Print
E-mail
Share
delicious
digg
Newsvine
Facebook
Stumble
Technorati
reddit
Fark
twitter
The Clinton folks had a conference call late this afternoon. Here's what came out of it as state Director Robby Mook and national mouthpiece Howard Wolfson accused the Obama team and the Culinary of strong-arm tactics and intimidation:
Clinton folks only refer to Culinary obliquely, saying Obama's "allies"
were using "intimidation and strong-arm tactics," in words of national
spokesman Howard Wolfson, who says "unprecedented" in all his years in
politics. He also refers to "outrageous, false and offensive ads," again an
oblique reference to Culinary -- that Unite HERE ad about Hispanics surely
will be use to organize in other states, especially California.
Wolfson says have talked to lawyers and "considering our options."
Reacts to Obama conference call: State Director Robby Mook says it is "a
completely false claim" and that it is "something we never instructed our
precinct captians to do." Says "desperate claim" by campaign "trying to
rewrite what happened yesterday."
Karen Hicks of campaign says "ludicrous to assume" would have only affected
Obama supporters.
Did Culinary endorsement backfire?
Mook: Clinton's message "was more powerful than intimdation campaign of
Obama campaign and some of their allies."
Wolfson: "We had strong support among rank and file of Culinary
workers.....There wer members that were turned off by strong-arm tactics
and...by outrageous Unite HERE ads....most people found rather laughable on
its face."
Manual seems to say what Obama campaign alleged, according to one
questioner (Sun's David Schwartz), who reads from document that indicates
doors should be closed at 11:30?
Mook says rules were unclear---"doors will shut at 11:30 a.m.," Schwartz
quotes and presses him. But Wolfson jumps in and says Clinton supporters
did not have power to close the doors. "Patently absurd," he says.
-------
Hey, guys, with this day-after tit for tat, can this be over now?
Clinton won; Obama lost. Could Obamaites stop with the sour grapes, and
could the Clintonites try for the gracious winner act?
Just trying to help.....
Clinton office ought to "try" for "gracious winner act," when accused this way, so unfairly -- when your own paper's caucus guide supports them?
When accused, they have to answer. And Clinton herself is being more than gracious about this, also not saying anything about the incredible lack of a concession speech from Obama in Nevada.
And in Iowa, when her delegate count meant she came in second -- by the Obama campaign's new interpretation now, in Nevada -- she did not crow and claim to have come in ahead of Edwards. No sour grapes from her, only the most gracious of concession speeches. A speech truly about unity.
Hey, Jon, your own paper reported on one incident:
http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/early-l...
Pressed into service
By Timothy Pratt · January 19, 2008 · 5:45 PM
Andres Ramirez, hired to do Hispanic outreach for the Nevada Democratic Party, found himself putting out fires during today’s caucus. Manning the party hotline for all problems caucus, it was soon apparent his duties would go beyond queries like, “What do we do if voters for the non-viable candidate don’t want to switch to another candidate?”
While handling such a call, he looked up to see a local TV news reporter speaking of chaos erupting at Rancho High School. As he pressed on in the call, staffers kept passing him notes reading, “Rancho.”
He hung up and jumped in his car and raced to precinct 4452, where he found that a Sen. Hillary Clinton supporter was also wearing the hat of caucus chairwoman — and wasn’t letting Obama supporters enter the caucus. People were shouting.
“I had to jump on a table and tell everyone, ‘I’m a state Democratic Party representative and we have to bring this to order,’” Ramirez said.
Clinton has a lot of nerve. She STOLE the election in New Hampshire. Dennis Kucinich has requested a recount of the votes in NH because Obama won the hand counted votes (just as the polls had predicted) and Hillary won the machine counted votes, enough so that she won the election. It's very SUSPICIOUS when there's a discrepancy between hand counted and machine counted votes. But it's even more suspicious when all polls predict a BIG win for one candidate (poll results were way beyond the "margin for error" in favor of Obama) and then suddenly the other candidate wins. Hillary HAD TO WIN in New Hampshire or her campaign would have really gone into the toilet, and that would have made Hillary really, really, really upset.
also on your own paper, it seems the caucusers did not always need ID. so how does anyone even know who was truly from nevada?
perhaps hillary and bill.
Obama is what America needs to regain a place in this world. Enough of the Clinton attack machine. The Clintons are so divisive and they are so fake. The only way they can make themselves look better is by running smear campaigns on others. Why don't they only talk positive about themselves instead of calling Obama a fairy tale, diminishing MLK's actions, and thinking we, the American people, are stupid enough to believe them?
Bill Clinton is a joke... he very well knows the Clinton campaign was behind the ridiculous lawsuit and then gets mad at the reporter asking him about it...
Yes Clinton, Give me a break, all right! Enough attacking others, Clinton! We don't want another Bush - Clinton - Clinton - Bush - Bush - CLINTON?!!!
That is not CHANGE.
You have a choice, so please make the right choice. Stop listening to the Clinton Smear Attacks...
Enough push-polls and smear campaigns. Clintons will do anything to get into the White House again. Enough is enough.
Obama uses the Victim card. No other card has worked yet.
This should bring out the questionable funds issue awaiting Barack Hussein Obama in Illinois.
The Clinton campaign has used their main campaigner, Bill Clinton, to discredit the character of Barack Obama. In New Hampshire, he creatively left off the last sentence of an Obama quote to misrepresent Obama's stance against the war. In Nevada, he makes a statement about overhearing a union boss threatening to penalize culinary workers who support the Clintons... yet Clinton's campaign can't verify his story. What I find amazing is that the press has not pursued these stories. Are we so afraid that the Republicans will win that we don't want to expose the kinds of tactics that the Clinton's are using? The Clinton philosophy is that "the end justifies the means".
I'm tired of seeing our leaders lie. But then the Clinton's might rationalize "that depends on what the definition of "lie" is."
Would we even know Hillary if she wasn't married to Bill? She has "found her voice" by taking the messages that Obama has been consistently saying from the start. Her website has even evolved into the informational website that Obama has always had.
Who is the leader who can inspire and unite us? Really listen... It's Obama!
Hi JR,
Like the Hatfield and McCoy's, Protestants and Catholics of Northern Ireland, and the Jews and Moslems of the Middle East, we will never really know who is responsible for igniting a race, gender and generation war in the Democratic Party. However, what we do know is that the hate and vitriol between the candidates and their supporters is quickly spiraling out of control. I fear we are not at the end of such divisiveness but only the beginning, and it bodes ill for the chances for the Democratic Party in November regardless of the nominee.
While I'm sure the Republicans look upon a fractured Democratic Party with some glee, they are plagued by their own divisive issues based on age,religion, and an undercurrent of national origin, race, and gender driven hate.
Sadly, at a time when we should be celebrating the most diverse presidential campaign in history, instead we are seeing both parties and our nation becoming more divided by factions then ever before in modern times. If you recall your Federalist Papers (9 and 10 in particular), such factionalisim was among their greatest concerns, and rightly so.
Voters are increasingly casting their ballots not on what candidates stand for, what they have done, and what they realistically can do, but rather on their race, their gender, their religion, their generation, and their national origin. While the process may have begun in other states, the results of the Nevada caucus - both democratic and republican, has put its stamp of approval on such politics.
We are witnessing the beginning of a meltdown in American Politics and with it perhaps the beginning of a meltdown in America.
How ironic that at a time when all of the candidates promise to bring us together and change Washington, they ALL share so much responsibility for driving us apart and proving that the only change we can expect is more of the same.
zb
Hillary the purse has to be carried by her husband since her credentials are weak. Only elective service is since 2000. Everyone's disproven 35 years.
the clintons Have Thrown Blacks and Gays under then bus when politically expedient.
This is not the kind of president we need now.