Exit Polls: Limbaugh Effect Seems To Rear Its Head

Did Rush Limbaugh actually impact the Democratic primary?

The loud-mouthed radio talk show host has been encouraging Republicans to vote for Sen. Hillary Clinton to continue the "chaos" in the Democratic race. And a sampling of some key exit poll information suggests he may, to a certain extent, be having an effect.

Thirty-six percent of primary voters said that Clinton does not share their values. And yet, among that total, one out of every five (20 percent) nevertheless voted for her in the Indiana election. Moreover, of the 10 percent of Hoosiers who said "neither candidate" shared their values, 75 percent cast their ballots for Clinton.

These are not small numbers. By comparison, of the 33 percent of voters who said Sen. Barack Obama does not share their values, only seven percent cast their ballots in his favor. Basically, more people who don't relate to Clinton are, for one reason or another, still voting for her. These are not likely to be loyal supporters.

On a broader level, among the 17 percent of primary goers who said they would choose Sen. John McCain over Hillary Clinton in a hypothetical general election match-up, 41 percent of that group came from Clinton's own camp. In essence, roughly seven percent of Clinton support in Indiana (40 percent of 17 percent) said they would defect to the Republican should she end up the nominee. That would be a difficult punch to stomach in November. In 2004, nearly 1 million Indianans voted for John Kerry. A seven percent defection rate would have meant 70,000 less votes.

By contrast, if the general election is between Obama and McCain, 19 percent of the Indiana Democratic primary goers said they would support the Republican. But only 12 percent of that group (2.28 percent) would come from Obama's camp.

The numbers suggest one of three things: A) Clinton's support in Indiana, while clearly there, is not entirely solid; B) a large swath of Indiana primary goers simply didn't like the nominees and thought of Clinton as the lesser of two evils; or C) Limbaugh's hatchet plan could be having political ripples.

Perhaps it's a mix of all three.

Comments

[reelcobra]

Rush is weird.

Now let's get back in the pew, to our peeps, and learn about how our government is killing blacks with AIDs.

But don't spend 20 years listening to weird ideas,

BHO '08!!

[DrDemon]

"AIDS is undoubtedly “man-made.­” We can now assert this “very apparent iatrogenic origin,” versus the “theoretic iatrogenic origin” of HIV/AIDS because of the rapidly increasing, now substantial, scientific support for this conclusion. Currently, international scientific consensus among leading investigators in this field, many of whose works and words are excerpted below, holds that HIV/AIDS originated from one or more extraordinary man-made, not natural, events dating back to the early to mid-1970s. Especially implicated in initiating the AIDS pandemic, according to many scientists and scholars, was the hepatitis B vaccine...­"

http://www.originofaids.com/articles/early.htm

[BobOnThis]

Who let that felony heroin dealer out of prison?
If felons can't vote why the hell would we allow felons like limbaugh to speak in public?

[JohnKemp]

A lot of people are in prison for using cocaine.

[BlackWidowPilot]

And? Your point being? Considering how many non-violent offenders convicted under current Federal drug laws for *possession* are Black, I would think that that would give an American Civil War revisionist such as yourself great comfort, Johnny Reb Kemp.

Fascinatin­g...

Leland R. Erickson

Citizen

[DrDemon]

And for every 1, there are thousands that are not!

[timothe]

You, my friend, don't have a choice. We still live in a country with free speech and thank God for that!

[JRandomPoster]

Yes, even a gas bag like Rush can say whatever he wants - with a few exceptions. He cannot yell fire in a theater. He cannot willfully conspire to commit crimes, nor can he, with full intent of causing others, advocate the commission of felonies.

But other than that - he can say whatever he wants.

The really sad part, though, is that so many people listen to him, get their daily dose of hate from him so they don't have to feel guilty about their own expressions of hate.

[realpolitic]

Who can think of a bigger stain on democracy, besides George Bush, than Rush Limbaugh? He is a major assault on the national intelligence quotient, as well. To listen to the rantings of this man all day, one must have some paranoia and fear of encroaching humanity.

[timothe]

I'm guessing that your brand of democracy, where only the Keith Olbermann side of the story is told, will play very well in places like Mother Russia.

For the rest of us, we can choose who we listen to by changing the channel or the dial or URL or picking up their book off the shelves.

I love this country!!

[JRandomPoster]

Good! Keep reading! Read everything you can get your hands on - by authors of as many different political and historical perspectives as you can get your hands on.

[realpolitic]

Rush is a sideshow and a distraction. He is entertainment as watching professional wrestling is entertainment. I do not think his presence or absence adds to or subtracts from our democracy. In fact, Rush and his listeners would be happy in a mother Russia where propaganda reigns and facts are controlled by the state. His listeners are not known for their independent thinking!

[LeeinJax]

Surely Rush takes the cake (and apparently eats it too) for being the bizarrest of the bizarre.

He waits until the day the media finally wake up to the fact that Obama will be the nominee, and suddenly comes up with a cunning plan that Obama is really the weakest candidate. So he will suggest people vote for Obama. That way, when they do what they were going to do anyway, he can take credit for it. Is he joking, or nuts?

Hey Rush, are you trying to get your dits to back you on the courageous gamble that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow?

[BuckeyeNut]

Been an enjoying day here. Lot of crazy comments and some good ones also. One thing that I must point out. If Obama would happen to get elected, I would support him even though I don't like him and his inexperience scares me. I would do that because I am an American and I believe in our system. My question to the Obama supporters here? Will you support HRC or McCain if one of them get elected?? Or will it be another 4-8 years of whinning that the election was stole? Thats the biggest difference between the progressives and moderate/c­onservativ­e democrats. I will support a person I don't like because I have respect for the office no matter who is in there. Bush will soon be gone. I hope our next President gets the support they need from all people no matter what their beliefs.

Optomistic from Ohio.

[HumeSkeptic]

Will you support HRC or McCain if one of them get elected??
----------
I am puzzled by that question. I hope you don't have such a convoluted view of democracy that one should always "support" the elected official regardless of what that official does in office. Opposition is an essential part of any democratic system.

Now, "another 4-8 years of whinning that the election was stole" is just a silly comment. Some might have used it to express their frustration for Bush, but that is not why most people oppose (not support) Bush. It is because of what he did in office.

No President should get the "support" of "all people no matter what their beliefs". That would be disastrous.

[BuckeyeNut]

with all respect: I didn't mean to infer that support met going out on a date with the individual. I mean support of the Office in general. One can have respect for the Office without liking the office holder. The comment about 4-8 years of whinning. I'll stand by that. I agree it is silly but I see that comment every day in here and you know that. FDR had the support of most all Americans and I will go out on a limb here and say it was not a disaster. Opposition is great-I love it! But, Let's keep it constructive. Cheap shots, hate should be kept to a minimum.

[JRandomPoster]

To be honest, it would depend upon their actions.

If, like Bush, they put themselves above the law with signing statements, outright lies to congress, our troops and the American people, and a ranging variety of constitutional infringements, then as I do in the case of Bush, be calling for impeachment.

However, if McCain or Clinton were to win the presidency and act within the bounds of the law, then I would indeed respect the office, if not the person holding it.

[BuckeyeNut]

Totally agree with your comments.

[LibDrummer]

The question is flawed. You make the assumption that people "whinned" because they did not like Bush perrsonally. The whole "Bush Bashing" argument is a dodge to avoid issues. If the president is a bafoon it is un AMerican to "support" him and being president does not put you above critical evaluation.


This "is the biggest difference" is really a stupid comment. It is true the progressives did not complain about the dishonest election process but do you think they had no complaints because that is the way of conservatives or the fact that any errors made where in their favor? The crimminal does not complain about the crime but not because they are different than the victim.

The bigest difference would be the rights problem with blind allegiance. The right defends the most incompetant and horrible actions because they put the party above the countries best intersest. The Left will attack and kill their own if they feel they are doing soemthing wrong. This is a huge advantage for the right who often move and think as one, but a price the left feels is worth paying because the truth is more important than the party.

[JerryinATL]

The right views things exactly 180 degrees from your view. The Right thinks that the Left has blind allegiance and does not put country before party.

If bush and company are so incompitent and stupid and moronic etc., why have they beat you left wingers at every turn on every issue?

[realpolitic]

Yes, say liberals should support McCain. I will if he obeys the laws and is not a mindless warmonger. Did Republicans support former President Bill Clinton? The loudest critics of our Bosnian intervention were the biggest boosters of our war in Iraq. It is Republicans who try to destroy Democrats, like Senator Kerry, at all costs.

[DrDemon]

Very true INDEED!

[HumeSkeptic]

A broader issue than whether Limbaugh's trickery had any effect is whether this type of manipulation is acceptable to patriotic Americans. Integrity of our elections is essential to our democratic system. How can compromising that integrity be acceptable to anyone claiming to care about America?

[timothe]

Simple answer, Hume. Either close the primaries and piss off the moderates or leave the primaries open and expose your party to shenanigans by the other party.

Limbaugh's so called lack of integrity pales in comparison to the DNC which is basically telling millions of people in Michigan and Florida that their vote doesn't count. Not to mention the fact that the superdelegates hold the power to go completely against the will of the people and choose their own candidate. In my party, we let the people decide our nominee. (even if "the people" are Democratic crossovers from Florida)

[JRandomPoster]

Personally, I say close the primaries. If the folks that you refer to as moderates are so upset, then they can always form a third - or forth - or fifth - party.

[HumeSkeptic]

Simple answer, Hume. Either close the primaries and piss off the moderates or leave the primaries open and expose your party to shenanigans by the other party.
---------
There is a third way: citizens learn to act responsibly and in the best interest of the country, which includes respecting the integrity of the election process.

The MI and FL matter is different and there is no fault on the part of the DNC that I can see. The fault is with state organizations, they defied the rules, and there is a price to pay when one defies rules.

The same is true about super-delegates. I personally don't like the idea of super-delegates, but it is completely lawful, and the Party decided to have them.

More importantly, all candidates agreed with those rules starting out.

The rules should be looked at and possibly modified for the next election, but it would be ridiculous to change those in the middle of this election.

[bryang78]

I really think that repubs are getting nervous. All they have is old recycled arguments that dont work against obama and they know it!

[realpolitic]

I do not think their racial arguments are working. If Republicans lose the Spanish community, they will quickly be a party of the past.

[timothe]

I am offended by your statement that Republicans have injected race into the campaign.

Show me one example of a Republican who has used racial arguments against Obama.
Just one.

If you can't, then I demand an apology. It is not acceptable for you to make racially charged comments without proof.

[Sapphire9]

I'm trying to get this straight. I understand that wearing a Chinese-made lapel pin is the ultimate test of one's patriotism. Is it also patriotic to encourage people to make a farce of the voting process which is based on a fundamental right that many have fought and died for?

[realpolitic]

Sadly, yes.

[rosal]

She won 7% of the robot Limbaugh's servants. He lost by less than 2%. Very interesting Her argument that he is unelectable is moot. She is electable with Limbaugh's help. She won't have that help in November. Superdelegates, take note.

[SolarPowerGuy]

WHO wrote this insidious, subliminal headline? It contains the words "Limbaugh," "head," and "rear" -- what images are conjured up for you?

Not that I have any problem with it. :^)

[BlackWidowPilot]

""Limbaugh," "head," and "rear" -- what images are conjured up for you?"

MUST GET IMAGE OUT OF BRAAAAAIN!!!!!!

Leland R. Erickson

Citizen

[indypete]

Dammit... I'm gonna hafta sleep with the light on for a month now!

[Binea]

Obviously Hillary and Rush don't really care about the will of the people.The­y care only about their will.
There's a word for that.

[BuckeyeNut]

Progressive Liberal??

[HumeSkeptic]

Is that what Limbaugh now claims to be? Hilarious!

[LiberalBuzz]

I gotta agree with Humeskeptic as well, so now you consider Rush Osamabinlimbaugh a PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL???

Seriously?

Dude you really need to THINK before you reply to posts.

[ljfrommin]

And the DNC does? Disenfranchising the Democratic voters in 2 states just because the party leaders can not get their 'stuff' together. Who is really manipulating democracy? Also explain 'Superdelagate' in the context of 'the will of the people'.

[JRandomPoster]

For democracy to work, the rules have to be followed. Otherwise it isn't democracy.

So - what do you do when the rules aren't followed in a manner that favors the one that doesn't follow the agreed upon rules? No one wins in this case.

Let's remember, though, it was Hillary who would not pull her name off the MI ballot - and it is Hillary wanting to get all the MI delegates.

Let's also remember that it was the republican controlled FL government that moved the primary date. Yes, some FL dems were for it - and they were wrong to do so.

Should the democrat voters in either state not be heard? No. That is wrong too. Personally, I think a do-over vote is the only way to make it fair - but that isn't going to happen.

You are making a sweeping generalization here about all democrats, and while the shoe may fit some, it does not fit all, nor the party as a whole.

[hoopesaz]

Rush and operation chaos are just the distracting news story. The truth is LOTS of republicans don't like McCain and are considering voting democrat this year (myself included). THAT is the story. And that is what is making up a majority of the swing vote IMO.

[ljfrommin]

If McCain is too conservative for you, you were never a Republican! Nice try though.

[ankjack]

Limbaugh is a boob. His dittoheads aren't what will cause "chaos" at the Democratic Convention this year. The Clintons have claimed that role for themselves. Barring his most recent political panty-raid, which MIGHT have netted Clinton her win in Indiana - wow, almost two points - Limbaugh has only had effect in traditional Republican strongholds, like Ohio and Indiana.

Is Limbaugh on drugs again? Or is it just his usual "I am right 100% of the time," clueless arrogance that has made him the laughing stock of political commentary?

[EdRoberts]

I'm not a Limbaugh fan, but it does strike me as odd, that someone who is as successful as he, and makes the money he has, you label as: a boob, on drugs and a laughing stock.

Hmmmm. How then are we to rely upon YOUR opinions?

[Richard729]

Yeah, Ken Lay made a lot of money too. But, I guess that's the real measure of a Republican's character: make as much money as you can via fraud, theft, lies and outright racist screeds no matter how many people you hurt.

[ankjack]

You want money to be a measuring stick for intelligence? I don't remember hearing about Einstein's millions or about the Queen of England's treatise on quantum mechanics.

And you? Your opinions are bolstered by your vast personal fortune, right?

[zoozey]

He made the main bulk of that money by smearing the Clintons, saying horrible things about them, making fun of Hillary (it was also Rush who started the untrue gossip about her being a lesbian), and Chelsea in the 90's, etc. Now she is gladly taking his "help" to "win" people who have no intention of voting for her in the G/A. How are we to "rely on your opinions" if you only use money as a ruler for character?

[99hockeyman]

He is an admitted drug abuser and his money and fame got him out of spending some time behind bars. He always rips the ACLU, but they were there to support him when he should have had his draft-dodging ass in jail.

[Chavez08]

It didn't take long to figure out Limbaugh followers were the wanna-bee bullies in school who were beaten early on for their love of de-capitating helpless cats - usually a foot or two shorter and would kiss the older kids asses in unsuccessful lobby attempts at recruiting body-guards.

Occasionally they'd mouth off and get their asses kicked every time, sometimes by younger girls.

Later in life, - they'd moved on to hating America as a way to vent frustration over their social inadequacies - so they found an obese, drug addicted loudmouth who could empathize and...oila­!..The League of Fascist Cowards were born.

[Hydro74]

I respect Hillary, and would like to see her address this to show leadership within the Democratic ranks, but seems that instead of addressing this, she is welcoming it. I know her chances are slim, and I am very Pro-Obama, but if she plans on taking this all the way and gain favor within the party lines, she should address this issue quickly and also push for a formal investigation on what Limbaugh is doing. In return, I would personally feel confident that it's not just a political game she is playing, but a serious leader that I could support if her small chance as of late becomes reality as the party nominee.

that is my two cents.

[JohnKemp]

Both Hillary & Obama actively solicited cross-over voters in Ohio.

[KBAR]

They know that. They just call that 'patriotic. '

[JRandomPoster]

Ohio law states that if a person signs a legally binding oath in Ohio, saying that they truly support the party in whose primary they wish to vote, they may do so.

This is NOT what Rush advocated in operation Chaso. He influenced people to be oath-breakers and fellons.

[HumeSkeptic]

Soliciting cross over votes is not vote manipulation, Genius. What Limbaugh is doing is vote manipulation.

Asking Republicans to become Democrats is not vote manipulation either. Convincing people to join your side is what elections are all about.

That's what I am talking about when I tell you that you should stop blindly following what Limbaugh pumps in your skull, and start thinking by yourself. Start with some basic concepts and definitions of things.

[Hydro74]

true, and i don't disagree, however from a political stance of trying to look like the 'Unifier' within party lines, this would be a ideal move for her to gain favor.

[JRandomPoster]

You keep posting this argument, but it is a fallacy.

In Ohio, if you swear an oath by signing your name, you can change parties on election day in Ohio. It is a two year jail term to lie doing this. However, if you truly believe in the candidate that you wish to vote for in a party's primary, then you can switch parties to do so. Specifically, the statement that is signed states, "that the person desires to be affiliated with and supports the principles of the political party whose ballot the person desires to vote."

So - yes - they sought crossover voters. The difference is that Rush advocated that his "minions" switch parties for just long enough to skew the election.

The law in Indiana is slightly different, but it is still a closed primary, and Rush's actions there were also illegal.

Michigan is an open primary. I do not condone crossover voting for the purpose of skewing primaries by anyone, but it is legal in MI.