They're Republican red, and true blue to Obama

[RamboLiberal]

Chatter bounces off the bare walls and checkered linoleum floor as Josh Pedaline and other Barack Obama supporters burn through their call sheets.

A map of Delaware County splays across a tabletop. Another table is laden with cookies, pretzels and other snacks. Volunteers sit elbow to elbow, pecking at cellphones and pitching the Illinois Democrat in advance of Ohio's March 4 primary. The scene is a typical campaign boiler room.

Except that four of the 13 dialing away are lifelong Republicans, including Pedaline, 28, who reveres Ronald Reagan and twice voted for President Bush.

"I am so sick and tired of the partisanship," Pedaline says, before starting his night shift at Obama's outpost in this affluent Columbus suburb. "I don't want to be cheesy and say, 'He'll bring us all together.' But he seems like someone willing to listen to a good idea, even if it comes from a Republican."

Pedaline and other GOP renegades are part of a striking phenomenon this campaign season: They are "Obamacans," as the senator calls them, and they are surfacing in surprising numbers. Though some observers question their commitment, they are blurring -- for now, at least -- the red-blue lines that have colored the nation's politics for the last several years.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-gopobama25feb25,0,1768618.story

[paulk]

1. I'm not at all convinced that this is a good thing

[DJ13]

3. If I was a Bush sr. voter in 1980 I would say the same thing about Reagan's appeal...

....to many Democrats, but the fact is that shift led to a permanent (well, 20+ years) power shift over to the GOP that the Democratic party still hasnt fully recovered from.

Its never a bad thing to expand your base, so long as those joining are so fed up with the status quo they want real change, as these Republicans seem to want.

[paulk]

9. we can expand our base with independents

we don't need Republicans.

I want people to support the party and what it stands for - not an individual.

-----------------

"so long as those joining are so fed up with the status quo they want real change, as these Republicans seem to want"

What does "real change" mean to a Republican, as opposed to a Democrat?

Seriously?

[AZBlue]

13. How do you know why they are supporting him?

How do you know they aren't becoming Democrats because that's the party that's aligned with their beliefs? How do you know they haven't realized that the GOP doesn't really represent them? How can you read their minds?

[ElsewheresDaughter]

20. follow the swinging pendulum ...you're getting sleepy, your eyes lids are so heavy...you must sleep

[ElsewheresDaughter]

21. in a nut shell!

[enid602]

2. base

That's why Obama can't support things like mandated universal health care; he'll piss off his republican base.

[FrenchieCat]

5. No. He would piss me off; a Democrat.

We ain't talking about Mandated single payer. If you don't know the difference, educate yourself. If you want to force me to write a check to insurance corporation, than I'll want to kick your ass!

[enid602]

8. health care

And when did Obama start supporting single-payer mandated health care? That's news to me. Seems to me he's been calling for voluntary universal health care, which is an oxymoron. France has had mandatory multiple-payer health care for years, and it's worked out pretty well for them. Despite the fact that the insurance companies are huge employers in France, and enjoy much political clout. Can our insurance companies match the results of their French counterparts? I have no idea; that might be when we'd want to transition to single-payer.

[FrenchieCat]

10. That would be his druthers......

Reality: Obama Has Consistently Said That If We Were Starting From Scratch, He Would Support A Single Payer System, But Now We Need To Build On The System We Have

If Obama Were Starting From Scratch, He Would Support A Single Payer System. The New Yorker wrote, "'If you're starting from scratch,' he says, 'then a single-payer system'-a government-managed system like Canada's, which disconnects health insurance from employment-'would probably make sense. But we've got all these legacy systems in place, and managing the transition, as well as adjusting the culture to a different system, would be difficult to pull off. So we may need a system that's not so disruptive that people feel like suddenly what they've known for most of their lives is thrown by the wayside.'"

"At a roundtable with a handful of invited guests at Lindy's Diner in Keene, Obama said if he were starting from scratch, he would probably propose a single payer health care system, but because of existing infrastructure, he created a proposal to improve the current system."

Obama said, "Here's the bottom line. If I were designing a system from scratch I would probably set up a single-payer system...But we're not designing a system from scratch...And when we had a healthcare forum before I set up my healthcare plan here in Iowa there was a lot of resistance to a single-payer system. So what I believe is we should set up a series of choices....Over time it may be that we end up transitioning to such a system. For now, I just want to make sure every American is covered...I don't want to wait for that perfect system...The one thing you should ask about the candidates though is who's gonna have the capacity to actually deliver on the change?...I believe I've got a better capacity to break the gridlock and attract both Independents and Republicans to work together." <http://iowa.barackobama.com/page/community/tag/Ames>

[enid602]

14. health care

He's right in pointing out Canada as an example of a single-payer system that works, and right again in expressing frustration over the difficulty of transitioning what we've got into what they've got. Also worth noting is that 50% of a $50K/yr Canadian's salary is immediately withheld from his paycheck; they don't file at the end of the year to report deductions (like we have) for a refund. So no system is free. I like what Obama says about making health care available to everyone, but without a mandated system, there's really no teeth in it. Unfortunately, health care would become just another 'choice' issue.

[FrenchieCat]

16. You underestimate what could be done with a working majority,

which is what Obama talks about in terms of how to achieve change.....and you overestimate that Hillary's health care would pass congress with mandates intact if she were to become President. The way you look at things is nice and tidy, but at the end of the day, it will not work out as you imagine it.....but of course, it is your right to choose to see it in that way if it helps.

Again, I am but one of many who do not want to be forced to have to write a check to an Insurance Company....unless that is what we choose. Mandating that we fill the coffers of large corporations is not the way to go.

[Cha]

7. That's just a

dumb statement..why don't you go study up on the issues and then bring something to the table.

[lligrd]

4. Dupe

And I'm not just referring to the post.

[MADem]

6. Key phrase: Though some observers question their commitment...

Republicans made up 6% of voters in Missouri's Democratic primary, 7% in Virginia's and 9% in Wisconsin's. (Most states make it harder to vote in the other party's contest.) The overwhelming majority cast their ballots for Sen. Obama, according to exit polls.

...Many are skeptical that Republicans will stick with Obama until November. They point out that many of his proposals -- including a timetable for ending the war in Iraq, repealing Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, expanding the government's role in healthcare and supporting gay rights and gun control -- cut too much against GOP orthodoxy.

....

[paulk]

11. but they want change!

Are people that irrational in their voting behaviour? Like that moment on c-span where the two Republicans proudly announced that they had voted for Ron Paul in the VA primary - but were going to vote for Obama in the GE.

Somebody hit me with a brick!

I mean, jesus! How does one go from voting for Ron Paul to voting for Obama? Are voters that irrational?

Maybe Obama is on to something....

[MADem]

15. It's called STRATEGIC VOTING. If you know who your party's nominee is

(for the GOP, McCain) you don't bother voting for the presumptive nominee of your party, but instead "cross over" and ensure that the WEAKEST opponent makes it to the show. You vote for the candidate that the GOP regards as easier to beat.

They don't consider themselves "irrational." They see themselves as "clever."

Come the General Election, they're back home with Johnny McCain. They'll pull the lever for Popeye...

It is an argument for closed primaries.

[FrenchieCat]

17. That's your fucked up theory because it helps Hillary look better.....

but it isn't even Republicans so much crossing over...it is the Independents that Hillary can't get to vote for her. They are the ones that will be voting for McCain if Obama isn't running. That's the problem that Hillary and her supporters have, and why she is not as electable as Barack Obama.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

22. Calling Dr. Myndbender....you are need in the GDP ward for meds increase STAT!

[MADem]

24. You can call it "fucked up" if that helps you to sleep at night.

But people have done doctoral theses on the phenom.

It exists. It happens. In fact, YOUR candidate's field level organizers have been encouraging it in his ground game to win some of those primaries. I am not sure what his game plan will be in the general, especially after his "crew" has pissed off half the Democratic party, and no small percentage of those pissed off people will either stay home or move to McCain. I live nearby a lovely older lady who is switching to independent after over a half century as a Dem--one of those charming Obama KoolAiders called her an OLD HAG when she wouldn't take a lousy, generic and downright stupid answer to a question she had about social security.

Obama--IF he wins the nomination-- shouldn't count on all of Hillary's supporters to fall in line. Even the ones that do, will do so very reluctantly. Many might just forget to vote on the day...!

And it's all thanks to folks like you, with your "In your FACE!!!!!!" attitude, treating fellow Democrats like they're the enemy. You are one of the most egregious scolds, here. Proud of it, too, I'm sure.

Sleep well, now!

:hi:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hm8-GlTqfJo

[Demagitator]

23. I agree 100%

Well funded as well; I seen it all in the 2000 election. The Nader raiders became aware of it; and it is estimated that Nader lost 50% of his support, shortly before election day -- and most became known as Green Democrats, when they defected to the Democrats.

The main reason they gave for switching is that when they signed the papers, they had never thought thy would be working for the Republican Party.

[juajen]

12. The Glitterbabies are in denial.

Oh well. Maybe dems can get in the white house in 2012. Hope we still have a country by then.

[Levgreee]

18. Glitterbabies? That's a new one n/t

[DemGa]

19. Oh now, even Republicans can become smitten by an archetype

And irrationality is the key behavior.

If it is genuine, they would be among the first to come back to their senses.

[Tatiana]

25. I'll take 'em. And any other Republicans/Libertarians that want to get on board.

Better them vote for us than McCain. Honestly, I don't even care about who they voted for before at this point. This election is too crucial and we are on the verge of a turning point. We're either going to stop this downward spiral and get back on track or this country is going to go to $hit.