ButterflyBlood
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 01:20 AM
Original message |
To Hillary supporters blaming caucuses and "intimidation"... |
|
I live in a caucus state. We voted 2:1 for Obama. There was no element of intimidation here because we didn't vote by standing in groups, we voted via paper ballots. And it was secret ballot, at least if you wanted it to be (many Obama supporters showed their votes at my precinct out of pride basically.) You didn't need to even attend the actual caucus to vote! You could've just voted and left like a normal election. And we still gave Obama a 2:1 victory, and an over 86%+ victory in my precinct.
So then how is it that the evil caucus system is the reason Obama wins?
|
JVS
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 01:22 AM
Response to Original message |
1. So the reports of old ladies being lit on fire by crazed college kids are exaggerated? |
ButterflyBlood
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
A few screaming college kids can change any woman's vote! Because obviously women are so weak and easily intimidated, no woman can ever stand up to a man...oh yeah and if you don't support Hillary you're sexist!
|
CoffeeCat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 01:33 AM
Response to Original message |
2. You know what is so sad about all of this... |
|
Edited on Mon Feb-11-08 01:35 AM by TwoSparkles
Is that caucuses are such an awesome way to participate in democracy.
They are organized, they are lively and everyone understands that each person and their vote--are respected.
When you caucus, you stand with neighbors, friends and others from your community. Everyone is so helpful and kind. There isn't any pressure, nor does anyone get angry or upset with anyone for endorsing a particular candidate.
I caucused for Dean in '04. I was the only one for Dean so he was not viable. I had people in every candidate camp talking to me about their candidate. I learned a great deal, but I decided not to join another camp. No one was angry. No one threatened me or made me feel bad. It is all respectful. We are all adults.
Hillary Clinton has disparaged the Iowa caucus process. She is now filtering this hate-filled talking point through Web sources and through her surrogates. It's so self serving and it's so disgusting. It's being done to SERVE HER. She's trying to diminish the effect of Obama's multiple wins, by blaming the caucus process and criticizing it.
In effect, she is disparaging the states that have caucuses, and the people in these states who work so hard to make them fair and professional.
I am really disgusted with what a human lawn mower Hillary Clinton is. She cuts up anything that gets in her way, and she doesn't give a rip who that hurts or how hundreds of thousands of people in caucus states will be affected by her lies and distortions.
She really is a selfish, myopic, ruthless person--and I am ashamed that she is a Democrat.
You would think that with 35 years of experience--that she would have learned a little bit about being a decent, gracious person--instead of devolving into a bitter, cynical, Rovian propagandist.
|
Eurobabe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. For that you get a heart! |
CoffeeCat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 01:51 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
...for the heart. That was sweet of you.
Love your Kool Aid guy!
:hi:
|
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 01:40 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. What a vile hate-filled post-go wash your mouth out with soap-strong soap! |
CoffeeCat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 01:50 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
8. No actually, it's not hate...it's sadness... |
|
Sadness that Hillary Clinton would service herself, and not care one whit about anyone else.
Hillary's needs and wants trump the caucus states, AND the untold numbers of people who just participated in those caucuses, AND the people who worked so diligently to make those caucuses professional and fair.
She's denigrating and insulting thousands of people.
Curious that you find truth so revolting, yet you have no qualms about your candidate slicing and dicing caucus goers and states that have caucuses--nearly one quarter of the Dem electorate that has voted so far in these primaries.
|
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
26. Clinton has made a fair assessment of caucuses--they do disenfranchise |
Egnever
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 01:40 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
ginnyinWI
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 01:41 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
7. I'm so tired of Hillary's excuses! |
|
If she were to become president, is this what we'd hear for four years? Whining about how everything that went wrong was someone else's fault? Sheesh! What if a male candidate were to try that ploy?
And as for her ruthless tactics, maybe she has some idea that they make her look "strong". But we've already had seven years of that kind of thinking.
"Human Lawn Mower"--great imagery!
|
joshcryer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 01:51 AM
Response to Original message |
10. Not all caucuses are like that though. |
|
Edited on Mon Feb-11-08 01:53 AM by joshcryer
edit: oh, btw, I don't "defend Hillary's losses" because of the caucusing system or anything. I mean obviously there's a compenent to it, but I have no problem with the way the system is now. I think it should be changed, however, due to caucuses having so much say with so little representation. Either that, or an all day caucusing system where you don't have to be there at a certain time and place. Oh, and national voters days would be nice, too.
|
CoffeeCat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 01:55 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
12. Have you ever participated in a caucus? |
|
Edited on Mon Feb-11-08 02:04 AM by TwoSparkles
You speak as if you've got an encyclopedic knowledge of caucuses.
If someone says something positive about a caucus, you dismiss it and point out that...well, not all caucuses are good.
People who participate in caucuses, have gone to them for years and help organize them are trying to tell you guys--that what Hillary says is pure bull.
She had no problem with the caucuses before she began tanking in the polls in Iowa--three days before the caucus. Then, the propaganda machine kicked in high gear.
She's been out of control with her bitter disinformation campaign ever since, and people like you who engage in this "Swiftboatting" are only echoing her lies.
I want to know what experience you've had in a caucus.
|
joshcryer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 02:06 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
18. I will admit that I've never been to one, however, I have been to town meetings... |
|
...on many ocassions. Now I know they're not the same thing, but logically, just how society works, I think that they're not fair for all sorts of reasons. I want everyone to be out there voting, I think it's incredible that the USA, supposedly the harbringer of global modern democracy, has some of the lowest turnouts of any democratic state.
And as we can see with the recent turnouts in caucuses, they simply cannot handle our populations.
Maine got 12-15% turnout of the Democratic Eligible Voters. NY got 31% of Democratic Eligible Voters (they're both closed, one is a primary the other is a caucus, as you know). And Maine had record turnouts. Almost 4 times as many people came out in Maine as in 2004. Don't you find that disconcerting?
How can people all vote, what can compell them all to vote? Where each vote is equal?
I am a proponent of direct (possibly runoff) democracy.
|
CoffeeCat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 02:14 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
22. You're right that town-hall meetings aren't... |
|
Edited on Mon Feb-11-08 02:15 AM by TwoSparkles
...the same as a caucus. Not even close.
I don't find record turnouts "disconcerting". Not in the least.
This year in the Iowa caucuses, we had record turnouts. Turnout increased 100 percent from 04. I was a precinct captain, so naturally I had a lot on my plate that night. However, it was fun, exciting and absolutely thrilling to be involved.
Everyone worked together to make sure that we had accurate counts, the process worked just fine and everyone went home knowing that their vote wasn't lost down some optical scan voting machine.
It was beautiful.
Unprecedented turnout is a good thing. Any type of election process would face challenges with record turnout. That's no reason to scrap the process.
The problem is, these "problems" with the caucuses don't exist. Hillary is making up rumors to service herself and her campaign. That's the problem.
I think it's good that you think about these processes and that you have your own opinions about what is good. You mentioned a runoff. It's good to think about alternatives and to want fair processes. However, I think we can all agree that being a sore loser and disparaging the process--to hurt your opponent is selfish, and it damages people who don't deserve it.
|
donheld
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 01:55 AM
Response to Original message |
|
I can honestly say in my precinct, in Denver's Capitol Hill, there was NO intimidation at all.
|
CoffeeCat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 02:02 AM
Response to Reply #11 |
14. Intimidation was never even SUGGESTED.. |
|
Edited on Mon Feb-11-08 02:03 AM by TwoSparkles
...until this year, by Hillary Clinton and her surrogates--AFTER she lost the first caucus in Iowa.
The Iowa caucuses have been going on for more than 100 years. During that time, we've never had a single candidate accuse the caucuses of disenfranchising voters or being bastions of intimidation.
Funny, how all of this disgusting evil just simply slipped by the thousands of politicians who won and lost in the caucuses through the years, isn't it?
This is getting utterly ridiculous.
Our caucus process is fine. There is nothing wrong with it. There is something wrong with Hillary Clinton--because she is willing to denigrate the states that have caucuses, and the people who vote and organize them---to leverage her own political distortions.
I have newfound disrespect for her--because of this.
When you know the truth, and see it---and you watch a candidate lie and distort--it's very sad and very telling.
|
cooolandrew
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 02:01 AM
Response to Original message |
13. Exactly, he has genuinely won. The labels we've got "c" words, mysogynists and now violent bullies.. |
|
...That is not the Obama supporters I have witnessed they all seem very good nature and enthusiastic.
|
Hill_YesWeWill
(652 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 02:03 AM
Response to Original message |
15. well, I'd picka caucus over a primary any day, it actually seems more democratic |
|
and a lot more involved and Fun!
|
TexasObserver
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 02:03 AM
Response to Original message |
16. They're just cranky, that's why they're making these absurd cult comments. |
|
It's probably got something to do with the Metamusil shortage. All that ... anger ... backed up.
|
CoffeeCat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 02:06 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
19. Well, hold on Texas... |
|
...all of that anger will be in your state, in less than a month.
If your state does not go Hillary's way, you should expect her to start insulting your state and your political process!
Get ready for it. It's coming!
Vote for Hillary or your whole state is a sham!
:rofl:
|
TexasObserver
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 02:14 AM
Response to Reply #19 |
23. Well, maybe that new cereal will be available for them by then. |
|
What's it called? Oh yeah, Colon Blow, with 48 times the fiber as TOTAL.
|
CoffeeCat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 02:16 AM
Response to Reply #23 |
24. I wouldn't want them campaigning in my state... |
|
...after eating a few bowls of that!
:hi:
|
Hill_YesWeWill
(652 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 02:19 AM
Response to Reply #19 |
25. Bring it on, I cant wait for the candidates to come here, I live about an hour north east of Austin |
|
and I'm starting to see myself as right in the middle of the two candidates, I really like them both, maybe I'm undecided?
|
nonconformist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 02:05 AM
Response to Original message |
17. I hope North Dakota goes blue in November, with all that Obama support |
|
And gives us their 3 electoral votes.
|
ButterflyBlood
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 02:10 AM
Response to Reply #17 |
20. So now only blue state Democrats' votes matter? |
|
Well previously we've heard fro Billary that blacks' votes don't matter, next step...
But my 2:1 Obama state is a blue state, and the one with the longest streak of voting Democratic, since 1976 and beyond.
|
lligrd
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-11-08 02:13 AM
Response to Original message |
21. I'd Love The Opportunity To Participate In A Caucus |
|
I think it is wonderful that you guys have a choice. With us it is just stand in line, vote and go to work.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 05th 2024, 09:17 PM
Response to Original message |