RedState Clintonistas, this one's for you

This here's for all the Republicans who voted for Hillary.

One pattern that we're seeing repeat every election cycle since 2000 is the Republicans' desire strategy to disrupt the Democratic process.  To wit: Causing chaos for the purpose of thwarting the vote count in Florida or under allocating voting machines to democratic districts is thuggish behavior by people who can't abide by the rules.  And before you go all Ann Coulter on me for being a pusillanimous idealist who's crying about people breaking the rules - I'm not going there.  

Because you can't look at my reaction without taking responsibility for your own attitudes that have caused it.  You see, more than one Repug has smirked about having Diebold on their side.  This is the reputation that you all have built for yourselves.

But each of you can claim that you didn't do any of these things.  Someone else made those decisions and the Republican brand has been unfairly tarnished by a few bad apples <sniff><sniff>.

Until now, that is.  

Because now you've done it.  Literally.  You have personally gotten involved.  Today you're proud.  You helped Clinton win in Ohio, keep even in Texas, and avoid a blowout in Mississippi.

Maybe someday time will give you the perspective to see what you've really done.  When they write the history books about tyrants and their regimes, you'll be able to hold up your hand and say, "I did that!"

•  You're wasting your breath...

  these aren't sensient beings they are robots, lemmings.  They are the followers, not the leaders.  They do what they are told, they have no sense of shame or give any thought to how destructive they are....

  by importer on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 10:52:41 AM PDT

  •  Not only that...

    ...but precious few of them will read anything on this site!

    by AnotherMassachusettsLiberal on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 10:54:47 AM PDT

  •  Someday, maybe

    I don't expect them to see the light, I'm just planting the seeds that they may realize oneday ...

    by winstnsmth on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 11:06:11 AM PDT

•  If they end up with President Clinton

  they'll all curse their dark deeds for many years to come.

  by Dont Just Stand There on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 10:54:37 AM PDT

  •  No, they won't

    They would rather have Clinton than Obama. Clinton will not end the war.

    by fightorleave on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 10:58:14 AM PDT

    •  They think. Problem is that Clinton

      gets those nifty unitary executive powers. And unlike Georgie she's very smart, very competent, has a lot of old scores to settle, and she's got power to defend. They won't be able to party with the hookers, troll the stalls and poke the pages anymore without setting themselves up for a little persuasion. Hillary would be their absolute worst nightmare.

      by dallasdave on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 11:09:01 AM PDT

•  yeah and

  tsk tsk tsk, all those naaaaaasty Obama Republicans too!
  Gaming the system and messing up the Daily Kos!

  by TexMex on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 10:54:40 AM PDT

  •  It's one thing to cross over and vote...

    ...for a candidate because you want him to be president and you're planning to vote for him in the fall.  It's quite another to vote for someone you know you won't be voting for in the fall, just to gum up the works for the other party.  The former is what happens with Obama, and the latter, with Clinton - apples and oranges...

    by AnotherMassachusettsLiberal on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 10:57:19 AM PDT

    •  And it's yet another thing

      To claim you can read minds and everybody who's voting for our guy has had a road to Damascus conversion and everybody who votes for Clinton is cynically gaming the system.

      by TooFolkGR on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 10:59:11 AM PDT

•  You know

  My sister, a lifelong Republican, voted for Obama in her state caucus.  She did so because she supports his candidacy (including sending money).  

  by BarbinMD on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 10:55:49 AM PDT

•  Be careful

  I believe this site was endorsing Democrats manipulating the Republican primary in Michigan.

  by rf7777 on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 10:56:21 AM PDT

  •  The Diarist Is Not "This Site"

    I live in Michigan and I voted in the Republican primary here.  It's not manipulation.  The purpose of a primary is to select who the voter wants that party's nominee to be.  If a State party chooses to have an open convention, they are inviting the participation of those in the other party who purely want to see a weak candidate.

    Republicans have been doing it in Michigan Democratic Primaries for decades.

    by TooFolkGR on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 11:00:29 AM PDT

  •  truth be told..

    i think kos was joking about dems voting for romney in michigan.

    if i'm wrong, mea culpa...but i know it was a front pager.

    by jonnykilbane on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 11:04:36 AM PDT

    •  Didn't sound like a joke

      "Next Tuesday, January 15th, Michigan will hold its primary. Michigan Democrats should vote for Mitt Romney, because if Mitt wins, Democrats win. How so?

      For Michigan Democrats, the Democratic primary is meaningless since the DNC stripped the state of all its delegates (at least temporarily) for violating party rules. Hillary Clinton is alone on the ballot.

      But on the GOP side, this primary will be fiercely contested. John McCain is currently enjoying the afterglow of media love since his New Hamsphire victory, while Iowa winner Mike Huckabee is poised to do well in South Carolina.  

      Meanwhile, poor Mitt Romney, who’s suffered back-to-back losses in the last week, desperately needs to win Michigan in order to keep his campaign afloat.  Bottom line, if Romney loses Michigan, he's out. If he wins, he stays in.

      And we want Romney in, because the more Republican candidates we have fighting it out, trashing each other with negative ads and spending tons of money, the better it is for us. We want Mitt to stay in the race, and to do that, we need him to win in Michigan."

      - Front Page

      by Adam C on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 11:05:44 AM PDT

  •  That's one state

    Whereas Republicans have "Rushed the vote," as the term came on his show, numerous times over.

    by BlueEngineerInOhio on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 12:08:04 PM PDT

•  You might call out Dkos first

  The front page created a whole icon and pushed for people to game the MI primary.  Or in Kos' words:
  "Next Tuesday, January 15th, Michigan will hold its primary. Michigan Democrats should vote for Mitt Romney, because if Mitt wins, Democrats win. (emphasis in original)"

  Perhaps states should not have open primaries, but as long as they do there will be efforts by both sides to game them.

  by Adam C on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 11:04:48 AM PDT

•  Primary Voter Switches

  I am sure that there has been some strategic voting, but having been familiar with the effort it takes to get voters of your own party to the polls, I am inclined to think that the end result is small potatoes, no matter what Rush Limbaugh may think.

  by Canadianbacon on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 11:16:04 AM PDT