Was Hillary’s Pennsylvania “Win” a Fraud?
Limbaugh hatched plan in February for Republicans to vote for worst Democrat.
by Charles Coughlin
Not long ago, Hillary looked finished. She lost eleven states in a row –often by landslides (57 percent or more) to Barack Obama. Most pundits were chalking this up to the fact that Hillary has a really high negative rating. Last summer, Hillary had a negative rating of 50 percent among voters. A recent Washington Post article reports “Clinton is viewed as ‘honest and trustworthy’ by just 39 percent of Americans, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, compared with 52 percent in May 2006. Nearly six in 10 said in the new poll that she is not honest and trustworthy.” How is it possible then that Hillary did well in Ohio, Rhode Island and Pennsylvania, not to mention getting a slim plurality in Texas?
Consider this excerpt from an article describing the Rush Limbaugh radio show: “In late February 2008, Limbaugh developed Operation Chaos, a political call to action with the initial plan to have voters of the Republican Party temporarily cross over to vote Democrat and vote for Hillary Clinton, who at the time was in the midst of losing eleven straight primary contests to Barack Obama. The goal was to have the campaigns of Clinton and Obama fight over the Democratic Party nomination for as long as possible and potentially force a brokered 2008 Democratic National Convention. On March 27, 2008, Limbaugh said that ‘at this point, the purpose of Operation Chaos is not to choose a specific nominee, and it wasn’t from the get-go to pick a specific nominee. The purpose of Operation Chaos is what you see. It was to keep the race going so that there would be hatred, animosity, and political bloodletting between Hillary and Barack Obama and their forces.’ “
Most pundits are looking for “conventional” explanations for Hillary’s otherwise unexplainable surge such as Pennsylvania having a large elderly White population, that’s possibly afraid of Obama. Or that Hillary was focusing her efforts in the larger population states such as Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Still, it’s extremely hard to believe that Hillary could go from a series of 57+ percent failures to a 55 percent victory –especially considering that her donations had dropped off sharply as Democrats lost faith in her and decided further donations would be a waste of money.
Hillary is still losing badly to Obama in terms of delegates. Obama had a 142 delegate advantage before Pennsylvania and he still leads her by at least 126 delegates with very few states likely to vote for her remaining except for Indiana. Obama also leads in the popular vote by about two percent.
How likely is it that Republicans are voting for Hillary with her high negatives so that McCain will have the weakest possible candidate to run against? Very likely. McCain clinched the Republican nomination on March 4th by getting more than 1,191 delegates. McCain actually had the primary locked up on Super Tuesday, February 5th, when his total delegates amounted to twice as many as Mitt Romney’s total. Just two days after Super Tuesday, Mitt Romney quit the race on Feb. 7th. So Republican voters have had little to do other than rubber stamp McCain since early February. Limbaugh hatched his plan back then to get Republicans to change parties and vote for the unelectable Hillary. This seems the most likely explanation for Hillary’s otherwise inexplicable recent victories.