Health Care, Reproductive Rights, The Economy, The War: Why Would Clinton Supporters Vote For McCain?

I thought it was an odd follow up comment from you, I should have realized it was intended for someone else simply because it was so odd.

:-)

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings ( http://www.flamingohouse.net/ )

More confused...is this not a political thread?

Later...My apologies, I just realized the dates on this. I see the comments in the sidebar and am assuming they're on recent items. Since not all items appear on the front page, I'm assuming its not on the page because it's a back page item. 

Feel free to delete my comments in this thread, I thought I was responding to a fresh discussion. 

Perhaps you might want to consider closing comments down after a week or a month, so that discussions can stay fresh.

Denise, this comment wasn't directed to you. I know that threaded comments can be difficult to read at times, but this was a comment to another person. I'll edit the comment and include a reference to their signature.

PS I can't edit the comment, but it was directed to wetnap

"Also there is the tactical reason, in 2012 Hillary would be able to run against McCain but she could not run against Obama if he were elected.
If we have 4 years of McCain and 8 years of Hillary, then Obama will still be young enough to take his turn, with more experience."

I'm sorry, but this one -- you've got to be kidding. Let's give the election to McCain, because then Hilary can try in four years and Obama will have his chance later?

Look around us! Our economy sucks! We're fighting a battle on two fronts! We have Supreme Court Justices who won't make it another four years, and who will be replaced by people who can be in SCOTUS for years. Let's also not forget 1 out 5 people not having health insurance.

This isn't a "Mother may I?" game, where all the good little boys and girls get their turn. This is the leadership of a country that is deep trouble.  

Competence? McCain changes his mind about the economy twice in a single day. 

You can talk about McCain's leadership capability, after the disasterous week when he was all over the place about the economy? When he can't even look at Obama during a debate? When his legendary temper is so well known his old classmates used to call him McNasty?

Frankly, I would rather have someone who is entering their peak as president, than someone who left it a couple of years back.

I'm a registered Democrat. I've never voted for any president except for a Democratic president. But as I said, I am not going to discuss politics again here until I'm ready to blog my position completely.

Might I suggest you jump back into a political discussion with members of the community who are prepared to have this kind of interaction with you? Otherwise you'll be talking to yourself for a good while.

I'd also love to hear your comments on the google/hakia/lijit search post that Virginia did, if you have the time or interest in joining that one. :-)

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings ( http://www.flamingohouse.net/ )

Actually, I respect your decision. I know this is my last time voting straight Democrat, and I'm considering switching to Green/Progressive. At least at the presidential level, the party (or I should say parties) have problems in Missouri.

But I couldn't do the switch this year. I am can't accept the thought of McCain/Palin.

I find it unlikely you were a true Clinton supporter, not based on the issues. You might have indulged in identity politcs, in which case issues don't matter.

Have you read the history of John McCain at Rolling Stone Magazine? This is not a man who considers women to be his equals. In fact, his attitude towards women is awful. If he did consider women to be equals, would he have treated Sarah Palin the way he has? Like a wind-up pitbull beauty queen doll to turn on or off at the flick of a switch?

And yes, I said I was going to blog about my reasons to support McCain/Palin (on my personal blog) - I have not done so for personal reasons.

Since that time, I have refrained from commenting almost completely on political topics on BlogHer.com.

I understand it is frustrating for you, and for others, because you're interested in hearing why I have made this choice. Unfortunately, I'm not ready to share details and deal with the follow up discussion. When I'm ready, I swear I'll send you the link. Until then, I'm not participating in political discussions here. :-)

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings ( http://www.flamingohouse.net/ )

Denise, I'm a little frustrated with your response. You keep saying you were a Clinton supporter and now you're considering voting for McCain, but you don't give any reasons why.

You don't have to explain, free country and all, but I find your opinion to be, frankly, contradictory -- how can a person who supports Clinton support McCain? The two are absolutely opposite in viewpoint and on issues. Yet Clinton and Obama are very similar. 

You had said once you were going to write on this, and I may have missed it. If so, can you provide a link?

I'm glad you're joining the conversation.  Since I last commented on this thread, however, I've found a solid reason NOT to vote for McCain.  Her name is Palin.  Actually, it isn't the person Sarah Palin that I object to.  I think she's a pretty damned fine politician, albeit not quite bright enough for my taste(but then George W wasn't either)  But I abhor her politics--everything she stands for.  And the fact that McCain chose her because she shores up the Republican base--well, that's a sellout in my book.  As far as his competence and judgment:  the more I see him on the campaign trail, the more I distrust him.  He's beginning to sound a little Dr. Strangelovian to me.  Anyone who is still holding out for Hillary in 2012 is--I dunno--breathing the fumes from the GOP????? 

By Jane

http://byjane.blogspot.com

http://midlifebloggers.com 

Comptence and judgement are two of the reasons why some HIllary supporters find McCain a better second choice than Obama.

Also there is the tactical reason, in 2012 Hillary would be able to run against McCain but she could not run against Obama if he were elected. If we have 4 years of McCain and 8 years of Hillary, then Obama will still be young enough to take his turn, with more experience.

Influencing  legislation on hot issues isn't the main thing a President does. And a President doesn't get very far on those with an opposing Congress. Mostly his/her job is to do a good job on the things that most of us agree on.

Do you really believe that NONE of the women who supported Hillary did so because she is a  woman? In the same vein, do you really think that all of the Afro-Americans who support Obama, do so without noticing  the fact that he is black? Come on ladies, every voter has her or his own agenda and therefore each votes accordingly. Since Hillary is out of the picture, sort of...what is wrong with women supporting McCain? He offers tried, true, tested and proven ability in remaining steadfast to our country and our people. I believe that Obama is a good man. My problem with him is that he has no history to prove that he can step up to the plate that is currently  in the middle of a mine field? Mc Cain has proven that he can. So ladies, this is really about Democrats vs. Republicans and not the candidates, isn't it?  

owww.ClaudiaBroome.com ( http://www.claudiabroome.com/ )

www.LadiesDontQuitYet.com ( http://www.tohaveandtoholdhostage.com/ )

www.ToHaveAndToHoldHostage.com ( http://www.tohaveandtoholdhostage.com/ )

Wouldn't you rather vote for a candidate that actually has a chance? By voting 3rd party, you are supporting the McCain campaign, whether you know it or not. Because if you are really conserned with the environment you should review Obama's voting record and his stand on environmental legislture, as well as his platform for reform.

Do you know that the US did not even participate in the last World Congress Conference on Enviromental Preservation? That is the Bush administration's calling card. And whether you realize it or not, McCain has alarmingly similar positions as Bush, demonstrated by his voting record. 

Although I often am disapointed in the inflammatory approach they take, you might want to go to: http://pol.moveon.org/mccain10/email.html?rc=homep... to see McCain's voting history on many issues that might make you realize you should do everything in you power to support Obama instead of wasting your vote just to make a statement.

Very few Americans are aware of the power of blog. It has been proven through millions of dollars in research to be a powerful influencing tool. So much so that now there are thousands of companies that offer "blog influencing" services. That's right. Companies that seek out influentiial blog sites and strategically place entries that identify themselves as a certain demographic or party and then offer their opinions on issues as a way to show the "me-too" personality types, looking for the direction they should fall of the fence that lands them in the safe majority, where their opinions should fall. They hire influential people AND WELL KNOWN BLOGGERS to fuel their campaigns by putting their paid-for positions out in the public realm. They take part in and influence polls as well along with many other gorilla warfare tactics. This isn't a conspiracy theory either, in fact this new approach at marketing actually has an industry name: Gorilla Marketing.

Often I see entries that just don't ring true. They typically use partial statements of candidates and slant them in the direction that best supports their position. A good rule of thumb is never believe anything you read that does not provide a solid reference for it's validity. And for the sake of all that is right and just, TAKE A LOOK AT THE VOTING RECORDS of the candidates and see exactly what their positions have been on issues close to your heart and life before being influenced by propaganda.

Point in case, just how many women do you know personally that were clearly hoping for a Hillary win that are now saying they won't vote? How many that say they would vote for McCain? I have a pretty large and diverse social circle and I have not heard this a single time. It seems to me like more of a suggestion than an observation.........

If Clinton voters are so outraged that a woman didn't get the nomination, they shouldn't vote for Obama - if they really want to vote for a woman, they need to vote for Cynthia McKinney (assuming she gets the Green nomination, which it looks like she will).  Of course, I don't actually know any Democratict "defectors" who are voting for McCain just because Clinton didn't get the nomination.  Maybe I have the wrong friends and visit the wrong parts of the internet?

 I actually will be voting for McKinney (in theory), but I decided this in February, well before we knew the outcome of the Democractic primary.  Neither Clinton nor Obama match with my values, and McKinney does.  I don't know why it took me so long to think about third party candidates, but for the first time ever, I feel like I'm not voting for someone who is simply the lesser of two evils.

Well said, wetnap!  I'm sure the obama-ites will be breathing down your neck, but you've articulated--short and sweet--what so many of us are thinking.   I feel about Obama right now the same way I felt about George Bush eight years ago--god help us.

By Jane

http://byjane.blogspot.com

http://midlifebloggers.com

the vote for obama was already against women. the anti clinton media bias was based a large part on sexism.  i cannot reward obama for this.  every victory of clintons was down played, and they pretty much were baying for her blood in a shameful manner.

as for mccain, clinton voters are centrists. and mccain is more centrist than obama who has the fringe left pushing him.  

for the first time in my life i'll be voting for a republican, thanks obama.   i'm not voting for someone just because he happens to be a democrat.  pro choice? i'm not a single issue voter.  there are so many other issues.  iraq?  obamas got an incredibly immoral position on it.  we broke it, we fix it, regardless of who was at fault. we all are. thats how it works. you don't switch seats after a hit and run and pretend it was fine. mccains been tested and it seems we can trust him. obamas shiny but his long past of associating himself with bigot extremists when he thought no one was looking show that he's probably an empty suit. i don't trust the man no matter what pretty words he manages to say.  he's a creation of perfect market packaging.

I was one of the ones who had considered McCain if their candidate of choice didn't win the nomination.

This issue is the one which decided me against McCain under any circumstances. It was the straw as it were when combined with his stance on immigration, civil rights and the war.

While I don't agree with the SCOTUS decision, I can see the logic and the solution was obviously to redo the law. That the Republicans killed the legislation was repugnant (but not at all surprising).

Jim Heivilin

Thanks for repeating the question, Atena. Realizing that the next president will likely appoint 2-4 Supreme Court justices, that question (which I hoped to then address on my own blog about media & politics), is why I wandered onto BlogHer in the first place. If anyone can direct me to the answer, posted on this site or elsewhere, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks.

http://jmcpherson.wordpress.com/

I offer no assumptions, pique-related or otherwise. Like Catherine in her original question and Atena in two subsequent posts, I am just trying to find out what those other reasons are  to vote for McCain, from the perspective of a progressive who realizes that the next president will likely appoint 2-4 Supreme Court justices. In fact, my desire for an answer to that question, which I hoped to then address on my own blog, is why I wandered onto BlogHer in the first place. And I don't expect you to necessarily provide the answer, but I hope someone reading this will. Thanks.

 I am still waiting for someone to answer the original question.  Why would a Clinton supporter vote for McCain when considering the issues that they represent?

 If someone did answer the question and I'm missing it, I would find it helpful if someone could elucidate.  I'm reading that people who are defending this possibility are questioning the author of this post without the courtesy of answering her question.

I've been wrong before, though.  Tell me if I am, please.  I would like to actually here the details of this point-of-view.   

 Atena

Assumptions, Biases & Irrational Fantasies ( http://antibias.wordpress.com )

Catherine, I'm not surprised that you didn't find those links this weekend.  We're all still shell-shocked.   

By Jane

http://byjane.blogspot.com

http://midlifebloggers.com

Don't play the Dense Guys card, James.  It's beneath you..

What offends me (and others that commented) is the assumption that we would only switch our vote to McCain out of some pique.  It's kind of a double ad hominem attack, isn't it:  McCain's a lying racist, sexist, lobbyest-loving jerk and therefore anyone who votes for him is as well.

I will go to your blog and see your reasoned discussions of the issues.  However, that is certainly not what you have offered here.    

By Jane

http://byjane.blogspot.com

http://midlifebloggers.com

Hi Jane. I did spend a lot of time looking for links to women supporters of Clinton, that were now going to vote for McCain instead of Obama...on the issues. If you notice, I didn't even post this until 3am. I really would like to have links to women that will switch from Clinton to McCain based on the issues. I don't understand it, but I would like to try.

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan at catherine-morgan.com ( http://catherine-morgan.com/ ), The Political Voices of Women ( http://politicsanew.com/ ), Care2 Election Blog ( http://www.care2.com/politics/features/ )

Maybe I'm just dense (I am a guy, after all), but I don't know what you mean by "biting." You seem to think I have some ulterior motive for asking for bloggers who offer reasons other than anger that a Hillary supporter should vote for McCain over Obama.

You apparently were offended by my attempt at wit, and for that I apologize. But I do trust that Catherine was sincere in saying she would link to those sites, and I would do the same at my blog, which focuses on media & politics(http://jmcpherson.wordpress.com/ ( http://jmcpherson.wordpress.com/ )). There you'll see a long list of links representing various sides of issues. I really do prefer reasoned discussion over slashing broadsides, despite the aforementioned comment.

And perhaps I'm misreading you, but you also seem to be under the impression that I was an Obama supporter and perhaps that I thought Hillary should get out of the race earlier. If you read my blog, you'll see that neither is the case. In fact I think she handled the suspension (not withdrawal) of her race perfectly, in terms of both tone and timing.

But as a progressive, I also know that there is no way I can support McCain, who favored the war, now supports torture and wiretapping of Americans, opposes abortion, makes racist and sexist jokes, opposes meaningful health care reform, loves lobbiests, supports big media, and opposes net neutrality (if he had his way, you and I both might lose our web voices). That is, unless I hear convincing arguments as to why I should support him, not just oppose Obama.

Sorry, James, I'm not biting.  You can read my reply, such as it is, here ( http://byjane.blogspot.com/2008/06/third-rail.html ). 

By Jane

http://byjane.blogspot.com

http://midlifebloggers.com

Flat out on issues across the board there is no reason for Clinton's supporters to choose McCain. I'm only going to repeat what Pam said, but it scares me that so many thoughtful people are so blinded by their rage that Clinton is not the candidate that they would vote for a person who stands for everything Clinton is against.

And to be frank, if we think Clinton lost due to sexism, voting for McCain who told people that he supports companies discriminating against women as long as they can successfully hide it for more than 6 months, is not going to fix the situation. Obviously, I am paraphrasing here, but here's what happened in the Lilly Ledbetter ( http://www.blogher.com/us-companies-and-politician... ) case, as I noted when Republicans shot down legislation to remedy the horrific decision in April:

"...the Supreme Court is also loaded with people who have no interest in justice or equality these days. Thus, Ms. Ledbetter was chided in a 5-4 decision for not consulting psychics, breaking into the payroll department, or doing whatever else she could do to determine that she was paid unequally for her work. Bush appointee Sam Alito hated that companies that discriminate against people might be faced with "the burden of defending claims arising from employment decisions that are long past. (In other words, "the longer you discriminate, the less you should be held accountable for your actions, so do whatever you can to not get caught in the first six months!)

"And don't forget that McCain missed the vote [to allow people to sue if they don't happen to find out they were discriminated against in the very small timeframe the Supreme Court set up to protect companies], but cheerfully told people during a speech that he would have opposed it, since women need "education and training" to pull them out of poverty, not actual paychecks."

Cutting off our noses to spite our faces is not very effective at making the world better for women.

Suzanne Reisman ( http://blogher.org/member/suzanne ), Contributing Editor - Feminism & Gender ( http://blogher.org/topic/feminism-gender )
Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants ( http://cussandotherrants.com/ )

Jane, though I admit I didn't spend a lot of time on it, I also haven't found any bloggers who answer what I think are Catherine's two most important points: "How anyone who was backing Hillary (and her positions on the issues), would think that McCain is now the candidate they most relate to on the issues," and "If you have links to women blogging about how they supported Hillary as a Democrat, but are now switching to McCain because of his positions on the issues...I would love to have those links, and I would gladly post about it."

If you have those links, you'd do us all a service by sharing them. Thanks.

Thanks for commenting Pam. I totally agree with you. We need to look at the issues, and vote on the issues. Now that the primary is over, it's about getting the democrats in the White House.

The truth is...Democrats need to start acting like Republicans in the voting booth. What I mean by that is...Most Republicans loyally vote for the Republican candidate whether they like the person or not.  Democrats need to adopt that mind-set (at least during the most important elections).  

:-)

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan at catherine-morgan.com ( http://catherine-morgan.com/ ), The Political Voices of Women ( http://politicsanew.com/ ), Care2 Election Blog ( http://www.care2.com/politics/features/ )

Oh gawd, see,  that last comment is just the sort of cheap shot meant to make the speaker look so cute and clever that I was talking about in my other comment tonight.  Sloppy thinking; sloppy writing.

Denise, I'm right there with you.  Catherine, how hard did you look?  

By Jane 

http://byjane.blogspot.com

MidLifeBloggers.com ( http://midlifebloggers.com )

Good post, Catherine. I always suspect that respondents like those who claim to be Hillary supporters who now will vote for McCain actually are McCain voters trying to capitalize on whatever might help them win. I’ve voted as an independent in almost every presidential election, and I generally agree with folk singer/storyteller Utah Phillips’ statement that, “if you vote for the lesser of two evils, you’re still voting for evil.” But on the rare occasions when I’ve lived in a state where my vote might actually matter (mostly I’ve lived in heavily red states where the outcome was a foregone conclusion), I’ve had enough sense to vote for the person most likely to support my interests.

One thing I do know: Conservatives will revel in the irony if disgruntled women voters give McCain the votes he needs to win and finally guarantee the Supreme Court majority that will overturn Roe v. Wade. Much of the reason for the current court majority is that Republicans who disagreed on various things–-taxation, immigration, war, abortion, etc.–-managed to put aside their differences to vote for one bad nominee after another. As a result, we’ve all lost–-but progressives have lost the most. And those of us who care about women’s rights likely will be the biggest losers if McCain wins.

On the other hand, I suppose if you cut off your nose to spite your face, it makes it easier to stick your head up your butt.

Hi Virginia, thanks for commenting. I totally agree. :-)

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan at catherine-morgan.com ( http://catherine-morgan.com/ ), The Political Voices of Women ( http://politicsanew.com/ ), Care2 Election Blog ( http://www.care2.com/politics/features/ )

I had a conversation about voting on issues right here on BlogHer with our own Morra Aarons. Her suggestion - which is so totally right on - was that we LOOK AT THE VOTING RECORDS. We need to look at where the candidates stand on the ISSUES.

Personally, I don't understand how a Hilary voter could go for McCain. I just can't get my head around it - especially now that Hilary has called for her supporters to get behind Obama. I understand the anger and frustration of those voters in not getting their candidate in, but after the disappointment has chilled a little, I would STRONGLY suggest we all go back to LOOKING AT THE ISSUES.

McCain and Hilary did not represent the same point of view. I don't understand how one could go from Hilary to McCain without totally changing one's politics. I just don't get it. I don't see how a Hilary voter can believe they're represented by McCain in any kind of logical way. In an emotional way, okay? But in a logical way? 

Is it only because Hilary is a woman? Would that be the deal breaker for these voters? If that's the case, would they have chosen a Republican woman over a male Democrat?  That's not voting on issues, that's voting on what's in the candidate's pants.

And Catherine, me too. The unity ticket. Lather, rinse, repeat. If I say it enough, will it become true?

Nerd's Eye View ( http://www.nerdseyeview.com )

If Obama puts Hillary on the ticket as VP, would you be more inclined to vote Democrat?

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan at catherine-morgan.com ( http://catherine-morgan.com/ ), The Political Voices of Women ( http://politicsanew.com/ ), Care2 Election Blog ( http://www.care2.com/politics/features/ )

Her speech was what I expected it to be. Positive and supportive for the Democratic party line.

Will it encourage her supporters to support Obama? I can't speak for everyone but no it didn't influence me in his direction at all.

I'm still where I was before she spoke today.

Thinking and listening to both McCain and Obama. Waiting for their VPs to be announced.

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings ( http://www.flamingohouse.net/ )

Hey Denise. While we're on the subject. Did you see Hillary's speech just now? What did you think of it? Do you think it will encourage her supporters to vote for Obama?

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan at catherine-morgan.com ( http://catherine-morgan.com/ ), The Political Voices of Women ( http://politicsanew.com/ ), Care2 Election Blog ( http://www.care2.com/politics/features/ )

I can understand that you want to consider all the options, and I respect that.

I want you to know that I did try to find women supporters of Hillary, blogging about voting for McCain - for reasons other than anger. I did not find any. And I made a choice not to post quotes by the women that were ranting about how they would never vote for Obama, so they will stay home or vote for McCain...Because they are already being given the loudest voice by the media.

If you have links to women blogging about how they supported Hillary as a Democrat, but are now switching to McCain because of his positions on the issues...I would love to have those links, and I would gladly post about it.

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan at catherine-morgan.com ( http://catherine-morgan.com/ ), The Political Voices of Women ( http://politicsanew.com/ ), Care2 Election Blog ( http://www.care2.com/politics/features/ )

I simply ask that you try to find democrats who are blogging about why they are considering or why they are voting for McCain rather than featuring women who are judging them or making assumptions about them.

:-)

You ask if I'm considering Obama, of course. haven't made my decision and probably won't until the last minute. He and his running mate have the chance to earn my vote.

Yes, I'm considering McCain and believe it or not, I have not ruled him out for any reason including: Roe, health care, Iraq, immigration, gay rights or the economy.

I'm not considering Senator McCain because I am "angry", I am considering him because I believe he might be a better President overall than Senator Obama.

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings ( http://www.flamingohouse.net/ )

Hi Denise. I really meant no disrespect to anyone considering voting for McCain. I totally get that women should not vote for a candidate over one issue.

I have friends that only vote Republican because their priest tells them it's a sin to vote for anyone who is not pro-life. They don't even consider issues like the war, the economy, education, the homeless, etc. - And that just drives me crazy. But, I know I could never convince them that what I think, is more important than what they believe God wants them to do.

I firmly believe that we all (democrats and republicans) need to vote on the issues (not an issue). So, I agree with you that there are reasons a pro-choice woman may still consider voting for McCain.

What I have trouble with is -- How anyone who was backing Hillary (and her positions on the issues), would think that McCain is now the candidate they most relate to on the issues.

I think many pro-choice people are very scared that McCain could elect another judge to the supreme court, that could finally flip Roe v Wade. There is also the issue of birth control and family planning being available to all (even the women who can not afford it).

But, there is also the issues of healthcare, the economy, the war, etc. It's been clear throughout the primary that Clinton and Obama have very similar views on the issues.

So, that is really what I don't understand. I do think there will be many women who might align themselves more with the Republicans than the Democrats on the issues, and vote for McCain. But, it seems to me, most Democrats will look at all the issues, and see that McCain is not the candidate for them.

I'm wondering...You say that you are "considering" voting for McCain. Does that mean you are also considering Obama? As a Hillary supporter...Would you vote for Obama, if Hillary was on the ticket?

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan at catherine-morgan.com ( http://catherine-morgan.com/ ), The Political Voices of Women ( http://politicsanew.com/ ), Care2 Election Blog ( http://www.care2.com/politics/features/ )

You absolutely do have a choice, and your identity as pro-choice does not automatically dictate your choice of candidate.

However, Catherine isn't arguing any of those points. She's asking 'Why would you make such a choice, based on the evidence of McCain record on choice-related issues for women?" I think it is an essential question. You have every right to choose McCain, and women who would be affected by his policies have every right to ask you why. How you answer that question is, again, your choice.

So what is your answer to the question she actually asked?

Atena

Assumptions, Biases & Irrational Fantasies ( http://antibias.wordpress.com )

was that there were a number of good Democratic choices including Edwards and Richardson along with Clinton and Obama. I'm more interested in getting one of the Democrats voted in rather than being only in favor of a particular Democrat. I can't imagine voting for McCain just because an individual Democrat that I backed didn't make it.

http://www.webteacher.ws/ http://first50.wordpress.com/

And I am quite definitely considering voting for McCain.

While you may believe the MSM is exaggerating the possibility of Clinton supporters shifting to McCain, as one of those Clinton supporters considering a party change - I'm not so sure.

There are valid reasons for me to consider doing so and I dislike being told that if I'm pro-choice I MUST vote for Obama. Umm no, really, I don't have to. I have a choice.

It is very possible to be a pro-choice Democrat and vote for McCain. Just as it is possible to be a pro- choice Republican. Just as it is possible to be a lesbian pro-choice Republican who voted for President Bush twice.

In your next post on this topic, I hope that you'll feature women who ARE considering McCain rather than the women who are judging us inaccurately and on their own terms for exercising our right to choose the candidate we believe in.

John McCain is obsessed with fighting wars and extending the war of choice on Iraq, but these women would rather vote for him than Obama. Why? Because they seem to feel that Hillary Clinton is somehow entitled to the nomination, despite the fact that she didn't get the votes.

That quote is so far from what I believe and who I am that it is laughable. It's also an interesting look at Senator McCain . "obsessed" really? Interesting. I don't see that at all.

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings ( http://www.flamingohouse.net/ )