NV teachers criticize lawsuit over caucus locations

Let the people vote, why would the Clintons discourage people from voting? I think it's just another silly tactic

I love the fact that this letter inadvertently calls it what it is by automatically assuming workers who show up at these sites will be "caucusing for Senator Obama". Why? Because they'll be intimidated into doing so.

So, Bravo Nevada Teachers Union. On the contrary, you are not preventing Nevadans from "caucusing for Senatory Obama". Rather you are preventing the Culinary Union from intimidating workers into caucusing for Obama.

This is another example of Clinton Tanya Hardyism. All the voters want to do is make sure they have an opportunity to do so. If they cannot get off from work to go to their neighborhoods, which are probably miles away, they will not be able to vote.

I'm sure that if Clinton had good judgment she would have had her organizers stop this action a year ago. But now that she runs a risk of losing the state.

Never underestimate the power of the Clintons. And never overestimate their ability to find a pile of dog doo doo to step into. They did it for 8 years in the 90's and are trying to kneecap everybody to do it for at least 4 more years.

If the teachers union had a problem with these caucus sites, they could have raised objections nine months ago, or four months ago, or even one month ago.

But instead, they apparently had no objection to it -- until the Culinary Workers endorsed Obama.

Anyway, the solution here would be to open even more caucus sites -- not to close down sites and limit participation.

Do I understand that the gigantic city of Las Vegas will have caucuses only in the strip casinos? What about the other hundred thousands citizens there who work and live elsewhere? Are Las Vegas Democrats willing to let 60,000 Culinary Workers who will not have a secret vote take away their voice? Who would vote against the Union bosses and their selection when everyone in the union will know how everyone voted?
Is this weird democracy or not?

Congratulations, Trib, you made the Rolling Stone hit list. RNC bruce would be proud:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/17977692/merchants_of_trivia

The clinton surrogates are attempting to disenfranchise voters in 9 locations. There are only 9 locations in dispute here. These locations have been approved for many months by the state and national leaders of the democratic parties. Clinton and her surrogates have stoop low by involving themselves in this ill-advised move only because they did not get the endorsement of the culinary union.

"There will be more than 1,700 caucus precincts across Nevada, but estimates are that the votes cast in the casinos could be more than 10 percent of the statewide total"

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/us/politics/13vegas.html?ref=us

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1953016/posts?page=3

Remember after Hillary lost Iowa, she said that the caucus was unfair because the evening workers couldn't caucus for her. Now Nevada solved that problem and now she's saying that the caucuses are to be held in neighborhoods, not in work places.
If she's so scared that the workers will be bullied in to voting for Obama she should call for impartial oversite at the casino sites.
And the teachers union needs to drop it because the only reason the caucus is on Sat. is so the teachers can vote on the weekend so that they wouldn't be disenfranchised.

So, now, Senator Clinton's highly connected folks are disenfranchising voters. Are we supposed to believe that the Clinton campaign had nothing to do with this?

Her new campaign slogan should be 'BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY' at least that would be truthful.

First the Clintons tried to stop students from voting in Iowa, and now they're trying to disenfranchise voters in Nevada...pattern, anyone?
They're shameless and are running scared.

Strange that the Dem machine in NV (Harry Reid's son is top guy)had this set up for her so nicely until they found out he would get the endorsement. These people really give me the creeps. I really want to believe in the system again, but if she wins I am moving to Canada.

Now you know what will take place in Washington if Hillary is elected...

Republicans love this!
All of these comments are doing great harm to the Democratic party. Maybe a party of this nature is not ready to win the white house.

Who needs a "Vast Rightwing Conspiracy" when the Clintons seem so intent on self-immolation, sacrificing their slender legacy on the alter of serial victimhood?

Let's hope that the country is smart enough to sidestep their smarmy little show.

This issue highlights how all caucuses disenfranchise voters who are unable to attend them, and deny people the chance to express their wishes via secret ballot, thus freeing them from undue influence of other voters.

I am a Hillary Clinton supporter. Or, I was-- until this week.

This is NOT REMOTELY ACCEPTABLE, Hillary. I'd planned to vote for Hillary because of her experience, connections and ability to get things done. But she has undone all of this support by attacking the most sacred tenet of democracy itself, the right of people to have their voices heard.

These rules have been in places for almost a year in the Nevada caucus, yet somehow Hillary's camp only waits until after Obama gets the endorsement to attack them?

That is bull.

I am not supporting Hillary at all now. I will not vote for her in the general election if the Democrats nominate her. I will even vote for a Republican nominee in November as a protest vote.

And no, do not try to shout appeals to "party unity" or some snake oil like that. I will toss you out on your ear.

Because if we don't make the Clintons pay for this action here, then we merely encourage it among other campaigns in later elections.

We are a better country than that and a better party than that. And this will carry a heavy price for Hillary, for more than her campaign can remotely imagine.

If the teacher's union had a problem with this why didn't they do something about this NINE months ago! This is the Clinton's trying to stop voters voting for Obama.

Makes you wonder if Karl Rove is helping her out.

Republicans love this!
All of these comments are doing great harm to the Democratic party. Maybe a party of this nature is not ready to win the white house.

Posted by: John | January 14, 2008 6:12 PM

Nah, we don't want to be like the Repubs who lockstep behind everything and everybody their overlords (Rush, Bill-O, Seany H etc) tell them to.

The Wingnuts deposit their brains at the door when they sign up for GOP i.e. Jerry White, Johnny D, Paulo, Terry etc.

Hillary really is the lowest of the low. I can't believe she made those comments in Iowa and is now using her muscle to disinfranchise voters.
It's not that she is a racist. It's that she cares about no one but herself and being powerful. She has no problems keeping the very minorities she claims to care about from voting.
Anything to win. Imagine what a presidency under her will be.

I have been asking God to show me the right person to side amongst the democrats.

He has used this 'EVIL ACT IN NEVADA' to show me whom NOT to vote for.

The crafty will be caught in his craftiness. Enough of craftiness in White House.

Teacher Union officials shouldn't allow themselves to be used like this. We teach government classes but want to create barriers? Don't seem to jive. Bringing the caucuses to the people is the way to go in a 24 hour town like Las Vegas.

I have worked in the hotel business my whole adult life. If you understood the kinds of employees that are the workers that do the manual labor day in and day out you would also know that this job may be just the 1st job and that they may go to a second or maybe a third. Choosing to have the caucus in hotels is a way to allow them to join in the process. Shame on the education union for causing a stink about this. These are the folks that could only wish they had the education for their children that you already have. And they do this by working very, very hard to achieve the "American Dream" for them.

Democrats trying to limit voter participation? This sets a bad precedent heading into a national election... the clinton campaign is starting to look a bit like those of Bush the younger. My biggest concern is that Hillary will bring down Obama and destroy herself in the process, leaving the door wide open for McCain to waltz into power. Either that or Bloomberg. Come on people! This is not constructive!

The lawsuit filed by Clinton allies in Nevada against planned "at-large" caucusing Jan. 19 on the Las Vegas Strip is beginning to look a lot like voter suppression. As we know, the plan was drawn up and approved unanimously early last year by the Nevada Democratic Party leadership, with input from the presidential campaigns, to enable caucusing by Strip workers unable to leave work to caucus in their home precincts. Indeed the plan's creators include several of those who are now plaintiffs against it. What changed their minds? Barack Obama's endorsement Jan.9 by the 60,000-member Las Vegas Culinary Workers' Union changed their minds. When the plan was approved, Hillary Clinton was presumed to be the "inevitable" Democratic frontrunner. Iowa changed all that, and Obama's subsequent endorsement by the culinary workers has brought a Clinton win in Nevada into serious question. Since it is largely members of this union who would be caucusing in the casinos, the plan is clearly no longer in Clinton's best interests. Hence the lawsuit against the plan, filed just two days after the Obama endorsement and scarcely a week before the caucus by Clinton allies from the leadership of the Nevada State Education Association (NSEA), on the grounds that it would be unfair to workers in other areas. Why didn't they think it was unfair earlier? After all, the plan was approved nearly a year ago in the very name of fairness, to enable participation by those who would otherwise be unable to caucus. The answer is simple: Because the lawsuit has nothing whatsoever to do with fairness, and everything to do with stacking the deck in favor of Hillary Clinton. The Clintons themselves are not official parties to the suit, but both Hillary and Bill Clinton have spoken in support of it despite the fact that their campaign and others were included in the at-large caucus plan from its inception. They, like their friends in the NSEA, have had more than ample time to consider and reconsider the plan, but appear to have deemed it unfair only since the culinary workers endorsed Obama. While the judge in this case obviously has every reason in the world to throw it out of court, I don't expect that even if it prevails the culinary workers will allow it to prevent their members' caucusing. In fact I wouldn't be at all surprised to see chartered buses from the union shuttling members between the Strip and their home precincts to caucus, a lot of pressure on Strip employers to comply, and a lot of anger at the Clintons and their allies for this seedy attempt to change the rules at the last minute. The whole affair seems likely indeed to do the Clintons far more harm than good in Nevada; and as we know, what happens in Vegas doesn't always stay in Vegas.

Amazing, and rather gross, that even the Orlando Sentinel is participating in the media blackout of Ron Paul. How can I even respect this source if, under the section "The Candidates" you can't have the respect to include Mr. Paul - even though he has already place higher - significantly - than Rudy Guiliani. To a new voter it is foul to see what the media has been doing.

I am supremely encouraged seeing most of the comments up here are against the lawsuit. i worry about the conscience of America sometimes, but i love to see truth-mongers such as yourselves sticking up for what's right. Amen, preach on, let's keep the faith!

Perfect caucus rules there are nto but the adjustment of placing caucus locations inside casinos is not very well thought out. Where can it end? It can't. A time period of say a week or even a month (like Oregon) would be fair with an election. This is poor and ill conceived.