Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hillary Camp Seeks to Delay Texas Caucus Results--Wants 1,000,000 Signatures Verified!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:25 PM
Original message
Hillary Camp Seeks to Delay Texas Caucus Results--Wants 1,000,000 Signatures Verified!
Clinton seeks Texas delay

From the Dallas Morning News:

As final results from the Texas Democratic caucus remain unknown, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign wants signatures from the March 4 contest verified before party conventions are held around the state later this month.

In a letter sent to the state Democratic Party late Friday, the Clinton campaign requests the March 29 count and state Senate district conventions be postponed until the eligibility of an estimated 1 million caucus-goers are double checked.

By Ben Smith 06:11 PM

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Clinton_see...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
slinkerwink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. she's upholding the democratic process. Reminds me of Putin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
16. Hillary wants to make the rules up as she goes along just like Bush
This sould be the mantra for Hillary "JUST LIKE BUSH"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abacus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
17. I think this helps Obama
It will keep the fact that he won in the news and verification later will look like continued winning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #17
34. I like your positive outlook and it also
shows what whining pos Losers the clintons turned out to be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abacus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #34
37. lol, I started a sentence along that vein
but decided the former was enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
juajen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
18. Hmm? Just like Gore held up the democratic process in FL in 2000?
You all are just unbelievable. Why would you want unfair caucuses and no verification of questionable votes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PseudoIntellect Donating Member (701 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #18
26. Oh, that's right, caucuses are, by default, unfair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elixir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #26
56. IN this instance, they very well may be unfair. The TX caucuses were comprised
of only voters who cast votes in the primaries. If HRC won the primaries at those same voters went to the caucuses, wouldn't it make sense that HRC would win the caucus? It's certainly worth checking the signatures.

Hey, Obama bumped several opponents off the ballot in Illinois by questioning signatures. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #56
59. You are forgetting the education factor.
The people that go to the caucuses are typically more politically engaged and better educated. Sorry, that is a big advantage for Obama. You HRC supporters like to spend a lot of time here at DU whining and ranting. You should have gotten off your duffs and attended a caucus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave29 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #18
55. It makes me want to hurl when you compare what Al Gore did in a
Presidential election that was stolen from him... to what Hillary is doing in a state in which she won the popular vote. Everyone predicted Obama would win the caucus. He did.

Explain why Hillary is not doing this in every state.

And for what it's worth -- my caucus here in Texas was 3-1 Obama. They made all of us show our voter ID's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #55
57. And in my precinct
BO won 400 to 61, I think the HRC number was.

And they made nobody show voter IDs or verify they were in the right precinct.

Why didn't they check? Because the guy who was apparently in charge (self-appointed, which was fine in the absence of anybody actually asking to vote for precinct captain) said it didn't matter--they'd be checking everybody's eligibility in any event. He made sure all the alternates were appointed, because, he said, it was possible the numbers would change when they verified eligibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 08:45 AM
Response to Reply #18
60. OMFG !! You compare Hillary trying to STEAL a nomination to AL GORE fighting for his rightful
place as President of the United States?? Who the FUCK ARE YOU PEOPLE??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #60
61. Kind of takes your breath away to see the bullshit that they hurl...
Edited on Sun Mar-16-08 08:58 AM by Hepburn
...like it represents honesty and a fair statement. I wonder some times where in the hell they got their ethics. No wonder they support Hillary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roguevalley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
62. then send her the bill to pay for this crap. send her the damned bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
2. They must be verified..... I think that there was a massive fraud committed by the Obama camp
in TX.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Link? Or is this just a gut feeling?
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. I'm not making it up. It is a wideheld belief among the Clinton supporters
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
graywarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #11
24. Ah, Hillary supporter's belief s got me sold.
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. Yes, it was a rub about how everything Rev. Wright
said is okay because "it is a wideheld belief among the AA community"
see... just because a group of people believe something doesn't make it true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoFlaJet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #11
30. read as: Clinton staffer
manning the board here at DU-BTW Didn't we go througfh the big "I'm Leaving" thread from this guy just a week ago or less?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #30
40. Prayers to you. Your sanity is rapidly slipping.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Umbram Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #30
49. I honestly don't think anyone would pay for that poster's services
A good operative would be subtle and come off as an intellectual.

That poster manages neither by any stretch of the imagination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #3
19. It's a gut link.
AKA gas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #19
23. The signatures need to be verified. Too many reports of
intimidation and unethical tactics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rainbow4321 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:53 PM
Response to Reply #23
46. Her camp knew this before the caucus was even started
"No lawsuits ***before*** TX primary election day"
Remember that non-denial when there were rumblings that she was going to sue TDP for wanting to expedite the caucus results--they were going to(and did) put forth $60,000 toward a voluntary system that would have counties get their results in faster since the race was so tight and everyone was wanting the results.

TX laws allow 3 full days to get the caucus vote results into the state but with the race being watched around the country so closely they wanted to give quicker results. HRC got wind of this, threw a fit, her campaign manager said that "rushing the caucus results would only give half baked and flimsy results" and then inplied lawsuits.

HRC got her wish, was able to claim a "TX victory" that night (even though some TX caucuses were STILL going on past the media announcement that she "won TX")---our precinct caucus was delayed by 2 hours and didn't END til 10:30 pm (CST)...so not only were all the caucus votes in TX not counted yet, they were not even CAST yet when she amd the media was up there saying with the ONLY primary votes TX was in her win column (the words "caucus votes" were NO where in the TV talking heads vocab that night).

Give it up, HRC...TX voters made their decision..the results have dribbled in slowly just as you wanted so they are far from "half baked and flimsy". Wonder what her internal numbers are showing about March 29th when the final TX caucus numbers are due?? Has she lost even more delegates than she thought she would?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoxFan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #3
52. His invisible friend "Dave" told him it was so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
graywarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. Think, or Know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. Has Hillary released all of her tax records since 2001, her earmarks, and her papers as First Lady?
Looks to me that your Queen needs to come clean first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PseudoIntellect Donating Member (701 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. How do you know this? Because there's no way he won?
jlake...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Little Star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #2
20. I read a TX blog right after the caucuses and those people were
not happy about the intimidation that went on at some of the caucus sites. Wish I had kept a link. Those signatures need to be verified. Obama people were the first to praise Kuch for wanting a recount in NH that found NOTHING.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kittycat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #2
22. Really? Because I read stories about the same handwriting for Clinton Votes.
In one district. Sore loser.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. Then we should have a recount/verification and see what went on.... maybe
Obama will pick up more delegates.
I'm not afraid of verification - why are you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kittycat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. I'm not. I"m just sick of your lying, crying sour grapes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. When did I lie or cry sour grapes?
I have congratulated Obama on all of his wins... or at least not said anything.... what's your damage?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #29
33. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #22
44. Fine
if both sides think there were problems, what's wrong with verifying the signatures? Sounds like everybody wins.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #2
41. Were you here? Did you participate?
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 08:25 PM by sparosnare
Hillary's petty crusade against Texas caucus goers is pathetic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thevoiceofreason Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #2
45. Bullshit
The election judges verify the voters when they come in to vote in the primary. From that point, the voters get a stamp on their voter rgistration card showing they voted democratic, or they got other verification that they voted democratic (a "receipt").

Hillary better be damn careful with this. First, it will net her nothing. Second, the area most ripe for voter fraud (that would be turned up by "inspecting" signatures is the valley -- which went 80-20 for Hillary. the African American precincts always vote, and vote heavy. She's really screwed up this time.

Final note: Caucus (precinct convention) goers do not "sign in." They just fill out their information -- no signatures. She's gonna get spanked hard on this one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nitrogenica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:28 PM
Response to Original message
4. The politics of division demand recounts until they win.
Go figure. Heck shoot for that 50.0000001% by dividing us, go ahead.

That political strategy is dying fast.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:28 PM
Response to Original message
5. Count every vote...in the states that vote for me
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Major Hogwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. Apparently.
Not a good idea. Because this will cause her to lose more later than sooner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:28 PM
Response to Original message
6. Appalling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cooley Hurd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:30 PM
Response to Original message
10. How KatherineHarrisy of them...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:30 PM
Response to Original message
12. Tie it up in the courts, I called this one
and she has permanently lost my vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #12
21. Mine, too. This is the final straw. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:31 PM
Response to Original message
14. Because she is losing. She doesn't want to move TX out of her short win column.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rainbow4321 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #14
43. The caucus votes are not on her (short) win column
Just as Bill Clinton said prior (quoted in TX newspapers) to that Super Tuesday as he encouraged HRC voters to go and caucus that night..."It would be a shame for her to win during the day, only to lose come night time". She lost the caucus vote and THAT is why she wants the results challenged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-16-08 07:18 AM
Response to Reply #43
58. But, she still claims Texas as a win.
The delegate count for the Primary and Caucus combined, Give Texas to Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
15. She needs to stall it as long as possible.
When the story "breaks" (the one we all already know) that she was claiming to have "won" texas, but actually got less delegates, it'll be a media feeding frenzy, unless she can get a few more wins under he belt, first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
31. What's the purpose of this? Does she really think they're going to find
enough "fake people" to make Obama lose delegates? Or is this a way to simply stall the results for some reason? Who foots the bill for this--Texas taxpayers? The Texas Dem party?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #31
35. Stalling til PA? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. But it wouldn't hurt her much, the media has already (falsely) proclaimed
her the victor, and any new declaration about the caucus and delegates is not going to be noticed. Just seems like a strange thing to do, when she's already making an obnoxious cheating ass of herself regarding Florida and Michigan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. But if Obama is honestly proclaimed the victor by the media, that's
one less state she can claim. She doesn't want to make it public, or wants to hold off for as long as possible. I don't understand the method to her madness either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WolverineDG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #31
39. I want her to piss of the TDP party structure
the majority of them are Hillary supporters. I'm sure they're going to love her for draining the TDP bank account before November.


dg
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
antigop Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #31
47. I'm rather glad about it drawing attention ....
Edited on Sat Mar-15-08 08:59 PM by antigop
to the ridiculous second part of the Texas two-step.

And before anyone gives me any cr*p about being a HRC supporter, CHECK MY PREVIOUS POSTS ON DU. I HAVE NEVER SUPPORTED HRC. I have been one of the most vocal opponents of her positions on outsourcing and h1-b visas. I despise the DLC and have said so on various threads over the last year.

But I also despise the Texas system.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burythehatchet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
32. sure, get rendell to pay for it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rainbow4321 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:28 PM
Response to Original message
42. Like the three forged student signatures for HRC at UT Austin??
Those will be the first to go....with many more to follow, no doubt.

My guess is that she didn't refer to those 3 signatures in her complaint.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
48. I think this is going to hurt her with Super delegates.
I think it is going to hurt her with uncommitted voters.


WHy is she doing this???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Upton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #48
51. Desperation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ORDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
50. I just want to inject a little reason into this.
No one is going to check all 1 million signatures/IDs, they will take a random sampling and extrapolate from that. That is common procedure for, say, verifying initiative and referendum petitions. Still, it's going to slow things down, and belies Clinton's lack of confidence in her chances.

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hart2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
53. uh, Sounds like she knows she lost big time! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave29 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-15-08 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
54. genius! Claim the results of the election are not valid until your rules
are instated. Where have I seen this before?

I know it had something to do with Texas... or maybe it was Florida.

Maybe it had something to do with both.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Sep 22nd 2014, 01:35 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC