Clinton campaign wants Texas to postpone

[White Eagle]

http://www.statesman.com/search/content/news/stories/local/03/16/0316texascaucus.html

I got curious as to how the Texas caucuses were going and found this at the Austin Tx newspaper site. Seems Hillary just isn't happy with anything. I personally don't think Texas should delay the next round of political meetings. The county and district conventions are March 29. The state convention is in June, how much time does she need?

Clinton campaign wants Texas to postpone party conventions

Campaign wants signatures from the March 4 contest verified before party conventions later this month.

By Paul J. Weber
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Sunday, March 16, 2008

DALLAS — As final results of the Texas Democratic caucus remain unknown, Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign has asked the state Democratic Party to put the brakes on the next round of political meetings that will help determine how many delegates each candidate will get from Texas.

In a letter sent to the party late Friday, Clinton asked that the March 29 count and state Senate district conventions be delayed until the eligibility of an estimated 1 million caucus-goers is double-checked. Her campaign wants the signatures from the March 4 caucus to be verified first.

The Clinton campaign wrote that it received more than 2,000 complaints about violations after the caucus, which was held on the same day as a statewide primary.

Clinton won the popular vote in the primary, capturing a four-delegate edge in the state over Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois. That vote was for 126 delegates.

However, with about 41 percent of precinct caucuses having reported, Obama was leading 56 percent to 44 percent in the contest for the state's remaining 67 delegates.

"It is the Party's responsibility to ensure the integrity of the precinct convention process by making sure that the rules were followed," the letter states.

The letter came after the Clinton campaign said party officials told them last week that it would not verify the eligibility of all caucus-goers before March 29. The county and district conventions will whittle down the delegates before the state convention in June, when the final delegate count for the Texas caucus will be known.

Texas Democratic Party spokesman Hector Nieto said Saturday that the party has not decided about the Clinton campaign's request.

"We're not surprised Sen. Clinton's campaign has engaged with their attorney, but right now the TDP remains extremely pleased by the record-breaking turnout," Nieto said.

Nieto said state party officials had not received a similar request from Obama's campaign. A message left to the Obama campaign Saturday was not returned.

When asked whether a lawsuit would be filed or considered if state party officials did not postpone the conventions, Clinton campaign spokeswoman Adrienne Elrod said Saturday: "We believe that we can work with the party to find a resolution that protects the wishes of every Texas voter and ensures that no one was disenfranchised."

In the letter, the Clinton campaign lists 10 instances in which party rules were violated during precinct caucusing. They include caucuses that started before precinct polling closed and results that were taken by head or hand counts instead of a written roll.

So far, precinct caucuses report 23,918 delegates being elected for Obama and 18,620 for Clinton. In the primary, Clinton received 51 percent of the vote, compared with 47 percent for Obama. That earned her 65 delegates and him 61.

 

[Kulindahr]

All I'd do is ask the people at the various caucuses if they were happy with the way it was done. If they are, tell Hillary to go sit on a cactus.

Sending an attorney is just ridiculous, and looks like desperation. A polite note saying "We have concerns" would have been fine... and more presidential. This suggests that as president she'd be likely to send in lawyers any time she doesn't get her own way.

It doesn't sound as though these little bads require any big effort to address. Hillary's just being a bitch here, when she could have looked like a lady.

 

[Homoerectus]

Unless something is not done according to the rules, the caucuses should proceed as scheduled. If Ms. Clinton or Mr. Obama can show something illegal has been done then they should appeal to the state Democratic committee. Since these are party elections, party rules apply.

 

[White Eagle]

She said she got 2000 complaints and I do remember something being said about complaints. But if there were 2000 of them I think people would be talking about it. I haven't heard anything being discussed.

 

[construct]

She said she got 2000 complaints and I do remember something being said about complaints. But if there were 2000 of them I think people would be talking about it. I haven't heard anything being discussed.

Here is an article describing some of the problems encountered in Tarrant County. They appear to be relatively minor considering the number of voters. We had about ten times as many participants as the previous record.

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_docid=11F599C37B7FEB18&p_docnum=2

 

[Centexfarmer]

She said she got 2000 complaints and I do remember something being said about complaints. But if there were 2000 of them I think people would be talking about it. I haven't heard anything being discussed.

Then you're definitely not a caucusing member of Texas Senatorial District 23.

I've been hearing rumors for the past few days that Senator Clinton's campaign was "suing the Texas Democratic Party" to prevent us from holding our Senatorial Conventions.

Then in Sunday's edition of the Fort Worth Startle-Gram, I read the following article on page 6B:

Clinton tries to slow march toward delegate selection

"It is the Party's responsibility to ensure the integrity of the precinct convention process by making sure that the Rules were followed," Clinton's letter states.

That statement, in and of itself, suggests that some of the precincts didn't follow the rules.

Which is my view is more divisive shit on her part.

With a historic voter turnout all the precincts that I'm aware of, mine included, weren't prepared for the deluge.

We didn't have enough sign in sheets, Senator Royce West (An Obama Supporter) at one point took over the microphone, and told the Obama supporters "If you want your vote to count then you need to stay for the whole convention." As if to imply that the Clinton Delegates would screw them out of their delegate selection.

After the polls closed on election day, thousands of Democrats across Texas crowded back into their polling places to take part in caucuses that would help determine 35 percent of the state's vote.
They stood in line, sometimes for hours, for the chance to be chosen as a delegate to the district or county convention and support their presidential choice. Many reported chaotic situations, rife with disorganization, that may well prompt complaints and challenges at the March 29 conventions.

Who could have been happy with that scenario? I wasn't! Primarily because (as a Clinton Supporter) I was booted out of my own precinct.

You couldn't pay me to attend the Senatorial Convention on March 29th!

Because this is what's going to happen:

• A special Creditials Committee is going to be set up for no other reason than to address complaints.
• Another Creditials Committee is going to be canvassing the allowable caucused votes per precinct, and which are valid and which will not be.
• Supporters from both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama's campaign are going to be there to fight for their share of the delegates.
• People who caucused in their respective precincts, aren't going to show up, even thought they received appointments to Senatorial Convention as delegates.
• And all of this will be taking place while the regular Convention business is being handled;
• The Resolutions commitee taking care of the hundreds of Resolutions submitted for the State Party platform (and I can promise that the most contentious resolutions will be the elimination of the "Texas-Two" primary.
• While that's going on, the Rules Committee will be addressing questions to the Rules, and addressing any proposed changes.
• And on the Convention Floor, Resolutions, and challanges to the rules will be the rule of the day.

I don't expect a very "unified" atmosphere.

Senator Clinton, will be doing her campaign a disservice if it appears that she's trying to hamper this process, and if there's any unifying to come out of it, more people will become unified AGAINST her!

I'm speaking from 16 years experience with Precinct, Senatorial, and State Conventions within the Texas Democratic Party.

Just let the local Democrats do their thing. It won't be pretty, and it won't be to everyone's liking, but that's the way things have always been. At least in the 23rd.

The only reason that I can think of that Senator Clinton's campaign wants to postpone the conventions, is because they don't have a clear picture of what's going on here in Texas.

 

[construct]

I pretty much agree with centexfarmer that there will be a lot of feather-ruffling at the district conventions. I'm sure I won't be pleased with everything about the process, but I'm also sure I'll be able to live with the outcome.

I also agree that it's probably better to let Texans handle conflicts within the state party. This is one fight that non-Texan campaign people ought to stay out of. They wouldn't be doing their candidate any favors by getting into a pissing match with the state party. And that goes for both campaigns. Remember how the Texas Democratic Party handled Rep. Kucinich.

 

[Centexfarmer]

^ Well Construct, as Texans, you and I both know that we don't have to smell, touch or taste bullshit to know it when we see it.

Like I've said, I've participated in enough Texas Democratic Party Conventions to know who the players are, what their game is, and how to identify the bullshit that they're spreading.

There's already a level of distrust amongst various Democrats of both the Clinton and Obama campaigns (Why shouldn't there be? Both campaigns thought that they'd have the nomination sewed up before March 4, 2008!), that for Hillary Clinton to challenge the processes within the TDP it will only serve to hurt her, than to help her.

I feel sorry for any out of state college kid from either campaign that tries to wade through this mess!

One of my favorite political t-shirts reads as follows:

Texas Democratic Party politics, It's not for the Squeamish!

​

What I am counting on (hoping for) is that, as has always been a part of the process, once the issue is settled, we pick each other up off of the floor, tend to each other's wounds, put the furniture back in place, and move on to the next agenda item.

That's not going to happen if we have on outsider (i.e. lawyers) trying to challange the outcome.

 

[Raincoat Massacre]

I'm starting to wonder if I have the energy to debate anymore...

 

[construct]

What I am counting on (hoping for) is that, as has always been a part of the process, once the issue is settled, we pick each other up off of the floor, tend to each other's wounds, put the furniture back in place, and move on to the next agenda item.

That's not going to happen if we have on outsider (i.e. lawyers) trying to challange the outcome.

Absolutely!

 

[White Eagle]

Centexfarmer
You're right I'm not one into caucases. My legs just won't be up to that. Our precint had about 5 chairs around the room, and the newsmen here in CC just do not report news like this. I'll let the pros battle it out.

 

[Centexfarmer]

"Outsider"... or "carpetbagger"?

You're from South Carolina you tell me.

In Texas an "outsider" is usually either someone who comes to visit for awhile, then returns from whence they came, or stays and adopts and respects the culture of the area.

A "carpetbagger," is someone who comes here, takes advantage of the good graces of those living here, insists that everything that we do is moronic, uneducated, and stupid, and then decides to move here permanently.

So being the polite Texan that I am, I'll use the term "outsider" for the moment.

Perhaps Texas should discuss, for itself, to get rid of caucuses? Would you be for or against this?

I can assure you that will be on the agenda from the Senatorial Conventions, all the way up to a final resolution at the State Convention in Austin, Texas in June.

That doesn't mean that getting rid of the "Texas-Two" step caucus, which I'd entertain the idea of doing, will happen, but clearly the system wasn't transparent enough everyone to be satisfied.

 

[Centexfarmer]

Centexfarmer
You're right I'm not one into caucases. My legs just won't be up to that. Our precint had about 5 chairs around the room, and the newsmen here in CC just do not report news like this. I'll let the pros battle it out.

You voted for your candidate, and that still counts toward the popular vote.

Most people generally only caucus because they're interested in becoming involved in the processes of the Texas Democratic Party; setting the agenda, establishing or contributing to the State Party Platform, having a stronger voice amongst elected Democrats, and that sort of thing.

This Caucus was about two candidates trying to get elected, and I'd bet that the majority of those who did caucus (regardless of the outcome) won't be seen again.

 

[Kulindahr]

Just let the local Democrats do their thing. It won't be pretty, and it won't be to everyone's liking, but that's the way things have always been. At least in the 23rd.

That's part of "government of the people, by the people, and for the people".
In this case, "the people" means the people of Texas, not Hillary Clinton or her lawyers. If she sticks her nose in, all Texas folks together should respond

The only reason that I can think of that Senator Clinton's campaign wants to postpone the conventions, is because they don't have a clear picture of what's going on here in Texas.

No, it's because she's a control freak: everything has to be her way, down to the nitty-gritty details. She doesn't just want Texas' delegates, she wants them selected just nice and prim and properly.
I see that as a serious mark against her as president: she can't trust people "less" that she to carry out what they know how to do and have been doing for ages.
Maybe Texas should be a little more polite to her: inform her that she lacks experience in Texas, so she isn't qualified.

One of my favorite political t-shirts reads as follows:

Texas Democratic Party politics, It's not for the Squeamish!

​

What I am counting on (hoping for) is that, as has always been a part of the process, once the issue is settled, we pick each other up off of the floor, tend to each other's wounds, put the furniture back in place, and move on to the next agenda item.

That's not going to happen if we have on outsider (i.e. lawyers) trying to challange the outcome.

I read about that saying in a biography of Lyndon Johnson! And it's still on t-shirts -- kool!

I've never seen Hillary as someone interested in picking anyone off the floor and tending to wounds, if they've opposed her. She'd put the furniture back in place right on top of the casualties she's inflicted.

And it's a sad situation when someone from outside a state thinks that sending in lawyers is respectful or civilized. If she did this in Oregon, I'd be saying it shows she doesn't respect Oregon at all. It just re-confirms my view that she respects no one, and just wants to be in charge. It's a sign of imperial yearnings -- not just tendencies. Plainly she's shown that to her the 9th and 10th Amendments don't exist, and that this isn't the United STATES of America, but the Combined Provinces of America -- and she wants to sit on the throne.
The Texas Democratic Party should pass a bylaw or some such stating that lawyers hired or funded by parties outside Texas shall have no standing in matters of the Texas Democratic Party. If that doesn't do the trick, they should change their name to the Democratic Party of the Lone Star Republic and work for secession.

Please attend the convention, if for no other reason than the sake of certain resolutions.

 

[Kulindahr]

Most people generally only caucus because they're interested in becoming involved in the processes of the Texas Democratic Party; setting the agenda, establishing or contributing to the State Party Platform, having a stronger voice amongst elected Democrats, and that sort of thing.

This Caucus was about two candidates trying to get elected, and I'd bet that the majority of those who did caucus (regardless of the outcome) won't be seen again.

That's sad. The validity of the Texas two-step system is that the caucuses allow people truly interested in party business to voice their preference for a candidate. But with this flood...
A useful reform might be to allow no one into the caucuses with their having a piece of business other than candidate selection -- resolution, platform, whatever. Or perhaps introduce card-carrying, dues-paying membership, and only those with dues up-to-date get in.

 

[Centexfarmer]

That's part of "government of the people, by the people, and for the people".
In this case, "the people" means the people of Texas, not Hillary Clinton or her lawyers. If she sticks her nose in, all Texas folks together should respond

No, it's because she's a control freak: everything has to be her way, down to the nitty-gritty details. She doesn't just want Texas' delegates, she wants them selected just nice and prim and properly.
I see that as a serious mark against her as president: she can't trust people "less" that she to carry out what they know how to do and have been doing for ages.
Maybe Texas should be a little more polite to her: inform her that she lacks experience in Texas, so she isn't qualified.



I read about that saying in a biography of Lyndon Johnson! And it's still on t-shirts -- kool!

I've never seen Hillary as someone interested in picking anyone off the floor and tending to wounds, if they've opposed her. She'd put the furniture back in place right on top of the casualties she's inflicted.

And it's a sad situation when someone from outside a state thinks that sending in lawyers is respectful or civilized. If she did this in Oregon, I'd be saying it shows she doesn't respect Oregon at all. It just re-confirms my view that she respects no one, and just wants to be in charge. It's a sign of imperial yearnings -- not just tendencies. Plainly she's shown that to her the 9th and 10th Amendments don't exist, and that this isn't the United STATES of America, but the Combined Provinces of America -- and she wants to sit on the throne.
The Texas Democratic Party should pass a bylaw or some such stating that lawyers hired or funded by parties outside Texas shall have no standing in matters of the Texas Democratic Party. If that doesn't do the trick, they should change their name to the Democratic Party of the Lone Star Republic and work for secession.

Please attend the convention, if for no other reason than the sake of certain resolutions.

I have some close friends who serve on the state Democratic Party Executive Committee (a few of them are lawyers themselves), who I know will most likely ignore Senator Clinton's request, or at the very least vote not to take any action.

Dennis Kucinich, who've I've caucused for in the past, wasn't on the ballot here in Texas this year because he tried to dictate his terms to the State Party.

Boyd Richie, the Democratic Party Chair takes his marching orders from the Precinct Delegates (of which I was one until being shut out by a mob of Obama Supporters), and the other group that he listens to is the Democratic National Committee, and Howard Dean is the chair of that committee.

The Majority of delegates that I know, don't give one flying rat's ass about Chairman Dean, or how he's chaired the DNC, and once I get back into the party I'll be campaigning for whoever challenges his position as Chair of the DNC!

After the mess that he helped create in Michigan, Florida, and his lack of action during the Anti-Gay-Marriage Constitutional Amendment here in Texas, it won't be hard to do.

Like I said, if Senator Clinton tries to postpone our March 29th Caucus, she'll only be galvanizing more Democrats against her, than for her.

The Texas Delegation of the Texas Democratic Party doesn't take marching orders from any one person, and certainly not a candidate for POTUS!

Those positions must be earned.

 

[Centexfarmer]

Ugh, no. Close though---NC.

Sorry, South Carolina actually started the war, and North Carolina has some really great barbeque, and the Great Smokey Mountains.

But never any carpetbaggers?

 

[White Eagle]

I went back to AustinAmericanStatesman to see what up and found this.

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/cont...008/03/17/slagle_doubts_clinton_will_sue.html

Slagle doubts Clinton suit, says he’s healthy

By W. Gardner Selby | Monday, March 17, 2008, 10:37 AM

Sherman lawyer Bob Slagle, a former chairman of the Texas Democratic Party helping Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, said Monday he doubts that Clinton will file a lawsuit to stop regional conventions from going forth as planned March 29. Those gatherings are the next hurdle in the party sorting the results of the March 4 primary-night presidential caucuses, which are slated to lead to the party’s state convention in June at which 67 delegates will be determined driven by the caucus results.

On Friday, Clinton’s camp sent a letter asking the state party to put a hold on state Senate district and county conventions until the signatures of participants in the precinct conventions can be verified. The letter fueled speculation in political circles that the Clinton camp wants to put the brakes on the regional gatherings to delay a toting-up of results potentially showing that Barack Obama won more delegates in Texas than she did. Clinton took a four-delegate edge in Texas because of her win of the popular vote in the March 4 primary.

Slagle, noting that Clinton won the popular vote in most counties including vast swaths of East and West Texas, said a far-flung suit would be ill-advised.

“Why do we want to annoy county chairs in 240-plus counties, all of them whose voters went for you?” Slagle said. “There’s no point in making a big deal all over Texas if we can narrow our complaints down.”

A suit affecting every county would be “incredibly stupid,” Slagle said, “and these are smart people” in Clinton’s camp.

Slagle, 72, also disputed a blog post suggesting he’s very ill. (See it here). Slagle confirmed, though, that he’s been battling a Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS), what used to be called pre-leukemia. Learn more on varieties of that condition here.

“This is not supposed to kill me,” Slagle said. “I don’t spend much time worrying about it.”

Democratic Party leaders, meeting in Austin on Saturday, gave a moment of silence to wishing Slagle good health. Slagle, speaking by phone Monday morning, guffawed, saying: “Maybe they had a moment of silence for me because nobody could think of anything good to say about me.”

He said he has been battling a mild form of MDS and may soon resume taking chemotherapy in the form of pills ingested daily.

Slagle said: “Unless I get killed in a car or airplane wreck… I’m planning to be with y’all for six, seven or eight, nine more years.”

Well, that makes more sense for the Clinton Camp to do. And to keep the post nice I won't comment on the "incredibly stupid" part.

I do wish Slagle well with his medical problem.

 

[Kulindahr]

I have some close friends who serve on the state Democratic Party Executive Committee (a few of them are lawyers themselves), who I know will most likely ignore Senator Clinton's request, or at the very least vote not to take any action.

Dennis Kucinich, who've I've caucused for in the past, wasn't on the ballot here in Texas this year because he tried to dictate his terms to the State Party.

Boyd Richie, the Democratic Party Chair takes his marching orders from the Precinct Delegates (of which I was one until being shut out by a mob of Obama Supporters), and the other group that he listens to is the Democratic National Committee, and Howard Dean is the chair of that committee.


Like I said, if Senator Clinton tries to postpone our March 29th Caucus, she'll only be galvanizing more Democrats against her, than for her.

The Texas Delegation of the Texas Democratic Party doesn't take marching orders from any one person, and certainly not a candidate for POTUS!

Those positions must be earned.

Why can't more people be obnoxious and stubborn like Texans?
Is it a disease we can spread?

Do you guys ever talk about flipping off the Union and going it alone with your republic?

The Libertarian Party there tried getting people to move that way, in like 2000. Centex, you really ought to -- Texas doesn't need D.C. Invite the Okies and a couple of neighbors running westward, while you're at it.

 

[Kulindahr]

^ It's like you think centexfarmer is today's Sam Houston.

You started it!