Print
E-mail
Share
delicious
digg
Newsvine
Facebook
Stumble
Technorati
reddit
Fark
twitter
Even at the 11th hour — and after this morning's ruling that the at-large Strip caucus sites are OK — there's still some confusion, at least within the Clinton camp, about who can participate in those caucuses.
New York Sen. Hillary Clinton’s campaign told the Sun this evening that only employees who work for companies with more than 4,000 workers can caucus at the nine at-large sites on the Strip.
That's not true.
The issue came up after the Sun asked if any unions supporting Clinton would have members caucusing at those locations.
“If a construction company doesn’t have more than 4,000 people, they are out of luck,” said Hilarie Grey, Clinton’s Nevada spokeswoman. Clinton is endorsed by eight labor unions, some of whose members work for contractors on the Strip.
She said she learned of the 4,000 threshhold from the campaign’s political and labor directors.
State Democratic Party caucus rules, however, say the at-large sites will be created working with employers at locations where more than 4,000 employees will be working during Saturday’s caucus.
Any shift worker working within a 2.5-mile radius of an at-large location can caucus there.
We took that information back to Grey, who said she would double-check her facts with the campaign’s political director.
“Thank you for working with us on that,” she said. “I am not that literate on the rules."
"I am not that literate..." That's obvious from her last campaign too!
Hillary Clinton is the best candidate. Please caucus for her - especially if you are a worker in need of health care, a good economy and believe, like Hillary, that the Iraq war must end now. I understand that an article like this might be confusing, but please identify where you are able to caucus and join in the exciting moment of sending Hillary Clinton to the White House.
Nah, can't do it Virginia, there is no Santa Claus and she will ruin the party with her corruption.
I have just resigned in protest as a precinct chairperson for the caucus based on the outrageous and unconscionable decision by the Nevada Democratic Party to have different rules for different groups.
This is a violation of our most fundamental principles of equality and democracy. Shame on the Nevada Democratic Party and shame on those who have turned this into a racial issue.
While all other participants in the caucus will have to be physically present at their precinct where they live, the hotel workers will be able to participate at work. They are the only group who has this special privilege. What about all the other people who have to work or for other reasons can not participate at their precinct... they will not have the same opportunity. In addition, the manner in which the number of delegates will be selected at these strip locations will be different from all other precincts and likely give them a disproportion number of delegates. This is fundamentally un-American and unconscionable. It is the kind of voting methods we expect from a dictatorship and not from a democracy.
I will not be part of facilitating what amounts to a form of "jim crow" law that makes it easier for one group to participate in an election compared to other groups. The more I hear people promising "change" the more it seems nothing has changed. zb
hmmmmmmmm....sounds like most here are Obama supporters maybe culinary?
No to a third term for the Clintons. Tired of corruption and lies in Washington DC. We need a clean break from the past. Hillary will not win the general election despite her resume inflation with the so-called "35 years of phony experience". Most Americans do not want a return of all the shenanigans of the Clinton era, and I will vote republican for the first time, should she be the Democratic nominee.
Can't you see the Clinton BrainTrust gathering with the stolen KarlRove diaries? "Let's see...how can we confuse the electorate and keep their voters from coming to the polls? Confuse. Obfuscate. Mix up the news that gets out so people think they swallow with their fingers! Brilliant!"
Boy oh boy don't we all want the same thing? These message boards sound like Obama and Clinton arguing which is something that most of the country says should not be happening but that they should stick to the issues. We all know that who ever wins this democratic race the other will back the other well at least they said so on one of the debates.
Yep the Clinton's will take the troops out of Iraq, only thing is they'll take them out through Iran!
If liked the Clinton/Bush Iraq war, you'll looove the Iran carnage.
"While all other participants in the caucus will have to be physically present at their precinct where they live, the hotel workers will be able to participate at work. They are the only group who has this special privilege. What about all the other people who have to work or for other reasons can not participate at their precinct..."
The solution is to have MORE at-large sites, right? Only the Clintons were against that too and now are telling workers who don't work for the biggest casinos that they can't vote at the at-large sites- which is a lie. ANYONE who works within 2 1/2 miles of an at-large site can vote at that site.
Comment removed by staff.
Give me a break; this is another fake tear for sympathy from the Clintons. Now who will fall for this one? Where are the COO skills of Hillary? Where is Bill when you need him?
Hahaha...Gosh darn, this article is a hoot. However, in all seriousness shouldn't the constituents of Nevada be concerned about their teachers? I mean...like it took them ten months to figure out exactly what the union signed off on/or what the rules were...?
Poor kids of Nevada.*sad face*
Those Clintons are brilliant! LOL
People, the horse is dead. Move on. Let's caucus. Get over yourselves. We have soldiers dying in Iraq as we speak.
Bil Clinton has become such an embarassment to the party and to the people who at one time held him in high esteam., The Clintons have shown no dignity or grace on the campaign !
Bill has been caught several times in outrageous lies, and is always mad and frustrated that his wife could actually be loosing her crown !
Who do these people think they are ? That they are entitled to the keys of the white house?
Si Se Puede!
Obama'08!
No wonder they're confused after that pre-flight attempt at humor. 2008 will go down in history as the year the Clintons made us so sick of themselves we’ll vote anyone else but them into office.
How about Hillary gets on the microphone on her next flight and says “If every American had an air sickness bag, and they barfed into it all at once, would they stop being sick of me?” NO, HILLARY.
Nancy, most here are not culinary, heck many are not even local, infact MOST of the culinary members back Hillary, over 60%. However you wont see that on caucus day because the Culinary leaders are arrainging it so only Obama's followers will be allowed the time off it will require to caucus.They are telling Hillary supporters they will not be allowed to caucus at the casino sites.And worse those who know better are not being given the time to caucus. The Union are picking and choosing those who they want time off for.
Senator Obama had the judgment to be against the Iraq War from the very beginning, even when it was very popular to support it. That position could have cost him his Senate bid, but he stuck with it. He takes positions based on principles, not poll tested positions. He has the impeccable judgment to keep us safe. That's why along with getting us out of Iraq, his first priority is going to be to refocus our attention on Afghanistan and capturing Bin Laden, which now should have been done years ago.
Senator Obama has proposed the most comprehensive, detailed, and economically responsible stimulus package to help the American People and this economy. It's the exact opposite of Bush's proposal. It's an investment of $120 billion that provides immediate relief by putting money in the hands of workers and seniors, stems the rising tide of the foreclosure crisis, and covers state budget shortfalls.
When he finished school, he could have easily taken a job on Wall Street and become a millionaire. Instead, he took a $12,000 a year job to be a community organizer, helping people who'd lost their jobs in the poor neighborhoods of Chicago. He has great judgment and great experience helping real Americans.
It has been proven in national poll after national poll, most recently by USA Today and Gallup, that Senator Obama is the most electable Democrat in the race today. He's the only Democrat beating all 5 Republicans, and unlike Hillary and as Obama's win in the Iowa Caucuses clearly showed, he strongly attracts Independents and Republicans. This has been proven nationwide. We want to support a winner and he's clearly our best shot. 50% of Americans have said that under no circumstances would they ever vote for Hillary.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cg0LlYQnt...
and those are just a few reasons....
Barack Obama: 25 years of GOOD experience, and a lifetime of demonstrated judgment and leadership. He's ready, not just on Day 1, but NOW! We need this wonderful leader as our President.
I love that at least half of Barack Obama's detractors on the internet throw the Hussein in there. Why not just begin your post by stating "Hi! I'm an uneducated moron and you probably shouldn't pay attention to anything I say!" I guess the Hussein thing does have the advantage of brevity.
Yesterday, Bill Clinton said that Hillary Clinton is the Insurgent and Obama represents the Establishment. Yes, he actually said that yesterday. Do you think the Clintons are the Insurgents in this presidential election or part of the established Democratic Party? I think that the Clintons are part of the establishment.
The establishment at large, including the mass media, wants to see a Clinton versus McCain presidential election. The reason is that both of these candidates are part of the establishment as well. This means
business as usual, the business of making money, not for you or me, but for themselves.
The establishment has been trying influence these elections on many levels, not just through the media.
The Democratic Party on a national level has super delegates consisting of high level Democrats who are part of the Democratic Party establishment who get an entire delegate vote all to themselves. Its very unfair, anti-democratic, yet not against the law. According to CNN right now, Hillary Clinton has 166 super delegates committed to her, more than twice her nearest competitor, Obama. Bill Clinton
himself is a super delegate.
In a similar manner, at the local level in Nevada the Democratic Party establishment weighted the new created casino caucuses to help the establishment nominee, in this case Clinton, win. Unfortunately for
her this backfired when the Culinary Workers endorsed Obama. The establishment quickly filed suit through their proxy the teachers union. Bill Clinton has spoken out against the casino caucuses as
being unfair. I agree. it is very unfair, anti-democratic, but it is not against the law.
I would love to ask the Clintons, "Now that you know super delegates aren't fair just like the casino caucuses, will Bill give up his super delegate vote?" or will both of you remain firmly entrenched in the
establishment, playing politics, business as usual, making money, not for you or me, but for the establishment.
Obama: Empty Promises from an empty suit with a gigantic ego.
The muslim thing won't play in the Dem primaries.. but the GOP will sieze on it like with force in the general election.. and it doesn't all have to be true.. innuendo is enough in many cases. The GOP will go after white blue collar voters by raising doubts about whether he would have allegiences toward Islamic groups. The Farrakhan thing will come up. The black identity ideology of Obama's church will be used by The GOP to frighten white blue collar voters. Remember the Willy Horton ads from 88?... the stuff they can use against Obama would be far worse and far more damaging. Remember, early on Dukakis had an 18 point lead over Bush 1.. but after Willy Horton, that lead evaporated and Dukakis lost in a landslide. Don't think for one moment it won't happen with Obama. The problem with Obama is that pp don't know much about him so they are projecting positive images on him..but Obama has not fully been vetted.. and you don't want that to happen in the general election.. The GOP will be sure to do it though.
Barack Obama 2008 = George McGovern 1972
Let's not make that mistake again
If you think we have a problem with illegal aliens now vote for Obama and watch you lively
hoods go to undocumented aliens. The two unions
in Nevada that hire the most illegal aliens have
endorsed Obama. That should sound a wasrning
bell to those of you who work in those industries. They don't support Obama because he
is going to take a hard line on illegals.
Bill Clinton answers questions over suit
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
By Mark Matthews
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Bill_C...
The Real Obama Record:
Has spent less than 3 years in the US Senate.
During that time he has passed only 1 piece of legislation.
No committee leadership roles..
He has spent most of his brief tenure as a Senator, running for President.
He gets ONE bill passed in his less than three years in the Senate, and yet he wants the American people to believe he can tackle all of these tough issues facing the country? GIVE ME A BREAK!
Don't believe the hype. Don't believe the lie.
If you look at Obama's supporters they consists of alot of college students with too much free time and wine-sipping white elitists. These people really don't understand how hard it is to raise a family with no health coverage, worrying every month how the mortgage can get paid, worrying that a simple illness can spell bankruptcy, worrying about how to afford a college education without the benefit of a trustfund, worrying about their jobs being shipped overseas..no they are more concerned about feeling good about themselves.. But working people understand these issues.. they live them everyday. They don't need a politician to tell them about how bad it is. Working people want someone with a trackrecord of results.. not rhetoric aimed at people who don't really understand the struggles working people face everyday. The Clintons have a proven trackrecord of fighting for the working middle class.. not just talk.. but real action.. They have the record of one of the greatest economic prosperities of our country's history.
ObamaTruth,
It was mainly a new technology, the internet that that brought one of the greatest economic prosperities of our country's history in the late 90s. As an economist, I can assure you that it has more to do with new technology than Clintons.
Sometimes it is a healthy thing to listen to the younger generation. I know that it takes courage and humility for an older generation to pass the torch to a younger one. But this is the time; it is for the good of the country. The Clintons cannot win the Whitehouse again. Hillary and the whole history of the Clintons is just too divisive to give the Democratic Party victory in November.
The Hillary and the Republicans
(Adaptation of the crow and the Fox)
Senator Clinton, on a winning position,
Held in her hands the NH victory,
Master Republican, by the odor attracted,
Held her with almost this language:
"Well hello, Senator Clinton.
You are so pretty! You seem to me beautiful!
Without lying, if your speech
Is comparable to your experience,
You are the Phoenix of the Democrats."
At these words, the Hillary was overcome with joy;
And to show his beautiful speech,
He opened her mouth wide, insert race in the race and dropped the presidency.
The Republican seized it, and said: "My good Senator,
Learn that every Divisive person
Lives at the expense of those who listen to him.
This lesson is well worth the US presidency without doubt."
The Senator, ashamed and embarrassed,
Swore, but a little late, that she would never be taken again.
But it was too late, a republican president was elected again.
Elect the clintons and you will see the country go down the drain. I will never vote for hillary and so are the majority of Americans.
Be fair minded and vote obama in.
Hillary Clinton keeps talking about her 35 years of experience. "I am offering 35 years of experience making change," she said in New Hampshire. "I'm not just running on a promise of change, I'm running on 35 years of change." And she repeatedly mentioned the 35 years again in this week's debate in Las Vegas.
Well, Senator Clinton, I'm confused. I've done the math. You're 60, which means that 35 years ago you were 25. And I Googled your name, looking for all the change you were making as a 25 year old and, frankly, I'm not finding much. You were going to Yale Law School at the time -- which I'm sure was a personally transformative experience, but it's hardly the kind of change that should count on one's Presidential Training Experience resume, is it? Is that when you started your personal Working-for-Change-O-Meter?
That summer, the summer of 1972, you campaigned in Texas for George McGovern's unsuccessful presidential bid. A worthy -- if ultimately futile -- endeavor to be sure, but a notch on your Years of Change belt? Kind of a stretch, don't you think?
But as liberal as you are with your Experience Arithmetic, you are awfully stingy when it comes to the experience and background of Barack Obama.
"He was a part-time state senator for a few years," you recently said of Obama, "and then he came to the Senate and immediately started running for president," she said. "And that's his prerogative. That's his right. But I think it is important to compare and contrast our records."
For starters, the state senate in Illinois is not a full-time job, but you make it sound like he was some kind of political temp worker, just filling in when someone called in sick. But leaving that aside, why is it that you get to count your time canvassing for McGovern as working for change, but Obama's time as a community organizer and public housing advocate aren't worthy of mention? And what about his time at Harvard Law (where he was the first black president in the history of the Harvard Law Review)? Doesn't count? But your time at Yale Law does? In the now immortal words of your husband: Give me a break.
I know you are good person who is devoted to public service. But that doesn't absolve you of the responsibility to not distort your record. And to not distort the record of your opponent.
Your 35 years talking point just doesn't add up.
Please go caucus for Obama and tell everyone about Clintons and their record.
Anyone who wants to see the true Hillary, ask her or her supporters why she waffled after initially supporting NY GOV. Spitzer's plan to grant Drivers Licenses to illegal aliens in NY State; remember that terrible debate answer and then the aftermath in which she received a lot of negative airplay. The former President Bill Clinton asked the Governor to pull his plan so Hillary would not have to answer any more questions about it to get her off the hook. Look it up. That is the big supporter of Latinos.
Please call out Obama on his comments in the debate and check with any relatives or anyone else you know in Chicago to see if he has that kind of record there of saying anything to win the moment and move on with your vote to the next audience.
The Clintons record in the White House is they never stayed around to fight for us. They caved in on Affirmative Action and Welfare Reform, and most importantly, their Crime Bill that they brag put so many more officers on the street is also singularly responsible for a generation of historically high incarceration rates for black and brown people in this country. We also have the Clinton years to thank for the mandatory sentencing guidelines, eliminating the discretion of judges, and the disparity in sentencing between crack/cocaine sentences.
We Democrats mobilized to rally around them in 1998 and defend them from attacks, and that was entirely appropriate then. But they are the attackers now, attacking our Union and Obama just to make some kind of triumphant return to the White House; and we have to let them know that we love them but we need bolder, bigger cajones this time around. We need a homerun to sweep in majorities in both Houses of Congress with a message of hope and unity; and then we can claim a mandate to enact sweeping changes in legislation.
The truth that everyone reading this knows in his/her heart is that:
1. Any of our three Democratic candidates CAN win in November.
2. Only one could just as easily lose. (HRC is the only candidate with higher negative ratings than favorable one among all DEM and REP candidates)
3. And only one could win HUGE. (Obama has the biggest margin between favorable and negative ratings among all DEM and REP candidates)
We gotta go for it! This is why the female Senator McCaskill from MO and Gov. Napolitano from AZ along with Native American Sen. Nelson of Nebraska all endorsed Obama last week. No one wants the name Clinton on top of the ballot in their state, except the Republicans.
So please don't stay home. Everyone must go out Saturday and share your views with your neighbors. Go For It. And Ba-Rock the Vote!!!
Hey, if anyone else is also tired of this back and forth bickering between Clinton and Obama and their supporters, you do have a third option!
The most progressive candidate in the race: John Edwards, has been all but shut out by the media because their in love with their own Clinton/Obama narrative.
Edwards has real, concrete plans to reign in corporate power in this country, support unions, raise the minimum wage, end the war in Iraq, and provide health care to all Americans.
Read his 80-page platform that outlines his plans to restore power in this country to the citizens at: http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/
No other candidate is this specific. With John Edwards, you get a positive message that we can take our country back - and a real plan to do it.
The real question here is how will people PROVE they are working with in 2.5 miles and at that time? Can a prostitute working the strip come and caucus at these sites?? Who would vouch for her? Her pimp. Do you need a union to vouch that you are working at the time and where you are working. These at large precincts violate so many voting laws is is astonishing.
The democratic party said they would set up at large caucus sites in workplaces of more than 4000 people on Saturday, which happen to only be casinos. Who can vote in them is much murkier. I have read the rules. It is not clear.
Who decides if you can vote at these sites??? Who will be turned away? Do you need ID?
My understanding is that you do not need ID at this time to vote and you only have to show residency. Well how do you show where you work????? A pay slip may not have the location of your worksite on it. Someone may have just started their job. Someone may be self employed. Others may show up just to vote where their votes have more weight. How do you prove they shouldnt be there?
These voting sites are more about the Culinary influencing an election than anything else. It is so open to intimidation and voting fraud it is astounding.
to Tomdc... I give the NDP the benefit of the doubt that months ago when the NDP came up with the "at-large" concept I doubt they had malicious intent or realized the implication.
The idea was to expand participation by Hispanic voters as part of a larger effort to organize for the presidential election. Organizing for the presidential election was the main reason for having a caucus over a primary in the first place - it brings out the more politically active. Personally, I was against the caucus from the beginning because it is more difficult to participate, the counting rules are completely unfair, and makes for even fewer voters then the already low turnout of a primary.
However, once it became recognized the manifestly unfair nature of the at-large precincts - that it would be available only to certain groups, that it was not available to everyone equally, and different counting rules - the NDP should have eliminated them. Even if they added other at-large sites there still would have been countless numbers unable to vote throughout the county and the state. Remember, this is not just here in LV and CC but throughout the state. (one possibility might have been to make all precincts "at-large" and have two shifts of voting)
The arrangement is manifestly unfair. It doesn't take a court or rocket science to recognize that. Obviously people who feel disadvantaged by it are going to oppose it and those who feel they benefit from it will want to keep and justify it. Isn't that what happens with all "jim crow" laws. Had the Culinary Union, for example endorsed HRC instead of OB we might very well have heard a different take on it from the respective parties - as in the proverbial show is on the other foot.
But the fact is it is still a violation of our basic principles and was ill conceived from the start. Once it was realized the NDP should have done the right thing and those who made this into a racial issue should be ashamed.
Given the facts, I would no more think of running a polling place under a dictator or the old south then running one here.
In the meantime, the vitriol against the candidates - of which virtually all of it is baseless and mindless - is really pretty stupid and sickening. Maybe instead of questioning the candidates motives it is time to question our own.
While it is important that the Democrats win the WhiteHouse, when it comes to local politics I don't see much difference between the parties. Its all about power and money and they all work for the same special interests.
zb
You know, I'm sure that my prostitute comment offends some people, but think about it. Why should someone have to disclose where they work, when they work and what their job is to vote? Why shouldn't a woman, who has perhaps not the most respected job, be able to vote without disclosing that in public.
What if someone is a stipper, or other low level position in society's esteeem and doesn't want to be disregarded by that at a caucus site. People who disagree with her choice, will be able to say, "Well you're just a stripper, or a maid, or a dishwasher" A casino owner, or manager can also show up to these sites, by the way, and tell people, "I'll give you a better job if you support my candidate". Does anyone think that the rich men in suits, or union bosses, also rich men in suits btw, at these caucuses won't be listened to more than the maids and dishwashers?
What a sad day for democracy in America. The secret ballot in a voting booth is a great equalizer.
Hopefully as many observers as possible come to these sites, but the damage will have been done. The union is only ensuring that those who support Obama get time off. In my world that's called voting fraud, not democracy.
FJR,
It is almost humourous to read posts such as yours where selective memory is at play.
Sen. Clinton never said she was for granting licenses for illegal immigrants. She said she understood why Gov. Spitzer was considering them: it was because the federal government had done such a poor job of protecting our borders and that failure was costing the individual states billions of dollars every year. Every state is having to find its own way of coping with that failure.
But let's consider Senator Clinton's statement during the debate where someone put words in her mouth with SCAMOBAMA'S stand on the Iraq war
- where he was against it,
- - before he was for it
- - - before he was against it!
SCAMOBAMA must have had Kerry for an advisor.
Regarding SCAMOBAMA's tendency to say anything to win the moment:
>>> The truth is this man of words and no action lets his wife RACEORAMA SCAMOBAMA do his dirty work for him, where she went around the country tell African Americans they have to vote for her husband BECAUSE HE IS BLACK! YEAH AINT THAT THE SOUL OF A VISIONARY AND A UNITER. Well, he used her and every other race-motivated shakedown artist on Chicago's south side as a means to an end.
Trust me, he is not liked outside the collar counties of Chicago for a number of reasons, the largest of which is he does not back up any of his SCAMORAMA words with action.
The only thing SCAMOBAMA might win is the publishers clearing house sweepstake
- which by the way, is his economic plan to start the country's economy: have the United States government enter the Publishers' Clearing House sweepstakes and HOPE we win - another of SCAMOBAMA'S magic words.
"There's a wall around Washington and we need to take it down. The American people are on the outside. And on the other side, on the inside, are the powerful, the well-connected and the very wealthy.That wall didn't build itself or appear overnight. For decades, politicians without convictions and powerful interests gathered their bricks and their stones and their mortar, and they went to work. They went to work to protect their interests, to block the voice of the American people, and to stop our country's progress. They went to work to protect, defend, and maintain the status quo.
"You have a choice in this election. You have to decide what kind of person you want as your next president. Do you want someone who is going to pretend that wall around Washington isn't there, or defend the people who helped build it? Or do you want someone who is going to lead with conviction and tell you the truth, and have a little backbone? Do you want someone who is going to hope that the people who spent millions of dollars and decades building that wall, and have billions more invested in keeping it up, are going to be willing to compromise, to take it down voluntarily? Or do you want someone who is going to stand up to those people and fight for your interests, when the chips are down, when your backs are against the wall, every single day?
"We have a choice in this election. We can keep trying to shout over that wall. We can keep trying to knock out a chink here and there, to punch little holes in it and hope our voices get through. We can settle for baby steps, half-measures and incremental change, and try to inch our way over that wall and toward a better future. Or we can be bold and knock it down. …
-John Edwards, DNC Fall Meeting
Knock Down That Wall! Don't vote the status quo and vote in another corporate Democrat.
Make a statement tomorrow and caucus for John Edwards.
finkmo
If you are interested in brevity, couldn't you have just admitted to being "an uneducated moron" and left it at that.
For those of you going to caucus for the man of Dope - sorry man of Hope,
His name is:
SCAMOBAMA
The event is called a:
SCAMORAMA
You may get lucky and get to meet his wife:
RACEORAMA SCAMOBAMA
and you will get to shout:
YES WE SCAM, YES WE SCAM.
So Shrillary's NV folks have been aware of these caucus sites since MARCH and they still haven't figured out the rules??? Bwwaaahaaaahaaa Three of the plaintiffs--Shrillary minions--were in on the meetings and final decision back in MARCH when this deal was okayed, and HillBilly rants that they didn't understand it all??? Bwaaahaaahaa You can be sure that both Shrillary and HillBilly both had the documents about the decision but perhaps they didn't read it, kinda like Shrillary not reading the NIE report.
They all must have had a last minute cram session--"holy cow, the caucus is next week and we haven't read about the rules!"--and decided "well, even though this was agreed upon and the DNC okayed it and 3 of us were at the meeting, let's file a lawsuit!"
Shrillary says, "see it's all the Culinary Union's fault because they didn't endorse me!" In the meantime, we're going to remain *neutral* about the whole thing...HillBilly must have missed that discussion given his vein-popping rants about it.
This sounds like the Clinton Campaign --
They were 25 pt up in the Nevada Polls a month ago - they are up in the polls as of today BUT as they like to have it all ways -- they portray themselves as the underdogs -- poor confused Clinton Campaign machine -- they just don't understand these complicated caucus rules--
You know those rules they set up with Rory Reid in March and August
-And then tried to change this week and failed because a judge did their job
This is about lowering expectations because they expect to win Nevada -- THEY HAVE THE ENTIRE NEVADA DEMOCRATIC MACHINE BEHIND THEM
and the owener of this newspaper - see below from "First Read"
"And the Reuters/C-Span/Zogby poll has Clinton up by five points, 42%-37%. But a caveat about the Nevada polls: We just don’t know who will actually show up at these caucuses. If Iowa was difficult to poll, Nevada might to 10-times harder.
Clinton picks up an endorsement from the Las Vegas Sun, while Obama gets one from the Reno Gazette Journal.
Do note, however, that the Sun’s editor, Brian Greenspun, is a HUGE Clinton supporter."
woe is me!!
This is the LV equal to the NH tears --
Hopefully there will be a BIG turnout and Obama will give her a good run and maybe even win --
The problem for the Clinton's is that the people are not as dumb as she wants to think they are --
We give Hillary credit for her smarts -- she should do the same for the electorate
question for ZB who just "resigned" as a precinct captain ---
Since all the judge's ruling this week did was leave the rules exactly as they were since March 2007 -- why are you resigning in protest; if you didn't agree with the Caucus rules - why did you accept the position in the first place??
Obama is much more progressive than Clinton, and yet he still appeals to many more Independents and Republicans than Clinton. If we want to get things done in DC, the right way, Obama is the one who has a history of creating the working majority necessary to accomplish it -- be it social security, medicare, a meaningful energy policy, enhanced natl security to real health care and a vibrant economy. Clinton's campaign continues to spread ridiculous and misleading information about Obama, which is just a signal that the old guard is threatened and is fighting for the position it feels entitled to. Long time loyalties to the family from Arkansas should give way to a true movement of change that isn't based on partisan politics. Vote your conscience. Vote Obama.
Why Hillary is more electable than any other democrat?
Watch the interview with the African-American Sen. Charles Rengel at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
Full address:
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/vi...
rem123 -- I'm just a Chicago resident with strong feelings about the con man Obama. You see, we have known him a lot longer than rest of Americans. He fooled us in Chicago with lofty promises of "change," but has done absolutely nothing for the people of Illinois as our U.S. Senator. He has, however, cut many sweet deals to enrich himself and his wife while on our payroll. I voted for him and feel totally ripped off by the guy.
Columnist John Kass said it best in the Chicago Tribune last week:
"All this pro-Barack hope and change and excitement, all these delicious, Barack-inspired comparisons to the Kennedys and Camelot and Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., it's all quite overwhelming, until you consider what's been left out:
That Obama is only a few short years removed from taking orders in Springfield, in the Illinois State Senate, and you know how clean Illinois politics is. So as we wait for Obama to transform our politics, let's hold our breath and see who turns purple first."
Maybe Hillary can get the big "fibber" Bill to continue to spread this misinformation. After all, ten years ago he didn't have sex with that woman and so many lemmings believed him.
NEW YORK OBSERVER (from last May)
"For the Clintons, an Editor and a Friend
by Jason Horowitz
May. 1st, 2007, 12:06 pm
It wasn’t until after Hillary Clinton’s most recent visit to Nevada this Sunday that I noticed this, but as one of her donors based there told me, she was the beneficiary of a fund-raiser hosted for her at the local Four Seasons a month ago by two supporters named Brian and Myra Greenspun.
Brian Greenspun is the editor of the Las Vegas Sun, one of the city's two daily newspapers.
The paper disclosed its editor's political activity in an April 17 blog post that said that the Greenspun family, "which publishes the Las Vegas Sun, donated a combined $31,400 this year to the presidential campaign of Sen. Hillary Clinton." (Greenspun’s official title is “President and Editor.”)
Senators Barack Obama and Chris Dodd also received donations from the family, but, according to the paper, "Sun Editor Brian Greenspun is a close friend of President Bill Clinton, the senator's husband."
Given the fact that Nevada is going to hold one of the country's earliest and potentially most influential primary contests, that seems like a pretty useful friendship for the Clintons to have."