the 2008 primary is the 1994 baseball strike

http://www.gallup.com/poll/105691/McCain-vs-Obama-28-Clinton-Backers-McCain.aspx

in the above link, gallup explains that there are an increasing number of democratic voters who say they would rather vote for mccain if their prefered democratic candidate doesn't get the nomination. this sounds disastrous: if either 28% or 19% of democratic voters don't vote democratic, john mccain will be in the white house in 2009.

the good news is that these people who promise to vote against their own policy preferences are lying. or, not lying exactly, but unable to predict their future behavior.

my favorite example of people claiming en masse that they would act against their own preferences is in the run-up to the 1994 baseball strike. "i love baseball. if you strike, and then start playing again later, i will not watch baseball." the threat to act against one's own future interest is what game theorists call a non-credible threat. and it turns out to be a pretty good name, since baseball fans didn't hold out after players stopped holding out.

as long as the democratic nomination gets settled without an actual no-holds-barred convention cage match, there should be no problem. the same democratic voters who find the other democratic choice so appalling right now probably won't once their candidate is no longer an option. then the question will be "would you like most americans to have affordable health care?" i don't see a lot of internal dissent once the debate returns to policy issues in august and september.