Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

EBW and MBW of the highly respected Wampum blog have got their hands on the incident report summary referred to in Pacific John's widely-read Texas caucus report.

As one of the only remaining highly respected neutral voices in the liberal netroots, EBW says,

"[...] I have the original [incident report summary], and the affidavits in my possession, and I personally know the person who provided these documents to me, and who's last name is redacted along with the rest.

I have a higher degree of confidence in the provenance of the material and veracity of the existence of the events journaled in the incident report than I have of anything in the media, other than perhaps the report of yesterday's weather where I was an actual observer, or the date."

That's quite an endorsement. A sponsor of the Koufax Awards, and blogging partner of one of the original Gate Crashers, says,

"I have a higher degree of confidence in the provenance of the material and veracity of the existence of the events journaled in the incident report than I have of anything in the media [...]"

We can assume the affidavits contain the worst of the incidents listed in the summary, but all of the irregularities are troubling.

In all, we know about 40 precincts out of 170 with irregularities, ranging from false delegate counts, to false entries on sign-in sheets for Obama, to a few incidents following the statewide pattern of illegally taking or attempting to take caucus materials from elections judges. Like Greg Palast might say, it doesn't take much to change the outcome of an election. In El Paso, pro-Hillary volunteers seem to have protected the caucus results so they were similar to the popular vote, but that was not the case in most caucuses http://politics.nytimes.com/election-gui de/2008/results/states/TX.html .

As the original diary mentioned, only four big counties were orderly enough to report most of their caucus results, and in three of these, the popular vote and the caucus results were very similar.

The incident reports seem to have the worst incidents near the top of the list. Some of them include:

Precinct 56: a witness saw someone make false entries for Obama.  Clinton-supporting temporary officers had the convention seized from their control, and they were excluded from the process. It looks like out of state Obama supporters helped "elect" a new chair.

Precinct 45: a witness saw an Obama supporter making false entries. An Obama supporter announced that people should leave.

Precinct 61: heavily outnumbered Obama supporters controlled the precinct convention awarded 18 delegates to Obama and 16 delegates to Clinton in a precinct where there the preference was 89 Clinton, 16 Obama, 1 Richardson, and 2 uncommitted.

Precinct 71: At 7:05pm at the Precinct Convention, all of the voting for the primary was complete and all of the caucus goers were seated. ____ reported that the Obama chair waited an hour and said "we did not expect this many people so we will have to move" when no move was necessary. The chair said "just sign your name and address and then you can leave." When asked "what about our presidential preference?" the Obama chair replied "we don't have time for that...just write your name and address."

Precinct 36: an Obama supporter took control from a standing chair.  The witness reported that Republicans and out of state Obama supporters helped "elect" the new chair. The witness was ejected from the room when he tried to report this to the Texas Democratic Party.

Precinct 41: the attendees included a large number of African Americans who did not appear to be from El Paso. Some Obama supporters tried to have elderly voters write-in Obama as their preference.

Precinct 48: This may be the anecdote Pacific John wrote about.  According to the precinct captain, Obama organizers first tried to award the precinct to Obama via a show of hands. The actual preference was 74 Clinton, 33 Obama. The witness reported that she overheard an Obama organizer call in a false delegate count.

The reports go on and on.

It's no wonder that the Clinton campaign got in an early fight with the chair of the TDP (who by the way just endorsed Obama).

It's no wonder that the Clinton campaign got in an early fight with the chair of the TDP
(who by the way just endorsed Obama).

So a lot of folks are asking a pretty obvious question at this point - why didn't the press follow up on these two statements?

A footnote is that the letter Pacific John first wrote to a superdelagete he campaigned for (Representative Lois Capps), apparently had an effect. Rep. Capps was quoted on May 7, five days after her very public endorsement of Obama, that she was willing to change her endorsement to Hillary. That is a HUGE change, considering her son-in-law is Obama's National Press Secretary, and her daughter is the Communications Director for Ted Kennedy.  

[...] In fact, she said, she's prepared to change if the popular vote swings in the opposite direction.

There's no pep talk for super delegates, about how they should vote.  Capps said that she's been approached by her constituents and colleagues who want to talk to her about one candidate or the other.

"The super delegates should only ratify the popular vote," Capps said.  We should only confirm what the public wants.

"Some people believe that we should just listen to our hearts," she continued, "but really, we should all be speaking with the same voice.  I have endorsed Obama, but I have to be prepared to change my mind."http://www.newtimesslo.com/news/139/so-w hat-is-a-super-delegate/

I spoke with a few folks who are involved in collecting information on the problems with the caucuses in Texas, and one woman in particular is involved in hearing any challenges to the credentials issued by the party.  From what I understand, things are way out of balance down there regarding these challenges.

Remember earlier on in the campaign when people were accusing Hillary of "lawyering-up" her team in anticipation of playing a no-holds barred kind of primary fight?  Well the exact opposite seems to have occurred where these challenges are concerned and it seems to fit right in with that "Chicago smack-down" kind of politics we were promised last fall. It also follows a pattern set by Obama in his very first run at public office, when he sent a team of lawyers in to the registrar's office to challenge each and every signature on the petitions of his opponents.  Whether it was because someone signed their signature incorrectly (by printing rather than in cursive) or if the person collecting the signatures wasn't property registered, he managed to knock every one of his opponents off the ballot - including his main challenger, Alice Palmer.

Apparently, teams of lawyers go in to challenge Hillary's delegates, complete with Power Point presentations and everything.  Meanwhile, Hillary's folks are represented by everyday people like us - folks who saw problems or feel a need to speak up, and want to do the right thing.

The reason...?

No one expected Democrats to pull this kind of stuff (caucus irregularities or outright crimes) on other Democrats.  Or period for that matter.  Campaign staff and voters / caucus-goers were absolutely stunned at what they witnessed in Texas.  So the legal team didn't go into this with the idea that they'd have to deal with this kind of crap.

Just like in Michigan and Florida, BO's using everything at his disposal to make sure his opponent's supporters / voters don't get a voice at our party's convention this summer.  Only in this election could a guy hide from the voters of Michigan not once (taking his name off the ballot) - but twice (refusing to go along with a re-vote) and come away with not only the 55 delegates in "uncommitted" status, but also steal 4 of Hillary's delegates.

He's using every trick he can think of to disenfranchise voters and from what I've seen so far...

BO's about anything BUT inclusion and voting rights in this election.

Michigan.

Florida.

And now Texas.

So who'll be next you guys?

Tags: 2008 elections, Barack Obama, caucus, Florida, Fraud, Hillary Clinton, Michigan, president, texas (all tags)

Comments

159 Comments

Is this question?

Serious snark.

by Builderman 2008-06-02 06:47PM | 0 recs
Truth Hurts

They broke the law down in TX.

by alegre 2008-06-02 06:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Truth Hurts

by ragekage 2008-06-02 06:48PM | 0 recs
That video sucked the first time

please stop posting it.  of course now that I asked I'm sure you will again.

by NewHampster 2008-06-02 06:54PM | 0 recs
Even better- if I could only find the original

by ragekage 2008-06-02 07:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Even better- if I could only find the original

Gosh, Alegre, what's wrong with Carrie Underwood? Or just not an Eagles fan?

by ragekage 2008-06-02 07:16PM | 0 recs
please

stop.

This is just spamming and hijacking.

by kevin22262 2008-06-02 08:27PM | 0 recs
Obama not responsible for alleged acts ????
Isn't that what Bush / Cheney / Rumsfeld said about Abu Graib (sp?) and Guantanamo?
It's always just a few bad apples, eh?
by kosnomore 2008-06-02 08:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama not responsible for alleged acts ????

Exactly!!! It's just a coincidence that "all this crap" was so widespread, and similar in nature.

There should be an investigation - "rules are rules".

by valleyboy 2008-06-02 08:53PM | 0 recs
Whitewater, cattle futures, travelgate

Wow, remind me what happened in the 90s and apply your own logic to that situation.

Hurts doesn't it?

by Regenman 2008-06-02 11:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama not responsible for alleged acts ????

Ok you need it explained to you.

Clinton's Campaign was incompetent and outclassed at every level.  They admitted they did not even know the rules to the Texas Primary.  Since they were so clueless and incompetent, they were incapable of training supporters in the Caucus process.  The Obama camp was holding classes on how to conduct themselves and how the process worked.  These things were both reported on prior to the Texas Primary.

On the Primary day, the news organizations had a number of people, that supported both Obama and Clinton on TV complaining about the Caucuses.  The thing was all these people complaining admitted they had never been to a caucus before.  They did not understand the process. And felt intimidated, and excluded.  This is fairly typical of all the caucuses, even more so this year when we had record turnout, and record first time turnout of people that did not understand the process.  It was more pronounced on the Clinton side because her base of support, has been less educated, and less informed, compounded by the disorganization and incompetence of the national campaign.

I know people want to blame the other side.  But this notion of an organized criminal attack is absurd.  People had problems with the process because they did not understand it, and because of their lack of understanding they felt intimidated and that the process was being taken advantage of by those who did understand it.   Some people really like to be the victim, and this idea that the whole world is against them must be comforting for them.  I do not think the Texas law enforcement, or related agencies as well as all the media outlets have an Obama bias.  When a Clinton supporter contradicts you they are a Judas, when  a right wing person does it they are trying to steal the election for the weaker candidate, when an Obama supporter does it they are a cultists.   I am going to be really amused with the logic you are going to come up with how Hillary Clinton is betraying Hillary Clinton when she supports the Democratic Nominee.  Or are you holding out hope that she splits the party like the Taft/Teddy Roosevelt split did to the Republicans, resulting in the election of Wilson.

by Tumult 2008-06-03 12:14AM | 0 recs
If you desire a video ...

by bobdoleisevil 2008-06-02 07:04PM | 0 recs
Sorry, I should have asked a serious

question about whether or not he was being snarky. Then alegre wouldn't have trollrated me.

by bobdoleisevil 2008-06-02 07:11PM | 0 recs
Brilliant.

I think you've just birthed a new message board meme.

by dystopianfuturetoday 2008-06-02 09:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Truth Hurts

They broke the rules when they erased your bad troll ratings.

Your turn.

by nightsweat 2008-06-02 06:56PM | 0 recs
Are they flying you to NYC

are they flying you to NYC for Hill's concession?

by Al Rodgers 2008-06-02 06:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Are they flying you to NYC

The deal the Clinton campaign is giving staff is either a ticket to NY or a ticket home. So if they go to NY, they have to pay for their return ticket.

Source: Andrea Mitchell, tonight.

by politicsmatters 2008-06-02 07:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Are they flying you to NYC

They couldn't even get her into the RBC meeting, I doubt they will be hit up for airfare.  Methinks Sen. Clinton doesn't need to be embarassed.  I am hoping her concession involves grace and dignity, which I am assuming it will.

by gchaucer2 2008-06-02 07:26PM | 0 recs
Hey! Where's the donation link?

Where's the donation link you put on diary?

Is this a sign of the end?

by Al Rodgers 2008-06-02 07:19PM | 0 recs
good report

and the caucus v primary results, which show that Clinton & Obama are very close in primaries, only reinforce the role of the obama supporters tactics in caucuses.  

SD and MT primaries should confirm the difficulty with teh caucus system where these abuses can occur, as the margin being close.  

by 4justice 2008-06-02 08:08PM | 0 recs
Re: good report

Absolutely.  I noticed that all traces of the "40 buses w. 20 people each" story seem to have vanished from popular consciousness.  In early March, there was a lot more buzz about how Obama was sending volunteers from Illinois not only to help GoTV in caucus states, but to actually participate in the caucuses.  

It seems several of these incidents are now hardcoded as documented by the Texas affidavits.  It's not like we even need direct evidence at this point because we have so much circumstantial (which just as easily provides the basis of murder convictions).  

When you have 30+% swings in primaries versus caucuses in the same state (Nebraska, Idaho, Washington, and the 18% swing in Texas), you know something is fundamentally wrong.  0-4% would be reasonable.  5% or over raises eyebrows.  10% is on its face, bizarre.  20% is presumptive wrongdoing.  30% is unambiguous fraud.  

The beauty of this is the documenting of how the presence of safeguards and Hillary's legal team in the caucuses maintained results in near perfect alignment with the popular vote.  Where there was no oversight, we had Chicagoans pretending to be Texans and writing "Obama" in blank spaces.  

Without a doubt, this phenomenon isn't limited to Texas.  This is every caucus having bizarre margins, which means every caucus aside from Nevada.  

by BPK80 2008-06-03 01:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Truth Hurts

You don't even live here.  No, I'm sorry, let me say that in a different way.

YOU DON'T EVEN LIVE HERE!

I'm so tired of your diaries trashing Texas based on hearsay.  No, a blogger's reputation is not deemed as evidence.  We have a process to address alleged abuse.  Someone in the precinct or the SD files a challenge and it is heard by the state credentials committee, which is completely balanced in terms of partiality towards Obama and Clinton.  There is a deadline to file a challenge.  If they didn't file the challenge by the deadline, then it's not admissible.  Period.  And even if they alleged abuse happened, no laws were broken.  Court precedence clearly indicates that political parties settle their own disputes within their own rules of governance.

by The Distillery 2008-06-02 08:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Truth Hurts

Don't go confusing alegre with facts.

by interestedbystander 2008-06-03 01:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Truth Hurts

No alegre you are wrong again.  

They are alleged to have broken the law in Texas.

And you and the Clinton Campaign have no credibility when talking about Michigan and Florida and disenfranchisement.

Your doing a worse job of copy/pasting McCain emails than you used to do with Clinton emails.  Is he not paying you enough?

by Tumult 2008-06-02 08:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Truth Hurts

The Democratically elected candidate will not happen until Colorado - in August.  That is when the Super Delegates actually get to vote on their preferences.  Until then, their endorsements continue to be preferences, but not actual votes.  Those actual votes happen in Colorado in August.

Between now and then, all of the super delegates can change their minds.

If you are truly a Democrat, you would be wise to let this process run it's course.

To declare a winner before the convention, shoving it down our throats, before all the votes have been counted, is highly un-Democratic.

by Gabriele Droz 2008-06-02 11:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Truth Hurts

Can you enlighten us to the last time this scenario played out, and the outcome for the GE?

by interestedbystander 2008-06-03 01:45AM | 0 recs
Re: Is this question?

So why hasn't the Clinton campaign or a single TX elected official or Clinton TX superdelegate said a word about it?

Have they come down with a case of overwhelming shyness?

by politicsmatters 2008-06-02 07:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

They broke the law in TX dammit.  It needs to be investigated.

by alegre 2008-06-02 06:49PM | 0 recs
You double posted this

you may want to consider taking one of the two down.  I haven't gotten a chance to read it yet but I will.

by Student Guy 2008-06-02 06:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Oh my.  Calm down, Harriet.  It'll be over in a day.

by neonplaque 2008-06-02 06:50PM | 0 recs
no, they didn't.

sigh Alegre, Alegre.....I saw you at the hotel last weekend. I thought about approaching you but decided not to.

by slinkerwink 2008-06-02 06:53PM | 0 recs
She is in last state of denial...n/t

by shirley temple 2008-06-02 07:03PM | 0 recs
Maryland is the state of denial, huh?

Well, New Jersey beats that. It's the state of utter disgrace.

by bobdoleisevil 2008-06-02 07:04PM | 0 recs
Re: no, they didn't.

She works paycheck to paycheck, how'd she find time to attend? It's almost as if she actually lives in a McMansion in the DC suburbs and has an excess of free time.

by ragekage 2008-06-02 07:06PM | 0 recs
Re: no, they didn't.

Some of us paycheck-to-paycheck types took Saturday off to attend the festivities.  How often does the circus come to town?

by Jay R 2008-06-02 09:27PM | 0 recs
Mojo Mojo

Am I the only tipper tonight?

Come on everybody, tip tip tip

Is it possible that I'll be the only one giving the mojo?

by HillsMyGirl 2008-06-02 06:55PM | 0 recs
I love you

and that's not snark.

by Builderman 2008-06-02 06:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Mojo Mojo

by Kysen 2008-06-02 07:21PM | 0 recs
Not to mention

That Texas has a whorehouse in it.  Lord have mercy on our souls.

by nightsweat 2008-06-02 07:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

This diary is so full of shit it isn't even funny.  She ran a good race but she lost.  End of Story.  Instead of claiming Obama cheated, why not look at how Hillary FUCKED UP and didn't contest the FEB 5 small and caucus states, didn't hire strategy people who knew the rules and knew that big wins in small states offset medium or small wins in bigger states (see Kansas and New Jersey for Examples) and who didn't think in their original planning that California was a winner take all contest.  She lost because her campaign made the critical Feb 5 error and had no game plan AFTER that point.  Had they not made that error, she'd probably be the nominee.  So why not actually admit, Hillary and her campaign don't walk on water and made several critical mistakes, which is why she lost.

It was a well fought contest, but in the end Obama's strategy won out.  He ran up the score big time when necessary, something Hillary wasn't able to put into practice until May when it was too late.  He kept CDs close when needed to limit her wins.  His campaign out strategized hers and THAT is why he won.

Either turn your attention to the GE, JUST AS HILLARY IS PLANNING TO DO, or go to the Pro-McCain blogs and support the candidate other than Obama... Support the candidate who favors bombing iran, 100 more years in Iraq and overturning R v W.  But this BS is just getting ridiculous and is nothing but trolling.

by yitbos96bb 2008-06-02 09:14PM | 0 recs
It was investigated

I have a relative in the Texas Dem party that participated in the investigation.  Their verdict?  Most of the alleged 'fraud' was simply the result of a larger than expected number of caucus goers, many of them unfamilar with the process.  It should also be noted that incidents were reported by both sides.

This is a non-story.

by protothad 2008-06-02 11:47PM | 0 recs
That Rotten Obama

The Texas Caucuses should be thrown out.

If Obama wants unity, he'll do this immediately and agree to be Hillary's VP.

Caucus states should not count.  Ridiculous.

Where's the tip jar so I can tip this positive diary?

by HillsMyGirl 2008-06-02 06:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Obama will just say or do anything to win.

He doesn't care about the rules.

He keeps changing his standards.

Shame on you Barack Obama.  Meet me in Puerto Rico.

by HillsMyGirl 2008-06-02 06:50PM | 0 recs
Getting desperate?

You posted two copies of the same diary, made numerous spelling and grammatical errors, and focused on a particularly divisive and specious claim.

Heh. Gee, Alegre, the other Clinton supporters around here who stood up for their candidate, like sricki, canadian gal (who's not even American!), VAAlex, Rummarhazzit, so forth and so on, will actually have credibility and honor to look forward to after this is all done.

You? Not so much.

by ragekage 2008-06-02 06:52PM | 0 recs
What are you talking about

Obviously you are a Hillary basher.

Alegre has been the most effective voice for Hillary the past 4 months other than Mark Penn.  I include them both because I'm not sexist.

by HillsMyGirl 2008-06-02 06:53PM | 0 recs
Re: What are you talking about

Gimmick accounts should be less obvious.

by Fuzzy Dunlop 2008-06-02 06:55PM | 0 recs
I love gimmicks

don't be a party poooper

by Al Rodgers 2008-06-02 06:58PM | 0 recs
OH NOES!

TEH LOIYERS R CUMING!  RUN 4 UR LIVEZ!

In other news, you still haven't answered my questions: http://www.mydd.com/comments/2008/5/31/2 33029/928/102#102

by Elsinora 2008-06-02 06:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

ummm there are a whole lot more than a 170 precincts

by cardboard 1 2008-06-02 06:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

read the diary before posting

by trytobereal 2008-06-02 08:08PM | 0 recs
I am with you

except for the assumption that Obama is responsible for it. Voter fraud is serious, and if this goes to court and gets prosecuted, great. But don't assume one candidate is necessarily behind it.

by Lost Thought 2008-06-02 06:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

"The reason...?    No one expected Democrats to pull this kind of stuff"

Umm . . . kinda like one Democrat calling another Democrat an elitist?

by reggie23 2008-06-02 06:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Or one Democrat saying the Republican nominee is more qualified to be president than a fellow Democrat.

by politicsmatters 2008-06-02 07:04PM | 0 recs
Don't forget the public shaming...

by Firewall 2008-06-02 07:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Don't forget the public shaming...

you mean for the lies promoted in that mailer authorized by BHO? Gosh what a scadal that she complained about it!

by trytobereal 2008-06-02 08:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Don't forget the public shaming...

Yeah - he said she said "boon" when she really said "good for New York and good for the United States.

Shame on him.

by Jess81 2008-06-02 08:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

How about praising Ronald Reagan in the biggest ways possible and dissing Bill Clinton`s eight years every chance he could?  What a great thing for a democrat to do!  Another "uniter" for sure!

by mcctx 2008-06-02 08:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Who did that?

by Jess81 2008-06-02 08:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Reagan did change the trajectory of America and the way people think about government, freedom, patriotism and a whole host of other things.  Until Democrats recognize that there's no hope for changing it.

by sneakers563 2008-06-02 09:06PM | 0 recs
Learn your history

Were you even alive in the 80s?  Do you have any understanding how this country felt after boycotting the Moscow Olympics and flubbing the hostage crisis?

For all my dislike of Reagan later on, I'd have to say he did stiffen the backbone of this country.

Just because I'm a Democrat doesn't mean I have to shut my brain off.

by Regenman 2008-06-02 11:52PM | 0 recs
Classic Ending

by Al Rodgers 2008-06-02 06:56PM | 0 recs
On the best source for texas political news

there is no mention of this.

http://www.burntorangereport.com/

They know Texas politics and would mention this if it carried water.

Now I am off to go write another positive diary instead of getting involved in a flame war.

by Student Guy 2008-06-02 06:56PM | 0 recs
Re: On the best source for texas political news

didn't bother to read the diary? or follow the links in it to burntorange.com? wow, such knee-jerking

by trytobereal 2008-06-02 08:12PM | 0 recs
The Burnt Orange Report has a letter...

from the Clinton campaign regarding what they believed are irregularities.  It does not have an incident report or any news of TDP challenges being heard.  If these caucuses were so unfair, why didn't the thousands of reporters combing the state see one incident of said cheating?

by nklein 2008-06-02 08:56PM | 0 recs
Re: The Burnt Orange Report has a letter...

Do you have a link for the diary with this letter?  I would love to read it.

by The Distillery 2008-06-02 09:42PM | 0 recs
It's the link in the diary n/t

by nklein 2008-06-02 11:40PM | 0 recs
Re: It's the link in the diary n/t

No, I meant the BOR diary that states this.  I was assuming there was a different more recent one than the link Alegre provided.

by The Distillery 2008-06-03 04:10PM | 0 recs
No, that's the only mention BOR has

of any caucus fraud.

by nklein 2008-06-03 05:24PM | 0 recs
Re: On the best source for texas political news

Try reading this site that was written on Huffingtonpost on March 7th.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-bell ows/clinton-claiming-widespre_b_89925.ht ml

by mcctx 2008-06-02 08:36PM | 0 recs
Re: On the best source for texas political news

And where is the evidence?  Because it's sure not in this diary, and it's sure not in your link.

by The Distillery 2008-06-02 09:40PM | 0 recs
Re: On the best source for texas political news

You're right. We haven't covered this because of a couple of reasons.

1) Most of it is like everything that came out of precinct conventions, wild accusations on both sides by people who don't really know how the process works

2) Legitimate complaints that are on such a small scale that they are in line with what should be expected by trying to plow 750,000 people through a process that wasn't built for even 200,000.

3) There have been credentials hears going on all week. El Paso for instance has already been resolved, where the committee overturned the gross mis-allocation done by the Clinton dominated county for at large delegates. San Antonio is working on a solution for a similar situation that will turn 10-12 delegates from Clinton to Obama based on at large calculations.  In Houston, the Obama folks simply gave Clinton 5 delegates to just avoid having a big debate about it all.

So in short, don't complain about the process or lawyers or one side simply working the solution end of this better. And unless you're doing anything with the credentials committee- all the posts in the world mean nothing.

by KTinTX 2008-06-02 10:25PM | 0 recs
alegre, why won't you vote for the nom?

I thought you were a Democrat. :^(

by Firewall 2008-06-02 06:56PM | 0 recs
Classic "End"

by Al Rodgers 2008-06-02 06:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

sometimes the enthusiasms take some off the edge. They assume the other side is cheating and they have to cheat too.  It comes of poor leadership, inspiring cheating isn't good. Still, it's fairly normal, except for Hillary.  

by anna shane 2008-06-02 06:57PM | 0 recs
How dare you call Hillary a cheater!!

that's just terrible!

by Al Rodgers 2008-06-02 07:02PM | 0 recs
Can't you read

It says 40 out of 170 WITH IRREGULARITIES

So there are 170 WITH IRREGULARITIES

So the irregularities clearly favored Obama in these 40 precincts.

As for the other 130, they overtly favored Obama.

It's all crystal clear to me.

by HillsMyGirl 2008-06-02 06:57PM | 0 recs
Did you post this diary twice?

Well, as I said in the other:

Alegre, is this really going to win Hillary the nomination? At this point, discussing this seems pretty futile.

by sricki 2008-06-02 06:57PM | 0 recs
You're spamming your diaries now?

It just kills you that you haven't gotten on the rec list with your troll diaries.  You should take a hint from the positive pro-Hillary diarists that have made it to the rec list.  You just don't have an audience for this crap anymore.

by Tenafly Viper 2008-06-02 07:08PM | 0 recs
Re: You're spamming your diaries now?

Yeah- these are real positive.

by ihaveseenenough 2008-06-02 07:47PM | 0 recs
When do we read your diary on how

Obama stole Wisconsin?

by benmasel 2008-06-02 07:09PM | 0 recs
Re: When do we read your diary on how

I am actually looking forward to that one.  Please don't rain on my parade.

I also eagerly anticipate the District of Columbia shouldn't count because it's not a state diary.

by HillsMyGirl 2008-06-02 07:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

by benmasel 2008-06-02 07:09PM | 0 recs
Who's next?!

How about the whole freakin' party???

by izarradar 2008-06-02 07:10PM | 0 recs
I know. The Lemon Party is all that's

left for us decent, non-sexist, non-fraudulent non-Republican folk.

by bobdoleisevil 2008-06-02 07:12PM | 0 recs
Re: I know. The Lemon Party is all that's

Ha, I told my friend to check out the Lemon Party while he was in the middle of a law school class.  He wasn't very happy with me.  

by reggie23 2008-06-02 07:20PM | 0 recs
Makes rickrolling seem tame in

comparison.

by bobdoleisevil 2008-06-02 07:21PM | 0 recs
Fuck it
I'm reccing both.
by Cochrane 2008-06-02 07:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

by Kysen 2008-06-02 07:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud
TR'd!?!?!
Too funny.  :)
Don't Hassle the Hoff!!
by Kysen 2008-06-03 03:29AM | 0 recs
Someone (I suspect the Obamabots in admin)

has deleted alegre's other diary. With malice aforethought, I tell you. With malice aforethought!

by bobdoleisevil 2008-06-02 07:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Someone (I suspect the Obamabots in admin)

Dammit, I really wanted both diaries to make it to the rec list.  That would have been a monumental day in Mydd history.  

by reggie23 2008-06-02 07:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Someone (I suspect the Obamabots in admin)

It's not too late.  Maybe alegre can copy and paste this one.

by haystax calhoun 2008-06-02 08:26PM | 0 recs
Indeed

I am very disappointed that the administration deleted that diary.

It's just another example of the Pro Obama slant at this site and the media that Bill Clinton spoke about.

by HillsMyGirl 2008-06-02 07:23PM | 0 recs
You're spamming your own diaries now??

It just kills you that you haven't gotten on the rec list with your troll diaries.  You should take a hint from the positive pro-Hillary diarists that have made it to the rec list.  You just don't have an audience for this crap anymore.

by Tenafly Viper 2008-06-02 07:19PM | 0 recs
Re: You're spamming your own diaries now??

Hey!  What do you mean she has no audience?  I tipped her jar.  I gave her mojo.

Granted I am the only one to have done so but are you saying that I'm a nobody?

Now if she loses me, well ----------

by HillsMyGirl 2008-06-02 07:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

I've worked credentials at state party conventions and there are always complaints.  They get worked out by the credentials committee.

BTW, that's why there are rules like those in the Chicago petitions you complain about, which require the person adding her name to the petition to both sign it and print it. That way you avoid fraud because you can check the signature on file and read the printed name.

And why do you claim that website as a neutral observer, when it's clearly anything but neutral?

by politicsmatters 2008-06-02 07:30PM | 0 recs
if it's a problem,where is the Clinton campaign?

You ask why the press doesn't talk about this, but they surely would if Ickes or someone else from the Clinton campaign did.

So why don't they if there is truly is a problem that they can establish?  Surely they are not timid folks.

by politicsmatters 2008-06-02 07:33PM | 0 recs
Reason: Texas Dem. Party!

Because the TDP officials threatened the Clinton campaign before, during and after the primary and caucus on March 4th.  I live in Texas and saw and heard it with my own ears and eyes.

After the TX primary and caucus, even the republican editorial board of the Dallas Morning News stated that the Texas Two-step should be abolished now!

by mcctx 2008-06-02 08:23PM | 0 recs
How did they threaten the campaign?

Are you trying to honestly tell me that some measly Texas state party official or chairman has the courage to threaten Hillary Clinton?  What with?  Clnton is a former first lady and Senator from New York, but some no-name party official has the guts to threaten her?  At some point, these talking points become ridiculous on their face.

by nklein 2008-06-02 09:02PM | 0 recs
So, this ends tomorrow or Weds.? Maybe not.


Austin American-Statesman: Garry Mauro, who's steered Sen. Hillary Clinton's Texas presidential campaign, insists that regardless of what happens in Tuesday's primaries in South Dakota and Montana (where Mauro has been chasing votes for Clinton like the twenty-something activist that he's not), Clinton won't quit her chase of the nomination against Sen. Barack Obama by this weekend.

"She is not quitting," said Mauro, who has known the candidate since they worked for Democrats in Texas in 1972.

Furthermore, Mauro said, he expects Sen. Clinton or Bill Clinton to speak at this weekend's Texas Democratic Party state convention in Austin. "One of the two will be there; I don't think there's any doubt," Mauro said, noting that Sen. Clinton had earlier told him personally she'd see him back in Texas.

"We're not quitting before the state convention" Friday and Saturday, Mauro said. "I can tell you that unequivacably. She is not going to concede."

by bobswern 2008-06-02 07:41PM | 0 recs
Indeed

Thank you for checking BOR, it is the site for Texas political news and if this had credibility it will be talked about there.

by Student Guy 2008-06-02 07:52PM | 0 recs
Apparently...you think you know more...

...than the Austin American Statesman.

Because they thought it was noteworthy.

Feeling pretty good about yourself tonight, I see.

by bobswern 2008-06-02 08:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Our friend from no25cents

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/05/31/ thou-shalt-not-steal-updated/

here is sum blue's fer ya alegre

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAvlYLCYO DU&feature=related

by nogo postal 2008-06-02 07:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Yeah - She may stay in through the TX convention. But note that neither Clinton nor Mauro make any claims about fraud, which is the core claim of this diary.

by politicsmatters 2008-06-02 07:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Damn!  More Republican troll poo down here at the bottom of the diary also.  This is the second time tonight!

Fear not! The Fearless Tracker will follow the trail of spore back to it's source.

In the mean time, could y'all stop shitting on me down here?

by Purple with Green Stipes and Pink Polka Dots Dem 2008-06-02 07:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

This is just flat out not true, that website was totally a Hillary echo chamber.    The diarist is now jumping the shark over the last dying dog.

by realistdem 2008-06-02 07:49PM | 0 recs
Well, now we have

three pro-McCain diaries on the rec list.  Good job destroying the site.

by gchaucer2 2008-06-02 07:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Alegre, can't you admit at least a little bit that the Clinton will not be the nominee primarily because she ran a bad campaign.  I'll take your silence to my comment as tacit agreement.  

by reggie23 2008-06-02 07:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Is The Campaign really that important - "bad campagn" in light of what? Relentless media bias that ignored every false and misleading statement out of Obama's and his supporters' mouths, right up to "she was the only one on the ballot in Michigan!"

In contrast, The Campaign is about all Obama seems truly prepared for, as his policies are so vague, and yet he seems so ready to scheme and manipulate the rules to win, just like he has done from the beginning of his political career.

I am more interested in who will Govern best, and there's no doubt it's Clinton.

by valleyboy 2008-06-02 08:29PM | 0 recs
Yes, a bad campaign.

Keep in mind that she was the inevitable candidate that started out with 100 SDs in her pocket and the party system behind her so here we go ...... ignored caucasus (Iowa killed her) and red states allowing Obama to amass uncontested delegates,  questioned whether those states counted angering SDs and voters from those states, allowed the prisoner (Penn) to to run the asylum in her campaign including keeping him after the Columbia fiasco, assumed the nomination would be over Super Tuesday, did not plan for primaries after Super Tuesday, willfully ignored some states in Feb allowing Obama to reel off 11 in a row, her campaign has fallen at least $20 mil (probably over $30 mil now) in debt, failed to pay vendors causing needless bad press, openly allowed bickering and in-fighting to go on between the head honchos of her campaign, hired a consultant that thought primaries were winner take all, needless gaffes such as Tuzla, etc, etc, etc, ......I can name more if you'd like me to.  The only proof I have of how she'll govern is by looking at how she ran her campaign which, to me, looked like she was woefully unprepared.

by reggie23 2008-06-02 08:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

This Diary?
FAIL...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLVCmqSAf Bs

by nogo postal 2008-06-02 08:00PM | 0 recs
I am curious

I wrote out an incident report for my 2 precincts in Houston, but they were submitted to HRC campaign because I did not know who to submit them to.

Is/was there a special place to go to submit these?

I had never heard back.

by nikkid 2008-06-02 08:01PM | 0 recs
Re: I am curious

1. You only have 1 precinct, not 2.

2. Your first action should have been to file a challenge in your precinct back in March.  You can report that challenge to your respective candidate's campaign, but they have no recourse.  They can provide campaign lawyers to help you with the challenge, but it is your responsibility to detail the challenge to your county party.  If you neglected to file a challenge, then you have no recourse.  An "incident report" filed to a campaign is not a recognized challenge in the Democratic Party, let alone the Texas Democratic Party.

by The Distillery 2008-06-02 09:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Uh oh, did someone's hand get caught in the cookie jar?

by grlpatriot 2008-06-02 08:09PM | 0 recs
another sexist remark

you people just won't let go of Hill's "stayed home and baked cookies" remark.

you hill haters are terrible.

by Al Rodgers 2008-06-02 08:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Are you sending alegre kisses?

by grlpatriot 2008-06-02 08:10PM | 0 recs
Total Crap

This diary and this poster.

by turtlescrubber 2008-06-02 08:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Is this what the summer is going to look like?

Within days, Hillary Clinton will in all likelihood suspend her campaign and announce her support of the Democratic nominee. It's what even her own high-level supporters (including a campaign co-chairman) are saying.

If and when that happens, what are you going to do? Spend the next three months working to delegitimize his candidacy?

If Hillary sets to work next week toward getting Obama elected, what will you be doing? Working against both of them? Spreading the perception that he's an illegitimate candidate? How will that help get a Democrat elected in November?

Serious question.

by BobzCat 2008-06-02 08:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

by turtlescrubber 2008-06-02 08:19PM | 0 recs
Man, whats with you guys?

Losing steam a bit?

It took almost an hour to get this up on the rec list.

You guys need to get back your timing if you are going to be taken seriously.

by pattonbt 2008-06-02 08:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Not one Obama supporter here cares if the law is broken?  Just so long as the breaking of the law happens to favor your candidate?  And you wonder why the American people are being shut out of their own country.  I believe the term is "enabler".

by bobbank 2008-06-02 08:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Last throes Alegre?

Please get away from the computer and step away from this whole thing for a few days.  You'll feel better and maybe you'll have a better perspective on how the real world thinks.

by brathor 2008-06-02 08:27PM | 0 recs
the stolen nomination

I guess when Donna Brazile said this:

"My mama taught me... (dramatic pause)... to play by the rules and respect those rules. And my mother also taught me, and I'm sure your mother taught you... that when you decide change the rules... middle of the game, end of the game, that is referred to as cheatin'."

I thought of this:

My momma taught me that when you take something that does not belong to you then it is stealin'. Well I guess Ms. Brazile's momma forgot that lesson because while she can discern cheatin' obviously her values are a bit lax when it comes to stealin'. Because stealin' is what happened in MI and she was complicit in that.

by tarheel74 2008-06-02 08:27PM | 0 recs
Re: the stolen nomination

MI lost its delegates because it didn't play by the rules.

by politicsmatters 2008-06-02 08:29PM | 0 recs
Re: the stolen nomination

Show me which rule allowed for this travesty:

giving 59 delegates to someone who did not initially even try to get on the ballot and then took his name off voluntarily.

And which rule says that you can count the delegates but not the popular vote.

Rule are rules and not RULEZ. And stealing is stealing is stealing.

by tarheel74 2008-06-02 08:44PM | 0 recs
Re: the stolen nomination

and whining is whining is whining...

by hootie4170 2008-06-02 09:20PM | 0 recs
Re: the stolen nomination

Well, ALL the rules say you count the delegates and not the popular vote to determine the nominee, since the rules allow for things like caucuses where there is no vote count.  

And the rules also allow for not counting the totals of improperly conducted and non-binding straw polls like the one Michigan held.

And the rules also state that you immediately look like a petulant twelve year-old when you change an "s" to a "z" for pejorative purposes (also when a "y" becomes an "i", for future reference).

But the basic guidelines suggest that posting divisive diaries like this one that directly impugn the character of our nominee is a really, really bad way to keep the Republicans from raping the nation for another term, and that perhaps that should be our primary focus instead of meaningless infighting that will have no bearing on whom our nominee will be.

by Jay R 2008-06-02 09:46PM | 0 recs
30,000 write in votes

Wow, guess that slipped your limited attention again.  For someone who claims to have 4 degrees, you're around as bright as linfar.

So you think you should reward someone for going back on her word and breaking the rules of her party?  You think "fair reflection" is tossing out 5% of the vote (more than 4 delegates).  Wow, your hypocrisy stinks.

Just don't reproduce and pass your "morals" along.

by Regenman 2008-06-02 11:47PM | 0 recs
to Obama supporters

I was not going to rec'd this diary, but I am now, simply because of the crap you do in every diary alegre post.

If you do not like what she writes, then ignore it. WHY do you keep doing this shit?

I will bet that many come in her diaries just to defend her. So the rec'd her diaries and attack the trolls and the spam.

PLEASE STOP.

by kevin22262 2008-06-02 08:35PM | 0 recs
Re: to Obama supporters

Because Alegre deserves all the scorn and sarcasm being thrown her way from now until eternity.

She flagrantly useds innuendo and rumour as fact and  refuses to ever, ever engage a single skeptic in a substantial debate about the issue at hand.

Alegre, and her ilk, are a cancer to our party and deserve whatever she gets.

Important note:  I am talking about ALEGRE not all Clinotn supporters that 99.9% who are good democrats who happen to support Hillary (like my sister).

Alegre is not one of those.  She is a mentally disturbed individual.

by FinneganOregon 2008-06-02 08:50PM | 0 recs
Because Alegre is doing McCain's work

and this is a progressive audience.

We have two diaries on the rec list - this Democratic Nominee hit piece and TexasDarlin, who's blog is referenced in McCain blogs as a source of information.

Very few here actually want to destroy the Democratic nominee.

-chris

by chrisblask 2008-06-02 09:34PM | 0 recs
Re: to Obama supporters

If someone day after day posted rumors about Hillary Clinton with no evidence you wouldn't tolerate it either and you know it.

Is it that hard to put yourself in other people's shoes?  I'm a reasonable person and a bygones-be-bygones kind of girl but ENOUGH.

by Jess81 2008-06-02 10:25PM | 0 recs
haha

It does happen.

Go look at Dkos and at times here.

That does NOT excuse the abuse that goes on by SOME O supporters. Or supposed supporters.

Some of the biggest asses on both sides, may very well be mccain people pushing us apart and pushing some Clinton people away from Obama.

Get it? Do you want to help mccain reach some of the Clinton supporters?

by kevin22262 2008-06-02 10:30PM | 0 recs
Or

Most shows on AAR and NovaM.

Also.. MSNC and most media.

and... you get my point.

by kevin22262 2008-06-02 10:31PM | 0 recs
This incident report is bullshit...

I read three incidents and there were huge holes in the stories.  In Precinct 56, there were all those irregularities that supposed stole 2 district convention delegates from Clinton, which was supposed to be witnessed by Channel 7.  Where's there report?  In Precinct 61, it was a 19 delegate precinct, but supposedly the caucus gave out 34 delegates.  That's not possible; the district convention would never accept that.  These bullshit claims of fraud have to stop.  They are unsubstantiated, unsourced and untrue.  I thought better of you Alegre, but you're just another troll.

by nklein 2008-06-02 08:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud
Vote for the Democratic nominee Alegre.
Just vote for the Democratic nominee.
by LandStander 2008-06-02 08:54PM | 0 recs
what is your point?

because if it's to get Antonin Scalia another buddy on the supreme court, you're well on your way to getting it.  Are you really accusing Obama of electoral fraud?  Do you understand what a serious charge that is to make?  To say that's he's Richard Nixon/Watergate/Robert Mugabe here?

Come on.  Clinton has lost.  Perhaps she'll have another chance in four years, perhaps she won't.  But this crying about how unfair everything is reminds me of the way a six year old acts after they lose their first baseball game.  Sometimes your candidate loses (it happened to me as well this year).  You move on, and work to protect the things you care about, things I suspect BO does care about and that JM doesnt...

by Dont tread on me 2008-06-02 09:00PM | 0 recs
Shut up about the f-ing Supreme Court

Democrats made Alito and Roberts possible.

***A

by adrienne4dean 2008-06-02 09:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Shut up about the f-ing Supreme Court

All the more reason to keep McCain out.  The Senate hasn't voted down a Supreme Court nominee in over 20 years.  It's all about whoever the president picks.

by Jess81 2008-06-02 10:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

I don't come here everyday because there's really no need. it's always the same b-shite.
Alegre, as a fellow hillary supporter I beg you, go get a nice sack of endo and chill for three or ten days. If you feel like writing a diary, then administer shock aversion therapy until that horrible, repugnant urge leaves your person.

She's done. It's over. Get behind Obama or you're not a progressive.
period.

by Zorkon 2008-06-02 09:15PM | 0 recs
Some feint-hearted supporter you are! n/t

by adrienne4dean 2008-06-02 09:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

This is why we shouldn't have caucuses in the first place. It is thanks to this polarized election that the world sees how caucusing works and how undemocratic it is. And it's pretty obvious that there will not be any reform because Obama gamed the caucus and those party leaders are with him. Think they would give up power? No way. The only way we can reform the system is to ensure a Clinton victory, ensure Obama signed a pledge to get rid of caucusing, or to the worst, John McCain wins. Because caucus is party base, and the party heads benefits from it, there will be no action on fraud and such. I'm willing for the greater good of this party to do whatever it takes to get rid of the caucus system and i hope you too.

by stevent 2008-06-02 09:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

either get rid of caucuses, or make the general election a caucus. However, that would end democracy. I see no reason for not having all primaries, or even one big nation wide primary, where candidates have to show up in certain state x number of times, to avoid any problem of over campaigning in certain areas with more people.

by DiamondJay 2008-06-02 09:59PM | 0 recs
You.

by chrisblask 2008-06-02 09:32PM | 0 recs
This diary is not shocking

Such trolling and dishonesty is typical for an inadequate white female such as Alegre.

/snark

by libertyleft 2008-06-02 09:44PM | 0 recs
Re: This diary is not shocking

Oh dear - you Hillary supporters that hide rated this do realise these are the exact words that Alegre promoted in her rec'd diary yesterday, don't you?

by interestedbystander 2008-06-03 02:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Jerome, tomorrow I expect you to clean up this place. Such hate pieces such as this one and TexasDarlin (aka Larry Sinclair) have no place on the rec list.

by MJJLWolf 2008-06-02 09:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Gee, who'da thunk. Alegre lies again, posting another dishonest diary filled with half truths and long-debunked myths.

You know, there are people who wish you would go back to the nicer Alegre that posted positive diaries, but the fact is that you were just as dishonest then as you are now.

And the people who subscribe to her mailing list, and recommend and encourage this crap? You're just as much liars as she is.

by maxomai 2008-06-02 09:55PM | 0 recs
what did you expect

from the Daily Kos and the Huffington Post. This is why we need to shut them up, and let them just give money. I support you Alegre, posting the truth. Sadly, Hillary will probably just let this go, and endorse Obama at some point so no one in the party, or well, less will blame her when Obama goes down in flames in November. If I could still rec, I would. I want my rec'ing privileges back.

by DiamondJay 2008-06-02 09:58PM | 0 recs
Re: what did you expect

I think you blew that when you were troll-rating everyone who said anything bad about Bill Clinton.  Yet you smear the current candidates left and right.

by Jess81 2008-06-02 10:22PM | 0 recs
So Who'll Be Next?

Jesus.

by venavena 2008-06-02 10:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

How about the Clinton shenanigans in El Paso alegre, forget those?

by skywaker9 2008-06-02 10:17PM | 0 recs
About the Texas Caucuses

As I posted up thread but will put here as  new comment.

You're right. We haven't covered this because of a couple of reasons.

1) Most of it is like everything that came out of precinct conventions, wild accusations on both sides by people who don't really know how the process works

2) Legitimate complaints that are on such a small scale that they are in line with what should be expected by trying to plow 750,000 people through a process that wasn't built for even 200,000.

3) There have been credentials hears going on all week. El Paso for instance has already been resolved, where the committee overturned the gross mis-allocation done by the Clinton dominated county for at large delegates. San Antonio is working on a solution for a similar situation that will turn 10-12 delegates from Clinton to Obama based on at large calculations.  In Houston, the Obama folks simply gave Clinton 5 delegates to just avoid having a big debate about it all.

So in short, don't complain about the process or lawyers or one side simply working the solution end of this better. And unless you're doing anything with the credentials committee- all the posts in the world mean nothing.

by KTinTX 2008-06-02 10:25PM | 0 recs
Go Away! n/t

by shalca 2008-06-02 10:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

I caucused in Texas, and my precinct didn't have any problems -- other than overwhelming numbers of people showing up to participate.  There were too many people to let in the building (would have been a fire code violation).  We waited for 6 hours to get inside to begin the caucus -- something that has never happened before.

This kind of thing happened all over the state.  Many people stayed for an hour or two, and then left -- because they either weren't able or willing to stay.  But we didn't have any fraud - we didn't even have any arguments.  A Clinton supporter was our Chair, and an Obama supporter was our Secretary.  It was a worthwhile event, and we discussed a whole range of issues.  I'm glad so many people participated here, and I'm proud of the Texas Democrats in my precinct for doing a great job under difficult circumstances.

The County Convention was also a great experience.  I learned a lot, and got to meet a number of people who are very active in the party locally.  This helped me to go from being a person whose only prior contributions to the process were filling out a ballot and making an occasional donation, to being someone who is actively participating in local politics.  There are a lot of people like me, too.  The caucus system has been roundly criticized this cycle -- but there are a host of great reasons to have them.  They are a benefit to the party.

I'm sure there were some problems in some areas.  I don't believe that there was widespread organized fraud.  I think it's far more likely that the difference between the popular vote totals and the caucus results were a direct result of the chaos and extended wait times caused by overwhelming turnout.  The younger voters were able to stay and wait in larger numbers, while many of the older voters couldn't, or wouldn't.  But, even so, it was a worthwhile process that got a lot of people involved for the first time -- and I think that can only help the party in the future.

by thepuppethead 2008-06-02 10:45PM | 0 recs
Tough Caucus Strategy
 Dallas Morning News Mar 01, 2008
Christy Hoppe    
Hillary Clinton and her campaign is pushing for precinct captains for Texas' 8,000 Democratic polling places. They need to train folks to lead the caucus sessions that will determine more than 60 delegates after the primary voting is over.
In training materials being handed out by the Clinton campaign, it is clear that they want to control those caucus sessions.
The materials say in part, "DO NOT allow the supporter of another candidate to serve in leadership roles."
It goes on to say, "If our supporters are outnumbered, ask the Temporary Chair if one of our supporters can serves as the Secretary, in the interest of fairness.
"The control of the sign-in sheets and the announcement of the delegates allotted to each candidate are the critical functions of the Chair and Secretary. This is why it is so important that Hillary supporters hold these positions
by Ida B 2008-06-02 11:36PM | 0 recs
How on earth can anybody trust you?

You wrote:

As one of the only remaining highly respected neutral voices in the liberal netroots,EBW says

I clicked on the link you provided. On the front page, I did a search for the word "Obama", then I did a search for the word "Clinton".

The coverage can hardly be called neutral: nearly all the Obama coverage is critical, while nearly all the Clinton coverage is sympathetic.

If that is your idea of a neutral voice, then nothing you write can be trusted.

by xynz 2008-06-03 12:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud
Alegre' - you have every right to post this information. Perhaps one day, a newspaper or television reporter from the "Main Stream Media" might pick it up as a journalistic lead. Maybe enough unbiased readers to this blog will consider the implication of the facts that you present. The facts are there, the testaments are there. If this were a trial, these affidavits would be entered in as evidence. Too bad if the facts don't fit the reality that the Obama/Axelrod/Rove mind machine has been trying to portray.
I applaud your courage for sticking around this place, where reason and rational discourse appear to have taken flight unless there is worship of the Precious.
by pan230oh 2008-06-03 02:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud

Thanks, Alegre. This stuff should have had MSM headlines weeks ago. The press is not doing its job. BO really knows how to game the system. And those who could put it out there just turn their backs. We have a problem, Houston! The future solution is to do away with the caucus system. This would be justified based on voter participation discrepancies alone.

by susanclare 2008-06-03 03:20AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads