digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

Pennsylvanians are switching parties to vote for Obama

mcclatchydc.com — "Since Jan. 1, more than 178,000 people in Pennsylvania have changed their party affiliations, and 92 percent of them have gone from Republican or independent to Democrat... They've warmed to Obama for two key reasons: They find him inspiring, and they want sweeping change."

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • diggeradoo, on 04/22/2008, -40/+293I did. White, middle-aged, conservative, former Republican. I changed parties in PA specifically to vote for Obama. And I did it soon enough to qualify to vote in the closed Dem primary tomorrow (Apr 22).
    • RockStrongo1, on 04/22/2008, -8/+55+1.. Me too.
    • Rosco, on 04/22/2008, -6/+15I wish I could have done the same, but just like Mike Moore, I live in Michigan and it's all screwed up here. More power to all you PA folks, here's hoping for the best.
      • lolinyerface, on 04/22/2008, -5/+2Agreed, what is going on here in MI is stupid. The American Vote: Must be 18 or older, not available in Michigan, void where prohibited. Thanks for listening to the whiny babies and not the people who need change the most, my fellow democrats!
        • pojut, on 04/22/2008, -1/+20I sympathize with you folks about not having your vote count, I truly do...but the only people you should be mad at is your own state. They knew the rules, they agreed to the rules, and they broke the rules.
          • lolinyerface, on 04/22/2008, -9/+1I'm guessing nobody ever broke the rules before? Should we constantly lie down and let tradition run us over? Our primary was moved up so the issues and problems that concern our state would be at the front of the issues. I guess they were to scared to address our problems. Maybe thats why we got curbed. It sucks, it really does. If Clinton wins, I'm just going to make sure McCain gets an extra vote, and that really sucks.
          • pojut, on 04/22/2008, -0/+9Plenty of people break the rules...people break the rules all the time. And when they get caught, they get punished.

            What's so hard to understand about this?
          • laserdog, on 04/22/2008, -0/+6"Our primary was moved up so the issues and problems that concern our state would be at the front of the issues."

            And here are Obama and Hillary spending 6 weeks in a state at the ass end of the primary season. =)

            Sour grapes.
    • jivecjedkin, on 04/22/2008, -16/+5Of course people are switching to Democrat, the Republican primary is over. And they don't know how many are going to vote for Obama, they never do, everybody knows polls are flawed and biased. Most people that have switched so far are voting for Hillary. Thats the only reason she's still in. They vote for her because it would be easier to beat her in the general election and it keeps the democrats bickering.
      • p51d007, on 04/22/2008, -3/+19The only reason she is still in, is because she is TEN MILLION in the hole.
        • nirav72, on 04/22/2008, -2/+6Yup..she can't touch the other 23 million until the general election. (According to election laws)
      • aigulf, on 04/22/2008, -2/+12You're talking about two very different motives for switching. Rush Limbaugh encouraged people to switch in an effort to sabotage the democratic primaries and vote for Hillary, usually with the intent of switching back after the primaries are over. From what I read, this article is attempting to talk about people who are genuinely switching parties because they want to vote for Obama.
        • haterrade, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2True, but i think he was trying to say the same is happening and helping Hillary..
        • tech42er, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Um, no. It's the same thing They're switching parties to participate in the Democratic nomination process know that the Republicans are done. It's the same thing.
    • zzzpoohzzz, on 04/22/2008, -7/+38i changed from independent to democrat just so i could vote for him... if things could have been different i would have switched to republican to vote for ron paul, but since he has no shot in hell i went democrat and just got back for voting for obama...
      • WilliamDavis, on 04/22/2008, -16/+5Sleep now in the fire.
        • ngmcs8203, on 04/22/2008, -2/+8Thanks for the memory jog. Time to throw on some Rage Against the Machine! What a great song.
        • theaceoffire, on 04/22/2008, -3/+4Yes, ***** him for voting for someone!
          Damn everyone who doesn't support {Fill in WilliamDavis's Canidate}!
      • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 04/22/2008, -11/+27You don't understand how RP's economics and Obama's economics are polar opposites, do you?
        • MacEnvy, on 04/22/2008, -5/+39Some people just want some honestly and consistency from their leaders, after 8 years (or 30 or 40 years) of *****. That's what both Obama and Paul (and Kucinich and Gravel) offer. Not everyone votes on specific issues alone, so it's incredibly insulting to chalk it up to "not understanding".
          • tech42er, on 04/23/2008, -1/+6Still, Paul would really take the government out of our lives, while Obama would expand the government's power and influence. They're polar opposites.
          • Lazydriver, on 04/23/2008, -4/+4Not quite!

            Obama (as well as Paul would've) will get rid of the Government's role in illegally spying on you, and try to get us out of debt, plus give us all essential free healthcare. I'd trust the government with my healthcare rather then a collective group of greedy, unethical sons of a bitches for doctors.
          • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2@LazyDriver (I can't believe I'm defending Ron Paul here) Uhm Ron Paul would cut the deficit by cutting spending drastically. Obama would "cut" the deficit by raising taxes through the roof.
            Polar opposites.
          • bphicke, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2@LazyDriver, You do know that Obama voted for the renewal of the Patriot Act don't you? And Ron Paul was very clear in that his healthcare policy was to phase out all government healthcare. Not give you more.
        • bphicke, on 04/22/2008, -3/+9Obama and Paul would bring back troops from Iraq during their terms. I disagree with allot of Obama's policies, but after being stationed overseas for 6 years this is a top priority for me. Obama plans to bring troops home too slow for my taste, and I wish he would extend his policy to close bases in Japan, Korea, and all other countries, but something is better than nothing.
        • laserdog, on 04/22/2008, -2/+17Economic policies are all window dressing if you're bought and paid for.

          Both Obama and Ron Paul are incredibly grass roots campaigns who owe nothing to lobbyists, which is the first step towards any real change.
        • jgtg32a, on 04/22/2008, -10/+4I think that most of the people who are voting for Obama don't know what he believes in. They just want something to believe in and they feel they can trust and follow him.
          And I can sympathize with that the the last 6 years have been messed up.
          But me I'll stick to my God and my Gun.
        • toytoyota, on 04/22/2008, -5/+7Obama and Paul are champions of civil liberties, something that this administration has raped and should be the premiere issue of our time. If we don't have our civil liberties back we don't even have the luxury to worry about things like the economy and foreign policy. We have moved backwards in time because of the Patriot Act and I think the appeal of Paul and Obama are that they are at the forefront of social progression in that nature.
          • jgtg32a, on 04/22/2008, -0/+3Guns?
            Ya I know Obama doesn't mind that we own a gun, just as long as you don't carry it with you.
          • nakani, on 04/23/2008, -0/+3Umm......... Obama voted for the Patriot Act, it's sad you're being dug up actually
    • p51d007, on 04/22/2008, -32/+4succcccckkkkkkkkkkeeeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrssssssssssssssssssssssss
      • theaceoffire, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4You got some Hillary stuck in your teeth.
    • TinternAbbot, on 04/22/2008, -31/+8You aren't a conservative if you support Obama. Sorry.
      • EtherGnat, on 04/22/2008, -4/+28It's all relative. Even our "liberals" are conservative by the standards of most countries in the world.
      • LocalDocal, on 04/22/2008, -3/+22You don't have to agree with a candidate's stance on abortion, gay rights, and etc to want to vote for him. You could vote for him because you believe that he will ultimately be good for your country and its economy.

        By the way, I'm also a conservative and (still registered) Republican. I support Obama.
        • TinternAbbot, on 04/22/2008, -16/+7If you are a social and fiscal conservative, you cannot support Obama. If you think he will be good for the country, you are not a fiscal or social conservative.
          • pojut, on 04/22/2008, -3/+12You are missing his point. He is saying that the "issues" aren't the only thing to worry about.

            Look. The republicans had their chance. Whether you consider Bush to be a "true" republican or not is irrelevant. The party had their chance. Now it's the democrats turn.

            You may despise the democrats, but it's quite obvious that the republicans as they are now are not doing anything beneficial for the country. And if you think that they are...you need to get your head out of the sand and look around. The dollar is *****, the economy is tanking, the housing market has termites and heavy water damage, the war (which, by the way, could have funded the entire education budget and a large part of the infrastructure budget) still drags on, and we have very quickly become the laughingstock of the world.

            I don't know about you, but I want someone in the white house that is 100% different than what we have had for the past 8 years. Obama and Hillary are more or less the same on the issues...but Hillary comes off as sounding like she thinks she deserves the nomination. That alone is enough for me to not want to vote for her, even though realistically an Obama administration and a Hillary administration would likely not be very different from each other.

            The image...the way our president appears in speeches and the way that they get their points across are instrumental in rebuilding how the world views us. It's not ALL that matters, but at this point it is certainly in the top 3.
          • MoofTheStoof, on 04/22/2008, -3/+12Thank god I'm not a fiscal or social conservative.
          • chaosium, on 04/22/2008, -1/+10"If you are a social and fiscal conservative, you cannot support Obama. "

            HAHAHHA REPUBLICANS ARE "FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE"

            Oh you.
        • creepermclurker, on 04/22/2008, -8/+6@TintrnAbbot

          Your ignorance is showing. You might want to cover that up.
          • TinternAbbot, on 04/22/2008, -6/+7How so? Obama is absolutely liberal. His policies are at odds with conservative beliefs. How can someone claim to be a conservative and support him? It can't be for policy reasons. It must be because they are drinking the "hope and change" kool-aid, in which case they are also not conservative. This isn't difficult.
          • onetimer, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4That's true tintern, he is liberal. But unfortunately for conservative voters out there, their isn't a conservative candidate running. They have to choose between a candidate that wants to raise taxes and spend, and a candidate that wants to cut taxes and spend.
          • tech42er, on 04/23/2008, -2/+1@onetimer
            This is sadly true. And McCain would also sanction torture and further erode our civil liberties. On the other hand, Obama would be a new New Deal. It's a terrible choice for a libertarian to make.
          • chaosium, on 04/25/2008, -0/+1"a candidate that wants to cut taxes and spend"

            More like "a candidate that wants to raise taxes and spend less on Iraq, and a candidate that wants to cut taxes and spend godawfully more on iraq."
        • johniskew, on 04/22/2008, -9/+4What the heck are you talking about? If obama comes in we'll be taxed well beyond what we are now. You cannot be a conservative and support extreme socialistic policies like universal healthcare, big government, and a nearly 60% upper federal tax bracket. You just can't. If you do you ARE NOT conservative.
          • petebot, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4Funny, I thought that Congress was the body that passed laws, including tax laws...
          • noahhoward, on 04/22/2008, -4/+2Some people are smart enough to realises it is no longer about issues but about the greater effect and the future of this nation.
          • TinternAbbot, on 04/22/2008, -3/+1petebot - the president sets policy and has a strong hand in legislation.
          • bpoteat, on 04/22/2008, -2/+3"If obama comes in we'll be taxed well beyond what we are now." I would wager a bet that we won't. Just like our taxes didn't go down in the 8 years bush has been in office.
          • sp4rty, on 04/22/2008, -4/+2I would wager that if you are lazy, unsuccessful American, your taxes will not change. However, those that work hard, and make their own money, will indeed be punished by the socialist hand of Obama.
          • bpoteat, on 04/23/2008, -2/+2Well, I guess you've got it all figured out sp4rty. The problem is my anecdotal evidence of having just written a check for right around 6 grand to the IRS - the most I've ever had to still AFTER having taxes taken out of my checks monthly, and on a salary that hasn't changed much in the last 4 years. I guess 40-50 hours a week isn't enough for my taxes to be low? The problem is simply that I'm upper middle class.

            I would LOVE to feel like it would be so simple as to vote republican and my taxes go down, but it is never that simple. The fact is that NOBODY pays less taxes under a republican administration just as they don't pay more under a democratic one - the only difference is where that money is spent.
        • Flamancot, on 04/22/2008, -4/+3Goddamn I LOVE Big Government so ***** much.
          • chaosium, on 04/25/2008, -0/+1Enjoy the McCain you're going to vote for anyway.
        • crweaks23, on 04/22/2008, -1/+7johniskew... who is "we?" Your post puts you in one of 3 categories: either you're making more than $200k a year, you're ignorant, or you're a liar.

          Obama has said time and time again he plans to give tax relief to the elderly and the middle class (or whatever is left of it) and raise taxes on the upper brackets, specifically people making more than $200k (I think it's even $250k, but i figured id write the smaller number to be sure).
          • TinternAbbot, on 04/22/2008, -6/+2Why should the upper brackets have their taxes raised? They already pay taxes at a higher rate than others.
          • Ramble, on 04/22/2008, -3/+8Because they're rich and can afford to, that's why.
          • TinternAbbot, on 04/22/2008, -3/+1I'm not sure whether to digg for humor or not.
          • tech42er, on 04/23/2008, -1/+2@Ramble
            ***** that. It's still their money and the government shouldn't feel they have some right to take it. Sure, the government will take the money in order to fund itself, but it's still wrong. At the very least, it's a necessary evil. But even if it's necessary, it's never good when people have their money taken from them against their will.
          • InfidelAl, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1"Because they're rich and can afford to, that's why." Nice... nothing like a little class envy. And the idea that the middle class includes those who make up to 250k a year is absurd as about 98% of the US population makes under that figure. 2% of the population makes 24.1% of all income yet pay 43.6% of ALL personal income taxes. The rich are already getting soaked.
            I have lots of friends in their late 20's that fall under the poverty line, but when it comes down to it they have their own bad choices to blame for it... not a lack of opportunity. I'm not interested in paying more taxes, thus reducing my quality of life, to pay for millions of other people's poor choices.
          • SHv2, on 04/23/2008, -1/+2Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

            The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
            The fifth would pay $1.
            The sixth would pay $3.
            The seventh would pay $7.
            The eighth would pay $12.
            The ninth would pay $18.
            The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

            So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers, he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

            The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes.
            So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
            And so:

            The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
            The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
            The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
            The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
            The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
            The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

            Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

            'I only got a dollar out of the $20,'declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,’ but he got $10!'

            'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!'

            'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'

            'Wait a minute,’ yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'

            The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

            The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
          • johniskew, on 04/23/2008, -2/+0I fall into the fourth category: flat tax
      • Ramble, on 04/22/2008, -0/+6Obama is more conservative than our own conservative party in the UK.
    • LordRedSnake, on 04/22/2008, -4/+19We also hate Hillary.
      • TubaTechno, on 04/22/2008, -7/+9It's weird. When people switch parties FOR Obama, it's democracy at work. When it's AGAINST Obama, it's voter fraud.
        • jgtg32a, on 04/22/2008, -4/+4shush you no pointing out double standards.
        • iofthestorm, on 04/22/2008, -3/+6Err, when they're intentionally switching parties to drag someone down so that their true party's candidate has a better chance, that is definitely not switching parties to actually be a member of the party, which is the point of joining a party.
        • theWrkncacnter, on 04/23/2008, -2/+3the point is you have to switch with the intention of that person becoming president. It's voter fraud when you do it to game the system
    • fulibs, on 04/22/2008, -4/+6I am so proud of you, you are going to get a gold star 'and' a smily face. * :-)
      • jgtg32a, on 04/22/2008, -4/+1And thats all we're going to get out of an Obama presidency.
    • LukasSmith, on 04/22/2008, -28/+9Whoopee. As if Digg.com were the birthplace of Republicans. Yeah right. True Republicans have already moved on to other blogs because this place doesn't tolerate them. I should know. I am a true Republican. I know I am forever doomed to - digg future but I really don't care.I just stay around to be a thorn in your side. Oh by the way switching parties is pretty freaking normal. A recent poll stated that 1/5 of democrats voting for hillary will vot republican if she is not selected in Primary. Fickle people. A handful of wanabee democrats for Obama don't bother me at all. I will be proven right in November when Obama doesn't just get handed the president but has to claw for every percentage point like his two unfortunate predecessors Gore and Kerry. Who knows maybe like them he will fail. Digg.com is not a true representation of America. So frankly if every single Digg.com user was an Obama fanatic spammer.(and they are) I really wouldnt give a *****. Because I know how fickle my good Digg.com friends are. Here's looking at you Ron Paul.
      • cvelusc, on 04/22/2008, -6/+8Re: "I just stay around to be a thorn in your side."

        Seems fairly petty to go out of the way just to annoy people. Maybe this energy is best spent elsewhere?
      • jnava121, on 04/22/2008, -10/+3-1 for saying something with Republican in your post... lol

        -Digg Mafia
      • LukasSmith, on 04/22/2008, -15/+6If I save even one democrat from liberal hell my job is done. I am just continueing the work of Jesus.
      • lolinyerface, on 04/22/2008, -1/+9WallofText hits you for 32 points of damage.
        You are afflicted by eye strain.
        • p0s3r, on 04/22/2008, -5/+1The Warcraft forums are --------->
          • lolinyerface, on 04/22/2008, -1/+3I was thinking Everquest..but its alright. Digg takes all kinds of people, even new young ones like yourself. :)
          • StarlessKnight, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1I think D&D had role playing and a RPG/combat/ailment system down long before WoW ever came along. Besides, D&D is based on verbal/text environment, whereas WoW is primarily graphics based (though you can watch the text log of it happening too).
    • rodrigo74, on 04/22/2008, -7/+6Thank you for voting twice on Bush, dude.
      • MoofTheStoof, on 04/22/2008, -4/+7We can't undo the past, but we can fix the problems created by the last 8 years. Let's just be happy they're on board and we can all work together to fix the country. We're a goddamn hardworking country, and it's going to take blood, sweat and tears to undo the damage of the last 8 years, but the country we have when we're done will be one to be proud of and well worth the effort.
        • TinternAbbot, on 04/22/2008, -2/+4If we were such a hardworking country, the federal government wouldn't have to dip so deeply into my pockets.
      • LukasSmith, on 04/22/2008, -14/+4ahahahah. aAHAHAHhaA. Yes all in board for another 8 years of hell. You people are such sheep. bah bah black sheep have you any bull? yes sir yes sir three bags full. Your hope disgusts me. Your lack of skepticism frightens me.
        • Rbstr, on 04/22/2008, -6/+6Your lack of hope is, perhaps, the saddest thing in the world.
        • LukasSmith, on 04/22/2008, -9/+8Oh I have hope. Hope that democrats will one day learn that all politicians are the same. Even black ones.
        • renagadex2, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4wow you guys are retarded spamming ***** like that. we have 3 viable candidates: mccain, clinton and obama. now of these three that can ACTUALLY take power in November who do you want? yes i love idealistic notions about actually choosing someone i want and not whose popular BUT WE DONT ***** HAVE THAT. so, of those 3, whose the best?


          (for me its obama)
        • StarlessKnight, on 04/23/2008, -1/+3LukasSmith once said: "I am just continueing the work of Jesus."

          I don't think Jesus would approve.
    • JointVenture, on 04/22/2008, -23/+15You are so FULL OF *****, I went and took a look at your profile going back to day one.

      You are full of *****!

      You joined Feb 7 and have 518 submitted stories! 518 submits in 80 some days, and all about the election.

      ***** off *****.
      • NoStoppingUs, on 04/22/2008, -10/+8how dare you accuse the obombanites of spamming digg! they would never do such a thing!

        buryburyburybury..
      • BeforeSputnik, on 04/22/2008, -5/+4How does that contradict what he said? He said he was an independant and switched to Obama in time to vote. He must have had to switch with enough time before the election, say in February. If someone is passionate enough to switch parties for a candidate it stands to reason that they would actively support them on Digg (if that's there medium of choice).
        You're a little too harsh for the amount of thought processing that goes on in your head - Check yo'self before you wreck yo'self.
        • JointVenture, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4Go wade through his submits and tell me that is a Reublican who switched with an honest face..well you know what I mean. I posted ONE DAYS worth from the 25th of march.
        • BeforeSputnik, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1well i didnt say that he wasn't a spammer, just that based on JointVenture's meager detective work, you couldn't positively jump to that conclusion (unless, of couse, you were using some sort of mat, one that would have different conclusions on it, that you could jump to).
      • mike17032, on 04/22/2008, -2/+6Obammabots dont like being called out on their spamming.

        Unlike old Ron Paul there are more than 12 people in the world who support Obamma, but his hardcore spammers are just as annoying as the ronbots where. And game Digg just as often.
      • Sinai, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1At least now you know where the campaign money is going.
    • JointVenture, on 04/22/2008, -23/+30A TYPICAL DAY IN THE LIFE OF THE FIRST POSTER IN THIS THREAD WHO SAID HE WAS A REPUBLICAN WHO SWITCHED. I could only handle going back to the 25, the ***** has 518 submits in 80 days.



      Red-faced Clinton stokes Obama pastor row
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      8
      Hillary's "Audacity of Hopelessness"
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      12
      Obama's camp responds to Hillary's comments on Rev.Wright
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      8
      Is Hillary’s horse too high?
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      5
      So long Hillary: It was swell while it lasted
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      11
      Mainstream Press picks up on "Hillary In 2012" theory.
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      5
      Obama Up Big In North Carolina, Race Speech Helping?
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      22
      New Video Shows HRC Making Same False Claim in February
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      36
      Hillary: 'Voters Are Tired of People Who Lie to them'
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      12
      After Week of Silence, TV Shows Pounce on Hillary's fib
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      55
      Clinton's new bizarre excuse
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      19
      Hillary's new spin: "I was sleep-deprived, and I misspoke."
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      12
      Hillary: The Audacity of Hoax
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      4
      CBS News Video: "Clinton Embellishes Past"
      Submitted in Videos - on 03/25/2008
      6
      Hillary Clinton -- a misstep or a tall tale?
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      17
      Obama posts tax returns
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      16
      WORD OF THE DAY: 'MISSPOKE'
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      9
      Hillary: Willfully suspending the truth
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      8
      Going Easy on Hillary
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      19
      Bosnia May Be Hillary Clinton's Biggest Mistake
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008

      Showing submissions in all sections
      12
      Where's Hillary? Missing from Trade Policy Briefing
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      48
      How can you tell Hillary's lying? Wolfson's lips are moving.
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      9
      Clinton campaign to target pledged delegates? Redux
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      19
      Hillary Wants to Flip Pledged Delegates?
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      13
      Hill calls her Secret Service agents "personal trained pigs"
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      7
      Is Hillary Too Unstable To Be President?
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      26
      Hillary Clinton Campaign: Home of the Whopper
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      9
      Hillary's Bogus Bosnian Story Exposed
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      8
      Hillary Clinton's Bosnia story a 'whopper'
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      9
      Resume Padding, Clinton-Style
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      47
      The Clinton Campaign Keeps Lying About NAFTA
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      12
      Hillary backtracks over 'misleading' Bosnia sniper story
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      37
      Hillary Says She 'Misspoke' About Wrestling Bin Laden
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      13
      Hillary's new plot to win: Steal Pledged Delegates
      Submitted in News - on 03/25/2008
      83
      G.I.Hillary? Olbermann pwns Hillary on "resume padding"
      Submitted in Videos - on 03/25/2008
      • p0s3r, on 04/22/2008, -19/+20Nice catch. Stupid paid Obama shills. They'll find out the hard way that the morons on digg just like to jump on whatever bandwagon is the most popular. Then not vote.
        • renagadex2, on 04/22/2008, -7/+2Uh this just proves that he loves obama...
          • hittnrun, on 04/22/2008, -3/+9UH, ITS CALLED SPAM AND IT'S ANNOYING.
          • 1timeuser, on 04/23/2008, -0/+4Yes it is.

            Would you like to enlarge your penis?
        • Pyehole, on 04/23/2008, -2/+1Bah. I'm as annoyed by the torrent of Obama digg submissions as anyone else, but the same thing is attempted by everyone with a candidate to shill for. The Obamites just seem to be more numerous and prolific than the Hillaristas.
        • 1timeuser, on 04/23/2008, -2/+2Better then the ***** who were getting paid by Ron Paul. Thank god that's over with.
          • Pyehole, on 04/23/2008, -2/+2Yeah, because nobody could possibly be disgusted with politics as usual and looking for somebody who is honest enough to challenge the establishment. The Paul supporters must have been paid whores.

            Right.
          • 1timeuser, on 04/23/2008, -1/+2Yeah, because people can't feel the same way about Obama, Clinton, or even McCain, So all their supporters are paid whores.

            Right.
      • 140Suffolk, on 04/22/2008, -3/+13Anytime someone starts a post, a Letter to the Editor, or a radio talk show speech with, "I was a lifelong Republican, but now...." I assume it's phony.
        • Pyehole, on 04/23/2008, -2/+4Why? Because that never happens? Go ahead and call me a liar, but I was a lifelong independent who registered as a partisan (Republican) for the first time ever so that I could cast my vote for Ron Paul.
          • 140Suffolk, on 04/23/2008, -0/+3I assume it's phony because it's designed to bring in conservatives by giving them "permission". "Once I too was lost, but then I was found...join us brother..."
            Also, I think that it often happens that lefties turn right when they mature. But very rarely the other way.
            I do think it's reasonable that an independent turn Republican
    • investr, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4We're all tiring of the same ol' BS and it's sinking our collective ship. Time to put on the thinking caps and set the party allegiances to the side. A two party system is NOT democraZy. Go Obama!
    • JK1150, on 04/22/2008, -3/+11every election we get people claiming to be of the opposite ideology switching sides to vote for the other guy. somehow i don't think you are a conservative republican...
    • JK1150, on 04/22/2008, -2/+12actually, looking at your digg history, it seems you spend day and night submitting/digging/commenting exclusively on pro-obama/anti-clinton articles. are you really who you say you are? or is someone paying you to say this? i can't imagine that an on the fence middle age person would spend his day on digg submitting articles like you do...
      • Pyehole, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1Same thing happens with Hilary supporters. Are we to assume that everyone who is active in campaigning for her is a paid shill?
        • 1timeuser, on 04/23/2008, -1/+2How else can you explain the massive Ron Paul spam we were getting a few months ago?
    • mitchlourens, on 04/22/2008, -0/+3I did in North Carolina. Every bit helps.
    • Sinai, on 04/23/2008, -2/+1I have a economically conservative friend who is voting for Obama because he decided the next 4 years were going to be awful no matter who was in the White House, so he decided the best thing for the Republican party would be for Obama to be president, since he judged Obama was the only one who could screw things up enough to save them.
      • InfidelAl, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Ha! That's funny. I suppose that as any of the three are likely to make things worse he'd probably rather the Dems get the "credit" for the mess than the GOP.
    • RealHyperX, on 04/23/2008, -1/+4And you are an idiot. How could a republican vote for a communist? Look up who Obama hangs out with.
  • PATSCRU, on 04/22/2008, -18/+219Hopefully they're switching because they believe in a candidate and not because a hack radio host told them to in order to sabotage an election.
    • Gabberwok, on 04/22/2008, -3/+39At this point it is clearly in McCain's interests to keep Hillary in the race as long as possible. She can't knock Obama out of the race today unless she gets a ridiculous lead (like 75% of the vote) in PA, so she's really just fighting to stay in it. If I wanted McCain's chances in the general election to improve, I'd vote for Clinton in the primary.
      • Coven, on 04/22/2008, -4/+13She can't knock Obama out of the race today no matter how well she does. He can undo a lot of whatever damage she does come North Carolina.
      • EtherGnat, on 04/22/2008, -0/+6Hillary would have to beat Obama 88% to 12% just to catch up today. Obviously that's an impossibility.
        • publiclurker, on 04/22/2008, -3/+3It depends, do they have electronic voting?
        • cvindustries, on 04/22/2008, -1/+6First off, if either candidate gets less than 15% of the vote in PA, they get 0 delegates. Second, even if Clinton gets 100% of PA, she'll still be down by 161 delegates.

          http://www.slate.com/id/2185278/
    • squirrel611, on 04/22/2008, -11/+10From the state of Pennsylvania's website: "In Pennsylvania, the deadline to register to vote is 30 days prior to each election."

      Hopefully, this will make Limbaugh's influence effect the voting much less than in Ohio and Texas.
      • Jwoey, on 04/22/2008, -2/+5That's not the rule that makes the Limbaugh effect less likely in Pennsylvania. It's that its a closed primary. Texas has the same law, but its an open primary, so republicans can vote for democrats.
        • LocalDocal, on 04/22/2008, -2/+2Allowing Republicans to vote for Democrats and vice versa doesn't make Limbaugh's warcry any more effective. Republicans could simply register as Democrats, then vote.
        • thebaron2, on 04/22/2008, -0/+3Yeah but the more hoops that people need to jump through the less likely they are to follow through to the end.

          Not having to re-register would make "Operation Chaos" that much easier to implement.
      • NoStoppingUs, on 04/22/2008, -6/+5arent you the same group of people who go "rush limbaugh who? no one listens to him!"?
      • elipabst, on 04/22/2008, -2/+3We'll see. I personally met several people who switched party affiliations to Democrat in order to vote for Hillary. They openly admitted that the only reason they did it was that McCain had a better chance against Hillary or at the very least that keeping Hillary in the race hurts Obama's chances. I'd be interested to see how many people switch over to Democratic party, but then ended up voting for Hillary. I'd bet it's a non-trivial amount.
    • p51d007, on 04/22/2008, -12/+30hehehehe......Operation Chaos is in full gear!
      • NoStoppingUs, on 04/22/2008, -13/+6so naive, arent they? :)
      • chubbybubba, on 04/23/2008, -1/+4Liberalism by its nature is chaotic, conservatism by it's nature is not.
        • Gabberwok, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Same could be said of democracy and fascism.
      • SoulDrift404, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1Downvoted. Clearly if you think Limbaugh is entertaining, you are NOT intelligent.
    • SargedeathXmode, on 04/22/2008, -6/+4This does give credence to the idea that Conservative Republicans are hoping McCain goes up against Obama for a better shot at winning. This, however, is a tough position since many commentators and polls think Hilary would lost to McCain, yes even outside of the Digg community. But yeah, they should really switch if they truly believe in him, not to sabotage the election.
      • mithrasinvictus, on 04/22/2008, -0/+4He'd have a better shot at Hillary since that gives him 2 targets, her and her husband.
        As long as both democratic candidates are in the race he just needs to sit back and watch Clinton attack Obama. He could even condemn such tactics while profiting from them.
      • SargedeathXmode, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1Wow, people digg you down even if your post's support is ambiguous... Guess it's either Obama or against him... (waves Nader flag)
        • Gabberwok, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Nader is the reason we're in Iraq right now. Maybe even the reason we weren't paying attention and let 9/11 happen. Anyone who values his own ego over the good of the country should not be taken seriously as a candidate for president.
          • SargedeathXmode, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1Wow, so you're saying we should knock out every third party candidate because all they can do is take away votes, thus allowing an idiot to win the presidency, in which there is a terrorist attack that we somehow might have let happen because of these third parties, which would drag us into a war with a country whose dictator hates the terrorist group that attacked us. The fact that Nader MIGHT have cost Al Gore the election just shows that the democrat's platform doesn't cover enough of the Left. Afterall, Nader voters want CHANGE; Nader believes that both parties are essentially no different, they're both conservative moderates. Now I don't quite agree with this line of thinking but since the Congressional party change nothing has actually changed (cept for some vague unfunded mandates or vetoed bills in the first 100 days). Now, the same Obama everyone here is cheering for represents the same platform (perhaps slightly less extreme) as Nader, CHANGE.
            (On a side note, I wasn't old enough to vote for Nader, and I'll probably just try to oust the Republican hold on the executive branch by voting Democrat, so Nader's for next election)
          • Gabberwok, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1There can indeed be a strong case for a 3rd party candidate, but it will require the development of a new party, not just one person pursuing his own agenda. If you're serious about 3rd party candidates, get them into Congress and local government, and then if a 3rd party grows strong enough and the main parties become weak enough there will be a good shot. When choosing who to vote for in an election, however, you can't make your decision in a vacuum. If you are torn between a moderate liberal and a far left spoiler, if you go with the spoiler you will only serve to make things easier for the person on the right to win the election. It's simple logic/game theory. People voted for Nader so they could act superior to the other voters who compromised, even though what they were really doing was casting half a vote for Bush.
    • pinchduck, on 04/22/2008, -4/+7To be fair, Limbaugh is no hack. He is a freaking juggernaut who has survived embarrassing boarder crossing inspections, a drug habit, and a stint in rehab. His audience is stable and he makes the Air America guys look stupid when it comes to the radio biz. If you wish to defeat his ideology, underestimating him is the worst thing you could do.
      • Greenkayak, on 04/22/2008, -5/+7Limbaugh IS a hack without any doubt. The only thing his stable audience proves is that there are a LOT of dumb, uneducated and easily fooled Americans out there. The worlds problems are complex and solutions are complicated and heavily nuanced, but some people would rather swallow solutions that sound simple and easy to understand. Rush capitalizes on this hunger for simplicity and 'blaming those not like us.'
        You can't defeat his ideology - it is that there will always people that are stupid in all societies. Thank you, Pinchduck, for proving that point over and over again.
        But you don't have to totally eliminate stupid ideology to win - you just have to make sure there are more educated views out there than ignorant ones.
        • ZeroG52, on 04/22/2008, -4/+6Two questions Greenkayak:
          1. Are you a Democrat?
          2. Are you a Christian?
        • SpeedSteamBoat, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Two questions ZeroG52:

          1. Who cares?
          2. Seriously, who cares?
          • ZeroG52, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Not very sharp are you? Isn't it obvious who cares? Me. Wow, it is difficult to have hope in the future with responses as empty headed as yours.
        • chubbybubba, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Your arrogance is astounding.
    • dareNmc, on 04/22/2008, -1/+0he did that again? He insisted in 1996 that every Republican switch and nominate Bill Clinton, because he knew for a fact that he would be indicted and had no chance of beating a Republican for president in the general election.
      • tacohead, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Is this real? got proof? I'm not discounting you, I'd like something to email to my republican friends.
        • dareNmc, on 04/23/2008, -0/+0I heard it on the radio at the time, and was disgusted. Although it is possible it was a quote from Michael Reagan, on his show and not Limbaugh directly.
    • itstodd, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2I did... life is good
    • casuallyevil, on 04/22/2008, -3/+7This is Digg - therefore, when people switch parties to vote for Obama, they're inspired and want change - when they do it for Hilary, they're saboteurs that should be investigated for fraud.

      This is getting ridiculous.
      • SpeedSteamBoat, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1Well okay, I guess it's fine to ignore that people actually have and probably continue to vote for Hillary to keep her in the race and not because they agree with who she is or what she stands for. Doing so would put you out of touch with reality, but whatever makes you feel good I guess. It's not as if this is some story people have pulled out a hat to make Obama look better or something. It's simply the truth of the situation.

        Sometimes the truth is *****. Sometimes people are real assholes. Denying that truth will not make it go away.
    • Cowboy1015, on 04/23/2008, -3/+2Doesn't matter!!! Clinton wins Pennsylvania!!! Hahaha
    • zadax, on 04/23/2008, -0/+6living in pennsylvania, i can attest to the fact that every local ultra conservative radio, print and television segments have been telling republicans to switch to democrats for several month now, in order to vote for hillary so mccain can win since they claim that mccain won't have a chance against obama, but has the possibility to win against clinton.
      • SpeedSteamBoat, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2This ***** makes me so mad. These are the same assholes that say Obama is "unamerican" for not wearing a ***** lapel pin. The very core of American values are in the democratic process (not flags, colors, or lapel pins), so if ANYONE is unamerican it's someone who goes out of their way to try and subvert that process. They are literally saying "Most people want this guy to be president, but we don't agree with that so we are going to try and manipulate the process so that us, the minority, can have our way regardless." They don't care about America. They don't care about democracy. They care only about themselves and their own ideals. They are out there telling people "We conservatives need to stick together against these liberals at all costs! Our values and ideas are better and far more important than theirs! They do not deserve a say because we are better than them! God bless America, and if you don't agree with us and do as we say you should you are unamerican and a traitor!"

        THESE ARE FASCIST IDEOLOGIES BY DEFINITION.

        I reject the opinions and ideas of these individuals wholesale. I will defend at long last their right to express them, but if we allow them to twist democracy like this we are playing into the hands of fascists. They are welcome to try and change the minds of enough people to win legitimately, but quite frankly I don't believe they can do it. I think they know they can't win that way, and I believe these recent anti-democratic actions are proof of that.
      • haylel, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Also living in PA, i see the same thing everywhere,
        a lot of them will outright admit they switched to vote for hillary in the primary but are going to vote for mccain in the general..
    • mefter36, on 04/24/2008, -0/+0I do not doubt it. These are the same people that goes to Church two to three times a week. Are these not the same people that Jesus had so much trouble with. The other problem that Senator Obama has is he has to fight the likes of Chis Matthew, Joe Scarbrough Rev. Joe Watkins, and the racist Pat Buchanan. Also the Media. Keith Oberman is the only commentator that is fair. How can Catholics critize Rev. Wright and they are in Churches where boys are being raped and they are not asked to leave.
  • itzdiceman, on 04/22/2008, -29/+12flip-floppers
    • CannedMango, on 04/22/2008, -2/+20Actually, I'm glad you made this (sarcastic) post. It shows how utterly stupid it is to hit someone for "flip-flopping".

      Sometimes people can... oh, I don't know... change their minds in their lives as they gather more evidence and facts to help support their decisions. There's no virtue in being a stubborn idiot your entire life who never grows or learns anything.

      Now, there are genuine "flip-flops"... but those are in the realm of changing your mind to fit the political landscape... so when public sentiment changes, so does yours so you can stay "popular". John McCain is the ultimate example of this.
  • JlmAWP, on 04/22/2008, -8/+10And it's more than likely that these people aren't polled often. Rarely are new and first-time voters either. 11 points my ass.
    • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 04/22/2008, -1/+7How many times has someone claimed "Oh my supporters don't have landlines, or they're first time voters, so they don't get polled!"?
      Let's see...
      Howard Dean...
      Ron Paul...
    • boombye, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4
      Who are all these people getting polled? I never get polled for anything...
    • bingobongony, on 04/23/2008, -3/+1You sure feel foolish now, don't you? OK,sure, it wasn't 11 points...it was only 10.
  • galeninjapan, on 04/22/2008, -38/+33Didnt a lot of people at Digg get mad when people switched parties to vote for Hillary?

    Is it ok to switch parties to vote for Obama but not for Hillary?
    • Falldog, on 04/22/2008, -10/+24No one in their right mind would switch parties to vote for Hillary, only to vote against Obama.
      • galeninjapan, on 04/22/2008, -11/+2Why?
      • galeninjapan, on 04/22/2008, -10/+9Why is it that "Only people in their right mind act a certain way," which is conveniently the way you think?
        • Falldog, on 04/22/2008, -6/+14Because my opinion is always correct.
          • Coven, on 04/22/2008, -3/+8Sounds like my father. "When I want your opinion I'll give it to you!"
          • Falldog, on 04/22/2008, -0/+3LOL

            You need a sense of humor, and that's a *fact*.
    • shortysmyname, on 04/22/2008, -8/+53People got mad previously because they switched parties to vote for Hillary, not because they want her to win the general election, but because they wanted McCain to have an easier candidate to beat in the general election. People switching parties to vote for a candidate they like and want to win in the general election is the case in this situation. There is a difference.
      • galeninjapan, on 04/22/2008, -20/+5How do you know thats the reason hey switched parties? Did you ask them?
        • gobbleplex, on 04/22/2008, -3/+17In what I have observed from admittedly annecdotal personal accounts, yes. More often, those who switched to vote for Hillary did so because they think she's easier to beat and they never intended to vote Democratic in the general. Likewise, most who switched to vote for Obama expressed an actual hope that he'll win. Could they be lying? Of course, but is it likely?
          • Coven, on 04/22/2008, -0/+3"This guy won't even debate the weakest link aka: Hillary"
            Um...what was that the other night on ABC? A debate? Between Obama and Clinton? Say it aint so!
        • cyrix, on 04/22/2008, -3/+4You're grasping at straws and it's sad.
    • kipmartin, on 04/22/2008, -2/+5yes.
    • zzzpoohzzz, on 04/22/2008, -2/+11people arent voting for obama so that hilary isnt the one running against mccain, theyre voting for him because they believe in him
      • JointVenture, on 04/22/2008, -6/+2Believe in what EXACTLY?
        • galeninjapan, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1Change, Hope, Hopeful change and changeful hope!
          • JointVenture, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1You forgot th future, because its like not right now, its later, you know it hasnt happend yet so I have hope about it?

            Can I have a job at Google please? Im hoping! Obama said I CAN!
  • Falldog, on 04/22/2008, -13/+73I had to switch from no party affiliation to Democrat in order to vote for Obama. I'm not a fan of either party, but Obama has gotten my hopes up. Both parties really should allow those without a set affiliation to vote on their candidates and let them avoid the risk of being brought into pointless cross party conflicts.
    • Skafia, on 04/22/2008, -4/+3I also had to go from undeclared to democrat in order to vote for Obama in NJ's primaries. But when I asked about how to go back to undeclared or change my affiliation in the future, no one knew; which is a bit unsettling.
      • diggduggDOOM, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2I believe you have to re-register for that (i.e., register again as undeclared or independent or whatever). At least, that's how it is in CA.
    • pjr12345, on 04/22/2008, -4/+6I'm for Obama because I hope for the change that hope in Obama can only change. I feel so much more optimistic about hope and change when Obama speaks about change and hope. I hope he wins so that he can change.

      GObama!
    • LukasSmith, on 04/22/2008, -12/+3pir12345 I am sure Germans felt great hope when Hitler spoke to them too. A siliver tongue doesn't mean a gold candidate. Obama keeps yammering about change. Change this, Change that. But he never really explains what change. And when he does im strangly aware that this change he speaks of isn't that far off from Clinton's change or even John Edward's change. I believe when they say that if Obama wasn't black he wouldnt have gotten this far. There is nothing to make me believe he offers any change greater then more melanin.
      • nirav72, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4WTF does his skin color have to do with this? Most educated people could careless. Hillary is the establishment that must be broken to bring the country back on track. If Obama is that person, so be it!
      • jdotter, on 04/22/2008, -0/+4His policies are Democrat to the core, no doubt about it. It's his politics that is drawing people to him. His willingness to take a different approach then the slash and burn, do anything politics that the Clintons have perfected is the change people are drawn to. Hitler was an evil, hateful, and sick man, there is no comparison. I've done a great disservice in even responding to you, because your comment requires nothing more than a thumbs down but I wanted you to see an example of what using the Reply link actually looks like when used properly.
        • p0s3r, on 04/22/2008, -3/+1"DOWNINGTOWN, Pa.—At the next train stop, I'm going to stand behind Sen. Obama when he speaks. When he's decrying the trivial distractions in politics, I think he may be crossing his fingers behind his back.

          As the senator's campaign train wound from one speech where he denounced tit-for-tat politics to the next speech where he denounced tit-for-tat politics, his campaign hosted a conference call to engage in the practice the candidate was busy denouncing. I suppose it would have been an even greater act of chutzpah for the Obama campaign to host the conference call while Sen. Obama was denouncing that kind of behavior, but not much more of one. "

          http://www.slate.com//id/2189485

          Square that circle, numbnuts.

      • pojut, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1That's like saying if Hillary wasn't a woman, she wouldn't have gotten this far either.

        It doesn't matter what got them where they are. They are where they are, and nothing is going to change that. To be honest, an Obama admin and a Hillary admin would be almost identical. The only real difference would be the persona standing up on stage giving the speeches...their policies are close enough that the outcome will be the same, regardless of which one of them wins.
      • pjr12345, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1No... hear me out... Obama is the best hope for change. We ought to all hope for that change. After all, the change offered by Obama is the best hope we have. Hoping for change, vote for Obama.

        GObama!
    • blademanx, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1California open primaries FTW
    • Hincapie, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1agreed with falldog...i did the same thing. ps nearly 11,500 people in Lancaster County PA changed their parties for this election. no amish jokes please.
  • wild, on 04/22/2008, -3/+43I am more concerned they are switching to vote for Hillary since she is the easier target to take down in November. (Not all of them obviously, but curious which portion is larger...)
    • elipabst, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4It would be interesting to see what percent of switchers ended up voting for Hillary or end up voting for McCain in the Fall. I've personally met several already. Frankly I think it's a disgrace that people of either party would act that way. It's like it's some kind of funny frat prank, when in reality it's going to lead to tighter restrictions on people being able to switch parties and participate in elections in general.
  • Jared85, on 04/22/2008, -15/+39There is something to be said for a leader who can cross party lines, the way Obama can.
    • p0s3r, on 04/22/2008, -7/+8He voted 97% party line. :(
      • trentshipp, on 04/22/2008, -3/+3i like how facts that are posted get buried while opinions are praised so long as they follow the liberal propaganda rampant on this site. FNORD
        • nblsavage, on 04/22/2008, -2/+3what facts? He posted nothing to back it up.
    • kuujjuaqguy, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2I am so sick of digg's Pro-Obama rally that they take over the front page with spam, just like they did with Ron Paul, I believe in Obama, and hate Hillary, but i don't smack ppl in the face with it 15 times a day.
  • ironrex, on 04/22/2008, -6/+108How do we know this isn't people switching to vote for Hillary, as McCain supporters?
    • CaptJackSparrow, on 04/22/2008, -10/+4RTFA!
      • CletusTSJY, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2Umm...the article pointed to "anecdotal evidence". So...I think ironrex's point stands.
    • SemiSarcastic, on 04/22/2008, -2/+17Good point. We may call Republican supports stupid, but every election year they sure don't act like it.
    • zzzpoohzzz, on 04/22/2008, -2/+8well... i'm one of the ones that switched for obama! ;)
    • shoestore, on 04/22/2008, -2/+2lawl I love that when people switch parties for vote for Obama its because they legit like him, but when they switch to vote for hilary its because they think she will lose
      • laserdog, on 04/22/2008, -4/+3Poll numbers back that up though.

        Hillary vs McCain = McCain presidency.
        Obama vs McCain = Obama presidency.
      • haylel, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1come to PA and talk to some people who switched
        you'll come to find, that's pretty much what's happening
    • faithfreedom, on 04/22/2008, -8/+3I don't think Obama really understand what he promised. There is no philosophical background behind his change. Putting several "change" words into his speech doesn't mean much. He really want to change a lot, i agree. But is it for the better? I don't think he know.
      If you want a real change, vote for Ron Paul. He talks the talk and walks the walk. He's a philosopher and a realist politician with integrity.
      • laserdog, on 04/22/2008, -2/+1So real change can only be achieved via voting for a man who has withdrawn from the race?
    • nonsequitor, on 04/22/2008, -0/+4You would think they would vote for their second choice not their last choice. Otherwise they would have no one to blame but themselves if Hillary actually won it all in Nov.
    • HotSaucePanCake, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Because unless you're an independent you can't vote for the other party in primaries.
      • ironrex, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1Unless it's an open primary, which this was.
  • imaxami, on 04/22/2008, -27/+2There's a funny-assed poll here: http://www.pwnsylvania.com/ PWN in PA
    • Philbert, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1The results are hilarious, I'll give you that.
  • brokenspatula, on 04/22/2008, -15/+3LOL
  • rahamm, on 04/22/2008, -18/+16I don't believe you the last two states people were switching to vote for Hilary I think it is the same here
    • rahamm, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4Do I get dugg up after the primary and we find out more Republicans switched to vote Hilary?
    • martoq, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1I dugg you up because I think the same thing. I am not buying it.
    • rahamm, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Still think I was wrong now that Clinton won by 10%? In two says Republicans switch parties to Reek Havocked in Penn Primary is going to be the top story.
  • cheezeme, on 04/22/2008, -21/+9I guess I'll be just be a little less bitter tonight ... might even sell my guns and become an atheist after Obama loses tonight. Can't wait.
  • suzywang3000, on 04/22/2008, -57/+12the "sweeping change" Obama will bring will be very similar to the sweeping change Mao brought.
    • pintomp3, on 04/22/2008, -5/+19you need to "change" your talking points.
    • IslandDog, on 04/22/2008, -21/+5"Change" is all you will have left after Obama and his socialist plans are enacted.
      • Kas70, on 04/22/2008, -0/+7As opposed to the pocket change we have now?
    • Nougat, on 04/22/2008, -10/+9ROFL MAO
    • AvidPreatorian, on 04/22/2008, -2/+5suzy wang. wang. when your last name is wang, there is is no way your childhood was easy so i'll let your comment slide. but just this time girl.
    • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 04/22/2008, -7/+2The Great Change Forward!
      The Change Revolution!
      • suzywang3000, on 04/22/2008, -5/+2don't forget about the Hundred Hope campaign...
    • Flamancot, on 04/22/2008, -3/+1Mao....?
    • wendelgee2, on 04/22/2008, -1/+9Look everybody, it's the rotted corpse of Joseph McCarthy and his politics! Welcome to the future.
  • coffee200am, on 04/22/2008, -25/+11What kind of changes?
    Please list them.
    • toconnor, on 04/22/2008, -9/+10Getting rid of the Federal Reserve, IRS, and Departments of Education and Energy to start with. You know real CHANGE. Oh wait I must be thinking of someone else.
    • ConceptualTrap, on 04/22/2008, -6/+7Investigating George W. Bush for warcrimes. He's already said that if he wins, he plans on doing this.
      • dondara, on 04/22/2008, -1/+5Really? I would think that would be the winning message. Let's hope capital punishment isn't off the table either. Seeing GW swing for what he's been party to wouldn't bring back any of those kids but it show the world America still believes in justice. (Or do we?)
    • coffee200am, on 04/22/2008, -9/+4Still need HIS list...

      Where is it?
      • munkyxtc, on 04/22/2008, -3/+9 How come every single political thread there is someone who says "what changes?" Have you bothered to check out his website? -- Obviously you haven't looked at all otherwise you would have the answers you seek. Every candidate for every electable position usually has a section of their website or document devoted to their stance on "the issues". Here, I'll do the leg work for you, read "The Blueprint for Change"

        http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/ObamaBlueprintForCh ...
    • itstodd, on 04/22/2008, -2/+3I think you summed it up good. The list is roughly 0 items long.
  • GrodyChamp, on 04/22/2008, -21/+5You mean they're switching because McCain will beat him easier than Hillary. Nice spin on it though
  • usgovterrorists, on 04/22/2008, -15/+3Who counts the unsecured electronic votes, and the unsecured ballots?
    When will the Americans wake up?
    Don't you get it, you've been had?
    It's only an illusion of an election!
    • plizard, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1i like bananas
    • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 04/22/2008, -0/+5When will you give up and realize no one pays attention to you?
  • petrodollar, on 04/22/2008, -20/+7http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1734350/p ...

    All right, folks. Guess I have to do it again around here and hand out the chill pills.

    1) It is absolutely clear to me that we have won this. We will keep the Senate, and I'm 90% sure we keep the House. We'll probably gain a seat, maybe two in the Senate.

    2) I know this from the turnout numbers, just as I did in 2004. The fact is, forget Indies. They don't vote in high numbers. It's all about the two parties, and who gets out their base.

    We have done that today beyond my wildest expectations. The info we have from the Hotline on turnout is overwhelming, and in virtually every key state, we have exceeded Dem turnout by 2, 3, 4, or 6%.

    As I predicted, we are seeing a Dem UNDERVOTE. They are underperforming, esp. in key states such as OH. However, they are underperforming far worse than even I dreamed. We are looking at 20% in Cuyahoga County! Brown and Strickland couldn't get elected dog catcher with that level of support.

    SO HERE IS WHAT TO EXPECT: THE MEDIA IDIOTS HAVE THEIR TEMPLATES. THEY WILL BE VERY SLOW TO COME AROUND. IT WILL BE A LONG NIGHT, BECAUSE THEY WON'T BELIEVE THEIR EYES.

    They may even "call" a few House races, maybe a Senate race, based on some ridiculously low "exit poll" and have to recant later. Be patient. The turnout numbers suggest we absolutely cannot lose.
    • Acewrap, on 04/22/2008, -3/+3The best posts are at the end of that linked thread.
      • petrodollar, on 04/22/2008, -2/+1Sometimes God's will is to let nations and or peoples fall to accomplish His ultimate purpose. The results of tonite show how much our nation has become apostate.

        617 posted on 11/7/2006 8:44:00 PM by DarthVader (Conservatives aren't always right , but Liberals are almost always wrong.)
    • BECoole, on 04/22/2008, -0/+9Quoting from November 2006?
      Buried!
    • OffPiste, on 04/22/2008, -9/+1Nothing will electrify the Republican base as a campaign against whichever of the two lying socialists wins. You've got a closet Muslim who hates America and a lesbian pantsuit wearing Hitler. Yeah turnout in the general is going to be Waaaaayyyyy low on the Republican side.
    • edgedmurasame, on 04/22/2008, -0/+4Nothing more amusing than seeing conservatives here drop into double digit negative diggs.
    • SoulDrift404, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2That optimism really worked out well for you nutjobs in 2006!

      Quoting from Freep? Buried!
  • groone, on 04/22/2008, -15/+8Obama obama fofama fee fi fo fama Obama
  • mach32, on 04/22/2008, -11/+5bread and circus
  • IslandDog, on 04/22/2008, -23/+14Obama's "change" BS is quickly running out of steam. There's only so many people you can convince to be in your cult.
    • Akairenn, on 04/22/2008, -3/+2Reminds me of the South Park hobos. Change... Chaaaange. Chaaaange! Do you have any change? Spare some change? Chaaaange. Chaaaaaaange!
    • b0ltacti0n, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2Agreed....watching the news clips when Obama speaks, and the reaction of the crowds...is like watching the video of Tom Cruse get his Scientology gold ribbon medal. The faces of the crowds in both cases have that same crazy eyed look....WTF ....RonPaul '08
  • Solis, on 04/22/2008, -9/+32It's sad, I'm the only one I know in my area (Scranton, PA) that's voting for Obama. Everyone at work all seem to be Hillary crazy.
    • gymbrall, on 04/22/2008, -2/+15Pam?
    • brianjlowry, on 04/22/2008, -2/+3Quit now.
    • BinaryDelt, on 04/22/2008, -3/+6Well, Hillary's crazy, so that makes sense. I can't see how anyone would vote for her.
    • huertanix, on 04/22/2008, -3/+8That's what you get for living in a retirement community. Maybe host a scabble/mylanta party today and distract them Hillfolk away from the voting areas?
      • Solis, on 04/22/2008, -4/+1One day when I can afford it, I'll be more than happy to move out of here, as it is, I can barely afford living here. But you're right, I should try and distract them with a game of bridge or something while I'm stuck here.
    • faizal5k, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1Just post this website somewhere at work:
      http://fizzel89.com/hitlary
    • Greenkayak, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2Being in the minority in a group but being CORRECT is much better than being in the majority and wrong. Be PROUD of yourself, Solis! I am proud of you.
    • Hincapie, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1people are ***** themselves for obama in lancaster. ive seen maybe two hillary signs in front yards, TONS of obama signs.
    • mefter36, on 04/24/2008, -1/+0Be careful there is a Jim Jones in the group when everyone think alike. Open up your mind and you will realize that we are no longer in the 50's and 60's. Your children and grandchildren will grow up to be stupid. Do not let them go out there unprepared
  • agentVivid, on 04/22/2008, -16/+52party affiliation is for losers... it creates a false sense of contention where none really exists.
    REPUBLICANS=DEMOCRATS=ELITE=NOT YOU
    • SemiSarcastic, on 04/22/2008, -1/+5Very true.
      • nbcaffeine, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4I'm L337. Is that the same thing?
    • laserdog, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1Amen.

      People very much want to believe that the world is simple. They also very much like believing that they are superior in some way to some other set of people.

      http://store.theonion.com/the-sports-team-from-my- ...
    • TheDudeDiggs, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1yeah man, our two party system is crap!
      • SpeedSteamBoat, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Huh, not sure why you are being dugg down. This two party system really is a terrible way of doing things. The way in which it suggests the views of every single American citizen (or at least the vast majority) can be placed only in one of two categories is obviously bogus. Just look at how often Congress gets deadlocked straight down party lines, and the way that the law works makes it very difficult to get anything done (especially the overturning of a presidential veto which has become practically a pipe dream in the past 8 years).

        America needs very badly a strong third party to break up the process, allow voters better choice in elections, and clean up the debate situation in congress. A strong third party would force a much greater level of discussion, compromise, and crossing of party lines in congress while preventing a single party from stonewalling any given piece of legislation they don't like.

        If you look at all the trouble and disfunctionality in the American congress today you are literally witnessing all of the reasons why George Washington hated and warned us about partisanship in government.

        It should be obvious to anyone that a nation of millions of people with just as many different ideas and points of view could never be properly represented by just two political parties.
    • theclar, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1What a load of junk! A democrat in the white house would not have invaded iraq. That's enough of a difference for me.
      • 1timeuser, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1All depends on who was paying him/her and how much.
    • headphonedude, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Elite is kind of a strong word, I don't think very many of those bastards are better than me. They were never intended to be full-time politicians either.
  • ladalang, on 04/22/2008, -7/+17This is totally bogus and inaccurate. No way that is happening. In Ohio people switched parties to keep him out of the race not get him in.
    • h2g242, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1It's happening. Trust me. He doesn't even need to win here, just keep it to single digits.
    • Hincapie, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1it's definitely happening. ive seen it.
  • maximm, on 04/22/2008, -16/+19so tired of hearing about this dude on digg this is a fanboy site for that dude now
    • HotSaucePanCake, on 04/23/2008, -0/+3AMEN
    • mefter36, on 04/24/2008, -1/+0Amen does not apply to worldly statement. I will just tell God on you
  • JimmyIkon, on 04/22/2008, -21/+15A vote for Obama is a vote for the "punishment for being too successful" tax. He is quoted as saying that cap gains taxes should be raised even if it decreases revenue because it's not fair for people to make lots of money. And this is America.
    http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/obama_on_capital_ ...
    • jerwin, on 04/22/2008, -4/+10To make this response even more scary, when Gibson pressed Obama again in the debate about the fact that raising the Cap Gains tax ALWAYS resulted in lower tax revenue, Obama responded with "Well, it depends on how the stock market does..."

      Obama does NOT understand the economic influences of what he proposes to do. This is VERY SCARY.

      If you agree with Obama's response above, you need some serious education as to what Cap Gains are and how all of this works as well. Otherwise you are voting in a very foolish manner and you will not like the results.
      • cramtod, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2Gibson pressed that LOWERING the capital gains tax rate INCREASED revenue, not the opposite. And this statement is disputed for other than short term tax revenue. Just because it's on TV doesn't make it true.

        "...extending the capital gains tax cut enacted in 2003 would cost $100 billion over the next decade"
        - Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Joint Committee on Taxation
    • boredrph, on 04/22/2008, -2/+7why is everyone digging you down without even a response? He had no good answer for this in the debate...
    • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 04/22/2008, -2/+10BUt but but... Chaaaaaaaaaaaaaange!
    • cramtod, on 04/22/2008, -0/+3A reduction in the capital gains tax results in an increase in tax revenue immediately after the tax cut goes into effect as people can unload their positions in a more favorable tax environment. The assertion that a reduction in the capital gains results in greater revenue in the long term is disputed.

      BTW, Obama never agreed with Gibson’s disputed assertion about the capital gains tax.

      MR. GIBSON: But history shows that when you drop the capital gains tax, the revenues go up.
      SENATOR OBAMA: Well, that might happen or it might not. It depends on what's happening on Wall Street and how business is going. It depends on what's happening on Wall Street and how business is going.
  • RRJackson, on 04/22/2008, -33/+4Republicans are terrified that they might have to run against Clinton. It's too late, though. She's going to be the nominee.
    • chrissku, on 04/22/2008, -2/+6Ok dumbass
    • jerwin, on 04/22/2008, -3/+4LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHALOLoh my god it hurtsLOLOLOLHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

      SHe is simply not electable under the best of circumstances. Not that Obama is either, but OMG you gotta be kidding...
    • sqwirl, on 04/22/2008, -1/+5Your poor attempt at reverse psychology is almost as transparent as your laughable comment history.
  • anbudom, on 04/22/2008, -12/+5Hillary needs a miracle, and fast.
    • IphtashuFitz, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1I'm sure she's already promised God/Allah/Vishnu/whoever plenty of political favors if they come through for her.
    • LogicBomB, on 04/22/2008, -4/+11No, she really doesn't. She needs to drop out, and fast.
    • jimbo92107, on 04/22/2008, -0/+0How about "Little Tuzla Girl Admits to Being Sniper"?
  • plizard, on 04/22/2008, -15/+8it's only to vote against hillary, dumb asses
  • bphicke, on 04/22/2008, -10/+4Wow, there were cries of election fraud when people switched parties to vote for Hitlery. But now that it is happening with Ospama everything is ok. Good Job guys. Really.
  • 919kwjc, on 04/22/2008, -12/+4At this point they're both looking like a huge mistake. How many of you Dems are dreaming about Al Gore coming in on a white horse at the convention? I mean, really, you've got a couple of stinkers on your hands.
  • Razed, on 04/22/2008, -20/+19"they want sweeping change" People switching to vote for the O-man aren't really up for sweeping change. They're more up for moderate change, but a change in the right direction I think. If you want somebody to bring about sweeping change Ron Paul is your man. There i mentioned his name. Let the downmod begin.
    • bdbr, on 04/22/2008, -2/+3Funny, a few months ago that same comment would have had a hundred thumbs up...probably from the same people digging you down now.
    • Stettenbauer, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2Agree,with the Ron Paul statement..but unfortunately the media has and will be ignoring him.No media= no chance ,because Americans need to have others think for them.( I also sent money to his campaign),Oh and by the way us Pennsylvanians are NOT gung ho Obama,buried.
    • laserdog, on 04/22/2008, -2/+2Ron Paul dropped out of the race.

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...

      It's like the Pacific Isles in WWII all over again.
      • newnie, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1No he didn't. Just goes to show you how the media can report false stories and get away with it. Ron Paul had to post a follow up comment saying that I didn't drop out - the media only listened to the first few seconds I think and made up their mind... most media outlets corrected their mistake.
    • ronintetsuro, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1And so the downmodding did commence. We can talk all fooking day long about Rev Wright's comments, but I have yet to hear a Paulette admit that he's a racist, sexist scumbag.
  • JimmyIkon, on 04/22/2008, -14/+4Rush for president!
    • ejde, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1Good, write him in in November. I'm sure your party will appreciate it.
    • ssn697, on 04/22/2008, -2/+3The flip flopper, you mean? Anyone doing drugs should go to jail, it is their fault. He gets caught, and it is suddenly a disease.

      ACLU is the devil. He wants his medical records private? ACLU baby! I have no respect for Rush Limbaugh. He is a talking head, nothing more. He shills for ratings.
    • BinaryDelt, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2You're an idiot. Anyone who believes what he says is.
      • JimmyIkon, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2I say it jokingly, but you can't deny that the guy is a great thinker. Let me guess, you hate him but you've never listened to his show.
  • designer, on 04/22/2008, -14/+11*****. Pennsylvanians like me are switching to vote for Hillary because of "Operation Chaos."
    • pojut, on 04/22/2008, -7/+6If that is true, then you are a sad, sad person. You do realize you are allowing yourself to be influenced by one of the worst people in the US Media, don't you?
    • BinaryDelt, on 04/22/2008, -2/+7Wow, you must be really reallllllllly stupid.
    • designer, on 04/22/2008, -7/+5Actually it's being done to keep the democrats fighting and spending money. The republican candidate has already been chosen so why not help continue the bloodletting on the democrat side. Just remember if the democratic party of the little guy didn't have these elite superdelegates, this process would already be over.
    • apetrie, on 04/22/2008, -2/+6If you really switched for that reason, you are a disrespectful, arrogant, immoral piece of *****.
    • frenchi, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2We need the republican party to run this country into the ground. Let's give them another term, so that we can tell them "I told you so". It's the only they'll understand how much they screwed up.
    • wishninja, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2really? What a pecker head you are.
  • TinternAbbot, on 04/22/2008, -5/+3Switching party affiliations because of one individual? I don't think I will ever fully understand political "thinking" in this country.
    • Hincapie, on 04/23/2008, -0/+3obama has made me interested in politics and improving our government and way of life...that says a LOT, cause i hate politics. if it was just hillary running i probably wouldn't care much at all.
  • JointVenture, on 04/22/2008, -12/+4Yeah right, they're voting for Obama.

    You're so dumb.
  • z3nbrain, on 04/22/2008, -10/+38The old ladies at my polling place said it was, "scary how many young people he (Obama) got out to vote."

    I was never more proud to "Cast Ballot" than I was today in voting for Obama. Can't wait for the election in November!
  • PhoenixAvatar2, on 04/22/2008, -9/+14Guilty as charged. Registered republican without putting much thought into it but now that I actually have someone to believe in, I switched.
    • JointVenture, on 04/22/2008, -8/+3What exactly is it you believe in?
      • jgtg32a, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2"Never ask that question"
        -Kosh
        /obscure
  • TheMayor, on 04/22/2008, -14/+3Of course this is true, Obama Hussein Barack (peace be upon him) is greater than God (the Christian God, not the Islamic one)
  • JointVenture, on 04/22/2008, -19/+2You gotta love philly, you know the city where a black mayor burned down a black neighborhood (see MOVE Black militants...funny that being the name of the group considering MOVEON)

    Not only that but the Justice department is monitoring a DEMOCRATIC state and a DEMOCRATIC city for voter fraud.

    Its real clear, the Democrats are the real crooks, and the real SWIFT BOATERs, just look at the ads this week from both sides.
    • Philbert, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1MOVE was a long time ago
      • JointVenture, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1Yeah, and the Dems have been running philly for a long time and look what they did with it, look at Detroit.

        Whats the commone theme there? How about New Orleans?
        • StarlessKnight, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Well if we're going to play correlation and causation games... aren't the Republicans usually in the White House when the country starts to deflate? Note: this is not a serious "debate," just playing by your rules.
  • slumslum, on 04/22/2008, -8/+18I was a registered Republican in PA and switched to vote for Obama. I don't look at the political propaganda I look at the issues, because at the end of the day they are the only things that mater.
    • JointVenture, on 04/22/2008, -6/+3OK, lets hear em.

      Give me 5 issues that convinced you where you dugg obama over mccain. Be specific, hope , change wont cut it.
      • pojut, on 04/22/2008, -2/+4Well, even though you weren't speaking to me, I can give you some good reasons.

        1. Education budget...you know, like actually having one and paying teachers more.

        2. Healthcare...you know, like actually providing it.

        3. Iraq...you know, like not continuing to fight a lost battle.

        4. Someone who has absolutely no connection to the current administration

        5. Someone who fully supports net neutrality
        • bdbr, on 04/22/2008, -2/+2What you're saying is,you had anti-Republican views in the first place...so why were you ever registered Republican?
          • pojut, on 04/22/2008, -0/+3Never said that I was.

            Been registered Independent since I turned 18. To be fair, I should have clarified that...I did make it seem like I was registered republican. My apologies.
        • stix213, on 04/22/2008, -2/+3Man I hate soft heads...

          1) Education budget comes from states, with only a little help from the federal government. Vote for Obama for Governor if you want to help here.

          2) Providing health care, but then raising your taxes to do it (like he said he would) doesn't sound much like "providing" especially when most Americans already get health care through their jobs - and when the government provides your health care then they control your health care, and get to decide when your life has just gotten too expensive..... I'll stick with my HMO thank you

          3) I don't think you have been watching what has been happening the last year, since we are winning and all

          4) McCain and Bush have hated each other for a long time, ever since Bush spread it around that McCain had a secret black child just to beat him in the 2000 primaries.... Then McCain fought Bush on nearly everything he tried to get passed in congress. Were you in elementary school back then or something? Or does that all qualify as a "connection" in your mind?

          5) Ahhh you finally got one here. While McCain doesn't oppose net neutrality, he is against over regulation of the telecom industry, which he would see this as.
          • pojut, on 04/22/2008, -0/+3"1) Education budget comes from states, with only a little help from the federal government. Vote for Obama for Governor if you want to help here. "

            Very true...however, the federal government still sets guidelines, such as No Child Left Behind...perhaps the worst thing to happen to our education system in a very long time. Did you know that based on No Child Left Behind that special needs kids and kids with severe and multiple disabilities still have their score count towards a school's overall average performance? That wouldn't be a problem, except for the fact that they take the EXACT same tests as "normal" kids. In addition, Obama (at least according to what he has said on the campaign trail) would make an effort to increase teacher's pay. My girlfriend is a teacher, and I assure you she does not get paid nearly enough for the amount of time she invests in her job...nor does she get paid enough for the ***** she has to put up with.

            "2) Providing health care, but then raising your taxes to do it (like he said he would) doesn't sound much like "providing" especially when most Americans already get health care through their jobs - and when the government provides your health care then they control your health care, and get to decide when your life has just gotten too expensive..... I'll stick with my HMO thank you"

            Yes, most people do get insurance through their jobs...and there are millions of people who don't. I personally work in the healthcare industry, and get to see on a daily basis how ***** it is in it's current state. Beyond that, I don't care if I pay more in taxes if it's because of something like more comprehensive healthcare or infrastructure