From KOS Edwards Supporters Bullied in Nevada.A First Hand Account!

Edwards supporters bullied in Nevada -
by kevin22262
Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 02:53:15 PM PST
I thought all of you might be interested in this.

This is what turns a lot of people off of politics and off of the other candidates.

The following is from the John Edwards blog. Read it, comment on it but mocking it will only prove my point.

Onward we go...

The mentioned diary is below.

kevin22262's diary :: ::
Edwards supporters bullied in Nevada

http://blog.johnedwards.com/...

The night before the Nevada caucus, the Clinton Precinct Captain stopped by my home. She said she knew I was leaning towards John Edwards.

She went on to say that the Edwards people were already pulling out and asked that I join Hillary because, like Richardson, Edwards would not be a viable candidate. (Imagine - she actually compared John to Richardson) The Hillary supporter also said that she didn't think our precinct had a captain for Edwards.

Yet, I knew John would not be giving up. The Hillary people have a lot of nerve pretending that John is not even in the race. He easily won the debate. Nevada should have showed him more support. Instead, I wonder how many people decided to support Hillary or Barack only because they were told that John didn't have a chance. I know this was happening because my own mother fell into this category. She ended up supporting Edwards only because I called and told her she shouldn't support one of the other candidates merely because she didn't think John would win. The caucus system would take care of that. Others may not have given him a chance, due only to people spreading lies.

When me and my husband arrived at the caucus sight, we were surprised that there was no section set up for uncommitted voters. I wanted to talk to the uncommitted people and tell them how we need John to represent us, the American people. Instead, I had to put up with Hillary and Barack supporters booing and yelling and making ugly comments as I attempted to find out if there were any undecideds among them. I did indeed find some, but it was very difficult to sway anyone, or even attempt to sway anyone, surrounded by these other candidates' supporters. By the way, our precinct only needed 8 people for John to be a viable candidate. I strongly believe that we would have had a chance to get those 8 if there had been an uncommitted section.

The worst part of the caucus was having to leave the John Edwards section and move over to the Obama section. I truly believe John is the right man for the job, but Obama was the best second choice. Still, it was hard to give up. For some, it was even more difficult. Me and my husband had already decided our second choice, while others had not. For those among the Edwards supporters who had not made up their minds for a second candidate, the Clinton and Obama supporters made their decision extremely difficult. One lady was completely surrounded by members of both groups and successfully driven to tears. She ended up leaving without turning in her preference slip.

Lastly, after moving, I stood next to an Obama supporter who was practically laughing at the aforementioned Edwards supporter, for being overcome by emotion. It made me nauseous. But, she said something that made me chuckle. She said that she, the Edwards supporter, should have known this was coming and made up her mind. She said she should have known from watching tv! I told her that some people don't believe everything the tv tells them. Her response - "How did you find out about the caucus then?"

In the end, I thought the caucus was an ugly experience and I wish John well in other states. Nevada is definitely driven by the media. It sounds like tv ads may have been the way to go, in Nevada.

Krystal Hernandez
Las Vegas, Nevada

it is not a fair solution. It is a way to legally disenfranchise people.

because verbal evisceration will be the least of it. I would have insisted on being "undecided" had I been forbidden to support Edwards.

I'm not entirely clear on how a caucus works. :shrug:

editted for speeling

:rofl:

Do you know if the caucus goer is forced to move, or can they stand firm?

uncommitted.

by disenfranchising small groups of voters. A candidate (or undecided) needs 15% to be viable (that is to get any delegates at all from the precinct). Apparently there were only 53 people in this precinct. (since the OP said Edwards needed 8 people to be viable.) You can stay in a small group (the Kucinich, Edwards, or undecided caucus) but unless you have 15%, then staying in that group basically means your vote does not count.

Which is how Edwards could drop from 14% to just 5% (the 5% coming from larger caucus sites where Edwards was able to hit the 15% mark.) Here's a theoretical example. Suppose a caucus site has 10 delegates and suppose 100 people show up to caucus. There will be a first round with these results (as an example)
Kucinich - 10
undecided - 12
Edwards - 14
Obama - 28
Clinton - 36

At this point, Obama would have 3 delegates, Clinton would have 4, with three remaining to be awarded. However, Kucinich, undecided, and Edwards would all have zero delegates. In order to get a delegate, Edwards needs to "steal" somebody from another group, either Kucinich, undecided, Obama, or Clinton. The same is true for Kucinich and undecided. In order to get a delegate, they need to steal somebody from one of the other groups. It becomes tougher if there is no group of undecideds. Also if the final vote ends up the same as my earlier example, I think Obama would get 4 delegates and Clinton 6.

Important to note though, that a delegate is not a DELEGATE. Delegates from the caucuses goto District Conventions where they elect DELEGATES who goto Denver.

At least that is my understanding (so far) of how we are doing it in Kansas. Nevada may be completely different. For one thing, they seem to have more caucus sites. We have two sites for our entire county of 73,000 people. I am not sure how that will work out, if we will get 50 people there or 5,000 (which would overwhelm our location which only holds about 800 people.

rather than not voting.

and undecideds. No bad stuff that I know of.

You get to deal with everyone from ass holes in it for a job or another cynical reason to the saintly folks who feel inspired...

Let me tell you from experience, when the County Prosecutor, or the County Commissioner, or one of there minions, are breathing down your neck to support a candidate you can't stomach then you know from politics...

There are no rules of behavior...

And who ever wins, wins...

And I don't take stock in them. And the BS second choice is just that. It should be YOUR VOTE IS COUNTED THE FIRST TIME. No wonder Nevada was moved up this cycle. Iowa and Nevada gave Obama and Clinton votes they wouldn't have gotten otherwise, which skews the real picture in my view.

Who's the bully?

another candidate based on the premise John couldn't win.Her mother was apparently an Edwards supporter that had been told NOT to caucus for him.

(My mother...) ended up supporting Edwards only because I called and told her she shouldn't support one of the other candidates merely because she didn't think John would win.

Sorry, but that is not bullying. Encouraging someone to caucus for whoever they really want to support is not bullying.

For the life of me I can't understand why any state would have them! It's just to damned easy to bully others into voting for your candidate if they are undecided, and it's to easy to pull dirty tricks at a caucus. A simple primary is the only way to go, and everyone can vote their own conscience without being bullied into voting for someone else!

Thaks for your post.

Their supporters say it is the ultimate expression of democracy. But it is really the ultimate expression of peer pressure and intimidation. The key part of expressing democracy is the secured secret ballot. There is no secrecy in a caucus. So I will (reluctantly) go to my state's caucus on the 5th and be there for John. If he isn't viable (in reality or otherwise) I will leave and not go over to Heckle's or Jeckle's side.

I really think the DNC needs to eliminate caucuses starting in the 2012 elections, just like they got rid of the "winner take all" primaries in the 1980s. I won't hold my breath.

Where is the MEDIA OUTRAGE?

I recall one in Ohio in 2006 where Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones was booed and heckled and disruptors tried to start shoving match with Sherrod Brown and his wife.

At least two reports of Clinton operatives telling the uncommitteds and Edwards supporters, once their numbers were deemed not viable, that they had to leave. Whether these tactics succeeded or not, I do not know.

On edit: This suggests that any Edwards supporters and uncommitteds that would've gone to Obama did not have a chance.

:(

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/19/162953/644/790/439573

Looks like Edwards supporters already left for Clinton and Obama without our knowledge. That's messed up.

Hillary's team apparently did, they would have gotten those 8 people.

that Clinton and Obama have he would be competitive in more states. But then if he had taken money from Rupert Murdoch and the health insurance companies like Clinton did and the financial sector like Obama, I wouldn't be supporting him.

he has enjoyed from the beginning here more than 80% name recognition. He campaigned and basically lived in Iowa for the last 4-5 years.

Apparently the more people get to know him, the less they like him.

for our country from getting out in any election such as media exposure and corporate media biases and whether a candidate is willing to compromise their message by taking money from the same interests that got this country in the mess it is in. However, the degree to which a candidate wins the popularity contest does not make their ideas more or less valid and truthful. BTW, John came in 2nd in Iowa in case you didn't notice. I will take John Edwards over the candidates who won this popularity contest (and apparently also whose supporters were willing to harass others who didn't go along) any day. I intend to continue to support him, to caucus for him in my state, and to fight for what's right, while you, apparently, are willing to settle for the popularity contest.

Nice knowing you.

Edwards has higher favorability ratings than Clinton or Obama.

He just knows when the system is going to be rigged against him by the Dem party.

Edwards toughest battles will be in the primaries, because DLC Dems dislike and fear him so much. In the GE, Edwards will have an easier time because he is well liked by voters.

DLC Dems are his greatest enemies. Once he gets past them, the public will be allowed to have a say.

... the mafia, serious big-time crime, Mormons that behave like a plague of Republican insects, prostitution everywhere, and lots of crap. Lovely state. (not)

Rather refreshing i must admit :)

Hillbot. I really dislike feigned outrage, especially for a Hillary Corporate candidate to espouse feelings for "the little guy". That is clearly JE province.

Anyway, nice job saracat! K&R, gladly!

:wtf: