Each campaign received 22 tickets to the debate. THE REST WERE INVITED BY THE NV DEM PARTY...

[ClarkUSA]

UNLV received tickets to one-half of the auditorium while the NV Democratic Party had tickets
to the majority of the other half.

Hmm.... this explains alot.

NBC's political guru Chuck Todd reports in his updated post-debate blog:

"*** Those boo-birds: A final Clinton vs. Obama point… Hillary really benefited from the audience
responses. An organizer for the debate told First Read that each campaign received 22 tickets,
while the state party and UNLV invited the rest. But just how many of the rest were Clinton supporters?
Because their booing when Edwards or Obama confronted Clinton was distracting to the candidates
and threw them off. The audience was supposed to play a role via the questions they asked; instead,
they played a MAJOR role in helping Clinton have home-field advantage." http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/default.aspx?p=2

---------

This information correlates to this firsthand account by someone who was in the debate audience last night:

"The audience was basically divided into two sections. One side was UNLV, the well behaved section
and the other section was the Hillary (oops, I meant the DNC) section. The DNC section is where I was
seated and it was filled with Hillary supporters." http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/11/16/32040/765?detail=f

What a con job. Nevada is a mob state in more ways than one.

[aquart]

1. So now Hillary Clinton is mafia?

[ClarkUSA]

3. Um, have you ever heard of a figurative saying?

As in political mob scene.

[BootinUp]

2. Damn those democrats!

:sarcasm:

[Clintonista2]

5. Have you ever heard such complaining in your life?

[ClarkUSA]

6. More like a damned rigged party machine

The same rigged party machine that pushed out Wes Clark as soon as Dean was out of the picture.

[BootinUp]

16. What'd they do, force people to sign blood oaths for Hillary?

You people are a riot.

[ClarkUSA]

19. No, they just called in the Hillary plants.

You people know how that works.

[BootinUp]

22. No I don't know

Please tell me. It sounds like another netroots conspiracy bullshit story.

[ClarkUSA]

25. Exactly what I'd expect you to say.

I don't remember you ever being so nasty during the 2004 primary season.
I guess supporters reflect whom they support at the time.

See ya.

[BootinUp]

27. Rejection of conspiracy theories

without facts is a healthy thing for democracies.

[beaconess]

35. Why are people having trouble grasping that lots of voters might just PREFER Hillary?

[sufrommich]

56. Because it ruins their hateful little fantasies.nt

[BootinUp]

17. Comparing Obama

to Clark and Dean is silly. This guy has big party bucks. Maybe you are for Edwards.

[ClarkUSA]

21. I was comparing how the party machine is rigged for their Anointed Ones.

"It's her turn." ~ Terry McAuliffe

Maybe you are for Machiavellian party hackery.

[BootinUp]

23. Hillary has broad national support. Why don;t you wake up and smell the coffee. nt

[ClarkUSA]

28. National polls mean nothing. It's a coin toss in Iowa and she's sliding in NH.

Thanks, but I'm a tea drinker. By all means, you smell the coffee -- of Hillary's early state poll declines
since she flipflopped on illegal drivers' licenses.

[BootinUp]

30. They mean nothing?

They certainly mean something. For instance in Nevada she has a lot more support in polls than Edwards and Obama combined. If the audience favored her it was perfectly natural for that state without your conspiracy theory.

[ClarkUSA]

36. 50% support in NV does not translate into such boorish partisan behavior at debates.

I didn't hear any booing at Clinton from any of the supporters of other candidates. That's because
they weren't plants. But the ones that booed Edwards and Obama everytime they criticized Clinton
were. That's my take and the opinion of many other here, on other blogs, some journalists who
were there and a number of media pundits.

Repeating the phrase "conspiracy theory" reminds me of Republicans who used the term to denigrate
post 9/11 Democrats who thought Bush's WMD pushing was a lie to start an oil currency war. Not
that you'd ever denigrate anyone, of course.

[BootinUp]

37. criticized? You mean attacked with hypocritical unfounded

bullshit. The audience was right to laugh at Obama for giving the same answer Hillary gave that he has attacked for 3 weeks, and they were right to boo Obama for comparing her to Mitt Romney, and they were right to boo Edwards for suggesting she is corrupt and untrustworthy.

She is a Democrat with real core party values, been one for a long time, our probable nominee, and the attacks are distasteful to Democrats and risky for our general election battle.

[ClarkUSA]

41. That's right, criticized. Only a hyperpartisan would think otherwise.

Her criticism/"hypocritical unfounded bullshit" attacks on fellow Democrats are fine by you, though.
I guess it's only "risky for our general election battle" when anyone criticizes Clinton.

Sorry, but that's truly BS.

[JDPriestly]

51. ClarkUSA -- wait a minute.

If Clark had been on that stage, you would have wanted him to point to the differences between himself and the other candidates. You would have wanted him to point to the weaknesses of other candidates. I was a Clark supporter myself, and I certainly would have. That is what the primary is for. The candidates are not supposed to sit back and just allow a Hillary, an Obama, an Edward, etc. to walk over them. The candidates are not supposed to ignore the differences between themselves and other candidates. They are supposed to draw the differences to the attention of the voters. That is what gives voters a choice. Get with the process. Don't squelch it. We need to hear the good, thje bad and the ugly about our candidates now before it is too late. I don't want to get into October 2008 and suddenly realize that this or that candidate has a failing that was never brought to my attention. Don't squelch free speech. I'm not saying you are a faxcist, but that is a fascist thing to do.

[ClarkUSA]

57. You misunderstood my meaning.

Read through the thread and you'll get my drift.

I have no trouble with free speech at all. What I object to is the rank hypocrisy exhibited by some
hyperpartisan Hillary right-or-wrongers who characterize any criticism of their girl by Edwards and
Obama as "unfair attacks" and making our chances "risky" in the GE while Hillary's criticism of Obama
and Edwards is viewed as wonderful pearls of wisdom.

[JDPriestly]

67. I agree with you there.

I think it is great that each of these candidates is being tested about how they react under stress. (We already know how Clark reacts. I really like Clark and am sorry that he did not run.)

[BootinUp]

39. This was funny too

Who is he God or something? He expressed his personal opinion for crise sakes. I get so sick of conspiracy nonsense, I will continue to berate it whenever I see it no matter which candidate I support.

[durrrty libby]

61. I really enjoy all the whiny winnies. It is a blast. Hill Rocked.

Deal Baby Deal:woohoo: :applause: :woohoo:

[MethuenProgressive]

4. False OP: "UNLV received tickets to one-half of the auditorium"

The 1st sentence in the OP contradicts the OP's subject line.

[ClarkUSA]

8. How so?

The ticket section for Democratic campaigns were on the DNC side of the auditorium, not the UNLV side.

Nitpick much?

[MethuenProgressive]

11. You claim the other half of the audtitorium doesn't count in your "math"?

Pointing out that you're off by 50% is "nit picking"?
OK, live in your world. I bet it's pretty there.

[ClarkUSA]

14. I'm claiming that the NV Dem Party machine stacked the deck in favor of Hillary

And many people outside of uber-Hillary partisans agree with me. Nitpick that.

[MethuenProgressive]

18. By inviting Democrats? And duct-taping the other half of the audience into silence?

Conspiracy theories are usually more imaginative than this one.

[ClarkUSA]

24. By rigging the audience with Hillary plants.

We've all seen how that works.

[MethuenProgressive]

26. 1/2 the audience was UNLV - they were all Clinton plants?

You're saying everyone in Nevada is a Clinton plant except the 22 people your guy invited? That's just silly.

[ClarkUSA]

33. The ones who booed and hissed against Edwards and Obama as if on cue were.

And each campaign had 22 supporters there. I doubt any of the other campaigns were in on this inside job.

[Cameron27]

7. Take it up with Howard Dean then.

I don't believe it, the man is pretty incorruptible.

[ClarkUSA]

9. He has little to no input/influence on Dem Party state leadership.

As evidenced by the primary calendar debacle.

[Cameron27]

12. You're right

but you're still relying on the DailyKos poster's opinion which conflicts with what a DUer who was also there said. The boos distracted them, but you're connecting dots that aren't there.

[ClarkUSA]

15. The big picture is clear.

I don't believe my eyes were lyin'. Believe me, I wish these ugly party machine dirty tricks would stop.
Candidates should rise and fall on their own merit and should not be ambushed or propped up by
plants in the audience.

[Cameron27]

20. You know what,

if I hadn't read through the comments in the other thread, I'd agree with you. But that poster has no reason to lie, and from what I've seen from his/her other posts, he/she's been pretty decent & consistent. CNN encouraged audience reaction, and I can easily understand it if that crowd wasn't in the mood for any more attacks, I'm sick to death of them myself.

We're never going to agree lol.

[ClarkUSA]

38. No, we're not going to agree.

But I appreciate your civil tone.

By the way, I'm not going by the comments of any one person alone.

Many in the political media world have voiced their suspicions; the divvying up of tickets by a state party machine
devoted to getting Hillary elected; the comments further on in that thread you mentioned regarding how tickets
were only given to those "connected" to higher-ups as well as my distinctly non-lyin' eyes have led me to make a similar
conclusion as Michael Scherer of Salon, NBC's Chuck Todd/Chris Matthews, liberal radio talk show host Ed Schultz,
the NYT political blogger, and no doubt many others.

Like you, I hope there's an investigation so it won't happen again to any Democratic candidate, including Sen. Clinton.
Even if there isn't, I hope this doesn't happen again: I dislike the notion that party bosses are manipulating public opinion
against outsider Democratic presidential rivals in favor of anointed insider Party Royals.

[Cameron27]

40. Thanks

I really do understand what you're saying, but I have to trust the DUer on this.

Peace

[Texas_Kat]

45. Which of the following were in Nevada?

Michael Scherer of Salon, NBC's Chuck Todd/Chris Matthews, liberal radio talk show host Ed Schultz,
the NYT political blogger....

Any of them?

[ClarkUSA]

46. And your point is???

:shrug:

[asdjrocky]

10. Booers, Ringers & Plants.... Oh my.

We're not in Kansas any more.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Burson-Marsteller

Take a look

[ClarkUSA]

69. You got that right. ALL six of CNN's "undecided voters" were NV Dem operatives

CNN hits bottom and digs: All six debate questioners appear to be Democratic Party operatives. So much
for "ordinary people, undecided voters". To paraphrase Junior Soprano, CNN is so far up the DNC's hind end,
Howard Dean can taste hair gel.

In a nutshell, CNN's six "undecided voters" were:

A Democratic Party bigwig
An antiwar activist
A Union official
An Islamic leader
A Harry Reid staffer
A radical Chicano separatist


http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2007/11/cnn-plants-questions-to-protect-hillary.html

[asdjrocky]

13. LOL what a joke,

An audience that boos on cue... to the Puru trade agreement yet. hard to believe. You heard it come on like someone pushed a button.

[Evergreen Emerald]

64. on cue? How about when appropriate.

[illinoisprogressive]

29. Last night was a sham and some media is investigating.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/16/questions-about-carville-begala-and-cnn/

[Cameron27]

32. Good, I hope they investigate thoroughly.

[laureloak]

31. Well, since a Clark posted this, I have to believe it was

all a set up to make Hillary look good.

It was phoney bullshit. That's what that campaign is built on - bullshit.
More of the corporate bullshit. More double talk, lies and back room deals.
I want no part of it.

[jenmito]

34. And as we now know, CNN chose the questions to be asked and they chose the "diamonds or pearls"

question for Hillary when the girl wanted to ask a question about Yucca Mountain. Also, many journalists or THs commented on how Hillary got a pass on her "No" answer re: licenses for illegal immigrants, getting no follow-up from Blitzer about what made her change her position once again...

[ClarkUSA]

55. CNN lost another chunk of the 10% credibility they had left. Link to that story follows...

Maria Luisa, the UNLV student who asked Hillary Clinton whether she preferred "diamonds or pearls" at last night's
debate wrote on her MySpace page this morning that CNN forced her to ask the frilly question instead of a pre-approved
query about the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/11/diamond_v_pearl_student_blasts_1.php

[girl gone mad]

42. I don't think Hillary benefitted.

The booing really made her supporters look petty and made Hillary look weak.

[ClarkUSA]

48. Iowans especially would have been turned off by the rude partisan booing.

Bless those Iowans. They are the only state where it's a three-way statistical tie between Edwards, Obama, and Clinton.
Being American, I dislike coronations. I suspect Iowans do too.

[PurityOfEssence]

52. It definitely did a lot to reinforce the image of the ham-fisted Clinton approach

That was my reaction when watching it: do you MIND? It's one thing to voice one's disagreement, but it's another to virtually attempt to drown out opposition. When viewing the hits Obama and Edwards took, it was rather more than just showing disapproval.

More and more, the Clinton campaign reminds one of those old Merrill-Lynch commercials: a big herd of stampeding cattle rushing at camera. "Hide the china, ma, here they come agin!"

Bullying appeals to the weak and the mean, but not to many other people. Had the responses been ones to make feelings known, that would have been one thing, but this was intimidation.

Fine, let them be uncouth boors; people pick up on that, and one is judged by the company one keeps.

[ClarkUSA]

63. That's what desperation does to a campaign.

Hillaryworld is very very afraid that they might lose Iowa to Obama or Edwards, so they are pulling out
every dirty trick in the book to make "the boys" look bad to stop her slide in the polls in Iowa.

[Egnever]

43. Sigh

Once again since you seem to be thick.

Hillary polls as high as 53% here what do you expect from a crowd of nevada dems a kucinich bias?

[Joe the Revelator]

44. You act like 53% indicates a mandate....

or that people at debates should act the way they did.

[ClarkUSA]

47. Exactly what I've been trying to say, all to no avail.

Those boobirds sure were loud, weren't they? Funny how they flocked together like that.
I've never seen that before in a presidential debate. Must be something in the NV air.
Yeah, that must be it.

[AtomicKitten]

49. No big deal.

The heckling and boo'ing was tacky and will reflect on the candidate on behalf of whom it was done. That kind of stuff always does.

[ClarkUSA]

65. You're right.

Bad karma always comes around to the source at some point. I hope the due date will be Jan. 3.

[JDPriestly]

50. I didn't think that the booing threw Edwards off.

He was unfazed. He responded to it, but gently and firmly. He handled it very well. It is definitely not too hot in the kitchen for him. I think he thrives on this stuff. That is because he is just himself.

[Andromeda]

53. You are just friggin' crazy!

This is just insane. Now Hillary is in the mob!

:tinfoilhat:

[ClarkUSA]

54. See Reply #3

Before posting, reading through a thread helps.

Keep the tinfoilhat. It suits you.

[bbgrunt]

58. those facts explain a lot and do not bode well for the future

of decreasing the government propaganda budget.

[ClarkUSA]

59. Don't they?

Good point: Self-interested propaganda is not limited to Republicans.

[bbgrunt]

60. what it tells me is that domestic psyops and planted questions

and controlled free speech zones and government controlled press will continue unabated in a Clinton adm.

[ClarkUSA]

62. I haven't thought that far because I don't think she can win against Giuliani or McCain in the GE.

But you sent a chill down my spine. Imagine... instead of Karl Rove, we'll have union-busting,
fake-exit-poll/coup-securing, Blackwater PR rep Mark Penn as Clinton's right hand man.

Wow, that's restoring honor and integrity to the White House!

[Skip Intro]

66. Omg. Hillary has a great night and those hostile to her stretch and twist to make it not so.

It's really funny.

She was together and did a great job. Obama faltered. Edwards faltered. That's what happened.


It wasn't a conspiracy with CNN. It wasn't a stacked audience. It wasn't alien intervention.


:eyes:

[ClarkUSA]

68. Oh, and the girl with the planted CNN question is a former Reid staffer, one of many, I'm sure.

From a NYT article last night.