Why Hillary is only hurting herself with that lawsuit..

[sf_331]

Texas Party Warns Against Legal Action
Feb 29, 12:01 PM (ET)

By BETH FOUHY



LAREDO, Texas (AP) - Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign has raised the possibility of a challenge to Texas' primary and caucus rules just days before the contest, drawing a warning against legal action from the state's Democratic Party.

Top strategists for Democratic rival Barack Obama said Friday they supported the party's action, suggesting the Clinton campaign was trying to block the reporting of caucus results.

===================================================

Im an Obama supporter from Laredo Texas, where I already voted in Early Voting and will vote again during the Caucus, a legal normal thing to do in Texas.

Here is the thing though: Laredo is so Pro-Hillary, its not even close. Ill meet 4 Hillary supporters for every Obama supporter. Doesnt help that Hillary came and visited this town and Obama didnt come within 200 miles of South Texas.

My City is 94% Hispanic, no joke..
Stopping us from voting is like shooting yourself in the foot, Hillary.
I aint complaining though - this only helps Obama win in Texas.

[Enrique]

1. then why is Obama trying to stop it?

[Divernan]

2. Noooooooooooooo. Hillary's trying to stop it.

Obama supports the Texas Democratic Party in refusing to cave in to HRC's last minute attempt to force a change in the long-standing rules. These are the same rules under which Bill Clinton ran twice in Texas presidential primary elections.

[Enrique]

3. I meant why is Obama trying to stop Hillary's action

the OP is saying that Hillary's action benefits Obama.

Obama's objecting to Hillary's action suggests that he thinks it harms him.

[Bluerthanblue]

5. Maybe he's tired of seeing her hurt herself-

and then being accused of his doing it to her?

"Co-dependent" no more?


:shrug:

peace

[adoraz]

10. because its good press for Obama an terrible for Hillary

if you were in texas and you read "Hillary tries to stop our voting, Obama tries to save it", what would you think of that? and be honest.

[desi]

4. "Normal" to vote twice for the same candidate

in the same election cycle on the same day. Yeah only in Texas....

[Zachstar]

6. Why are you making a big deal about it now?

The time to do something was many months ago! But then I guess there was no need to because Clinton was supposed to have this done by super tuesday?

Common now! The more this goes on the more damage she is doing. To HER future.

[desi]

11. Who's making a big deal about it?

Certainly not me. I simply find it odd to have people vote twice in one state. "One man, One vote." Why not have the entire nation voting twice?

[Zachstar]

17. Tell you what. If you still care after this election process is done PLEASE bring it up again.

There is no more time to change it now. Me.. I'm neutral on the topic. And it isn't because Obama might win. Id say the same even if Clinton was going to win.

If you find it odd then the time to change it is for the 2012 election. I assume you are a Texan and not someone from another state trying to change how Texas does things right? I assume because woah that will have the complete opposite effect.

[desi]

20. I don't care, one way or the other. Why? Because it is beyond anybody but the

state legislature to change it if they so desire. It matters not. Texas Democrats need to work on getting rid of the Publican majority and Governor and go from there.

[WolverineDG]

8. Bill seemed happy enough with it in 1992

so why are they whining about it now?

Oh yeah, they're losing.

dg

[City Lights]

25. Bingo!

:hi:

[Igel]

32. Not just normal, I found out a few days ago ...

I could only caucus with the dems if I show up with certification that I'd already voted in the dem primary.

Not is it legal to vote (or sort-of-vote) twice, but the only way to participate in the caucus is to have voted.

[Zachstar]

7. Hey Clinton! Here is a tip: DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS!

[desi]

Agreed...

Leave Texas to its owners...the Republican Party.

[rodeodance]

19. "Spokesmen for both campaigns said there were no plans to sue ahead of the March 4 election."

"Spokesmen for both campaigns said there were no plans to sue ahead of the March 4 election."
http://www.kansascity.com/449/story/510802.html

[Evergreen Emerald]

9. Every time Obama looses he threatens a lawsuit --and even campaigned to change the rules

to help his supporters. When the reverse is true--Clinton damages the country. Clinton is evil for doing the very same thing Obama is doing.

What a load of double standard BS.

[Window]

12. .

[WolverineDG]

13. Um, when have the rules been changed to help him?

are you referring to the change agreed to by everyone in March for the Nevada caucuses? And I don't recall him threatening a lawsuit anywhere else he lost. It was Kuchinich who challenged the New Hampshire vote, btw. At my local precinct caucus training, it was the Clintonistas who whined about the rules & how the results would be released & if they could tape the proceedings because they were afraid :eyes: of being intimidated.

dg

[Inuca]

15. WHAT?!?!

Posts like this are almost scary. What lawsuit threat is associated with the Obama campaign? What rules are they campaigning to change? What reality do you live in? For your sake, I hope you do not really mean what you wrote, and it is just an expression of your frustration, which I could very well understand.

[Evergreen Emerald]

21. Where have you been?

The first state he lost, he called for re-count, and threatened lawsuits. In Las Vegas he advocated to change the caucusing rules to allow certain people to be able to caucus, and yet not everyone could change their way of caucusing.

Indeed, in every state she won, including CA, he has suggested that Clinton cheated to win--and threatened to challenge votes.

[Inuca]

24. Really?

Obama never asked for a recount in NH, Kucinich did. In NV, Clinton tried to change the caucusing rules that have been decided on for roughly one year. As to your last sentence, I have no idea what you are talking about (not that the first two sentences made much sense, but at least they were somewhat related to a mirror-image of reality). As I said earlier: scary.

[Evergreen Emerald]

26. Obama's camp DID threaten to call for a recount, Kucinich did it.

[karynnj]

16. Links please -

Obama has lost 11 states to HRC, I want a link in each to a threat of legal action by the Obama campaign itself. The only one I know of is one in NV, where it specifically is not to change delegates awarded, but to deal with alleged problems - closing doors 30 minutes before posted.

HRC's allies lose a law suit in NV.

[rodeodance]

14. READ this please before you look more FOOLISH:

"Spokesmen for both campaigns said there were no plans to sue ahead of the March 4 election."
http://www.kansascity.com/449/story/510802.html

[adoraz]

18. what about after?

couldn't they still sue after the results?

I may be wrong.

[NoPasaran]

22. This is America

You can pretty much sue before, during, or after anything that happens. But in this case THERE IS NO FUCKING LAWSUIT.

[WolverineDG]

30. Yet, but one is in the works

I was at the precinct & delegate training in Laredo & the Clintonistas asked two questions that made absolutely no sense until I saw this thread & story with the dateline of Laredo.

Question 1 from Richard Raymond: Whining about "negative media coverage" of Clinton, he whined further about the phoning in results process, with the direct line & specific code for each precinct--how this would lead to "confusion" & "lack of control" over the results with the media in a negative feeding frenzy saying Hillary lost. :eyes:

Question 2 from a known Clintonista: If the caucuses could be audiotaped. This after Ken Bailey had already said TWICE that the proceedings were open to the media & the public. Why ask this question unless you are trying to gather evidence of bias? :eyes:

dg

[shrdlu]

23. Get a grip. There is no lawsuit.

This is just lawyers popping off.

[Thurston Howell III]

27. Though no lawsuit has been filed yet, if Hillary does win

Texas using a lawsuit and gets the nom she WILL lose the GE!

[suston96]

28. I asked once before: Is it true that Texas Democrats can vote during the day in the primary....

...and then again in the evening in the caucuses - for the same candidate?

Is that correct? Does anyone know?

[Divernan]

31. My understanding is that when an individual votes, they get a

caucus admission "ticket" of some sort (it may actually be their receipt for voting), which will have their name on it and be stamped with either "Republican" or "Democrat" depending upon which primary they voted in. They also get the address, time and date of the caucus meeting for their area. The caucuses are all held only on the night of the election day, but Texas has early voting, so many people will be voting or will have voted on an earlier day, but attend the caucus on election day.

It is generally referred to as the Texas Two Step. (And I do love that dance - wish my SO knew how to do it.)

If anyone thinks I got this wrong, please correct me.

[cooolandrew]

29. ...