Any Clinton supporters would be unhappy with Obama candidacy?

It seems like plenty of people love both of the two Democrat front runners, but I’d like to hear from people that strongly support one over the other.

How many people who strongly support Clinton would be upset if Obama won the nomination? Is there anyone who supports Clinton that might vote Republican if Obama takes the nomination?

How about the other way around? The general vibe I get (until recently also supported by most political polls) is that there are plenty of strong Obama supporters who would rather vote for Giulliani than Clinton.

If this is so, is Obama more likely to unite the left-leaning base? Is Clinton actually more likely to lose votes to Republicans that otherwise would have gone to Obama?

I’m terrified of a Clinton candidacy, actually. Personally, I think she represents the worst of both the Democrats and the Republicans, as her biggest platform issues are socialized health care and being “tough” in foreign policy. The worst possible nominations for me would be Clinton and Huckabee/Thompson/McCain, but I’d vote for Giulliani over her.

Not what you asked for but,

I support Hillary but I won’t try to change your mind. Simply put Obama doesn’t do it for me.

BUT,

I’d vote for an escaped felon crack whore before I would put any Republicans in office.

I support Obama (and will vote for him on Super Tuesday), but if it was Clinton versus Giulliani, I would probably vote for Giulliani.

Clinton versus anybody else, I just wouldn’t vote for any candidate.

That pretty much sums up my attitude. I’d prefer Obama over Clinton just because I find the idea of Bush-Clinton-Clinton-Bush-Bush-Clinton unhealthy for the country; a family name shouldn’t get you in power. And I find her opportunistic, too pro-war, and too far to the right for me to override that concern.

I support Obama, but would vote for McCain over Clinton. If it was Clinton vs anybody else, then whoever the Communists or Peace & Freedom put up would get another vote. Yes, you heard me. I’d vote for a communist before I’d vote for Hillary.

OP describes me. Hillary’s my first choice, but I’d vote Republican before I’d vote Obama. I consider Obama the last person I’d want in office, next to Bush somehow getting re-elected.

Or worse . . . I’d vote for any *Democrat . . . *

Clinton is my first choice but I harbor no revulsion towards Obama. To the contrary, if he can snag the Dem nom, he will have bloody well earned it and will receive my full support.

There are no Republicans I would vote for in preference to either of them, and if Edwards somehow secures the nomination instead the only Republicans I’d prefer are not running and I’d have to write them in. Which I probably would not do, I would probably hold my nose, vote Edwards, and then go get drunk.

If I did, my write-in would be Olympia Snowe.

Of the active Republican contenders, Ron Paul or Rudy Giuliani I guess.

Back to Obama, I doubt that he, John McCain, or God can stop Clinton, but I don’t think this season will do less than whet future appetites for him and I anticipate that he will be back.

Frankly, I doubt we’d notice much of a difference between a Clinton or an Obama administration. I think Clinton would be a lot more secretive than Obama, but I think they’d push for similar policies. Maybe Clinton would be a bit more trigger happy than Obama.

I wouldn’t call myself an Obama supporter, so much, although of the people who have a realistic shot I suppose he’d be most likely to get a vote from me. (I’m nominally a libertarian, but recently more apolitical; age has divested me of edge.)

But. Yeah. I echo the OP’s sentiment: Hillary represents the worst of two parties, a hybrid creature who somehow manages to come down on the wrong side about everything and to do it, what’s more, without style. I would vote for several of the republicans before I’d vote for her—McCain and Giuliani, at least, and probably even Romney.

What if Bloomberg is in the mix? Would any of you be tempted by a third-party Bloomberg candidacy if your Democrat loses the nomination?

I am OK with either Obama or Edwards and would definitely vote for either of them if they get the nomination. But if it were, say, Hillary v. whatever Republican v. Bloomberg, I definitely wouldn’t vote for the Republican, but I would at least give Bloomberg a fair hearing.

Why? (This being GD, not IMHO.)

I would vote for Obama, but will not under any circumstances vote for Clinton. I can’t see myself voting for a Republican, so to be honest, if it is Clinton I don’t think I will vote at all and to be even more honest, if it is Clinton, I don’t think I will ever vote again.

I’d vote for him before any Republican but behind any Democrat.

I think people have learned their lesson from Nader and I wouldn’t risk splitting the Democratic vote that way. Seems a sure way to see President-Elect [Republican] giving a victory speech that night.

Clinton’s my first choice but if she doesn’t get the nomination I’d support Obama in preference to most of the other viable candidates.

This strikes me as odd. I’m leaning toward Obama, but I’d vote for any of the current viable candidates, Democrat or Republican, over Giuliani. Giuliani, IMHO, represents the worst of everything in politics. The man is entirely posture with no appealing substance. He’s GWBx2, with a little snake oil thrown in, as far as I can tell.

I can’t objectively dispute your claim that many Obama supporters would turn to him, but I find it hard it hard to believe. I find it difficult enough to believe that anyone would find Giulani appealing, let alone that those whose first choice is Obama would do so.

I also find it remarkable that Obama supporters would take Giuliani over Clinton. Clinton and Obama actually agree on several issues. What would be an Obama supporter’s incentive to vote for sleazier little brother of GWB?

Giulliani seems like a decent candidate to me. He’s a moderate on most social issues like gun control and social services, he’s got a ton of experience in a powerful elected political post, and tries to distance himself from the big religion lobby. I honestly don’t want to see him as president because of the miserable way I expect he’ll handle foreign policy, but he seems much better than most Republican candidates.

Giuliani probably won’t sign a ban on abortions, and if I remember correctly, he’s run as a pro-choice candidate before. That’s a pretty big issue that lots of voters would vote “single-issue” over. If you already don’t like Clinton, that is.

As far as plain old diplomacy is concerned, I think Giuliani would do better than miserable. Certainly better than some of the other candidates who seem to have a complete disregard for diplomatic caution. The Bhutto incident gave me a glimpse of how the candidates would treat foreign powers, were they President.

I’m not terribly fond of Obama. He is pretty much just a standard Liberal in terms of politics and outside of being “likeable”, doesn’t seem to have much to offer.

And if it came down to Clinton vs. Giuliani, so far as I would be concerned, that would just be wonderful. It would be a big win for us guys who dislike the politics of both parties and who like politicians who pick and choose their ideas from both sides.