Kansas remains a Republican state, but less so than when 2008 began: More than 13,100 Kansans registered as Democrats in the first two months of the year, for a total 445,000, as the number of registered Republicans dipped by more than 1,500 to 741,000. The 4th Congressional District gained 2,600 Democrats and lost 380 Republicans. Clearly, the state’s Obama mania left a mark. “I think there’s a lot of excitement about the choices voters have this year,†Mike Gaughan, executive director of the Kansas Democratic Party, told Harris News Service. Let it also be noted that Democrats allowed registration at the Feb. 5 caucus sites, while Republicans had to register in advance for their Feb. 9 voting.
-
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in. -
Contact us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- donndublin on Budget raid costing USD 259 about $119,000
- donndublin on Budget raid costing USD 259 about $119,000
- BlueJay on Budget raid costing USD 259 about $119,000
- Agnatha on Budget raid costing USD 259 about $119,000
- Agnatha on Budget raid costing USD 259 about $119,000
- Agnatha on Budget raid costing USD 259 about $119,000
- ksfarmgrrl on Budget raid costing USD 259 about $119,000
- ksfarmgrrl on Budget raid costing USD 259 about $119,000
- DavidB on Open thread 12/2
- donndublin on Budget raid costing USD 259 about $119,000
66 Comments
I still wonder how many of those were registering for illegitimate purposes…only to mess with the outcome.
Ummm…PM…after the midterms when the Republicans got heavily spanked…the rebellion against everything Republican continues.
Kansas will go blue if Obama runs. It’s too historic and his message of hope vs ’same old shit different Republican’ is sticking.
America sees the Republicans to blame for the economy tanking and will vote for ‘hope’ not more of the same.
“Let it also be noted that Democrats allowed registration at the Feb. 5 caucus sites, while Republicans had to register in advance for their Feb. 9 voting.”
The Democratic party wants to make it easier for people to vote.
The RepubliCONs, not so much.
“Kansas will go blue if Obama runs. It’s too historic and his message of hope vs ’same old shit different Republican’ is sticking.”
Political_mama
Posted March 23, 2008 at 5:30 am
PM, I find that highly doubtful. By the time Hillary and Obama get done with each other, there won’t be 30% of Americans who will vote for the Democratic candidate that’s left standing. Meanwhile, McCain campaigns for president while Obama and Hillary do what?
Only around Wichita and Kansas City will you find any Democrats. Kansas can be considered safely red for the foreseeable future.
Dream on Nano…dream on.
“McCain campaigns for president while Obama and Hillary do what?”
——————–
Is that what McCain is doing? Hmmm, he said he is doing Senate business and that’s why we the taxpayers are paying for the trip.
But watching him I thought he was competing to be the poster child for mental decline in old age.
“illegitimate purposes…only to mess with the outcome”
Some of us old republicans heard the calling of Obama and his mantra for “change” and were enthralled by his charismatic speeches. Mesmerized by his passionate call for “change”, we were driven to re-register to follow his footsteps for “change”.
And other old time republicans listened intently to the shrill voice of Hillary calling for continuation of the war until 2013, her vast years of experience serving tea and coffee, and her wonderful speeches of hate for things republican. And yes, knowing full well that we would gain the leadership of former president Bill Clinton, and despite not quite knowing how the first First Gentlemen would have a legal roll in the white house, we felt compelled to give up our republican roots to follow in her lead.
Not. Of course we re-registered for illegitimate purposes~!
All perfectly legal thanks to the democratic rules.
Come on American Way! You don’t have to do all those mental acrobatics to admit that a lot of Republicans are abandoning the party to join the Democrats!
Read the article: Republicans are switching parties to become Democrats (not the other way around BTW).
“Republicans are switching parties to become Democrats”
HEH-HEH, HA-HA, HO-HO!! Fat chance. Many were ENCOURAGES to vote in the democrats caucus. Don’t you listen to radio talk show hosts?
Most, because they believed McClame has a better chance against one particular candidate. Others, dislike the Clintons so badly, they would do anything to ensure her not getting the nomination.
Additionally, republicans had a cut off date in advance of the causus. This prevented any last minute switchovers to influence the republican vote.
Silly rabbit. Tricks are for kids.
It is sad to note that even if you did gain a few democrats to your Kansas roll call, only two of Kansas’ 105 counties stood alone in a sea of Republicans. Wyandotte and Douglas counties went for the blue in November 2004, backing Democratic challenger John Kerry.
And that took registering all the kids at KU to vote the democratic ticket.
And finally, even if you COULD muster the voters to turn Kansas blue, what does it matter? Your democratic old time party leaders in the senate and house along with all the other super-delegates are GOING to decide your candidate for you.
Kansas voters probably won’t vote Republican. No big loss.
Either of our two excellent candidates will beat McCain in the national vote.
Here’s the truth on our states delegates:
How Kansas’ GOP, Dem delegates are Allocated
Democrats
National convention: Aug. 25-28 in Denver.
Total Kansas delegates: 41. Of those, 32 were at stake in Feb. 5 caucuses; eight are so-called “superdelegates,” party leaders and elected officials who go to the convention no matter whom they support; one is an unofficially unpledged “add-on” delegate.
For Illinois Sen. Barack Obama: 26. Twenty-three were won in the caucuses and three, including Gov. Kathleen Sebelius are superdelegates who have endorsed him.
For New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton: 10. Nine were won in the caucuses, and one is a superdelegate.
Uncommitted: 5, all superdelegates.
Republicans
National convention: Sept. 1-4 in Minneapolis-St. Paul.
Total Kansas delegates: 39. Of those, 36 were at stake in Feb. 9 caucuses and three are party leaders who go to the convention no matter whom they support.
For former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee: 36, all won in the caucuses.
For Arizona Sen. John McCain: 2, both party leaders who have endorsed him.
Uncommitted: 1, state GOP Chairman Kris Kobach.
It’s interesting to see the obsession of Republic Cons about the Democratic Party nomination process. We Democrats are used to a spirited primary and will unite around the nominee at the convention.
The Republic Party, on the other hand, is stuck with a doddering old man who isn’t quite sure who the enemey is in his 100 Years War in in Iraq. The Republic Party is goose-stepping toward a Second Great Depression with a coot who isn’t “all that knowlegeable on the economy.” The key faction of the Republic Party’s victories (sort of) in 2000 and 2004 — twice-born Huckabites — were systematically shunned by the Republic Party establishment and won’t be a viable force in the general election when asked to support a guy who considers them “agents of intollerance.”
Note how you don’t hear Republic Party advocates saying anything positive about their candidate? It’s ’cause they’ve got nothin’.
“It is sad to note that even if you did gain a few democrats to your Kansas roll call, only two of Kansas’ 105 counties stood alone in a sea of Republicans. Wyandotte and Douglas counties went for the blue in November 2004, backing Democratic challenger John Kerry.”
———————–
It isn’t 2004. Kansans have had four more abysmal years of bushco - his war of choice, his corporate welfare, his lack of fiscal responsibility.
Obama isn’t Kerry. The youth are our in full force! They’ve seen what is being done to their future and want to be sure they have input!
hahahhahhahahhahahhahahah
right arm MH!
“Clearly, the state’s Obama mania left a mark. ”
Uh huh. An insignificant one.
Obamania is a huge mistake.
“Time will tell just who has fell and who’s been left behind…when you go your way and I go mine!” -RZ
“who isn’t quite sure who the enemey is in his 100 Years War in in Iraq. ”
Maybe Monkeyhawk, just maybe, you can explain Hillery’s commitment to KEEP THE TROOPS in Iraq until AT LEAST 2013? And she added, “To keep permanent bases in the middleeast long term?”
Hundred year war versus permanent bases.
H ooooooooope!
Ch aaaaaaaange!
O baaaaaaa maaaaaa!
As noted, “American Way’s” got nothin’ positive to say about the Republic Party candidate.
MH I have posted many times my displeasure with the republican candidate. Go back and search my posts for “McClaim” if you doubt me. Now I could post a few positives about McClaim, but his negatives far outweigh them to me - so why bother?
At least I admit that. What is fun is to read you liberals posts trying to find anything of substance for either of your two candidates. So far, we have “change” and “war until at least 2013″ from your chosen side.
All the interesting stuff is happending in your democratic primary. I love watching a good mud fight.
Sorry. It’s “McClame” vice “McClaim”.
Monkeyhawk, you indicated McClame wants a 100 year war. No response/comment on Clinton’s promise to keep the troops in Iraq until at least 2013 and beyond with permanent bases?
Are you tap-dancing?
As Regular might say…there’s an awful lot of Republican arm flailing this AM!
/chortles/
“American Way” –
Discussing Senator Clinton’s Iraq policy is about as relevant as discussing Mike Huckabee wanting a King James version of the Constitution of the United States of America.
Obama is my candidate. You’ve got nothin’ positive to say about McCoot (and, significantly, no other Cons do, eiither) and all you can to is, ahem, tap dance about the Democratic runner-up.
That’s typically pathetic.
You want something positive about your front runner?
O.K., here it is:
Obama is positively going to be for “change”.
“American Way” tap dances –
“You want something positive about your front runner?”
From you? Hardly.
Your track record of backing losers speaks for itself.
You Paul-bearers live in a political Bizarro World.
MH apparently it doesn’t matter whom you back.
Your old time party leadership is going to do the pickin’ for you.
Yeah, right, “American Way” –
We all bow to your superior knowlege of internal Democratic Party operations.
OMG!!!!!!
AmWay drinks the Paulio kool-aid?!?!
It must be lonely in that dream world!
What the guy remembered when he read American Way’s posts, was what he now said to a friend of his:
“What Clinton said was, ‘we should not go looking for other fights.’ Right?”
The friend said, “Right.”
“So what’re McCain and Lieberman doin’ then, over to Iraq, there?”
“Photo shoots.”
“We all bow to your superior knowlege”
Arise Monkey Hawk. Go forth and read today’s newspaper and political websites.
You too can learn much about either parties
structure and activities.
I am imparting wisdom to you.
However, please don’t rain credit upon me for regurgitating what your own party is doing and saying.
I think I am gaining a better perspective being unaligned with either party.
“American Way” squirms –
“I think I am gaining a better perspective being unaligned with either party.”
Yeah, we know what you think, “American Way.”
You think Ron Paul is the savior of the nation.
You think you know more about the Democratic Party than Democrats.
You think I haven’t been beating you like a rented mule all morning with your wild-eyed Con fantasies.
You think — actually, there’s not a lot of evidence you think — you’re “imparting wisdom.”
It is to laugh.
I was wondering how long it would take Monkeyhawk for libs to revert to name calling and insulting instead of posting opinions.
When you can’t win an argument, you attack the character.
Ho-hum.
MOM this is one heck of an election cycle, there is as much divisiveness in both parties. Neither one seem to close ranks well this year. The Republican are at odds with the “Conservatives”, the Democrats are at odds with the “Progressives”. Old school of both parties are as much against the new directions of their party as they are against the opposing party. I have as many problems with the “Conservatives” with in the Republican party as I do with the “Progressive” with in the Democratic party.
So whom is who?
This may echo much of American Way had said, but here it goes at to Republican cross-over. For some it is as he stated, they saw their own candidate as someone that they just could not support. Mc Cain for all the fanfare is seen as simply “Bush-lite” a continuation of the Neo-Cons agenda and to far in the wrong direction.
Many would have been call moderates until the term got such a bad taste within the party by the extreme that seem to have such a strangle hold on the GOP. As to why Obama over Clinton? Clinton is seen as more of the same. And much as I will touch on for those crossing to Hillary, she seem only a paper thin difference from Mc Cain. Being the only difference in the long run is whether there is a “R” or a “D” beside their names.
Now the other reason for the cross over of Republican to Democrats. If the intent was to sway the election to a candidate that could be beaten by the Republican. Of the two, Hillary is that candidate, in part because there really is a gut dislike for her with in the party. This would sway many to vote for Mc Cain over Hillary. Since there is little if any real difference between the two so as often goes when deciding the “R” would win out for Republicans. Also if let’s say she would win, as JR often points out, she would continue the Partisanship and through that give the GOP a quicker chance of recovering from the Bush administration.
Where if Obama were to win, there would be a real difference between the R and the D which would give a choice and many want a real choice after some many years of voting for the lesser of two evils.
Of course I am a Paul support and as such think he would have been the only Republican that could have had a chance to beat Obama. The two are the change candidates and as such are the only two whom would be a hard choice between the two parties. Paul was doing to the Democrats what Obama is doing to the Republicans. The difference is that the Democrats are in a larger count for their change candidate then we were for our change candidate. Also Obama is for real change in a newer direction while Paul was for changing back to what was prove to be good for America and proven ways of economics and foreign trade.
Yes the old party ways over the new and improved ways that has us being the Policeman for the world and making us look more like Barrie on “The Andy Griffith show“. And as fiscally responsible as a Freshman with his first Credit card. Such is the Big Government, big spenders and reactionary Neoconservatives “Conservatives” agenda. So having those of us among the party losing the only real chance of changing not just the party but the country too. Many will support and vote for Obama from the GOP, in that it is a bipartisan effort. There are just more who see the need for change over the status Quo. Mc Cain and Hillary are the status quo.
Monkeyhawk this much I do know about the Democratic party, if it comes down to the “Super Delegates” and they choose Hilary over Obama. THAT will be the example of the ole saying “The Democrats have a natural ability of pulling defeat out of the jaws of Victory!”.
Mrs Clinton has clearly stated that some troops will be needed to guard our embassy and consulate offices and such. We have Marines in Embassies all over the world, but that does not mean we are occupiers…..
Well put Writerdog, minus the emotional baggage of my posting. Except I’d substitute “gomer” for “Barey Fife”.
Barney Fife.
I have herad Hillary say at least THREE times in the past week, that if she is elected President, she will start pulling out troops within 60 days… Where is all of this nonsensical crap about 2013?? That statement came out of a debate from several months back!!
red state… ??
i always thought red was a kommie kolor.
exile, if you read the history of the Neoconservatives founders, you would find that many were avowed Socialists.
“will start pulling out troops within 60 days… Where is all of this nonsensical crap about 2013?? That statement came out of a debate from several months”
So which is it for ole wishy-washy hillery?
First she if for the war, then she is against the war. First there were WMD, then she says there were not.
Do we believe Hillary’s comments today, hold any more weight and truth than her comments yesterday?
What if she changes her mind again? Will she be right last time, now, or next time? Is that a womans perogative?
While I am happy to see these numbers, what is even more important to realize is that, many voters will be casting ballots for change this year - and voting against incumbent Republicans - regardless whether they have changed their party affiliation. The change in party affiliations are the tip of the iceberg of changed public opinion.
Where are the total numbers in this article (Ronda’s link) for the unaffiliated voters?
Are the writer and the other two parties afraid to be honest and mention their numbers?
In recent years affiliation among the Democratic Party declined 8% from 1988 to 2004 and affiliation among the Republican Party declined 2%, unaffiliated voters increased 9%, from 16% of the electorate to 25% of the electorate. Also 41% of college undergraduates are self-identified unaffiliated voters.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7329-2004Jun26.html
As a register unaffiliated, I am voting for Obama.
I might vote for Obama. I certainly will vote McClame if Hillery gets the nod. (Ron Paul dreaming)
But I’ll also be voting OUT Nancy Boyda(Dem).
She has proven to be just more of the same (which is why I voted Jim Ryun(Rep)out before her).
Since this thread is about cross overs to the blue, I have a question.
Years ago, when I registered as a Republican, I received membership offers for exclusive American Express, Diners Card, discounts at the yacht club, and country club golf course discount.
When I crossed over for the Caucaus to vote for Obama, I didn’t get anything from the democratic party in the mail.
Don’t you libs get anything for becoming members?
Just curious.
LOL damn A.W. I guess I should have register at the same place you did! All I got was a cheesey sticker to wear on my shirt for a day! Well that the last time I register at a Q.T.!
“Don’t you libs get anything for becoming members?
Just curious.”
—————–
Yeah! We get to be proud of our excellent candidates for the nominee for POTUS! We get to be the party of the next POTUS, and the majority party in Congress. It’s all good!
“American Way,” clueless as always stuts –
“…when I registered as a Republican, I received membership offers for exclusive American Express, Diners Card, discounts at the yacht club, and country club golf course discount.”
So the Republic Party sold your personal information to Big Biz.
I’m stunned.
And the Democrats didn’t?!
I dunno, maybe to protect your personal identity?
Hell, “American Way,” why stop with the Republic Party’s invitations to yacht clubs? Go ahead and post all your credit card numbers, SSN, and give us a list of all your assets. The Republic Party alread has access to it (as does American Express, the Diner’s Club, and yacht and golf clubs.) Why should they have all the goodies?
exile
Posted March 23, 2008 at 12:08 pm | Permalink
red state… ??
i always thought red was a kommie kolor.
==========================================
Look, you can look stupid if it gives you a thrill… But, Republican States have been called “Red” States for a number of years…
I have always thought, given Republican mind sets about Communism, that whoever assigned Republicans to Red States must have had at least a silent laugh over it!!
And to think that the Republicans have just gone along with it??? Priceless!!
Welcome to the new(or new nic) posters, Komraade, and Pepper… Please try to remember >>>>
“Although The Wichita Eagle is not responsible for the content of the comments on this blog and has no obligation to monitor them, it reserves the right to remove any comments that are threatening, libelous, obscene or otherwise objectionable. Please refrain from personal attacks and using other posters’ nicknames. Report possible comment violations to:
weblog@wichitaeagle.com.”
It’s quite possible there was some “Obama subterfuge” by Repubs who hated Hillary (or thought Obama was the weaker candidate), but who will vote for McCain in the general election. But the dramatic increase in Kansas Dems doesn’t bode well for the GOP in any circumstances.
P.S. Flipped past Fux News not long ago, and they were still doing non-stop Wright “coverage.” It looks like Roger Ailes has finally abandoned any pretense of objectivity.
I love the smell of desperation in the morning. It smells like victory.
Rage — And Fox, like the Reich Wing of the Blog, will keep up the “Wright thing” as long as large numbers of “thinking” people start calling them on the issues involved… THEN and ONLY then, will they back down…
people start = people *dont* start
Rage I missed it, but did you hear about one of the host on Fox finally took a stand at the over kill of the race bating and walked off the set! A guess one of the other host that was on with him just kept it up till enough was enough.
Yep, dog, sure did.
By the way, I would be honored to work with you. :)
Thank you sir,I feel the same.
And for anyone who may have missed it, I found it and more on youtube:
Here is the clip of the host walking out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afKU0RjbW1g
And here is Chris Wallace taking the Fox and friends host to task over it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5vzwJXszww
It was a statement that probably shouldn’t have been said.
However, if I heard it in person, I probably wouldn’t give it much thought.
Parsing statements sometimes can be the detriment of both sides.
seldom do I say much good of Fox news, mainly because most of the time I am watching the Fox cable channel is in the evening and on occasion during the day while flipping through the channels. But Chris Wallace and Brian K should get an at-a-boy for taking a stand. Gee I hope they are not fired!
But Chris Wallace and Brian K should get an at-a-boy for taking a stand. Gee I hope they are not fired!
Probably not–Fox will point to these episodes and Geraldo’s blow-up over immigrants as proof of being “fair and balanced.”
LOL how did you know Rage? :> That was another video!
It really doesn’t matter if Hillary Clinton or Barack Hussein Obama wins the democrat nomination. Kansas will be just as red this November as it was in 2004.
Bet on it.
I think it was Al Frankin who said that Fox news went with that slogan “Fair and Balanced” because it really drive the Liberals nuts. And it was Roger Alies who came up with it.
KSGolfNut: With a election season like this and the mood that is growing. You might be right but not quite as Red as it was in 2004. I see the real growth of the “I” and it staying that way for some time is the results.
Obambi may have added a touch of blue to Kansas but his Pastor Wright has just turned it to Bright Red. BTY is Pastor Wright an ordinarly Black person?
“…is Pastor Wright an ordinarly Black person?”
———-
I’m going to hazard a guess that this man ORDINARILY wakes up and goes to bed a black person. Would that count as “ordinarily?”
Better Red, and slow bled, than to vote for those demon worshipping Dems.!
2 Trackbacks
[...] haggling seems to be going mainstream-even becoming acceptable at big-box electronicwww.tvsnob.comObama mania left Kansas less redObama mania left Kansas less red Posted5:04 a.m. Kansas remains a Republican state, but less so than [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]