Posted on 03/07/2008 6:08:22 AM PST by fightinJAG
Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh led a campaign to have his Republican followers in Texas cross party lines and vote for Sen. Hillary Clinton in the state’s open primary last Tuesday. Why? Because Limbaugh thinks Republicans can defeat Clinton in a general election. Plus, watching Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama bloody each other in a nomination fight is pure sport for Limbaugh conservatives.
According to exit polls, Clinton won a notably higher number of Republican voters than she has in past open primary contests. Of the 9% of voters who identified themselves as Republicans in the Democratic Primary, Obama still edged Clinton 53%-46%. However, that margin is significantly slimmer than earlier contests. In Wisconsin’s open primary, for instance, Republicans broke 72%-28% for Obama. Similarly, in Virginia’s open primary, Obama was favored 72%-23%.
Clinton unquestionably secured a Texas victory, but some locals are convinced it was a false win bolstered by dirty politics. Laura Jean Kreissl, an accounting professor at West Texas A&M University, served as an election official in Canyon, Texas on Tuesday. She contacted the Wall Street Journal to report the hijinks she observed at the four precincts that voted at her polling location.
Of the 181 voters she personally dealt with, 70 offered that they were “Rush Limbaugh voters” who were there to cast ballots for Clinton. “I’m here to vote for Hillary Clinton, I want to see the Democratic Party implode,” one voter told Kreissl, she recounted in an interview. “I was just stunned,” she said. “As an election official we can’t say anything. We just jot them down and let them vote.”
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.wsj.com ...
How could they tell ? Did the voters wear little flags in their lapels ?
Which is why I do not see the Democrats holding new primaries in Florida or Michigan. If they did every Republican in the state would cross over and vote, and the results would be meaningless to the party.
Hmm. Hadn’t thought of that. Thanks.
While I’m pondering that, I will say that this is exactly one of the reasons I think Rush’s stunt was too cute by half. I object to “teaching” people that it’s okay to view one’s vote as nothing more than a poker chip to play around with.
I am glad so many GOP’ers did this b/c it may change the 2012 primaries so that more of them are closed. We are tired of Liberals crossing over and selecting our nominee. When they do that, they view it as acceptable but when we cross over it is a perversion of democracy. Remember, you can’t teach a liberal until their own tactics backfire.
Now they know how it felt to have the GOP candidate selected by Dims and Indies.
Turn about is fair play.
Republican primaries should be for those registered as such just as Dim primaries should be for those regestered as Dims. Indies should get a backbone and get off the fence. JMHO.
That is horrible. What kind of election official just sits by and lets voters vote when they disagree with them? Obviously she was not trained well.
Oh that’s just perfect!
It must be be fun to get to define the words. It is "dirty politics" when republicans vote in the democrat primary, but democracy in action when democrats vote in the republican primary. Democrats can dish it out, but they sure can't take it.
We will look back on Rush's stunt when Hillary is being sworn in.
She is FAR BETTER positioned to beat McCain.
Her people haven't even begun to take out the knives they have reserved for the Republicans.
She is far better positioned to “move to the middle” and cut off McCain's appeal to the middle.
Barakomania was going to implode of its own weightlessness, and he was a weaker candidate for the final election.
All Rush had to do was keep his big fat mouth shut — but he wanted to get back at the dems for crossing over to elect McCain.
But we were already crossing over, although is far less coordinated fashion, to help give Barak a boost. Rush tipped that heavily toward Hillary, and now the vampire is out of the casket.
Rush has made himself an 800-lb gorilla in the room — and I think he — and we — will all regret it.
“If they did every Republican in the state would cross over and vote, and the results would be meaningless to the party.”
I was wondering about that since I live in Michigan. I think a problem might arise because in the first primary, I requested a Republican ballot. I don’t know if I would be allowed to now vote in the democrat primary, version 2.
Just another reason the GOP is the Stupid Party.
I have a lot of doubt the Republican voters made the difference for Hillary. Of the cross over voters I know, most of them voted for Obama to try and kill off the beast ASAP.
Demonrats has been doing it for years, hence McLame as our nominee. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. (I happen to prefer my goose with an apple stuffing and a blackberry sauce.)
“If they did every Republican in the state would cross over and vote,”
Only those who did not vote in the already held GOP primaries or risk voter fraud and jail time.
Rush tipped that heavily toward Hillary, and now the vampire is out of the casket...
...agreed...nice Dracula symbolism going on...I was appalled that anyone on the R side of things would aid and abet Hilary, and now having to endure her screeching voice and the media’s fawining ‘Comeback Kid II’reviews is more than I can bear...time for new blood on righty talk radio...
This is the most interesting question of the whole problem to me. What of those votes that would have been cast differently if the first democrat primary was supposed to count?
Will the "do-over" be limited to those that voted democrat in the first primary. (Not likely, as that would require the voter to show ID at the polls, which democrats won't tolerate.) Do the democrats that voted in the republican primary (most likely for McCain) get to participate in the do-over? (I am sure they would have voted democrat if they thought it would count. /s) Should those votes get subtracted from McCain's total?
What restrictions would they put on the "do-over"? How can anything they do (other than follow the rules as written) be fair?
Ms. Kreissl, IMO, cannot be a proficient accounting professor. And I think I can speak to that as a CPA myself.
One of the greatest gifts God gave me was the opportunity to attend Gonzaga University. I had the same accounting professor, Dr. Dan Brajcich, for my last 3 years at GU. "Black Dan", as we lovingly called him, NEVER USED NUMBERS. No matter the course, be it Tax, Advanced Accounting, Audit, Governmental, Cost, etc., he taught the underlying theory to the course.
His exams were brutal: 5 questions, all essay, and the first sentence to most of the questions was "based on the information you've given, I can't answer it." From that point, a two- or three-pronged analysis of the topic was necessary. I remember one test (30+ years later), where I wrote 10 pages in the course of 55 minutes.
I do remember the one time he used numbers in my three years under his tutelege. A couple of students (not me!) kept pestering him, saying they needed to see the numbers in order to understand. Exasperated, Dan said "I'll do this one time, and that's it!"
"Here's the situation: you have two pigs, and one of them dies. How do you account for it?" Dr. Brajcich proceeded to spend the next 10 minutes going through the theory underlying that situation.
Ms. Kreissl may know numbers, but she could never hold a candle to the great Dr. Brajcich.
My fellow students and I absolutely loved that man.
Ms. Kreissl, IMO, cannot be a proficient accounting professor. And I think I can speak to that as a CPA myself.
One of the greatest gifts God gave me was the opportunity to attend Gonzaga University. I had the same accounting professor, Dr. Dan Brajcich, for my last 3 years at GU. "Black Dan", as we lovingly called him, NEVER USED NUMBERS. No matter the course, be it Tax, Advanced Accounting, Audit, Governmental, Cost, etc., he taught the underlying theory to the course.
His exams were brutal: 5 questions, all essay, and the first sentence to most of the questions was "based on the information you've given, I can't answer it." From that point, a two- or three-pronged analysis of the topic was necessary. I remember one test (30+ years later), where I wrote 10 pages in the course of 55 minutes.
I do remember the one time he used numbers in my three years under his tutelege. A couple of students (not me!) kept pestering him, saying they needed to see the numbers in order to understand. Exasperated, Dan said "I'll do this one time, and that's it!"
"Here's the situation: you have two pigs, and one of them dies. How do you account for it?" Dr. Brajcich proceeded to spend the next 10 minutes going through the theory underlying that situation.
Ms. Kreissl may know numbers, but she could never hold a candle to the great Dr. Brajcich.
My fellow students and I absolutely loved that man.
Sorry about the DP...I received a message that my first post was not received by the server...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.