Quote Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
In some view points that's one in the same.
Winning at any cost, or denying the other side a victory at any cost, is not always in the country's best interest. There are so many examples of one party obstructing the other on things that everyone agrees should be dealt with just because one side thinks the other will tout the achievment as a victory. The so-called Social Security "crisis" is something that could have been dealt with long ago with simple fixes everyone should have been able to agree on, but in each case the minority party thought the majority would take too much credit for it and blocked it.

The mentality that it's more important to win than to do right is one of the biggest political problems our country faces. We keep poisoning the atmosphere with these all-or-nothing tactics, and it's no wonder we can never get past it and come together to get something done.

Quote Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
I was disappointed with ALL the candidates. Just that I feel McCain is the lesser of the three evils we have left.....like others do.
That doesn't explain or escuse this tactic at all. Trying to get the candidate that you think is the WORST of the three nominated for the other party is a dishonest tactic that does not serve the country. Anyone who honestly thinks that Clinton would be a bad president but votes for her to give MCain a better chance is gambling with the presidency and not putting the country's interests ahead of their party's.

And for those who don't think it'll really affect the nomination but just think it is in the country's best interest to try to cause confusion and frustration in the other party is wrong. That doesn't help any of us. It just raises the level of anger and distrust and causes more division in the country. I personally resent the idea that anyone would intentionally try to distort the outcome of my party's primary. It's sleazy and arrogant.