• on a comment on Red State Democrats Rising over 5 years ago

    You'll be seeing ads soon...

  • comment on a post Road To 60/Blue America Fundraising Push over 5 years ago

    It's great to see the full circle of the netroots support that started here in Texas!

  • comment on a post Obama's VP: Daschle over 5 years ago

    Are you saying that you're agreeing with.... Markos?

    Whoa. What happened to good blogger, bad blogger? :)

  • on a comment on The New Texas Caucus Lies over 6 years ago

    Um, sorry to break it to you but anna has a loooooong history in the blogosphere.

    And there is only one true McBlogger.

  • on a comment on The New Texas Caucus Lies over 6 years ago

    So the question is, what is being done about any of this? Credentials hearing have been going on all week. Blog posts on MyDD are meaningless other than just whining if no one's doing anything about it at credentials.

  • on a comment on The New Texas Caucus Lies over 6 years ago

    Before you go off half cocked and making up wrong assumptions like other people on this site.

    That comment is in regards to the data entry of data off of the sign in sheets. Given that it was handled by a data processing vendor, the remark about complete addresses is a comment on how many units of information came back with full address information. It's entirely possibly that the data was not or could not be fully transcribed (and lord knows as we've seen from using the email addresses, there are typos).

    If anyone had an issue with the sign in sheets at the precinct level convention, they wold have to be taken up with the county credentials committee back in April. We are waaaay past that now.

  • comment on a post Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud over 6 years ago

    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.

  • on a comment on Updates Re Texas Caucus Fraud over 6 years ago

    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.

  • Thanks! We try to keep up the quality. It's been over 5 years now so we like to think we are doing something right. :)

  • comment on a post Puerto Rico local Primary Poll over 6 years ago

    So if Hillary wins Puerto Rico, does that mean she's better positioned to win this critical swing state in the general election against McCain?

    If a state that cannot vote in the general election is the one that puts her in the lead in a couple measures of the popular vote- does make that argument more or less relevant?

    Either way, this is EXCELLENT NEWS! FOR HILLARY!!!

  • Small note- it's "Barack" with a c.

  • comment on a post DNC Superdelegate Putting His Vote Up For Sale over 6 years ago

    Hm. Guess he's a little outside of Hillary's price range right now.

  • on a comment on Texas Caucus Fraud (Updated) over 6 years ago

    You're right. There was a lot of fraud in El Paso and Bexar. Both SD-29 and SD-26 have delegations to state that do not match the signins at the county convention. Clinton is overweighted in both because they did not follow the rules for allocating at large delegates, but thanks to the committees in place, these can be rectified at the state convention.

  • on a comment on Texas Caucus Fraud (Updated) over 6 years ago

    And as to the point, everything you mentioned is provided for in the rules, and yes, they were ignored.

    The first being that if a particular candidate's delegation (this is from precinct to county) does not have enough alternates of their own kind to seat in place of missing alternates of same kind, then alternates of any presidential preference (in this case, only Obama in a 2-way race) ARE seated. That's just the rules.

    The second point was concerning the allocation of at large delegates from the county to the state level to bring the entire delegation in-line with the sign in at the county convention. That sign in, as both side agree, was 75-25 in El Paso SD-29. The delegation to state is supposed to be of the same make-up. It was not (it was a 90-10 split). This is simply wrong and against the rules. In this case, Clinton (naturally) won a majority of the delegates in the precinct by precinct round, overweighting herself to a 90-10 ration of that set. The Clinton controlled committees then simply allocated the at-large delegates in the same 90-10 ration (which is contrary to the rules).

    This is indeed before the state credentials committee and they will be very much in the right to revers the incorrect ratio meaning that around two dozen Clinton delegates will flip to Obama delegates because that's what the sign-ins allocated.

  • on a comment on Texas Caucus Fraud (Updated) over 6 years ago

    Mobilizing more of your supporters to come to the caucus isn't corrupt, it's called running a campaign.

Diaries

Advertise Blogads