Precinct captains from the various campaigns are no less biased a source than Bill Clinton.

[TwilightZone]

Keep that in mind when assessing the validity of claims coming out of Nevada (or anywhere, for that matter.)

Personally, I'm skeptical of anything that originates from campaign staff, die hard supporters, or family members of the various candidates. It is simply impossible for bias to be removed in those instances.

[KoKo]

1. Good point...

There have been a couple of "eye witness" experiences coming out of Nevada cross posted at KOS and here...that seem to be very biased on the careful read. :shrug:

[terisan]

2. The one I saw was unsigned. If a precinct captain criticizes and won't give a real name the

report is worthless and probably a fake, imo.

[TwilightZone]

5. As you probably guessed...

those were part of the inspiration for my post.

[ccpup]

3. when reading anything these days concerning politics

or the Primary Race, I turn my "bullshit meter" on high and go with my gut in assessing whether or not it's a reliable source to be trusted.

[Cameron27]

4. Absolutely

there are so many idiots trying to stir things up, that I wait for confirmation from a few reliable sources before I believe anything.

[TwilightZone]

7. It's funny how people seem to see an agenda in everything, except when their candidate is involved.

Allegations about another candidate: "It must be true, there's an eyewitness!"

Exact same allegations about their own: "The eyewitness is obviously biased and lying."

:silly:

[TomClash]

6. But I don't know that the Precinct Captains have a history of lying

But Bill Clinton certainly does.