In 1962 liberal Democrats in Maryland engaged in a similar strategy to retaliate against the conservative wing of the party and elect a then unknown politician - Spiro Agnew. If you can't handle the unintended consequences, don't do it. This is a bad idea.

DailyKos,
I'm sorry to tell you this but based on the evidence that few people on this blog even understand what the tactic is, I doubt if it will work.
Anyone who not only disagrees with the tactic but suggests the vote be for another Republican candidate and gives them advice on how to beat the others explains why it works for the Republicans and would not work for Democrats. It also explains why the Republicans have KICKED OUR BUTTS in every Presidential election since 1972 except for three times.

Loons for Rue Paul!

Actually this makes very good sense. When I hear people say they think it's a bad idea, I think they are not quite getting it.

Keeping Mitt in the race does indeed keep the infighting between Thug party members at a high level. We have the same problem but I think it makes for a better race than the presumption that King Hillary will walk away with all of this.

I do NOT want Hillary and won't vote for her under any circumstances because I could not live with myself trying to apologize for helping to elect a Bush wannabee warmonger totally beholden to the war profiteers and corporate fascists.

Think about it, she takes more money from the Pharma industry and you don't think she's gonna make sure she protects their profits even to the point of helping to bankrupt Medicare?

So vote Mitt and keep the Thugs fighting each other.

americans are not smart enough to do this. if they do this i will buy john edwards his next haircut.

what am i saying i could not live with myself paying 400 dollars for a haircut.

does obama pay that much to have his ears stick out. bet not.

bet hillary does.

So let me get this straight. We're supposed to use the same dirty tactics as the Republicans now? Whatever happened to two wrongs don't make a right? What if a Romney win in Michigan propels him to an eventual victory? I'm not going to help sully my state by helping that snake win.

I'm voting uncommitted to send a message to the tyrants running the so-called "Democratic" National Committee. We're supposed to be on the same side, but they knifed Michigan voters in the back to appease Iowa and New Hampshire of all places! What makes them so special?

Who do you think the good folks of Michigan will listen to: Some blogger most have never heard of or Rep. John Conyers of Detroit? http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/10/a-ploy-for-uncommitted/

I'm a Michigander, and i will be crossing over to vote in the Republican primary. Why not, other than maybe making Clinton lose to "uncommitted" there really isn't any point in voting Democratic.

I won't be voting for Romney though. It will either be Huckabee or Paul. If i'm going to go through the moral and philosophical trouble of voting in the Republican primary, i'm not going to waste my vote on someone as mainstream as Mitt. He'll hold out until super Tuesday anyhow, money bags that he is.

No, no, daily kos, i'll be voting for a Republican that the Republican party hates...

What a horrible idea this is. Maybe it's a little temporary short term mischief to hurt an already stumbling GOP, but does anybody, given the record of Democrats in the last 30 years, think that we're going to be better at this kind of sleazy game than the Republicans. If it works, the GOP slime operation will convince the public that this is the first time in American history such a vile tactic has been used; it will be a talking point for all the moronic talking heads; and it will come back to haunt us when the Republicans become a non-insane party again. And the GOP will return to sanity now that they understand that their Christian soldiers are leading them to hell.

I'm impressed at the number of negative comments on this Kos posting. Did any of these folks read the whole posting on the DailyKos website? There's a legitimate strategy here, and I don't think it deserves the fast judging it is receiving.

The right is very good at winning elections using clever tactics, and this same strategy has worked for them three or four times in Michigan alone and it can work for the left as well. Read into the logic here, and please understand that Michigan is in fact a meaningless primary for the Democrats (literally meaningless - it is completely uncontested) so it opens up an excellent opportunity for Dem's to vote for the wackiest guy on the field that could actually be affected by such a swing vote.

Oh Please all you moralists. The Republicans did exactly this to defeat Democratic Congressman Cynthia McKinney in GA a few years ago. The Bushies orchestrated a cross-over Republican to Democratic vote to defeat the Black vote and get rid of her.
So I say...LET THE WORD GO FORTH TO ALL YOU MICHIGAN DEMOCRATS.­..PRAISE THE LORD AND PASS THE AMMUNITION­.(republic­an ballots)

Will the leader of the Koshacks cover this.....“­It’s about establishing whether 100% of the voters had 100% of their votes counted exactly the way they cast them.”

-Dennis Kucinich

http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20080110006236&newsLang=en

Hey, what happened to all those shiny polls and betting websites that HuffPost was pushing that said Obama would take it all in New Hampshire?!? -Sure hope mommy and daddy didn't drop the children's college tuition on a, 'sure thing.'

LOL

Simultaneously brilliant and really stupid at the same time.

Ha Ha more Koshackery.