Oct 16, 2008
What do you call Democrats who vote for McCain?
Republicans.
How can one honestly call themselves a Democrat (and by implication that they support the same policies and positions as the Democratic Party) and then vote for McCain?
Don’t give me that “experience” bullshit. We don’t align ourselves with political parties or causes because one or the other is more experienced. We do it because they share our worldview and promote positions that we agree with. To call yourself a Democrat and to be willing to vote for a Republican (particularly one that so violently disagrees with Democratic positions) is the worst kind of dishonesty with yourself.
I think it goes back to fear. Some people are so convinced that we’re under immediate threat of attack from anyone and everyone that they’re going to go with the guy (or woman in the form of Hillary Clinton) who says that they’ll take the fight to the enemy and all that macho BS. It’s sad, really.
McCain reaches across the isle quite a few more times than his opponent has (introducing more legislation co-sponsored by a Democrat in recent years than by a fellow senator in his own party). He also has had a greater tendency of not toting the party line, in that he has voted against the majority of his party quite a few more times than his opponent has.
That would be about one of the only reasons why I think a Democrat would consider voting for him (moderate Democrats favoring bipartisanship over perceived extreme partisanship). Other than that speculation, I’m as confused at the notion as you are. You’d almost think it’s another ridiculous “Operation Chaos” (which in my opinion was one of the sleaziest strategies employed this election).
I don’t think anyone who is a die hard, dyed in the wool Democrat would vote outside their party. Same goes for a Republican. But there are a lot of voters who are dissatisfied with the two party system. Neither party truly defines all of their “world views”. I am typically a more conservative voter but sometimes I feel like some candidates are so extreme, I can’t support them. I voted for Clinton over Dole. As for McCain, I agree with Recyclican, he does reach across the isle more so than his opponent or any other politician I can think of.
@Recyclican — I think you’re right on all points. My only comment is that co-sponsoring legislation with a member of the opposite party is a pretty standard practice for getting things done in a evenly balanced Senate. The fact of the matter is that Obama has had less time to build the kind of relationships and legislative history that McCain has. For an example of how past actions don’t guarantee future actions, one need only look at Bush’s record in Texas vs. while in the White House. He had a “reputation” for bipartisanship in TX, but that all went out the window when he got to the White House and had a Republican dominated Congress.
@kdb — I also agree that there are a lot of people who aren’t happy at all with the two party system. The question is, though: what are we going to do about it? It’s time to either start favoring moderates on both sides of the spectrum, or to build a truly effective third party. (Libertarians are too extreme, as are Greens, etc.)
More effective, I would think, would be to shift to a parliamentary system where parties are elected based on their percentage of the popular vote and coalitions are built, etc. I find both of those possibilities highly unlikely considering the tight grip on power that the major parties have.