Chaos? Not In Pennsylvania

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.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

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.

Disobey authoritarians, support The Nation

Over the past year you’ve read Nation writers like Elie Mystal, Kaveh Akbar, John Nichols, Joan Walsh, Bryce Covert, Dave Zirin, Jeet Heer, Michael T. Klare, Katha Pollitt, Amy Littlefield, Gregg Gonsalves, and Sasha Abramsky take on the Trump family’s corruption, set the record straight about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s catastrophic Make America Healthy Again movement, survey the fallout and human cost of the DOGE wrecking ball, anticipate the Supreme Court’s dangerous antidemocratic rulings, and amplify successful tactics of resistance on the streets and in Congress.

We publish these stories because when members of our communities are being abducted, household debt is climbing, and AI data centers are causing water and electricity shortages, we have a duty as journalists to do all we can to inform the public.

In 2026, our aim is to do more than ever before—but we need your support to make that happen. 

Through December 31, a generous donor will match all donations up to $75,000. That means that your contribution will be doubled, dollar for dollar. If we hit the full match, we’ll be starting 2026 with $150,000 to invest in the stories that impact real people’s lives—the kinds of stories that billionaire-owned, corporate-backed outlets aren’t covering. 

With your support, our team will publish major stories that the president and his allies won’t want you to read. We’ll cover the emerging military-tech industrial complex and matters of war, peace, and surveillance, as well as the affordability crisis, hunger, housing, healthcare, the environment, attacks on reproductive rights, and much more. At the same time, we’ll imagine alternatives to Trumpian rule and uplift efforts to create a better world, here and now. 

While your gift has twice the impact, I’m asking you to support The Nation with a donation today. You’ll empower the journalists, editors, and fact-checkers best equipped to hold this authoritarian administration to account. 

I hope you won’t miss this moment—donate to The Nation today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel 

Editor and publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x