Post number one.

Nope, independent, not a democrat (well, you asked).

When the dems stopped fielding prolife candidates, they lost me. Sad, that. Considering that I would otherwise agree with Sen. Obama on the vast majority of his positions. No, I don’t trust Sen, Clinton, I wouldn’t vote for her if she were prolife (that run at the airport under fire sounds too much like some of the things her hubby said, both I and my wife think honesty challenges must run in the family).

I hope everyone has a good time at their shindig. Perhaps they should remember that caring about human life shouldn't start when the baby has escaped the womb, it means caring for the person throughout its entire life; otherwise they’ll continue to strike me as far more hypocritical than the “make it on your own and if you don’t, too darn bad” GOP.

Like most everything, our nominating process is a popularity contest and Sen. Obama is the star quarterback. This is the same reason the GOP nominated Bush is 2000, and that worries me. Neither candidate will be able to pull the country/countries out of the catastrophic mess the current administration is leaving. The most selfish part of me would like to see John McCain elected, just to see how bad things can get. Bring on the "end times"!

"The most selfish part of me would like to see John McCain elected, just to see how bad things can get." Quincey, seriously? That's a monumentally dispiriting approach to picking a candidate -- even in a jokey rhetorical device!

Its foolish if you think "quincey" is any less informed or any more childish in his/her thinking then the other superficial reasons people choose candidates. Democracy is the new American Idol, average people making average decisions in a below average format. I think even if you decided to pack it all in - you are hardly worse for it!

I am not a happy Democrat. The party leaders go out of their way to marginalize my favorite candidates. Dennis Kucinich was excluded from debates. The D's and the R's ganged up on Cynthia McKinney in Georgia.

In the May primary I plan to vote for Barack Obama, not very happily. By November things may be a lot different. Maybe a war against Iran, maybe a dollar crash. In November I'll probably vote for Cynthia McKinney if the Greens have enough sense to nominate her.

I am registered as non-affiliated and will not be switching for the primaries. Too bad "independent voters" cannot vote in Oregon party primaries as they are allowed to in some other states. However, if my preferred candidate, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, was still running I would have re-registered.

I hope to have the option to vote for Obama in November, and have found Prof. Lessig's arguments on Obama's behalf very persuasive (http://blip.tv/file/647623, http://blip.tv/file/664200). If Sen. Clinton is the nominee, then I will be voting for a third-party candidate as I have in previous elections.

I can admit that I am not a happy Democratic Party member living in Oregon because there doesn't appear to be any accountability for our elected party leaders in Oregon. Let me explain, having one party in power means that when politicians don't reply to constituent inquires or requests for help, then there is not a secondary party to turn to for assistance; and, with one party ruling the roost, there isn't a second party around to investigate instances of fraud and abuse of power. I live in downtown Portland, and my district's state legislators do NOT respond to constituent letters or faxes forcing myself and my neighbors instead to contact the state House speaker or state party leaders when we need help, and state leaders won't call out these lackadaisical legislators for fear of them loosing the next election to another political party.

I keep hearing in state after state as each primary takes place, "Our vote hasn't mattered before..."

Does it matter here? It is clear that neither candidate will have a majority before the convention, so draw your own conclusion there.

PS - vote third party - this is the only democracy in the world with only two parties. That needs to change.

I am a relatively happy newly registered democrat, because I am confident the States will have a dem in the White House next year. I was formerly an independent but registered in order to vote in the primary. I don't believe in defining myself with a group mentality, as it does tend to blur your ability to self-critique and critique group leaders. After this presidential election is over, I'll probably go back to being independent. Hell, I may change back before the presidential election. I never would have changed my party if the primary vote wasn't so heated. If I could have voted for my dem nominee without changing parties, I would have stayed independent.

As for the divide, I am behind the issues of both Obama and Clinton, and I am actually happy that the country is in shambles because, in these privileged times, that's what it takes to bring about change. If Joe Average doesn't feel it, Joe Average is apathetic to it. I believe the country will move in a much better direction under the next democrat-controlled administration.

I am voting Obama, because he stands for more than issues, he stands for a new political zeitgeist. His past, though not as lengthy as Clinton's, is a hundred times more pure. He taught Constitutional Law; she joined the board at Wal-Mart (she says to promote women's rights, but there is class-action lawsuit re gender discrimination which includes the years she was on the board - she can really get things done, huh?). Clinton and her husband's past is littered with corruption, big money deals, nursing the corporate teat, leeching taxpayer dollars for personal gain, and livid dishonesty. I wonder how many people with an "IMPEACH THE LIAR" bumpersticker are planning on voting for Clinton in the primary. She always boasts how she fought for healthcare during her husband's administration - yeah, she really fought hard, in the first of his eight terms, then after that she let the hundreds of thousands roll in from big pharm and big insurance in exchange to not bring up the subject again. Big fighter.

However, despite all my meanmouthing and dislike of her and her political rhetoric, if she wins the nomination, I will still vote for her. And wait for the next corruption scandal as she betters the country.

The sad reality about being part of any group is that as you become more immersed you realize it isn't what you expected. You realize that few people make choices based on objectivity and that members of the Democratic party are almost as superficial as Republicans. In some ways the Democrat is even more annoying then the Republican; at least with a Republican you expect subjectivity and traditional thinking - you know what you are in for! With the Democrat the lack of intelligent thinking comes as a surprise.

-Portland, Oregon

Just last week I changed my registration from Republican to Democrat. I voted Republican from Reagan until the 2004 election when I voted for Kerry. Why? George W Bush and the Neocons have devastated this country with their war in Iraq and their trashing of the constitution- this is not conservatism - conservatism avoids foreign entanglements and preserves rights.

I plan to vote for Obama in the primary and in the general election. McCain and Clinton are just more of the same. I also plan to vote for Democratic candidates across the board in order to punish the Republican party; hopefully this will convince the Republicans to rethink their disasterous direction.

I would also add that I will not vote for Hillary if she is the candidate - I will vote for a third party candidate in that case.

I have been registered as an independent since I started voting in '84. I voted for McCain in the Michigan primary. I am less enamored of him now, especially given how the Republican party has abandoned all fiscal responsibility (their only saving point.) The Republicans have forced the middle of the electorate to the no-longer-liberal Democratic party (anyone who considers Clinton the 1st as anything but a moderate hasn't been paying attention.)
I like Obama and switched to a Democratic registration to vote for him. H. Clinton is slandering him and hurting the Democratic party's chances. I will have trouble voting for her over McCain.
I am a white, 43 y.o. male with an advanced degree. I will switch back to a non-affiliated registration after the election.

I changed my party affiliation from Socialist to Democrat because I'm so excited about the US Senate race. By voting for Steve Novick, I feel like I finally have a candidate in the party that won't be enforcing politics as usual. It's about time we elect someone the party insiders hand-picked.

oops, I meant: "it's about time we elect someone the party insiders DIDN'T hand-pick"

You know you have an edit button, Molly. It's the little pencil.

I was listening to the show and heard Brian, an unaffiliated-turned-Democrat because he's so excited about voting for Obama. I had to post and say that my husband and I are both lifelong unaffiliated voters (myself primarily in California, here in OR since 2005) who are re-registering as Dems in order to vote for Clinton. Not only do we agree that Clinton is better on domestic policy, healthcare, and human rights (particularly in her outreach to the gay and lesbian community, an area where Obama has been evasive at best), but we are appalled by the media-promulgated acceptance of misogyny in the rhetoric of this primary. Although we're both far more left-leaning than either Obama or Clinton, we feel it incumbent upon us to register our discontent with both the status quo and the Obama cheer brigades by voting for her. Clearly, this move is pragmatic, or even cynical, but as Democrats we will, of course, participate fully in all party elections and events and continue our political activism as organizers and fundraisers. Since we both vote primarily Democrat (the notable exception for me being my vote for Matt Gonzalez, Green Party candidate for mayor of San Francisco, and for Nader prior to that), it is a sensible move in terms of supporting our party of, if not choice, default.

I should add that, in either case but particularly if Obama wins the nomination, I will be sorely tempted to vote for the Nader/Gonzalez ticket. Gonzalez is a true progressive, unlike either Dem. Although I want to avoid a reign of McCain, and although being in Oregon unlike the much bluer California will probably sway me to vote Dem, I agree with the poster above who remarked that having a two-party system in a "democracy" is ridiculous, and believe that we have to stand for systemic political change with our votes as well as our activism.

I don't yet have a vote in Oregon but hopefully will be the presidential election. But I wanted to share an online experience I had recently. I participate in a parenting discussion board - no political content. Approximately 40 women are active on the board, from all over the country. The question was asked who people had voted for in the primaries. 4 republican women in states where it is possible to switch parties for the primary vote, admitted that they had already, or intended to, vote for Clinton in their primary as they felt McCain had a better chance against her in November.

Loretta

I think that Pelosi betrayed the clear mandate that Democrats showed in the last election to impeach and try Bush/Cheney.

What does it take to bring this country back to the moderate center?

I think it is great the democratic party is in disagreement or divided if you like. Why shouldn't it be? Where did this absurdity come from that we think it shouldn't be divided? Elvis and the Beatles? Is that all there is? Its a complex world - should politics not reflect this? Does everything need to be prepackaged?

What this is truly about is that people want to win! Winning is apparently more important than discussion. What an intelligent democracy we have... .

Retaining people in the party is irrelevant - retaining votes is.

I am a pro-life Democrat. Pro- ALL life, from fetal all the way to the elderly and all animal life. If you look at which candidates promote policy that supports the largest percentage of life on earth, they are inevitably Democrats or Green Party candidates.

I started as an independent (non affiliated) voter when I started voting in Oregon in the 1990's.

I was disappointed to find out that I my choices in the Primary election are limited no matter what affiliation I chose. Oregon's closed primary format is the reason I recently changed my affiliation to the Democrat party.

Oregon voters are disenfranchised in the national primary process by having our vote soooooo late in the year. This may be the only election in my life that my primary vote can actually make a difference!

I look forward to being able to vote for Barak Obama in the primary. My preference for the Presidental candidates this year are, 1) Obama 2) McCain. If Obama does not win the nomination, I will vote for McCain.

I am not very attached to any party affiliation. I think it is limiting that our current political system is monopolized by only two parties, and we voters are urged to pick a side (red or blue). I will continue to change my registration to enable myself to vote for the primary candidates I am most interested in.

It seems the show's already over by the time I got registered to post. Well, anyhow, I have something to say.

I am pro-life, and I could never in good conscience vote for a pro-choice candidate. Even though I may often agree with the Democrats on other issues, I am discouraged from voting from them when I know they would vote against my position on the sanctity of life. I would like to see more pro-life Democrats.

This position will never change and it never should.

Sometimes you need to state the obvious, because it is so often overlooked: The Democrat is (generally) liberal; by definition liberal means "open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc." Being anti-choice is fundamentally against what it means to be liberal. You are asking the Democratic party to do the impossible!

It is philosophically incongruous to be anti-choice and democratic; you can't mandate the right of choice to others and rightfully be considered open-minded and tolerant.