33 Comments
Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumblePublished Sunday, Jan. 20, 2008 | 2:44 p.m.
Updated Thursday, Oct. 30, 2008 | 2:14 p.m.
I Flashed on this a short time ago (go to RalstonFlash.com to subscribe) and now the campaign has put out more information to back up its case. Still waiting on Clinton response.
The Flash:
In conference call with reporters a short time ago, Obama campaign counsel Bob Bauer insisted that while "it could have had an effect on the vote," he is not "going to call into question" the results." But Bauer said that Clinton precinct campaigns were given amanual to not allow anyone into caucuses after 11:30, contrary to party rules that said doors should close at 12. He said there are over 300 incident reports they are looking into.
"There was a clear disenfranchising effect," Bauer said. "We want a full review of this."
State Director David Cohen said reports of this behavior came from "all over the state."
"We don't know fully yet how pervasive this was," Bauer said. "We're not calling the results into question at all. I want to stress that."
But he said "a pattern emerged" that is "fairly striking" that the timetable in the party rules was violated by Clinton precinct captains
Later Bauer, in response to a question, says other campaigns may have had voters disenfranchised. "Other voters may have been affected."
----
And I thought it was over......
----
The Obama additional information:
Despite clear rules and timelines laid out by the Nevada Democratic Party that caucus doors should remain open and voter registration should continue until noon, the Clinton campaign encouraged their operatives to close the caucus doors at 11:30 AM – a half hour before that deadline. This caused confusion and led to people leaving the caucuses before having the chance to participate.
It our distinct hope that such disregard for the rules will be avoided in future contests.
NEVADA DEMOCRATIC PARTY RULES
THIS PROCESS MAY NOT BEGIN UNTIL NOON
In order to participate in the Nevada State Democratic Party Caucuses, attendees MUST be in line, or signed in, by noon. At noon, Presidential Preference Cards should be given to any person in line, and after that point, no Presidential Preference Cards should be given to any new arrivals, as they will not be allowed to caucus.
http://obama.3cdn.net/d472e284343e050b79_1im6b5jdh.pdf [Page 8]
THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN TOLD OPERATIVES TO CLOSE DOORS EARLY
From the Clinton campaign precinct captain handbook:
11:30 am Deadline for registering (or standing in line to register) to participate in the Caucus.
Inside the Room
11:30 am Caucus Chair closes doors and announces attendance
Brief Democratic Party business (letters read, Permanent Chair elected).
http://my.barackobama.com/page/-/pdf/NV%20HRCcaucusdayguide0001.pdf [Page 7]
If Republicans win in November, this type of bickering and whiney accusations between Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama will be why.
All this type of BS does is divide divide divide.
From People who claim they want to unite, it doesn't make sense.
http://www.c-span.org/videoarchives.asp?...
link to Obama speech today at Ebenezer Baptist Church
Words do matter
I agree with footballfan in that people shouldn't come across of sore losers. The 11th Commandment should be to not speak ill of your fellow Democrat. That's why the other guys are able to keep a relative amount of unity.
This being said, I say shame on both sets of Precinct Captains. If the HRC camp was told that was the agenda and they were also temporary chairs and they didn't post the official agenda, shame on them. If the Obama Precinct Captains didn't know what the agenda was going to be, then shame on the campaign for not better training their folks. As an Edwards Precinct Captain, I clearly knew what the agenda of the day was supposed to do and what numbers to call if something was fishy.
no one is a sore loser...it is just frightening that these kinds of things are happening here so early. And to think we monitor other countries elections! If machines are malfunctioning, that could affect anyone's campaign, so too if those in charge are not provided with official rules. If Hillary wins, or if Obama wins, how are we to have faith that any of it was done in an accurate manner? Scary.
I was a precinct captain in the southwest and found it was the Obama supporters who were causing more issues than Clinton supporters. Obama's campaign was very organized and had a number of reps at our caucus site. They were putting stickers on people entering the site regardless of who they were supporting. The caucus was such a mess to begin with, this did not help matters any. Voters then were asking the other volunteers and myself if they had to support Obama at our site and it took a lot of time to assure them they could vote for whoever they wanted to. It was also the Obama supporters who questioned the card draw for the last delegate and could not accept that it was the rules of the party and not my personal decision. I must say that the offical reps from both campaigns were great - they were very polite, organized and did a good job.
Nothing like this happened at our precinct as far as I could tell but things were very very disorganized. I think the sad thing is even if the Clinton camp was innocent there is such wide spread distrust of the Clintons that there are many people that will beleive it to be true. The fact that people CAN believe it speaks volumes of the need for change in Washington and an end to the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton Dynasty. Perception becomes reality and the perception is these people are not to be trusted!
I was a Precinct Captain for Hillary Clinton and we were given the training with the instruction manual. The training, although for Hillary volunteers, could have been attended by the other candidates supporters, and I'm sure it was. We were told that the State Democratic rules were unclear, with some people being told the caucus doors would close 11:30 and others told 12:00. To be certain that everyone who wanted to caucus could, we were told to tell them to get there no later than 11:30.
Precinct Captains did not have the authority to close the doors. Only the temporary Chairs, who were selected by the Nevada Democratic party, had final authority over everything that went on. The Obama campaign people know this and to state otherwise is to deliberately mislead the media into reporting misinformation.
The temporary Chair in my caucus was also an Obama Precinct Captain and was not impartial, wearing Obama pins and had Obama signs. She had told a caucus goer who wanted to change her registration from Republican to Democrat in order to vote for Hillary, that she couldn't vote, that only Democrats could. Fortunately this woman approached a Clinton worker who straightened out the matter with the Chair. I don't know how many others were dissuaded however.
The Caucus system is ridiculous. It is not representative because it doesn't allow all people who wish to, to vote. People who work, except for strip hotel workers, people who observe Saturday sabbath, etc. We are too big a State for a caucus. I won't go into all the other problems created by the State party,
P.S. Message to Jon Ralston. You should have checked out the manual yourself before spreading this misinformation.
Message to desertlover: It is people like you who have been tainted by the right wingers who during the Clinton years of peace, prosperity and a budget surplus, relentlessly went after the Clintons from the day they took office. Too bad their poison effected some Democrats as well.
Apparently you've also bought the propaganda put out by the Rush Limbaughs, Sean Hannitys and their ilk impugning the Clintons integrity. Well actions speak louder than words and I and millions of other loved the nineties and had looked forward to the 21st century and the things that could have been accomplished with the surplus that Bill Clinton left.
Boy, you really buy into the media story lines. Dynasty?? You mean like our 2nd President and our 4th President, the Adams father and son.
Because Bush 43 has been such a disaster should not disqualify spouses or offspring of past Presidents who are highly qualified and would make great Presidents from aspiring to lead this country.
I had the same experience (at Judith Steele Elementary) as DodgerFan described above. Pushy, aggressive, Obama representative blocking the door and demanding to know who I was supporting.
My bottom line is three fold. First, I suspect that obnoxious, caucus tipping activity on the part of both Obama and Clinton supporters occurred.
Second, I have actually litigated election cases, and the bottom line is that judges will tell you unless you can actually prove the activity would have changed the win/loss in the election, there is no cognizable claim. So its time for the Clinton and Obama partisans to be professional and get past the wah! wah!
Third, the caucuses were used to allow the state to save money. Now that we all know that Nevadans care, and will express their opinion in a presidential nominating process, it IS worth the cost to have a legitimate primary with absentee balloting. No more disenfranchising people because they have to work, or because they're disabled, or because they're Orthodox Jews. It's clear to me that these caucuses brought a lot of revenue into Las Vegas. As a result, it's time for the state to go back to primaries.
Let's all get on Harry Reid's senatorial website and let him know.
essgee:
Yes I too remember the Clinton years of perpetual corruption and scandal. A chosen few were riding the money wave of the internet bubble until it burst just before Bill left office. High drama, fast money,a country divided, corruption, BJ's for the prez, Hillary trying to sneak things out of the White House when they left. The Bushs actually brought a little class back to Washington but turns out they all work together.
Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton. sigh
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/arch...
see above first hand accounts of a few precinct captains
this is not about negating the result - it's about getting it right when it really counts
I would agree with CynicalObserver that I'm sure there were transgressions on both the Clinton and Obama sides. I'm sure all three campaign offices had phones ringing off the hooks with transgressions at a variety of sites. All I can say is that the caucuses this year were leaps and bounds better than 2004 when we were forced to caucus on the Chapparal High School football field because the fire marshall was going to shut it down.
This being said, the rules I received as a temporary chair were extremely clear - the meeting was to be called to order at 11:30 and the doors shut AND attendance counted at Noon. This was reiterated on a conference call with Jill Derby and Howard Dean the night before the caucus.
Are caucuses a practical means of determining the next president? Sure. It's just not as easy as a primary. A caucus should be viewed as a neighborhood meeting - grass-roots democracy if you will. That being said, given the nature of the economy in the state's largest city, a primary might be more effective. However, the only way to change this is with the Nevada legislature. All Democrats and Republicans should submit resolutions to their Central Committees suggesting a primary. After the 2008 elections, you should also write your State Senator and Assemblyperson.
Because I was undecided, I got email from all the candidates over the past few months. By the time I got home from the caucus and checked my email, I had a thank you email from the Clinton campaign and an email from the Obama campaign. The Obama email said that they had heard of problems at caucus sites and listed problems and then asked that I email them any problems I saw, especially from the ones listed - which were caused by Clinton supporters or the Democratic party.
So they had planned to complain about the caucus from the beginning... and they gave people a list of problems to complain about. It's just too convenient that now those are the problems they are complaining about.
I'm thinking that if Obama wins the nomination, I will just vote "present."
Sunday's Las Vegas Review Journal also stated that doors would be locked at 11:30 am in the section about how a caucus runs.
Obviously no one knew what was going on. The first caucus and everything. Why wasn't someone consulted besides the Clinton campaign on how the caucus was to run? The Clintons have been through enough caucus' they know how they are run and if they did not instruct the people right that is an out right violation of something. I can't decide of what because they won't do anything about it now that it is over and they knew that in the beginning. Why do you think they did it? Clinton supporters can defend them all they want, this is just plain wrong. I don't care who wins anymore because this is going to ruin the Democratic Party and any chance of anyone from it getting into the White House.
By the way, vote present all you want, the Republicans will love it.
Okay guys, the problem is at the official caucus site:
http://www.nvdemscaucus.com/
The main section says noon, Appendix C says 11:30 applies to ALL caucus sites. Apparently this wasn't caught by ANYONE prior to the actual caucus.
p. 9:
Section III: Selection of Delegates and Alternates
Subsection B: District-Level Delegates and Alternates
3. The January 19th non-binding presidential preference caucus will open it's doors
for registration at 11:00 a.m. (with the exception of at-large caucuses) and be
conducted in public venues and with limits on the amount of time allowed for
candidate debates so that each caucus may be run efficiently and participants
time respected. Caucus registration will remain open until viability is determined
by 12:00 p.m.
Appendix C: At-Large Precinct Caucus Rules and Procedures
Attendance and Registration Requirements for At-Large Precinct Caucuses
• Doors will open at 10:30 a.m. due to anticipated attendance expected at the At
Large Precinct Caucus sites.
• NSDP staff will keep a running count of each eligible Caucus participant as they
enter the At-Large Precinct Caucus. After the doors close, there will be a final
count of eligible participants.
• NSDP staff will call the Caucus to order at 11:30 a.m.
o If attendees are still in line at 11:30 a.m. when the Caucus is called to
order they will be allowed to sign in and participate in the Caucus. (this
rule applies to all Caucus sites throughout Nevada)
Correction to LVRJ date above: It was Saturday's paper, pg 12A. "How to Caucus"
I was an Obama pricinct captain and I saw the Clinton handbook that said 11:30. I showed them my handbook that said 12:00 and we took it too the chair. She was also unsure so I called the hotline like we were trained to do and clarified that it was 12:00 and had the chair speak to the hotline also to clarify and it was all good. We were pricinct 7330 and we got along very well with our clinton counterpart and our chair. We all worked together to make things go smoothly and help everyone get a chance to vote. Of course there were pricincts around me that did not run as smoothly, but honestly I put the blame on the Democratic party in general, they did not have enough chairs and they were not well informed. The pricinct captains were just very enthusiastic and their mistakes should not be reflected onto the candidates themselves.
LESSONS LEARNED
I don't belong to an organized political party. I'm a Democrat. - Will Rogers
Assume good faith. - Wikipedian motto
SunCityDem -- and Sun reporter Jon Ralston -- it's not just the Review Journal that states the rules that the Clinton workers followed.
For pity's sake, Mr. Ralston, look at your own newspaper's caucus guide on this very site:
"Caucus begins: At 11:30 a.m., the number of voters is counted and a decision is made how many voters it will take to win at least one delegate. The caucuses begin. . . ."
Think it through. If the number of voters is to be counted at 11:30, registration is over -- and the only way to be sure that only registered caucusgoers are there is to close the doors.
Try being fair and balanced in this story and, even if you're still waiting to hear from the Clinton office, at least don't just rely on what you're fed from the Obama campaign . . . when you could, with a click, report what you have on your own Sun site. And report where the Sun got the information. Probably the state Democratic Party?
Aha. And you also can look at its official rules. The truth is out there. . . .
The big thing that we have learned from the Nevada caucuses is that the Obama supporters are cry babies and sore losers.
I guess the Union Leaders can't stand having egg on their faces.
TO ESSGEE---AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Too bad the whole party suffers for this!
No Wilkns, what we can learn is that we all live in the post-Lee Atwater (Republican 'operative') era.
That means that instead of assuming mistakes are inadvertent, everyone immediately assumes it must be dirty tricks.
The Clintons have jumped to conclusions about the Obama campaign and vice versa.
Let's all pledge to take a deep breath and calmly talk things before making any assumptions.
VegasDem, the Reno Gazette-Journal did the same thing:
http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/articl...
One more thing...I didn't include the Official Rules link that the official caucus site linked to:
http://www.nvdemscaucus.com/images/draft...
As you can see, the url name says it's a draft version. I don't know if there was a later final version, but if so the caucus site didn't include it. (Pay no attention to the date on the first page of that pdf - it's September 24th, 2008 which is months in the future.)
If Hillary wins the nomination, I can ASSURE YOU that it will be by the very tactics Obama is now accusing her of. The Clintons don't care how then win, as long as they do. They will do, and have done, ANYTHING to get back into the White House and attain POWER. That's all they care about.
I was very disappointed with the Caucus process and the Obama campaign. I agreed to serve as a Caucus Chair and quickly determined that some of the other people attending the temp caucus chair training did not understand the process. An easy prediction that some of the precincts were going to be very disorganized. On caucus day, an Obama supporter tried to fraudulently register for my precinct. I tried to help this person figure out which precinct they belonged to. The person glanced at our precinct map and misread a street name. So they first gave a non-existent street name and then said that they could "not remember" the name of their street. After asking the person to describe their home area and telling them that the description did not match our neighborhood, they finally relented and went into another precinct caucus meeting.
After our meeting had started (the 11:30 am party business meeting) another Obama supporter walked into our meeting and wanted to know how many Obama supporters we had. After first determining that she was not there to register for our precinct, I politely (e.g., always used a friendly tone) told her that she was welcome to stay and observe but that she could not participate or speak to the group. She tried one more time to interject but I once again stated that observers could not speak or participate after the meeting had been called to order. She then left saying "go for Obama". I heard of worst things happening at another precinct where people from the Obama preference group pulled unregistered observers into their group to increase their numbers.
Just too many ways for voter fraud to occur with a caucus. Time for NV to switch to a primary. Additionally, I agree with the previous bloggers that we need to provide every citizen of Nevada an opportunity to participate in their party's presidential candidate selection process and a primary is the only way to do that.
Enough of the Clinton attack machine and strong-arm tactics. 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 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!
To Tom Blase :
Don't let your biases get shaken by facts. Didn't you read most of the postings that described the problems, many of which were the fault of the State Democratic party . The time confusion is only one example. Don't you read information before you spout off and show your lack of knowledge.
Shame on you!!! And shame on the Obama campaign who had to know the rules problems and had apparently prepared in advance to raise complaints as was stated by Lisa .
I hope we can get past this animosity but I fear that some people don't want to be dissuaded by the truth. I never say negative things about the other candidates. I think Obama will make a good president in 8 years when he gets some experience and learns how to accomplish goals, run a government without having to depend on advisors to tell him how and what to do. I definitely would never compare him to Bush but the media gave Bush a pass on experience too and said he'd get advise from others like Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. Regardless of the better calibre of advisors Obama would get, the buck stops at the Oval office and the President can't learn on the job with all the problems that will be faced immediately.
We've learned in the past 7 disastrous years that we better make sure who we are electing. The person named on the ballot or his/her advisors.
I also think Edwards is a person who cares and he does have more experience than Obama. But neither is as ready as Hillary Clinton to take on the problems immediately facing our country.
She's extremely intelligent, caring about people, especially children, and has the experience needed.
essgee,
Do you know what Hillary's experience is? What exactly has she done? I care about people and expecially children. Does this qualify me? I care about our country, I have ran and served in county office. Does that qualify me? No, I haven't lived in the White House, or drank tea with foreign diplomats staff of signifigant others. That right there disquilifies me! Darn, I thought maybe I would jump into the race.
Give me a break, (I stole that line from Bill) what experience did Hillary get in the White House? I don't understand you people. Hillary has served one term more than Obama or Edwards in the senate, but she has that much more experience. The other thing that bothers me, if Bill is acting like this now (a loose cannon no one seems to be able to control) Has anyone thought about what it would be like if he was back in the White House. Would he let Hillary run the country???? Bill was an okay president. I am not trying to diminish what he has done for the country. That is over though. We need change and unity in the Democratic party before it is too late.
I am someone who was drawn to Obama at the very beginning, but after reading about his positions, many of which are not very well thought out, I switched to either Hillary or Edwards (still undecided). I also researched Obama's Iraq positions and discovered that what Bill Clinton said about his flip flops was largely true, so that takes away a major reason why I may have voted for him. His position on Iraq is really not that different from Hillary's!
Anyway, this is what I have to say to Obama supporters--I have been to lots of gatherings with many Obama supporters and have discovered that most are for him because they believe he is a "change agent" etc. BUT WHEN I ASKED THEM WHAT HE STANDS FOR AND WHAT HIS POSITIONS ARE, VERY FEW COULD DISCUSS HIS POSITIONS WITH ANY DEGREE OF UNDERSTANDING. The result has been that I have been able to "convert" many of them to either Hillary or Edwards just by educating them about where the candidates stood on important positions such as healthcare, the economy etc. (Obama's positions on some issues are more developed now as he has taken many ideas from both of his rivals--he's still playing catchup though).
To sum up--most Obama supporters react to "style," "image" and subliminal messages about change rather than substantive issues. This is what Obama is counting on--that his lofty rhetoric and image will override the lack of substance.
Some of my white liberal friends often say to me--look, we agree with you that Obama's positions are often vague and not thought out and his grasp and articulation of policy issues cannot compare with Hillary's or Edwards' grasp of important issues, but we should vote for him anyway, because of what he stands for just by virtue of being black and liberal.
My answer is: I refuse to be a racist. I have the same standard for everyone regardless of race or gender. When it comes to deciding who I will vote for, I do my own research. I go through their policy positions and their records very carefully.
Obama is every bit as smart as Edwards and Hillary but he hasn't done his homework and his track record is quite meager as he hasn't shown much leadership in his years as a legislator. If he does some hard work in the way of adding subtance, he could be a prime candidate in 4 or 8 years.
I don't want another Reagan or Bush--someone who does NOT have a grasp of issues himself/herself but claims, as Obama does, that he will gather advisors who will execute his "vision."
I want SUBSTANCE and Obama hasn't shown me much of that so far.