pm

37. Posted by MASK 04/22/2008 @ 10:32pm

    Ya'll have to forgive HAPP....he's a ditto-head who lives in this weird zone where he actually thinks Rush says what he means, and isn't playing a game for ratings and relevance...

    Well, you know, Rush has all that competition from Air America to worry about!

    Posted by pontificus at 04/23/2008 @ 9:40pm

38. I just want to thank all you lefties for the free entertainment in this primary. Watching two complete losers like Hillary 'Sniper Fire' Clinton and Barack 'God Damn America' Obama go after each other with hammer and tongs is just too much fun to be legal. And unless McCain stumbles badly, which is unlikely, neither one of these two jokers will garner more than the kool-aid drinkers that make up 42-45 percent of America, the fraction that habitually votes for Democrats.

    Posted by pontificus at 04/23/2008 @ 9:44pm

39. Posted by PONTIFICUS 04/23/2008 @ 9:40pm

    Not about "competition", PONTI. It's about ratings dropping away in the last few years as Rush had to defend his "perfect storm" of Government (i.e. a Republican-run Congress and a "real deal conservative" President)....who both were monumental failures and Rush had to keep coming out and trying to defend them as a SMALL (I grant) percentage of his audience started saying "Huh?...Are you kidding, Rush? That was stupid".

    No, Rush needs the boost. In fact, he the REAL boost he needs is Obama WINNING. Something to FIGHT against from 2009-2012.

    McCain elected? Rush and YOU and the rest of the Hard Right slowly get pushed back to the back of the auditorium where you were during Nixon and Ford, as McCain builds his "new coaltion"...stem cells, pro-global warming, pro-affirmative action, pro-immigration, "Sorry, had to let the tax cuts lapses" "Read My Lips" moment of 2010.

    That's what "Operation: Chaos" is all about...making YOU think you are still relevant, and showing Rush can still wield guys like you to keep himself invited to the "cool parties" if McCain is elected...

    and of course the ratings whenever somebody like John Nichols of "The Nation" gives him a mention, or better yet Wolf Blitzer or Chris Matthews.

    You don't think Rush DOESN'T have an ulterior motive.....do you?!!???!

    Posted by Mask at 04/23/2008 @ 9:52pm

40. Posted by MASK 04/23/2008 @ 9:52pm

    You don't think Rush DOESN'T have an ulterior motive.....do you?!!???!

    Unlike you lefties, MASK, I don't see a conspiracy behind every action. Rush has more money than God, and he got it because he has principles that he believes in absolutely. Sure, he'd be disappointed if he lost his radio show, but I seriously doubt if that's what keeps him up at night. Having someone like Obama as President, a man who tolerates and condones the fostering of racial hatred in this country, I'm sure is much more of a concern to Rush than anything else, including having another lukewarm Republican as President.

    Why you see some need to read ulterior motives into his actions says more about you than anything else.

    Posted by pontificus at 04/23/2008 @ 9:58pm

41. Remember, MASK, a guy like Reagan only comes along every couple of generations, if that. The rest of the time, we have to make do with mediocrities and charlatans as President, especially in times when half the country has pretty much lost whatever good sense they were born with.

    Posted by pontificus at 04/23/2008 @ 10:00pm

42. Remember, MASK

    how could i forget?

    , a guy like Reagan only comes along every couple of generations, if that.

    thank god!

    The rest of the time, we have to make do with mediocrities and charlatans as President,

    i thought you said guys like reagan were a rarity.

    especially in times when half the country has pretty much lost whatever good sense they were born with.

    yeah, they voted for bush, ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡TWICE!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Distorted by PONTIFICUS 04/23/2008 @ 10:00pm

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/23/2008 @ 10:15pm

43. Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 04/23/2008 @ 10:15pm

    Ah, FROSTY, if we could all make music for a living, perhaps then we could afford Democrats in the White House. Unfortunately, most of us have to live in the real world.

    Posted by pontificus at 04/23/2008 @ 10:19pm

44. well, the past administration (although much blame also lies further in the past)

    has really mucked up MY economy (i.e. ME).

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/23/2008 @ 10:23pm

45. Posted by PONTIFICUS 04/23/2008 @ 9:58pm

    Yes, because Rush has never kept any secrets from you before...has he? [cnn.com]

    "Remember, MASK, a guy like Reagan only comes along every couple of generations, if that. The rest of the time, we have to make do with mediocrities and charlatans as President..."---Posted by PONTIFICUS 04/23/2008 @ 10:00pm

    just "Reagan", PONTI?....did you forget somebody, or now willing to call Dubya a "mediocrity" or "charlatan".

    (Revision from PONTIFICATE coming in 5....4...3...2...1....)

    Posted by Mask at 04/23/2008 @ 10:46pm

46. ....Clinton won Pennsylvania with strong support from mainstream Democrats......Democrats chose Hillary Clinton by a 56-44 margin over Barack Obama.

    Exactly..."mainstream Democrats" who will vote Democrat no matter who the candidate is in the general, despite the exit poll numbers suggesting that a lot of Hillary supporters won't vote for Obama. Democrats will vote for either Hillary or Obama in the general especially since McCain will still be courting the conservative right and thus remind them of Bush's policies.

    Now, Hillary can't take any votes from McCain. Republicans, moderate or not HATE her. She will not take any independents from McCain either. Obama will take some moderate republicans (especially with McCain courting conservatives) and will take a good portion of independents...It's a pretty simple formula. Luckly for Dems, after last night its even clearer that Obama will be the nominee.

    On another note, I love how she makes a big deal about winning big DEMOCRATIC states, like California and New York won't go for Obama if he's the nominee...ridiculous! Those who vote for her may fall for all of her obvious spin, but I imagine or hope that most of the supers can think for themselves...

    Posted by danconstan at 04/23/2008 @ 10:51pm

47. In Operation Chaos, crossover voters bet

    Rush's mere irrelevance, is easy to forget

    Confusion is contextual, the pundit's ready tool

    A box of hammers sensual, is wisdom for the fool

    Be proud to vote your conscience, vote in legions of the brave

    And slake the thirst of heros, this country for to save

    Give not your attention, to steam and mirror'd memes

    Leave the games to players, harken higher themes

    Been fighting to a standstill, been losing sight of dawn

    Live the change you long to see, not "who's side are you on"

    Posted by ttr at 04/24/2008 @ 12:13am

48. canada's a big place.

    and we pay world oil prices. which affects many, many, many prices.

    which affects many, many people.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/24/2008 @ 12:55am

49. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/24/2008 @ 08:02am

    Shorthand, Darin. He's "pro" the idea that global warming is occuring and that it is atleast "in part" caused by man-made activities.

    Now...care to try again to explain it away? Or want to try a HAPPY answer and say "McCain doesn't REALLY mean it"?

    Posted by Mask at 04/24/2008 @ 08:56am

50. Since there is a lot of talk and few actual numbers citations on this comment string, I offer the following analysis I wrote for the comments section of the reprint of this article on Common Dreams. Please let me know where I "went wrong" in the analysis. ................................................................

    Before we quite throw out of court the effectiveness of the execrable Mr. Limbaugh's Operation Chaos in PA, consider please a few facts about the election (these are tentative, requiring closer examination of actual election results.) 1. There were about 2.3 million votes, and Clinton's margin of victory was about 215,000 votes.

    2. If, as estimated, 1 of 10 primary voters were former Republican registrants, that makes 230,000 such voters.

    3. On Nichols estimate of 40% of these former Reps voting for Clinton*, this means that Clinton received about 92,000 votes that she would not have received (and which, I would argue, are almost totally "Limbaugh" voters who would not vote for her in November if she were nominated, opposed to the "principled" Obama voters who were probably mostly white men eager to have a "safe" Democrat in the White House: the "kind" who would condemn a Jeremiah Wright).

    4. While the absence of these 92,000 "Republican" votes would not have deprived Clinton of her plurality win, it would certainly have reduced the margin of her win well below the "double digit" win that both campaigns said would be necessary to keep her in the race. With the 92,000 she does (or just barely misses) the magic 10% and voila! the contributions pile in and pundits announce her as still "viable."

    No wonder Rush was celebrating on the "morning after." And, as they say, perhaps "it's not over yet." Registration changes in Indiana and North Carolina ahead of their May 6 primaries are already closed, but Indiana election officials are complaining of the difficulty of processing an "overwhelming" number of new registrants. Hmm.

    *I personally believe this is a low estimate. If it is based on "exit poll" results as Nichols indicates and if only 3% of poll exiters identified themselves as ex-Republicans, isn't it obvious that, as one poster here noted, these mischief-makers who entered the Democratic contest to vote for a candidate for whom they would not vote in November would be unlikely to admit the scam that they were committing?

    Posted by Jerry D. Rose at 04/24/2008 @ 11:37am

51. Posted by JERRY D. ROSE 04/24/2008 @ 11:37am

    You are right on point, Jerry!

    Without Operation Chaos, this is a 4-5% win for Clinton, and this fact is being GROSSLY UNDER-REPORTED in both the mainstream and alternative press!

    Posted by Metteyya at 04/24/2008 @ 1:17pm

52. RE: Jump the Ship ...

    Well, yoou may think reporters on the average is clverer than the mortals. Nope, they're as corruptive as Rovians. And opportunistic.

    ------------

    Media Jump Ship From Obama To Clinton April 24, 2008 10:02 PM

    -------------------------------------- Read More: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Media Barack Obama, Media Jumping Ship, Media Jumping Ship From Obama, Breaking Politics News Media Politics Show your support. Buzz this article up. Buzz up!Show your support. Digg this article.

    About Thomas B. Edsall Thomas B. Edsall is the political editor of the Huffington Post. He is also Joseph Pulitzer II and Edith Pulitzer Moore Professor at the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism. From 1981 to 2006, he was a political reporter at the Washington Post. He is the author of Chain Reaction and Building Red America. Tom can be reached at edsall@huffingtonpost.com.

    Like this story? Get Alerts of big news events. Enter your email address

    In a blink of an eye, the media has jumped ship from the Obama campaign and become a crucial Clinton ally, pressing just the message -- that Obama is a likely loser in the general election -- that Hillary and her allies have been promoting for the past six weeks.

    Posted by HelenDAO at 04/25/2008 @ 03:41am

53. why is this blog all in bold?

    Saturday, April 26, 2008 1:07:40 AM

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/26/2008 @ 01:03am

54. Frosty: Mine isn't all bold, but at least the "larger text" enables me to see it. Of course, that means I can type like 3 words visibly into the teeny-tiny text box - and the lack of HTML support still pisses me off.

    Posted by leftofcenter at 04/27/2008 @ 12:23pm

55. Posted by MARYBRETBRAD 04/24/2008 @ 08:02am

    Au contraire MBB, see: http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/10/white-house-glo.html

    Posted by leftofcenter at 04/27/2008 @ 12:24pm