Are you a HillPublican?

[Platapus]

Yes, but they are not voting for Senator Clinton because they want her for President. They are, in their opinion, voting for the weakest opponent. This way, their candidate, Senator McCain, would run against Senator Clinton. It the belief of some GoP strategists that Senator Clinton will be a more easier opponent for Senator McCain to beat.

This is entirely different from the number of disillusioned republicans, such as myself, who, while still republican, will be voting for the Democratic candidate because they do not want Senator McCain for President.

Voting for the "opposite" in the primaries as a way to skew the election is nothing new. People have been doing that ever since there have been open primaries.

I have not come across any data that would indicate that this "cross voting" had any significant impact on an election.

[Von Tonner]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Yes, but they are not voting for Senator Clinton because they want her for President. They are, in their opinion, voting for the weakest opponent. This way, their candidate, Senator McCain, would run against Senator Clinton. It the belief of some GoP strategists that Senator Clinton will be a more easier opponent for Senator McCain to beat.

Precisely, that is what the article is getting at. They are voting for her to set the Democratic Party up. 1) It continues the cat fight and 2) they just might get Clinton nominated - which is the contender they believe they can shoot to hell and back.

I will try and look up the reference on Texas. What I found interesting is that she won Texas by that amount of votes.