ABC News picks up story of Hillary voter suppression tactics in Nevada..

Tough-Guy Politics on the Vegas Strip
January 12, 2008 7:58 PM

Two days after a key Nevada union of casino employees endorsed Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, allies of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, filed a lawsuit to block the special "at-large" casino precincts set up months ago for those very casino employees.



http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/01/tough-guy-pol-1.html

Wasn't it enough for her to steal, "It's personal"?

Without looking into the actual merits of the complaint*, yes.

*casino workers being given a disproportionate number of delegates. Teachers who will be required to assist with caucus at schools they teach in will not, themselves, be able to caucus.

"Teachers who will be required to assist with caucus at schools they teach in will not, themselves, be able to caucus."

Amazing

Do you even read the stuff???

Now I can see why the GOP stood by Bush for so many years when it was obvious what he was doing was wrong. When people become loyal to politicians...they'll excuse damn near anything.

I am utterly amazed at how much rationalizing is advanced here by HRC supporters. Justify anything and everything.
And we have been so critical of those dead ender Repubs. Sadly in both cases they do not realize how desperate it all sounds.

needs to be able to trust that the system is not gamed -- and when attempts are made, they need to be brought out into the open.

I am going to donate another $25 to Dennis to thank him for keeping the NH thing in the open.

Cudos to ABC for not allowing this to fall between the cracks.

They have me on ignore by now so I don't bother too.

It was said as long agto as Spring 2004 during the Kery-Dean Primaries that in New Hampshire, where it was paper counts, Dean won, and Machine counts, Kerry won.

The DLC is not very above board. It is their Hillary or no one.

Unless you believe that people who work in the casinos have a right to be unfairly over-represented compared to other Las Vegas residents, including teachers who will be required to work at their schools to help other caucus-goers, while they themselves will not be allowed to caucus.

Hindsight is always 20/20.

Forgive any typos -- my select and paste for .pdf isn't picking up, so I typed as I was reading.

Observation: The teachers have volunteered to work for the Union, not the school.

Observation: This has abcsolutely nothing to do with the strip caucus locations. If the strip locations were closed and the union scheduled teacher A to work in caucus B, then we are back to the circular argument.

Observation: The challenge they are presenting will not be resolved by removing strip caucus locations, only by going back to being a primary state as opposed to a caucus state.

Observation: The decision to add At Large caucus' locations was made in December of 2006, yet it is now a disenfranchisement problem only now?

I do appreciate you posting the link to the brief. It was an interesting read to see what all of the line items were on this.

she says nothing when others use these tactics to benefit her,thus absolving her of responsibility for the actions of others.

Just wait until I unleash Chi-Chi. My robotic pterodactyl. All of us voter suppressing Clinton supporters have one. Chi-Chi swoops down upon identified Obama and Edwards supporters and flies off into the Nevada desert and drops them into a volcano.

But you shan't worry, to avoid all that annoying screaming and thrashing around Chi-Chi provides in flight cocktails.


Have a safe trip, Chi-Chi!

Yeah!op!:yoiks::yoiks::yoiks:

Union (which has not endorsed HRC) would dare ask for the opportunity
to vote.

Who is doing the suppressing. They set up the Caucuses right by
the Casinos---easy for Casino Workers to vote.

The Place and Time make it near impossible for the other Nevadans
to vote.

Since the Casino UNion has endorsed Obama, I would not throw
a stone that could be thrown right back at me.

Democrats are not in the habit of suppressing votes. They are
usually fighting for African Americans when votes have really been
suppressed.

a little perspective please,

Oddly, they didn't seem to have a problem with it the last 14 months. I wonder what happened to change their mind?

Perspective, indeed. :hi:

They set up at-large precincts in locations with 4,000 or more employees to attempt to give a voice to the largest number of people possible.

Noon on Saturday at the local precinct is as convenient as it gets for someone who wants to caucus. If the teachers don't want to work, they should take it up with their union and have them hire peope.

People who might be part of a union that supports Obama. That's all. What's the harm in that? :eyes:

2000 and 2004 elections when someone "on our side" starts
using the same tactics.

Credibility shot, thanks to Camp Clinton.

Again.

and a whole host of other people won't be able to vote either.

And the Democratic Party creates their rules, per Nevada law. The time to fight about this was back in Dec 2006 when the process started.

disenfranchised (by their work) is undemocratic.

Ultimately there should be laws on the books that every employer must allow an employee time to vote. But just because this inclusive action is not a full effort is no reason to condemn it.

Why would Hillary fear lower class workers anyway? Maybe she should just spend some time getting their votes instead of trying to disinfranchise them?

And on top of it, the casino workers are over-represented in delegate counts. I don't know why the teachers waited to sue. Maybe they thought the state party would correct the situation on its own.

The average casino caucus gets 80.

That's most of what the teachers are objecting to.

They finally included Hillary's comments near the bottom:

“I know about the lawsuit that has been filed and I hope that it can be resolved by the courts and by the state party because obviously we want as many people as possible to be able to participate that is the whole idea.”

But wow, they use that "allies of" Hillary tag a few times.

And the OP - makes it sound like the article says Clinton is behind the lawsuit. The article tries like hell to imply such, but doesn't say the Clinton camp is behind it.

What would some here say if it were a story on Obama's allies trying to fan hatred of gays to pick up the evangelical vote, and then I posted a thread saying Obama was preaching hatred of gays? What's the difference?

picked up on this. It's why we have Blogs, we get the jump on it.