A letter reveals how Team Obama steals caucus wins - a Texas caucus review

[papau]

here are significant questions about whether the precinct conventions were conducted in accordance with the Party's Delegate Selection Plan and Rules. On the night of the caucus itself we brought many instances of these irregularities to the attention of the State Party. The campaign received in excess of 2,000 complaints of rules violations, indicating widespread violations of the Party's rules, including the following specific occurrences that are clear violations of specific rules:

• Temporary Chair packets were released by the election judge prior to 7:00 pm
• Sign-in sheets were filled out before 7:00 pm
• Precincts were consolidated for purposes of holding a convention
• Precinct caucuses began before polls closed for the primary
• Ineligible participants voted or ineligible delegates were elected, including participants who were not registered voters, participants who did not vote in the primary, provisional voters whose votes were counted, and no verification was made of the eligibility of participants or delegates
• Accurate written records of participants, presidential preferences, and elected delegates were not kept
• Participants' names and presidential preference were entered on sign-in sheets by someone other than the eligible individual participant
• Results were taken from a head count or hand count rather than the written roll
• Delegate votes were not ratified by the precinct convention
• Failure to follow Robert's Rules of Order at the precinct convention

We have had several conversations with the State Party since March 4, including conversations with Chad Dunn, regarding the procedures that the State Party intends to follow to insure that the rules were followed and that only the votes of eligible participants would be considered. We understood that we were to receive a memorandum regarding that process, but were advised yesterday that instead we would be invited to a briefing on Monday, March 17.

Last week our Counsel, Lyn Utrecht, was told by Mr. Dunn that the State Party intended to verify the eligibility of participants and that the Party's IT people were working on a system for doing that electronically. On Tuesday the 11th, when Ms. Utrecht contacted Mr. Dunn to inquire about the status of the memorandum regarding the procedures, she was advised that the State Party no longer intended to verify the eligibility of participants or delegates because the Party would not have the ability to do that before the County Conventions. This was confirmed by Mr. Dunn yesterday.

Therefore, it is our understanding that the results will be counted and delegates awarded based on a count of votes without any determination by the State Party of eligibility of the participants, and without any certification by the Precinct Chairs or County and Senate District Chairs that they completed a thorough review of the eligibility of participants and delegate candidates.

Thus it will be left to the campaigns to file credentials challenges against those delegates awarded based on the votes of ineligible participants, without the State Party making any effort to identify ineligible participants. We were advised yesterday that we will begin to receive copies of the scanned sign-in sheets sometime early next week and that it will not be until the end of next week when we will receive all of this data. In order to review this, the campaigns will also need access to the voter rolls to determine who voted in the primary held that day. While the State Party has indicated that it will request this information from the larger counties and provide it, it is unclear how soon that information will be available. For the smaller counties, the campaigns must request it from each county.

We believe this is in direct contravention of the Rules, which require that the Party determine the eligibility of participants and that only the votes of eligible participants are counted. Moreover, if the Party's reason for not ensuring that only eligible participants are counted is based on the fact that the Party cannot complete the review process prior to the scheduled date of the County and Senate District Conventions, the campaigns can't possibly complete this review in a timely fashion. Credentials challenges are presently due March 26.
We believe that (1) it is a violation of the Party's Delegate Selection Plan and Rules for the Party not to ensure that the eligibility of participants was determined before their votes are counted; and (2) if the Party cannot complete this task in time to hold the next level conventions on March 29, those conventions must be postponed until such time as accurate presidential preference counts can be made based on a review of each and every sign in sheet to determine eligibility of participants and delegates.

It is a violation of the rights of legitimate participants to have their true vote count distorted by violations of the Party's Rules. It is the Party's responsibility to ensure the integrity of the precinct convention process by making sure that the Rules were followed and that the final official results of the precinct conventions are accurate and in compliance with the Rules.

Therefore, we respectfully request that the Party explain to both campaigns what procedures will be followed to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the precinct convention results and agree to postpone the County and Senate District Conventions until such time as that process can be completed.

We look forward to working with you to ensure that the votes of the people who participated in the March 4 primary and precinct conventions are accurately counted.

Sincerely,

/s/

Garry Mauro
Authorized Representative

[question everything]

1. But, but... Teflon Obama can do no wrong

and any complaint about caucus goers, most of them were African Americans, would be deemed racist, anyway.

This is why caucuses are so bad for democracy. They practically generate the rules as they go along. Because they are considered more "grass roots" anything that happen there is "justified" by people's power.

[jasmine621]

43. Don't blame Obama for stupid Dem rules and caucuses.

If the Dems don't change the rules next time around, they will have to live with the consequences.

[tabatha]

2. I don't see the name Obama anywhere in the article.

I have seen a list of cheating rules come out of the Clinton campaign..

[sueragingroz]

3. link?

[thunder rising]

4. The only mention of Obama IS IN YOUR TITLE!! ASSHAT

[indimuse]

5. r& r!!

..

[Forkboy]

12. I think some R&R would be good for many here.

[indimuse]

14. ooops...

so true. :)

[UALRBSofL]

37. What this means they will be going through the voter registration and compare it to the sign in

sheets with a fine tooth comb to make sure the complaints they received were any reflection on the caucus results. This is not unprecedented and it's done quite often, just so the folks whom are green to the primary's and caucus' may not know.

[IdClaire]

6. very interesting.. glad they are doing this

[K Gardner]

7. LOL.. I love the smell of desperation in the morning.

[bunnies]

8. Not me.

It smells like rancid sewage on a 100 degree day. :puke:

[ProSense]

9. No wonder you didn't post the link. It's Hillary's campaign trying to cheat again

Clinton: Delay the Delegate Count (Because I'll Lose)

The Hillary Clinton camp has tried every avenue to delay reporting on the delegates from the Texas primary. They tried to intimidate the Texas Democratic Party prior to the primary. That failed. On election night, they threw up a duststorm of objections about irregulatories. Now, the Clinton camp us urging the state party to delay the March 29 county and senate conventions, where details of how 67 delegates picked in the county caucuses will be announced.

Why are they doing this? Because they are losing.

CNN has confirmed that Barack Obama won the Texas caucuses with 38 convention delegates, compared to 29 for Clinton. The Texas primary is a complicated, two-step process. Clinton won more delegates than Obama in the popular-vote portion, 65 to 61. With his likely caucus-delegate haul, looks like Obama won the overall statewide delegate lead, 99 to 94 -- or once superdelegate endorsements are factored in, 109 to 106.

Hillary Clinton declared victory in Texas and moved on. As for these pesky details, like delegates, that's the last thing the Clinton campaign wants to talk about.

Here, after the jump, is the Clinton campaign letter urging Texas Democratic Party Chairman Boyd Ritchie to delay the March 29 county/state senate conventions:


March 14, 2008


BY FEDERAL EXPRESS, EMAIL
AND FACSIMILE TO [phone]

Mr. Boyd L. Richie
Chairman, Texas Democratic Party
State Democratic Executive Committee
505 W. 12th Street, Suite 200
Austin, Texas 78701

Dear Chairman Richie:

We want to congratulate you on the extraordinary turnout of voters across the State of Texas who participated in the March 4 Democratic presidential primary and precinct conventions. We appreciate the unprecedented administrative challenges the high turnout presented. Fortunately, the Texas Democratic Party has under its Rules and the Texas Delegate Selection Plan requirements designed to ensure that the process in which eligible voters participate is fair and one in which they can have confidence, and when there are deficiencies, requirements to ensure that those deficiencies are rectified.

[TML]

10. That's Interesting

I don't remember seeing Obama's name, but I do remember seeing Hillary's:

Government senior Ray Skidmore, precinct chair for the voting precinct that includes all UT dorms, said one of the caucus volunteers on Thursday noticed almost identical handwriting on one of the caucus sheets. Volunteers were recounting the caucus numbers Wednesday and Thursday, Skidmore said, just to double-check before turning them in today. Information from all caucuses - forms and the official delegate counts - are due to the Travis County clerk's office today by 6 p.m.

When recounting, the volunteer noticed a whole list had Sen. Hillary Clinton written in similar handwriting in the presidential preference column for each of the six voters on that list. Skidmore started calling each of the voters on the list when he reached finance senior Ronesha Holmes, who told him she did not write Clinton as her preference; Holmes said she was instructed to leave that line blank.

[sonias]

11. This is crap

Garry Mauro is the head of Clinton's Texas Campaign team, and obviously it's part of their job to spin about results of the Texas caucuses since they're losing them. I went to several trainings conducted by the Obama campaign here in Texas. And at no point we were ever instructed to do anything illegal or unethical. We won the caucuses fair and square by playing by the rules. Getting our people organized, getting our people to the caucuses and getting them to stay an sign in. It was that simple a directive. Nothing sinister about it at all. We have spent many hours since then reviewing all of our work in our caucuses to make sure our paperwork was in good order. If Garry wants to come look at our paperwork - go for it dude. It will stand up to the review. We did it right!

But we can not postpone our conventions because it's Garry's is doing his job spinning for Hillary.

There are equal amounts of reports coming out of both sides about all kinds of shenanigans. 99% of them are probably totally exaggerated. We had massive turnout of people for the first time in decades. Were there problems due to turnouts yes. But 99% of them were handled the best we could.

Shame on Garry for trying to destroy the Texas Democratic Party just when we're experiencing the largest membership increase in decades.

There is a process for challenging actual "malfeasance" in the caucus system and he knows it. I fully expect our credential committees at our county and state conventions to be full day affairs addressing allegations. And at this point, this is all these are "allegations". And until Garry has solid proof of anything going seriously wrong, he is wrong to cast any aspersions on the legitimacy of our caucus system.

Sonia

[PDittie]

13. Garry Mauro is running for state convention chair

and the Clinton supporters intend to deny credentialing or bottleneck the process severely, beginning at the SD conventions, on the premise of "leveling the playing field".

Their ultimate goal is to deliver plenty of Texas' delegates back to Hillary, by hook or by crook.

[WolverineDG]

18. I don't think they want to dig too deeply

because most of the illegalities he listed were locally done by the Clinton people.

I hope I get to State so I can vote against this asshole for party chair.

dg

[TexasLady]

27. Folks, SoniaS is the number one most awesomest

person who represents Texas, and quite frankly, Ive met her, and LIKE her a LOT, and think she needs to run for office herself...
:hi: Hi, darlin!!

that aside, she's the Expert and What she says goes. Dont mess with her.and Dont mess with Texas..

[WolverineDG]

30. sonias for party chair!

:woohoo: :bounce: :woohoo:

dg

[sonias]

33. Shut up with that - How about Chalie Urbina Jones?

Now he might actually pull off a win this year.


Sonia

[sonias]

32. Much better expert than me - Glen Maxey

And I'll let Glen Maxey speak for himself. He says the convention date is written into Texas law, and we can't change that period.

BOR thread
If there were violations to the rules
then there are processes in place (Credentials committees at every County and Senate District covention) to take the complaints.

We all know that our precinct conventions were a daunting task to get signed in and establish the roll. I have only heard of a few instances where people believed that ineligible voters participated, and in all these cases the appropriate remedies are being used: filing the appropriate appeals with the Credentials Committee.

As to the Clinton campaign's request for a delay, I'm sure that both of these great lawyers know that the date of these conventions is not left for the State Party to willy nilly move. It's in the Texas statutes and I don't think the Texas Democratic Party should be in the business of ignoring the law (let's leave that to the Republicans, since they have a long history of it).

Moreover, we have over a million names on sign-in forms across Texas. The Delegate Selection Plan and Rules of the Party anticipate that the people who were to make these determinations were those in charge of the local precinct conventions: both Clinton and Obama leaders. I hope they aren't claiming that one camp or the other systematically violated the law or rules. Human error occurred, to be sure. Remedies are in place. I'd suggest that the Clinton campaign use the remedies at hand before carpet bombing the Party and its Rules.

:applause: Bravo Glen - the voice of reason!

:hi:TexasLady


Sonia

[WolverineDG]

59. Okay, sonias for co-chair!

Glenn for chair! His slogan can be: See, I told ya so! :rofl:

:hi:

dg

[Jane Austin]

15. Our Precinct Convention went 2 to 1 for Obama

and I swear on my mother's grave that none of the things listed there occurred at our convention.

[WolverineDG]

19. Didnt happen at my precinct either

because I insisted we follow the damn rules (they aren't THAT hard for cripes sake). however, I was approached by one woman who told me she'd been appointed the Permanent Secretary of the Convention while we were standing outside waiting for voting to finish. Yup, Hillary supporter. wasn't happy when I told her it would have to be done correctly when the convention actually started.

dg

[hfojvt]

22. even if they did, many of the complaints seem picky or inconsequential

ooh - people signed in early. So what? We probably should have signed people in early at our caucus because we were overwhelmed. We had about six VOLUNTEERS checking names on the list, and we had bad lists from the state party - many people were not on our lists even though they came with registration cards showing that they had registered months ago. So they had to fill out new forms (and many of them were not happy about that). The huge room was packed with people and we could not process them all in an hour. So people had to stand around or stand in line for another half hour while those who had gotten in line before closing could be signed in.

I wouldn't be surprised if mistakes were made, but the somewhat overwhelmed volunteers were doing the best we could. Besides that, according to my training, the precinct chair had wide latitude and authority for running the caucus, and in my precinct she was a Clinton supporter.

[MagickMuffin]

16. Facts about Mauro

Garry Mauro: served on the WalMart broad with Hillary during the 80's.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/clinton-texas-c.html

Garry Mauro, the former Texas land commissioner and another friend from 1972 whom Clinton has tapped to head her state campaign. Mauro also ran Bill Clinton's Texas effort in his 1992 presidential race.

Richard Murray, a political scientist at the University of Houston, was skeptical of Garry Mauro's stewardship of the statewide campaign.

But one of Clinton's top Texas fundraisers, Alonzo Cantu, has raised some eyebrows. Cantu, a developer from McAllen who made his first federal campaign contribution to Bill Clinton in 1992, has been responsible for more than $640,000 for Hillary Clinton's campaign, making him one of her top fundraisers.

A number of people who wrote checks to her at Cantu's behest are employed at businesses he owns or has a financial stake in.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5548009.html

"We know what we're doing." Mauro said. "We know what we are up against. We have a plan in place, and if we execute, we'll kick some ass."

Mauro's strategy is based on running two distinctly separate, simultaneous campaigns: one for the primary and one the caucuses that follow after the polls close. "I don't even let the two talk to each other," he said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-cutbirth/the-mauro-factor_b_88315.html


GM: Hillary Clinton's been the front-runner. You have to feed the beast. To maintain your front-runner status, it's all an illusion; you have to do things that the press thinks are smart and you have to have this illusion of inevitability. But at the same time you also have to campaign to get votes and oftentimes things you are doing to feed the beast - the press - is really showboating and not much vote-getting... I would have preferred her to do more grassroots campaigning, but she didn't have the ability to do that because people were expecting certain things to happen because she was the front-runner. If we ignore the journalists, they start saying, 'Well she looks like she has an incompetent campaign,' you can't win, and all of a sudden we lose 10 points in the polls. I would probably rebalance that a little bit so she'd have a little more time to do political things and get real votes rather than do things that made the press happy.

http://www.dailytexanonline.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticlePrinterFriendly&uStory_id=fbe9e794-95c2-4c82-b1b5-26af5ee09a97


State Rep. Jim Dunnam, D-Waco, leader of the Democrats in the state House of Representatives, accused the Clinton campaign of trying to “stoke fears or promote cyncism” by raising questions about a process that has been a feature of the presidential nomination process in Texas for decades.

“If you’re losing at half time, you don’t try to unplug the scoreboard,’’ Dunnam said.

The law requires the caucus results to be reported within three days, but the intense interest in the results prompted the Texas Democratic Party to invest $60,000 in a voluntary reporting system so that the media and public would have an idea about how the caucus tallies were breaking.

Obama officials see no problem with it. But Mauro, the Texas Clinton adviser, said the system would produce “flimsy, half-baked results.’’ Still, Mauro said there were no plans to challenge the legality of the voluntary reporting system.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/v-print/story/29073.html


Coleman said he thinks the Hillary Clinton campaign did threaten legal action despite Mauro's assertion.

"The reality is when you talk about the Democratic establishment at the time the rules were laid out -- that was Garry Mauro," Coleman said late Sunday. "Contemplating suing is kind of silly."

The issue came to light as a result of a report published Thursday in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram by reporter Jay Root.

"The law requires the caucus results to be reported within three days, but the intense interest in the results prompted the Texas Democratic Party to invest $60,000 in a voluntary reporting system so that the media and public would have an idea about how the caucus tallies were breaking," Root wrote on Saturday. "Obama officials see no problem with it. But Mauro said the system would produce 'flimsy, half-baked results.'"

http://www.keyetv.com/mostpopular/story.aspx?content_id=f11e8af1-7500-4635-8b26-aadbc6a4dc61



These are just a few articles I found doing a google search.

Bottom line Mauro is working for Clinton and will do whatever it takes to make sure the election is all about his candidate.

As PDittie said "By hook or Crook."

[bilgewaterbill]

35. Excellent work!!

[MagickMuffin]

40. Thanks, bilgewaterbill

It didn't take that long to find out about Garry.

I was surprised that he worked alongside Hillary at Wal-Mart. I guess that really opened my eyes about their cozy relationship.


edit to include bold text

[antigop]

17. I attended my first precinct convention and caucus

I did not attend as a member of any candidate's campaign, so I did not receive any training beforehand. Consequently, I do not know all of the rules. However, regarding

• Precincts were consolidated for purposes of holding a convention


I can verify that more than one precinct was in the same room as mine.
Now whether that setup was a violation of the rules, I don't know. I'm only posting my experience.

And before anyone gives me cr*p about being a Hillary supporter, READ 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 raising the h1-b visa cap. I have posted before how much I despise the DLC. And I'll admit the ONLY reason I showed up at the precinct convention and stayed around for the caucus was because I wanted to vote against her. My family's (and family members') livelihoods are at stake with this issue.

<edit to add> And I'll admit it IRKED THE HELL out of me that these are conducted the way they are. I almost did not go because I have this thing about the privacy of my vote. I had to overcome a great amount of resentment against the system and decided that I had to register my resentment against the DLC anyway. So I attended for one reason and one reason only -- to vote against HRC even though I was and am pissed that these are conducted the way they are.

[MagickMuffin]

39. The TDP held several training seminars before the election all over the state

I attended one and was glad I did, for the shear fact that it did come in handy at the convention. I also attended two more sessions put on by the Obama campaign.

People need to educate themselves on the process. There is no reason no one would take the time to learn about the conventions, especially since all that information is posted several places on the internet, including the TDP's website.

The first vote you cast WAS private. The only reason it isn't private the second time is because that is how the process works, it is how the delegates are alloted.


Go read David Van Os excellent post regarding our conventions.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=180x50589

[antigop]

41. Yep. That's "how the process works". I knew that. I despise it.

So don't give me this "educate yourself" cr*p. I KNEW how it worked. That doesn't mean I like it.

And the other people I have spoken to don't like it either.

So spare me the lecture.

[MagickMuffin]

44. ooh, striking a nerve, am I? I guess so...it's tough to defend the indefensible.

No where in my post did I insinuate that you did not educate yourself. Too bad you took it personal. But from your other post I can understand your anger issues.

I stand by what I said.

Spare me your insults.

[antigop]

45. "tough to defend the indefensible"...yep. You should know, right? n/t

[thevoiceofreason]

46. Amen brother

There were no surprises. Everyone knew how it worked. Hell, the Hillary zombies were in charge of 75% of the party apparatus. They can shut the F up. The Obama folks mad esure to get there folks to the caucuses. And we're coming to the district conventions. ALL OF US! Get used to it. You have been out-organized and out-prepared.

[antigop]

48. What part of post #17 didn't you understand? Here, I'll repeat part of it for you...

And before anyone gives me cr*p about being a Hillary supporter, READ 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 raising the h1-b visa cap. I have posted before how much I despise the DLC. And I'll admit the ONLY reason I showed up at the precinct convention and stayed around for the caucus was because I wanted to vote against her. My family's (and family members') livelihoods are at stake with this issue.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[antigop]

55. I'll repeat it -- I despise the Texas two-step system. Got it? n/t

[avrdream]

20. I'm glad this is happening.

The second part of the Texas two step is utter bullshit. Get rid of it already.

Why would any State make a voter vote TWICE in order to be counted? Strange.

[antigop]

21. see my previous post -- I almost did not go because of it n/t

[sonias]

23. Oh and we should listen to someone from Australia tell us what to do in Texas

No thanks! Stick to handling your own elections.


Sonia

[WolverineDG]

29. When the Aussies let us tell them how to run their elections

then you can tell us to get rid of it. Hilly didn't get her panties in a twist about the caucus portion of our primary when Bill ran in 1992 & 1996. It's not our fault she was so arrogant she didn't do her homework.

dg

[MagickMuffin]

38. Our Texas precinct conventions are not caucuses

Our Texas precinct conventions are not caucuses, they are conventions. Caucuses are when supporters of a particular candidate meet together to select their delegates to the next level. Our primary election night meetings are not Iowa caucuses, they are precinct conventions. Caucuses take place within and during the precinct conventions when the different presidential preference groups separate to different parts of the room to choose their delegates to the next convention level. Both campaigns did a disservice to all of us by encouraging their supporters to think the sole purpose of our convention process is the presidential nominations, when it isn't.


For the overwhelming majority of precinct conventions and for all of us as a whole, democracy and fair play won out. Despite the isolated reports of irregularities (about a dozen such reports out of nearly 8,500 precincts), all reports suggest that the overwhelming majority of the precinct conventions ran smoothly and amiably.

I love our precinct conventions. They are democracy and self-government in live action at the most grassroots level. Our trouble was that when the heightened interest rose up this year, we had relatively few people who were experienced in the process and prepared to conduct or help conduct the precinct conventions. This is because the interest and participation dropped so low over the last 16 years.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=180x50589

This was posted by a Texas Attorney based in TEXAS LAW. He ran for our Attorney General during our last election. Of course he didn't when he was up against a corrupt incumbent AG.

Please go read the rest of his post. If you are so concerned about our elections here in Texas. Since you do not even live in our state or live in our country, then education yourself before spouting out something you are obviously do not know anything about.

Our conventions are for the voters to have a chance to offer up resolutions to help form our party platform.

[my3boyz]

24. Whine..whine..whine....Hillary supporters are just pissed

that the guidelines she sent out did not work.

[grantcart]

25. The people in the state actually know what is going on - if one side did something

48. OBAMA MAKES MAJOR DELEGATE GAINS IN IOWA
Multiple Media sources have all agreed that Obama will net atleast 7 more delegates in Iowa

Clinton may be up or down one delegate

From DemcomWatch

7:00 EDT: NBC has Obama up 7 to 23, Clinton up 1 to 16, Edwards down 8 to 6.

8:20 EDT: The AP has Obama up 7 to 23, Clinton down 1 to 14, Edwards down 7 to 7, with 1 delegate to be decided.
stupid or dishonest they will lose support in the second round


Which brings me to Iowa

OBAMA GAINS 7 DELEGATES IN OBAMA - MAY MEAN NET + NINE IF HILLARY LOSES A DELEGATE

You see after the caucuses Hillary complained about them, how they were insignificant and undemocratic. Well virtually all of Edwards supporters went Obama, and some Clinton supporters changed sides.



Update: 9:50 EDT: - Some of the confusion is due to the requirement that a candidate receive 15% in a Congressional District to receive a delegate from that district. Currently, Edwards is projected to be viable in 4 of the 5 CDs, giving him 4 delegates at the CD level, plus 3 at the national level. But he's on the edge of 15% in a couple of CDs, and with some counties still out. If he drops below 15%, he loses the delegate, and it goes to either Clinton or Obama, depending on how the math plays out.

Note: We'll update all our trackers when the AP updates their official delegate count.

By DemcomWatch numbers Obama's magic number will drop to 419

As a point of comparison Clinton's Huge win was +9 delegates - If Clinton ends up losing a delegate in Iowa that will mean that her huge win in Ohio has been wiped out by what happened today in Iowa.

I am out of threads but if someone wants to post a thread on it please feel free.

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results...

http://demconwatch.blogspot.com /

[ampad]

26. How desperate

The title is misleading and where the heck is the link for this so called story?

[wileedog]

28. I have another letter that proves

Hillary has been taken over by body snatchers from the Alpha Centauri system. The apparently are using her to manipulate our government into shooting Taco Bell Gorditas into space by the millions for them to consume.

Sincerely,

Internet Bullshit

[Quixote1818]

31. How did he steel all the Primary's he won by 20% then?

These are all Primary's Obama won:

South Carolina
Alabama
Connecticut
Delaware
Georgia
Illinois
Missouri
Utah
Louisiana
Virgin Islands
Dems Abroad
Maryland
Dist. of Columbia
Virginia
Wisconsin
Vermont
Mississippi

[Upton]

34. He won here in Wa. state by 34%

was this state stolen too?

[thevoiceofreason]

36. Garry Mauro was a lame politician before his Clinton friends caused Texas to go red

He doesn't understand the rules now, either. The State Senate Credential Committees are responsible for determining eligibility. If he wants to attack the election judges, who by in large were not responsible for the precinct conventions (but who did prove eligibility), these folks who are the backbone of the party and who work tirelessly to see that the votes are fair), he can go ahead. That is why Texans wouldn't elect Garry Mauron to state dogcatcher. He sucks.

[MagickMuffin]

54. A party HACK who doesn't know JACK

By Hook or Crook.

[Johnny__Motown]

42. Clinton in Nevada was much worse than any of this.. good luck

[Freida5]

47. Didn't McGovern do well in the caucuses with student support? Isn't that why the superdelegate

system was created? I hope the caucuses face a host of legal challenges that eliminate caucuses as an option for voting in primaries.

[barack the house]

50. Funny how results matched exit pols isnt it. HRC needs to be gracious for once in this campaign.

Democracy first and foremostis to respect how the people voted in every avenue she is spoke of overturning the will of the people. The world is watching this how can HRC sell democracyto the world. Rather than Democracy now this is democracy when I feel like it. To win you sell yourself well not in a negative light and not chase away voters.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

51. wow I am glad that someone is doing something about this insane caucusing crap

[rainbow4321]

58. Will someone PLEASE ask HRC why she had no problem with the TX caucus..

when Bill Clinton won them back during his time?? Did they threaten to sue back then? Were they in an uproar about our system for weeks afterwards??
Leave our frigging primary system alone..you knew that you were going to lose the TX caucus, your own husband predicted it with his "it would be a shame for her to win during the day, only to lose at night" comment in the news that day.
Her people chose to take our TX votes for granted, they didn't even give our system a glance until a few weeks before our primary day. Her own campaign manager was gloating in the Dallas Morning News that she had TX wrapped up because she was "the only candidate who had been south of San Antonio"....her strategy people FUCKED UP big time and now they are blaming Texas for her loss. So fire your strategy people and leave Texans ALONE.

[Zhade]

53. Dude, the MODS have caught you plagiarizing others TWICE.

Why do you still think people give a fuck about ANY of your lies?

[jackson_dem]

56. The numbers suggest this may be true

Two states have held both a caucus and a primary, Washington and Texas.

Washington caucus: Obama 68, Clinton 31
Washington primary: Obama 50, Clinton 47

Texas caucus: Obama 56, Clinton 44
Texas primary: Clinton 51, Obama 47

[Emit]

57. Caucus chair uncovers discrepancies

~snip~

When recounting, the volunteer noticed a whole list had Sen. Hillary Clinton written in similar handwriting in the presidential preference column for each of the six voters on that list. Skidmore started calling each of the voters on the list when he reached finance senior Ronesha Holmes, who told him she did not write Clinton as her preference; Holmes said she was instructed to leave that line blank.

Even one discrepancy threw up a flag of suspicion, Skidmore said.

As he continued calling people on the list Thursday, he found that two other students, history and pre-med sophomore Abigail Cheney and government sophomore Adam Aldrete, said they did not fill in a presidential preference and that Clinton was not who they would have listed.

"I think it's pretty disappointing," Skidmore said. "It might not affect the delegates, but it's the integrity of the process that may turn people off." He added that he was sorry for the inconveniences or problems the situation may cause.

~snip~

http://media.www.dailytexanonline.com/media/storage/paper410/news/2008/03/07/TopStories/Caucus.Chair.Uncovers.Discrepancies-3258732-page2.shtml