How can Hillary supporters say they won't vote for Barack in the general and vice versa?

Answer: "NO!". While some "get over it" most can't "realize" that their self-destructive behavior destroys their cause, just as Nader elected Bush after the demos treated him like dirt. The answer is the voters WANT to make "Hillary/Barak cry." That's the whole point of voting for McCain. It's obvious that psychopathology of politics is the functional equivalent of domestic violence in its depravity. "If I can't have her (i.e. the Democratic party's love I am courting) then nobody can." Neurologically, you saw a symptom in Hillary's New Hampshire crying, where she whimpers about her human identity being at stake, and voters identified with that emotion like a batterer talking to a batterer-friend. The domestic bond (with the public) is threatened and all hellbreaks loose. If Hillary can't have then, "nobody can". Just like O.J. couldn't have Nichole. Drinking and shooting are trophies of DV control. DV perpetrators need control, and lash out like any trapped animal when it slips away. So too reacts the spurned voter where Clinton's resurgence threatens their relationship with Obama or vice versa. Bonding with a candidate and then having it snatched away, causes jealousy, separation anxiety, and thus the same physiological reaction of C02-buildup in the brain, causing a panic and dread similar to drowning, where you will do anything for one more breath; panic that can only stop with self assurance that the snatcher is not rewarded by one more vote. These reactive enduring emotions have been hardwired into our brains over millions of years. The panic of seeing Clinton discuss "Wright" from wrong produces voter attitudes (disgust for the "unfair" candidate) which produces beliefs (one is better than the other) which produces behaviors (voting). For the above reasons, no DV batterer will see that he's destroying his relationship in order to save it, and no Clinton or Obama supporter will see that they are destroying their country (more wars with McCain) in order to satisfy their DV control and vanity urges. All reason and logic is blocked. The frontal lobe is shut down and only the amygdala functions. Like the DV batterer, the Democrats and voters will have remorse when McCain invades more countries, but meanwhile they will self-destruct, blame each other, and have a subconscious gut feeling that McCain can "teach them a lesson", especially if he blows us all up, since "If I can't have "her", (=the voters) nobody can." The voters will explain how McCain is better, but that belief's just rationalized self-delusion to satisfy primitive needs. People who murder their families rationalize that he is sending them to heaven (McCain). The seeds of "Evil" dwell within all of us. We are humans. Thus the answer is that the issues do not matter as the brain (and the media, which is the collective voter brain) blocks awareness of the issues, so the bitterness will not dissipate. The solution is religion if it convinces voters of the merits of "forgiveness" as necessary for survival as are most things "God" "tells" us to do, or perhaps the voters can get psychotropic medications to control their anxiety so they can then focus on "issues", or the other solution: vigorous exercise of the logical brain so it can prevail against primitive emotions. This requires more sophisticated voters AND candidates; able to articulate the connection between the election and the hundreds of thousands of slow gruesome deaths for want of healthcare, and inability to see other countries in more sophisticated terms than good and evil. This would require civility and education, or maybe even political DV treatment. I will treat them at no charge. It's tax deductable. Any of them could win if they understood and knew how to educate instead of sloganize, but the landscape remains as barron as 1968 and neurologically, we have not evoloved.

I remember when the political parties really had Party Platforms which were chiseled out for days in meetings and after much debate to which not everyone would agree, but consensus was achieved. The party came first...Over time, the person running for high office was not funded by the party, as there was not enough money and they raided their own funds for whomever and wherever they could because money yielded wins. Loosing an election for want of money to advertise is a great disaster for the candidate. Now, the only winners in an election season is the MSM, TV, Radio, Print etc., as they get paid dearly for those spots. Limiting all candidates to the same amount of money to run their election would even the playing field and just maybe get the better man/woman elected.

This seasons election has been bitterly contested, the two last candidates are both great, but only one can win. Better to admit that the polarization of Democrats to specific candidates while great for the ego, is also bad for the Party. Winning is a must for one of the two, I personally prefer Obama, but purely on the issue that the our Presidency has been the property of these two families, Bush+Clinton..24 years to date and 32 years if Clinton is the nominee. Really,now, we are country of over 300 million, how can there be only two families capable of leadership?

Because perhaps there are people out there who still believe that character and integrity mean something.

I disagree with the platforms of both Democratic candidates on the table. However, of the two, I believe Hillary is by far the greater evil. She appears to be a person without conscience or humanity. She believes in one thing only: HER power. Even if I did agree with her political views I could not bring myself to vote for her because I do not believe she can be trusted with the power she would gain in office. While I don't agree with many of Obama's ideas I believe he's a decent person from what I've seen.

I long for the days when we had decent individuals to choose from. There hasn't been one in my lifetime.

i've got considered questions like this plenty here at present and that i'll respond to this one. i'm an Obama supporter yet i'm a Democrat first. As a member of a technology that did not get a RFK or JFK we do get emotional approximately applicants. however the theory Democrats are going to stay homestead in Nov. if "our individual" would not win (for in spite of the fact that reason) is an invention of the media. The coverage ameliorations between to 2 applicants are minimum. i think that Sen. Obama has an intangible high quality of management that I see while i seem a video of RFK. yet I comprehend Sen. Clinton (and her supporters) a great deal and believe that she may be a large President. Bernie Sanders replaced into on the Colbert report a short on an analogous time as in the past and stated that no remember who wins, Obama or Clinton may be a extra effectual President on their worst day than Bush has been on his terrific. i'm happy with the two between the applicants and happy with my occasion. confident i might like "my Democrat" interior the White homestead yet we want "A Democrat" interior the White homestead. not something Democrats believe in is going to get achieved below Bush 2.0. we could desire to remember that we've been all Democrats until eventually now this race began and while it quite is over we are all nonetheless going to be Democrats.

Emotional childishness.

That is the answer and as simple as it gets.

I've seen the same thing said during other elections, then people end up voting for the "lesser of the two evils"

I the case of Obama, they vote Hillary because they know McCain is a very bad choice.

In the case of Hillary, they vote Obama, because they know McCain is a very bad choice.

As for me, I haven't made my mind up who I'm voting for. I'm waiting till after the dog and pony shows of the conventions to start making up my mind.

==============

Life is so simple, but we insist on making it complicated.

Confucius

551 - 479 BC

==============

Peace

Jim

.

they just haven't thought about it yet...

and most seem to be Hillary fans who seem to believe very strongly that Obama's racist and hates America...

Hillary has went too far with her attacks and it could hurt Obama... if he loses, I think it will be undeniably her fault... ALL DEMS were ignoring the Repub propaganda until Hillary started touting it... they've been talking about Wright for 5 months... and a month ago it's a huge issue all of a sudden?

then the Hillary fans thought it was OK to trust what the cons were saying about Obama, which basically makes him unelectable...

the only Obama fans that seem to dislike Hillary are those that do so due to the actions I just stated... I know it will make me think twice...

I'm voting Democrat no matter who eventually wins the nomination- Clinton Supporter-

The nomination Hillary and Obama or Obama and Hillary, should be faced with McCain, who lost in primaries, should automatically be the vice president nominated. It's the fairest.

McCain basically is a Democrat, so they have another option. Democrats have shredded each other and made both of their candidates unelectable in the national election.

With 3 Supremes in the balance I cannot in good conscience vote McCain.