Clinton frets over possible union pressure in Nevada vote

CNN: January 18, 2008
Clinton frets over possible union pressure in Nevada vote

ELKO, Nevada (CNN) – Hillary Clinton expressed concern that undue union pressure might play a role in Saturday’s Nevada caucuses, saying that some members are being told they should either caucus for a particular candidate, or just stay home.

“I have some concerns about the process, and I want to be really clear about this to everyone. I am afraid that some people may feel that they can't come, or they shouldn't come, or they can't support the candidate of their choice,” Clinton said at an Elko, Nevada campaign event Friday.

“We know that there are some unions in the south that are telling people who to caucus for… so I am calling on all the candidates and all of the unions to make it clear to their supporters and members that people in Nevada — a free and independent state with a very independent people — are free to stand up for the candidate of their choice,” she said, adding that “There should be no interference with anybody's right to caucus.'

Clinton has been endorsed by twice as many Nevada unions as John Edwards, and more than twice as many as Barack Obama. But the 60,000-member Culinary Workers Union, which has endorsed Obama, dwarfs the others combined in size. Some of Clinton’s supporters recently filed an unsuccessful lawsuit over caucus voting at casino sites, where many Culinary Workers Union members are employed....

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/18/clinton-frets-over-possible-union-pressure-in-nevada-vote/

What's wrong with her saying that? Or better said, why wouldn't she?

though does it.

... I want to read about it, otherwise I won't even know!

... the rights of unions and ensure the prosecution of corporations that dare to stop people from organizing.

They tried very hard though, I'll give them credit for that.

I wonder if there is anyway to monitor the process? Of course they are not going to pressure the workers in public. But, if my job were on the line, and I had to publically go against my boss, I would likely not do it!

Disenfranchisement of voters occurs in many ways, which we should be against all of the ways it can occur.

But obviously on DU, this does not matter anymore.

Between this and DK getting that recount in NH, this makes us look like a bunch of idiots.

Election Fraud has been one of my biggest concerns and now I see that as long as it helps your candidate it really doesn't matter, there is no principle left.

and why doesn't he do it in a state where it really might matter. Like in one where there is no verifiable paper trail.

This is a travesti by any means - having to tell your boss you disagree to his face.

at the naiveté of your statement

I've seen plenty of members tell the union leadership off.

I loved union pay, but the local organization sucked, especially for women

I am truly glad to be far far away from them now

:eyes:

Damn, that's just f**king shameless! - but not unlike the conniving nature of your candidate and her minions.

Don't let HRC *use* people of all colors against one another? ... as well as one each, SHAMELESS portrayal of "the damsel in distress" on the side. :crazy:

Hey! Let's get real?

"In 2003, a handful of concerned Iowans formed the Iowa Presidential Watch PAC (IPW-PAC). The mission: To hold accountable the Democrat presidential candidates bombarding the state of Iowa with their comments and allegations, and to make citizens aware of false statements or claims by the Democrat candidates. A website was created – iowapresidentialwatch.com -- to report, defend and set the record straight."

Loud obnoxious blow-hards.

So sure the union membership doesn't like her

today is minimized.

Can't people see that they are behaving like the RNC by attempting to suppress the vote?!?

will loose. In another thread, I replied to someone who didn't like Kucinich winning the fight to recount NH. Why on earth, if the law states it is possible, would someone protest someone's decision to do a recount?

For these older DU members who protest Kuchinich's recount efforts, it would be fascinating to look at past posts on how they felt about recounting Ohio in 2004. Methinks it would be a study in hypocrisy.

it was a call for "fairness to union workers".. I imagine this issue will be dealt with again at a later date.

Having worked for one of the Clinton endorsed unions. You're right. It's what unions do at election time, pressure their members.