Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Union Files Suit Over Casino Caucuses


Members of the Culinary Workers Union, which has endorsed Obama, will likely make up most of the casino caucusgoers. (Reuters).

By Paul Kane
LAS VEGAS - A teachers' union filed federal suit late yesterday trying to shut down nine Democratic caucus sites to be held next Saturday in casino halls along Las Vegas's famed "Strip", arguing that those sites give unfair advantage to union workers who are backing Sen. Barack Obama.

The suit was widely expected by state party officials as well as Obama's campaign and the powerful Culinary Workers Union 226, which earlier this week endorsed the Illinois senator in advance of the Jan. 19 Nevada caucus. That endorsement had been eagerly sought by Obama as well as Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and former senator John Edwards (D-N.C.), and by yesterday afternoon culinary union leaders told the Washington Post they expected an outside group with ties to Clinton to file a motion seeking to quash the casino caucuses.

The Nevada State Education Association, some of whose top leaders have individually endorsed Clinton, filed the suit and is using a law firm with close ties to the onetime front-runner, Kummer, Kaempfer, Bonner, Renshaw, and Ferrario. Former congressmen James H. Bilbray (D-Nev.), a lawyer at that firm, has endorsed Clinton and is stumping for her in the Silver State.

"The Democratic Party of Nevada has violated the principle of 'one person, one vote' by creating at-large precincts for certain caucus participants, based solely on the employment of such participants," the suit alleges.

The contention surrounds the nine casinos that have been selected as at-large sites for tens of thousands of workers who will be working midday next Saturday inside the many casinos in Las Vegas, a town whose dynamic energy is fueled by shift workers whose work patterns don't fit into the Monday-through-Friday schedule of most cities. All nine of those casinos have employees organized by the culinary union, giving Obama's campaign a large edge in terms of proximity and ability to get his supporters to those caucus sites.

In a first-of-its-kind arrangement, executives at culinary union-backed casinos have largely been cooperating with their employees to allow them to take a break just before noon Saturday - when the caucus begins - to participate in the political event. The teachers union contends this set up is specifically for just those union workers.

But those sites are also open to any shift worker, from cab drivers to employees at non-union casinos, on duty midday Saturday within a 2-½ mile radius of the nine casino caucuses. They must present identification showing that they work on or near Las Vegas Boulevard, as the "Strip" is officially titled.

However, the logistical reality of the casino haven - where mega-size casinos can be a half-mile long and the Strip is clogged with cabs hustling gamblers around town -- is that it will be very difficult for workers in non-union casinos to be able to take the time to walk or drive to the casino caucus sites.

There will be 10,000 delegates to the state nominating convention available to the candidates among the more than 1,700 normal precinct sites, but as many as 650 delegates will also be up for grabs in the "at-large" sites inside the casino ballrooms that are being retrofitted into political halls for the caucus. Some estimates are that these casino precincts could produce 10 percent of the total statewide participation in the caucuses.

The state party quickly dismissed the lawsuit. Going back to last spring, every presidential campaign was involved in setting up the unusual casino caucus sites while state party officials and the Democratic National Committee ironed out the details. "This is a fair, legal and proper way to choose delegates under established law and legal precedent that has been reviewed by attorneys....The time for comment or complaint has passed," the party said in a statement.

The union was more blunt, contending the arguments are only a political effort to muddy the waters in case Clinton loses. "It's strange [the suit] is coming after our endorsement," said D. Taylor, the secretary-treasurer of the local labor group, told the Washington Post in an interview last night after an Obama rally in his union hall.

Here is a link to the suit (PDF), courtesy of Las Vegas' top political blogger, Jon Ralston.

By Washington Post editors  |  January 12, 2008; 2:48 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Race to Super Tuesday, Now on TV
Next: Gone From the Granite State, But Tactics Not Forgotten

Comments

hyguj giqztp yhwq osvatueq gydfj audmpf rxwtcljfu http://www.qozkv.kotj.com

Posted by: doxa xpye | August 21, 2008 1:46 AM | Report abuse

vywdunlmg bekdjoiu svta exwqrukyj oqzjxgnr fwxbprdm vzurkpje

Posted by: lwjehk dknbcywe | August 21, 2008 1:45 AM | Report abuse

I'm astounded and disturbed by the vitriol against Hillary Clinton on this issue. I can't say I've ever much cared for the woman, but the lockstep nature of so many pro-Obama comments really give me pause. All I see in Obama is a man with very little experience, lots of rhetorical flourish and very little substance about anything. Bill Clinton is right--the guy is a fairy tale.

Go Hillary!

Posted by: ddjones | January 17, 2008 6:54 PM | Report abuse

rat-the, you are correct in stating that nowhere does it say that Hillary Clinton is doing anything! The reality is she could be doing something. She could be asking her supporters to drop this suit, which would have a much better impact on her campaign than allowing them to proceed.

The reality is that she agreed to the process last year. She has control over her supporters, and can press them to drop this suit but she will not, which immediately makes her guilty by association. If she is such a "voice of reason", why can't she reason with her supporters? She has no integrity or leadership skills, and will ultimately hurt the democratic process by allowing her supporters to continue with the lawsuit.

I am an NV resident, and many of the points that were made by the NSTA president in Nevada had to do with the lack of fairness because her workers would not be able to show up to caucus. first of all, her workers are teachers, and do not work on Saturday (the day of the caucus).

Secondly, she stated that Janitorial employees are required to work on Saturday and would not be able to caucus. Janitorial workers have a completely different Union, and I'm fairly certain that they will be allowed to caucus regardless.

Nevadan's understand how important it is for us to have a vote in this primary, and many are taking their voting responsibility quite seriously. This lawsuit is essentially saying that many Nevadan's don't matter, unless they support Hillary. This is a gross manipulation of the current democratic system, which I'm sure we all agree is not exactly the most organized and efficient system. But to counter a rule only after the Union impacted endorsed your candidate's competitor is a gross infringement on voters rights and the civil rights of the American people.

rat-the "I had to read the article a few times, but I am certain that NO where in it does it state that Hillary Clinton is doing anything! Once again people are reading and interpreting what they want.

I would much rather see people speak about facts as it relates to the candidates, instead of assumptions as it favors their candidate."

Posted by: tom.mcmillan | January 17, 2008 2:24 PM | Report abuse

The Clintons have stooped to a new low. This is truly disgusting. Is there no end to their "Clintonian" ways? BTW, "Clintonian" will define for this generation what "Nixonian" was to my Baby Boom generation - any campaign that specializes in dirty tricks. Oh, how I hope this couple does not get back in the White House! We need a new direction in the Democratic Party, away from the 1990s and the Clintons. Barack Obama will make a phenomenal president!

Posted by: uofmdgrad | January 16, 2008 11:38 PM | Report abuse

It is time to pass the torch away form Clinton-Bush divisive politics of the past 20 years. It is time to move forward !
I hope we have an independent candidate to vote for if Hillary is nominated because I will vote against the Dems for the first time. I fail to see how Clinton can stand for a new direction this country desperately needs.

Posted by: PulSamsara | January 13, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

This "strategy" on the part of Clinton's surrogates to disenfranchise thousands of Latino union workers is extremely shortsighted and can only serve to hurt her in the long run if it succeeds. I can already see the 527 attack ads on Univision, Telemundo, etc., trumpeting that "Hillary Clinton *says* she's a friend of the Latino community... but thousands of hardworking Latinos were denied their right to vote because they decided to endorse another candidate instead of her. Make sure to cast your vote for a true friend of Latinos, before Hillary's friends try to take your vote away from you." That should play real well in Texas, Arizona, Southern California, New Mexico...

Oh, and the labor unions who still haven't announced their endorsements for a particular candidate won't view such anti-labor tactics with enthusiasm either. Unions have lost a lost of their clout from days past, but it still rankles their rank-and-file members when they see fellow blue-collar workers being denied the vote. Unions react poorly to attempts at strong-arming, especially by politicians. With friends like the leaders of the NSEA, Hillary doesn't need enemies.

And while there's no direct evidence of coordination between Hillary's campaign and the NSEA, she made another major misstep this morning on "Meet the Press" when Tim Russert broached the subject of the lawsuit with her. Instead of taking the opportunity to publicly disavow the NSEA's efforts to disenfranchise these thousands of Latino union members, Hillary shrugged and said it was a matter that should be left to the courts. Way to stand up for minority voters there, Hillary! A condemnation of NSEA's tactics would have cost her nothing and would have been smart politically, while at the same time doing absolutely nothing concrete to impede the lawsuit. Instead she gave the impression that she tacitly approves of this attack on voter rights.

Hillary can claim to have all the experience in the world, but wisdom and good judgment are what counts. They seem to be in pretty short supply today.

Posted by: whatmeregister | January 13, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

I like your observations, jade_7243!
With Hillary going after the women's vote and the Hispanics vote, there should be a few things kept in mind - Clyburn was asked how he felt about a comment she made referencing MLK, Jr. He voiced disappointment...and she blamed Obama. Bill Clinton's comment re: Obama 'fairytale' - he called Sharpton to 'clarify' it. It seems to me that in these 'slipped comments, the truth is readily evident. Take a look at the Jan. 5th article by Kate Phillips in the NYT. Some time after a Union organization expressed their backing of Clinton, a portion of that Union spent funds, much to the UNION's chagrin, in advertising to bash Obama. And then, let's look at the Culinary Union...not long after they express their support of Obama, the Teacher's Union files suit..by some of the SAME PEOPLE who APPROVED the 'expanded' caucus sites a while ago! And lastly, it appears, at least to me from all I have read, that the Clinton campaign is pitting black against white against Hispanic, women against me...and yet she is the first to use the word 'devisive' ness with reference to others! Her campaign is doing NOTHING to encourage UNITY...and that truly IS what we need right now! Or is it just another case of change your speech to suit whoever you're talking to at the moment? Is it 'what's best for the American people'? Or whatever it takes to get Hillary in the Whitehouse? My advice? Women, Men, Hispanics, non-Hispanics...PLEASE read as much as you can BEFORE you cast your final vote! And to the commentor who noted the lack of negative comments against Obama...perhaps it's because his only comments have been, as far as I can see, to defend himself against the mudslinging OTHER candidates have lowered themselves to!

Posted by: ndolan622 | January 13, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

melodymg says>>>there is no reason to be holding a caucus in a casino. there are plenty of schools and other buildings that can be used. im glad somebody is looking into this.

You've obviously never been to Las Vegas. You won't find anything other than mega-casinos/hotels, fast-food joints, souvenir shops, penny arcades and similar attractions along the Strip. There's nothing vaguely like a school or municipal building suited to the purpose of convening caucuses literally for miles around, and certainly not within walking distance when you're a casino worker on an hour break. If this lawsuit succeeds, thousands of workers will be unable to vote. Is that acceptable to you?

Posted by: whatmeregister | January 13, 2008 12:43 PM | Report abuse

The Nevada State Education Association, some of whose top leaders have individually endorsed Clinton, filed the suit and is using a law firm with close ties to the onetime front-runner, Kummer, Kaempfer, Bonner, Renshaw, and Ferrario. Former congressmen James H. Bilbray (D-Nev.), a lawyer at that firm, has endorsed Clinton and is stumping for her in the Silver State.

These individuals are deeply involved in the Clinton campaign and are acting as her surrogates in Nevada. Hillary need not muss her fingers when she has the minions to do the dirty work for her. Do not think for one minute this is done without the full approval and behind the scenes orchestrating of the Clintons, their campaign manager Terry McAuliffe and strategist/pollster Mark Penn.

Posted by: jade_7243 | January 13, 2008 10:08 AM | Report abuse

How about a suit against the public employee unions. These endorsed Clinton and, although we don't how how they did it, they pulled the biggest elect fraud in American history in NH. So, no voting in any site controlled by one of the state, county, etc. employees and don't allow them to count the votes, either. Worse, these scum are allowed to exchange emails, while "working", about the election. Is there some way of closing that down, too?

Posted by: mibrooks27 | January 13, 2008 2:40 AM | Report abuse

WHAT IS THE DEAL WITH CLINTON HATERS? I REMEMBER A TIME OF PROSPERITY AND PRIDE IN AMERICA AND THE REST OF THE WORLD LOVING US. I ALSO REMEMBER REPUBLICANS DOING EVERYTHING THEY COULD TO CAUSE PROBLEMS. NOW THEY SAY WHO WANTS A RETURN TO THE SCANDAL RIDDEN CLINTONS? I DON'T GET IT, MRS CLINTON HAS SPENT HER LIFE TRYING TO SERVE THIS COUNTRY. I DON'T KNOW WHO I WILL SUPPORT BUT I'M LEANING TOWARDS HER DUE TO THE VITRIOL I'M READING HERE. WHERE'S THE VITRIOL DIRECTED AT OBAMA? OH, HE'S BLACK AND YOU DON'T DARE SAY ANYTHING TO QUESTION HIM OR YOU ARE RACEBAITING. AS A BLACK PERSN I WOULD LOVE A BLACK TO BE PRESIDENT BUT BECAUSE OF HIS EXPERIENCE AND PLANS FOR THE COUNTRY. NOT BECAUSE OF HIS SKIN COLOR AND A (STARTING TO BE) REALLY ANNOYING CATCH WORD. CHANGE. CHANGE WHAT? HOW? I HAVEN'T HEARD AN ANSWER. ANYBODY HERE, WITHOUT SLAMMING CLINTON, PLEASE TELL ME WHAT OBAMA HAS SAID TO YOU THAT PUTS YOU IN HIS COLUMN? I'M COMPLETELY OPEN TO HEAR FROM YOU, BUT STICK TO HIM AND HIS POLICIES, I ALREADY KNOW YOU HATE CLINTON.

Posted by: dwashington314 | January 13, 2008 1:08 AM | Report abuse

Hmmmm..... If the Clintons and their supports don't look like they are getting their way, they cry foul. Look what they are doing now! It's just a bad pattern. I hope they get beat bad.... It should have happened in NH. This Sh*T won't play all over the States... I hope people who want change open their eyes!

Posted by: QuietStormX | January 12, 2008 11:33 PM | Report abuse

FUNNIEST COMMENT ON THE THREAD:

The whole Obama campaign stinks.
They will say or do anything to get elected.

Give me Hillary Clinton any day.

Posted by: svreader | January 12, 2008 09:40 PM
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Hillary Clinton has proven she will do anything to anyone for power. To pretend not to see that is amusing indeed. The color of the sky in my universe is blue. That apparently doesn't apply to everyone. Go google "Hillary Uncensored."

Posted by: dougfromupland | January 12, 2008 11:20 PM | Report abuse

They agreed to the casino sites. They lost the endorsement. They filed suit. Is anyone surprised?

Posted by: elange | January 12, 2008 11:07 PM | Report abuse

Hillary supporters must be one taco short of a combo plate to make everyone believe she is not behind this. The public is not that stupid. Her comments about illegal immigration is going to backfire on her in NV. She will say anything to get elected.I am so sick of her!

Posted by: laland69 | January 12, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

there is no reason to be holding a caucus in a casino. there are plenty of schools and other buildings that can be used. im glad somebody is looking into this. hillary is a true leader. obama doesnt come close. go hillary GO!!!!!

Posted by: melodymg | January 12, 2008 10:12 PM | Report abuse

As an avid follower of your election from Ireland, I agree with DDAY. I saw no reference to action by Clinton in the article. It is interesting to note that the outraged comments supporting Obama greatly exceed the comments defending Clinton. Very quick to react and appears very organised.

Posted by: gerry1 | January 12, 2008 10:06 PM | Report abuse

I had to read the article a few times, but I am certain that NO where in it does it state that Hillary Clinton is doing anything! Once again people are reading and interpreting what they want.

I would much rather see people speak about facts as it relates to the candidates, instead of assumptions as it favors their candidate.

Posted by: DDAY_2525 | January 12, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

What I am curious about, is how are the polling Stations set up at the Military, and Government bases? Those are going to be pro-Billary!

Quid pro quo?

Then, I could recommend only affending your Food Handlers, AFTER you get served!

Posted by: rat-the | January 12, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

These comments sadden me because of their ad hominem nature.

Need I say more?

Posted by: pmroddy | January 12, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

The Clinton campaign might want to reconsider a move that clearly seeks to disenfranchise union workers. This Putin-like move will be an issue in the upcoming primaries.

Posted by: karlanne1 | January 12, 2008 9:44 PM | Report abuse

The whole Obama campaign stinks.
They will say or do anything to get elected.

Give me Hillary Clinton any day.

Posted by: svreader | January 12, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

If a school has a thousand employees, then, sure, holding a caucus there is just like holding it in a casino.

If the +only+ caucus sites on the strip are union casinos, sorry, it's a serious fairness problem.

Posted by: WylieD | January 12, 2008 9:25 PM | Report abuse

Now, how does Clinton look? Will people realize Clinton is not for change. Not for minorities gaining power, (it's all a fairytale, isn't that what they said?) and it looks like she is about to kick Nevada's largest and most powerful union in the shins. So do you think she'll win Nevada? I guess she is expecting lose, and this will increase the chances. I don't understand the campaign she is running. Everyone agreed to this months ago in Nevada, and now they cry poor me. Yes, it is going to be Clinton's trademark tactic, those tears, and that "they're picking on me" refrain. Good grief. This is no way to try to be the first female President. It is really pathetic.

Posted by: goldie2 | January 12, 2008 9:13 PM | Report abuse

FROM THIS LINE OF REASONING, CAUCUSES THAT MEET IN SCHOOLS AND LIBRARIES GIVE AN ADVANTAGE TO THE TEACHERS' UNIONS. But since teachers are more educated than the servants, we shouldn't question these public servants nor any advantage they might have when the coolies walk through schools and libraries that have all the accoutrements of education.

Sounds a bit elitist to me; and it fits right in with the attitude of their chosen candidate - that "do-gooder Methodist", which is how Molly Ivins described Hillary Clinton's motivation.

Hillary knows what we need . As she has said, she has "so many opportunities for this country, and I just don't want them to slip away." We just need to sit down and shut up before she raps our hands with her ruler.

Posted by: Anadromous2 | January 12, 2008 9:10 PM | Report abuse

FROM THIS LINE OF REASONING, THE CAUCUSES THAT MEET IN SCHOOLS AND LIBRARIES GIVE AN ADVANTAGE TO THE TEACHERS' UNIONS. But since teachers are more educated than the servants, we shouldn't question these public servants nor any advantage they might have when the coolies walk through schools and libraries that have all the accoutrements of education.

Sounds a bit elitist to me; and it fits right in with the attitude of their chosen candidate - that "do-gooder Methodist", which is how Molly Ivins described Hillary Clinton's motivation.

Hillary knows what we need . As she has said, she has "so many opportunities for this country, and I just don't want them to slip away." We just need to sit down and shut up before she raps our hands with her ruler.

Posted by: Anadromous2 | January 12, 2008 9:06 PM | Report abuse

For "virginiaconservative" and others, especially those who sit at the feet of the Maharushi, "Caucus" is an Algonquin Indian word, not Latin. Therefore, the Latin plural "Cauci" is incorrect. The correct, obviously, is "Caucuses."

Posted by: filoporquequilo | January 12, 2008 9:05 PM | Report abuse

I wish the Clinton supporters would wake up and see this woman for what she is. A scheming and caculating witch! She is dividing the Democratic party and its gonna hurt our chances to retake the white house. Do you think people feel this way for no reason? I am beginning to understand why conservations has so much disdain for her. I am no longer drinking the clinton kool-aid. It has given me gas.

Posted by: laland69 | January 12, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse

As an elected member of the NSDP board, I can tell you that several in this lawsuit are also in party leadership, sit on our State Central Committee, one is an elected official, and ALL voted in the affirmative to accept the formula we have been working on all year, during 4 consecutive SCC meetings in NV during 2007.

The DNC approved, we are compliant and ready for a terrific event next Saturday that will include all nine Strip sites that were part of the presentation we gave the DNC in seeking the early date this cycle.

No one in this suit voiced any objections...until their person was not endorsed by NV's largest and most powerful union the other day.

One week before we caucus, it is no less than disingenuous to protest now, isn't it? A late Friday filing to get press bang?

Let's see this frivolous suit for what is is ladies and gentlemen.

Posted by: mjzahara | January 12, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

Totally agree with above post, Clintons will do anything to get to white house

"OBAMA, he's smart, speaks well, inspirational, educated, young, black, but ask yourself this, does he point this out himself our do we. That is what the Clinton campaign is "Afraid" of. That you will take the time to look at him, and see what is really wrong with American, because he doesn't fit the stereotype of what white America really thinks about black people. That is the fear that the Clinton campaign is afraid that we will see in them. That is why they have been visages in their attacks on Obama, and are trying to dismiss him. So don't be fooled by the Clinton's or Karl Rove, they are both using the same playbook. "Attack, Attack, Attack, Dismiss, Dismiss, Dismiss, Blame, Blame, Blame, Destroy Destroy Destroy, Defeat, Defeat Defeat"! Then we the people LOOOOSE!!!!!"

Posted by: dewanitum | January 12, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

Totally agree with above post, Clintons will do anything to get to white house

"OBAMA, he's smart, speaks well, inspirational, educated, young, black, but ask yourself this, does he point this out himself our do we. That is what the Clinton campaign is "Afraid" of. That you will take the time to look at him, and see what is really wrong with American, because he doesn't fit the stereotype of what white America really thinks about black people. That is the fear that the Clinton campaign is afraid that we will see in them. That is why they have been visages in their attacks on Obama, and are trying to dismiss him. So don't be fooled by the Clinton's or Karl Rove, they are both using the same playbook. "Attack, Attack, Attack, Dismiss, Dismiss, Dismiss, Blame, Blame, Blame, Destroy Destroy Destroy, Defeat, Defeat Defeat"! Then we the people LOOOOSE!!!!!"

Posted by: dewanitum | January 12, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

P.S. I sure wasnt aware that the Clinton's ran A teachers' union or any other Union?? Are you sure it isn't Obama or Edwards that's rigging all these elections and taking over the Unions?? If your going to tell a lie, tell a really big one. that way folks will figure it's true because you sure wouldn't lie about something that's really big. Gosh darn folks, get a life!

Posted by: faray | January 12, 2008 8:35 PM | Report abuse

Woe to those who court the wrath of the Hillaroids and the Teachers Union! To me it looked like New Hampshire was "fixed" so that Ms. Unavoidable would be near the top of every ballot while B.O. graced the bottom, hard to locate among the 28 or so (believe it or not) candidates. Watch for the Teachers Union to call a strike in cahoots with the students giving them several days off provided they campaign for Ms. Unavoidable. B.O., beware!

Posted by: filoporquequilo | January 12, 2008 8:31 PM | Report abuse

P.S. I sure wasnt aware that the Clinton's ran A teachers' union or any other Union?? Are you sure it isn't Obama or Edwards that's rigging all these elections and taking over the Unions?? If your going to tell a lie, tell a really big one. that way folks will figure it's true because you sure wouldn't lie about something that's really big. Gosh darn folks, get a life!

Posted by: faray | January 12, 2008 8:31 PM | Report abuse

As an elected member of the NSDP board, I can tell you that several in this lawsuit are also in party leadership, sit on our State Central Committee, one is an elected official, and ALL voted in the affirmative to accept the formula we have been working on all year, during 4 consecutive SCC meetings in NV during 2007.

The DNC approved, we are compliant and ready for a terrific event next Saturday that will include all nine Strip sites that were part of the presentation we gave the DNC in seeking the early date this cycle.

No one in this suit voiced any objections...until their person was not endorsed by NV's largest and most powerful union the other day.

One week before we caucus, it is no less than disingenuous to protest now, isn't it? A late Friday filing to get press bang?

Let's see this frivolous suit for what is is ladies and gentlemen.

Posted by: mjzahara | January 12, 2008 8:31 PM | Report abuse

Whose complaining? What with a few free drinks and the slots close by, how better to caucus? Let the Clinton bashers have a few drinks on the house.
You just might be surprised at who they pick. Only thing is, I think there should also be caucus's held outside the strip just in case someone who doesnt party or assoicate with that type of clientel can hold a caucus void of drink, drugs, gambling, etc (you know what etc means, right-grin!). Lets give everyone a chance to participate. OK? Now lets party!

Posted by: faray | January 12, 2008 8:13 PM | Report abuse

There goes the Clinton machine again! Trying to rig another election. I don't care what anybody says. I still feel suspicious about the NH primary results. Why are the Clintons so afraid? They should have Nevada all locked up. Not! Is this how they are gonna win? By lawsuits and crying in public. This is so disgraceful.

Posted by: laland69 | January 12, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

Also, if you look at what has been said over and over again, The Clintons have been telling us that Barack Obama, isn't good enough to represent any race, or class of people. That is why this is so dishearten the since of "Entitlement" We don't owe anyone our vote, and this is how the American people are being pushed into voting for the Clinton's. What was done in the past is just that, the pass! What matter now is what you have done lately!

Has Hillary made any major changes since she has been in the "Senate" now, did she vote for the war and the Iran resolution, what bills has she passed that has helped the American people within the last 7 years. What makes you think that anything will change, does she have the ability to work across party lines.

From what I see so far we are being had, all talk and no action. So my point is this "We the People of the United States, must judge for ourselves and not what anyone is willing to say to get elected.

So, Hillary if we don't have unity instead we will still have divide then what good would it do to elect you!

So, if Obama can bring about change then we are better off going with a new way of thinking instead of having the same old thing and expecting different results equal Stupidity!

As, to race and the gender card being played it has been played all along by the Clinton. Example: I am a woman, I sorry that you don't like me, crying to get votes in NH, what does that say about what you are willing to do to get elected. Remember their is no crying in politics, state you case and move on.

OBAMA, he's smart, speaks well, inspirational, educated, young, black, but ask yourself this, does he point this out himself our do we. That is what the Clinton campaign is "Afraid" of. That you will take the time to look at him, and see what is really wrong with American, because he doesn't fit the stereotype of what white America really thinks about black people. That is the fear that the Clinton campaign is afraid that we will see in them. That is why they have been visages in their attacks on Obama, and are trying to dismiss him. So don't be fooled by the Clinton's or Karl Rove, they are both using the same playbook. "Attack, Attack, Attack, Dismiss, Dismiss, Dismiss, Blame, Blame, Blame, Destroy Destroy Destroy, Defeat, Defeat Defeat"! Then we the people LOOOOSE!!!!!

So, I ask you again we are free to choose the candidate of our own choice, but don't be fooled by what you see, or hear the Clinton say. Bill Clinton, hasn't never been a black president for black people, but rather the president of the United States of America. That IS the same opportunity that Barack Obama is asking of us too!

Posted by: thomca2 | January 12, 2008 8:09 PM | Report abuse

Look:

The Clinton's are taking advantage of an early lead by selecting which "quirky' process they'll participate in (Iowa) and which they won't (Nevada). I say - if you're an African-American running in national political elections - they're all quirky, and then some.

This argument via the Hillary campaign doesn't hold water, and lends it self to anti-labor, as it come from teacher union higher-ups, as opposed to a teacher's union.

Posted by: zachrosenau | January 12, 2008 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Sour Grapes! What a sore loser she is indeed!

Posted by: alzach | January 12, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

Sour Grapes! What a sore loser she is indeed!

Posted by: alzach | January 12, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

Sour Grapes! What a sore loser she is indeed!

Posted by: alzach | January 12, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

I have two points:

1. The caucus process is not democratic enough and should be scrapped and banned. One person, one vote in a secret ballot. And protect every person's right to vote.

2. There is nothing different about the Nevada caucus rules today versus the past 6 months or so. Why sue now and not then? Answer: because you don't care about being fair, you only care about winning at any cost. The Clintons take what works from anyone be it Obama's call for change or the Republican's voter supression tactics.

Posted by: matt_ahrens | January 12, 2008 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Quick Bill, wake up! Get your clothes on, they want to have a caucus in the trailer!!

Posted by: Tupac_Goldstein | January 12, 2008 7:45 PM | Report abuse

I'm for Obama, but I fail to see the difference between holding them in casinos and those Nevada houses of ill repute.

Posted by: johng1 | January 12, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

The only election where the Clintons managed to eke a 2-point victory and 0 delegate advantage is highly questionable. In a caucus (Iowa) that could not be rigged, they tried to disenfranchise students and failed. In another caucus (Nevada) that cannot be rigged, they're trying to disenfranchise casino workers by changing the rule of the game in the middle of the game and by pitting blacks against Hispanics.

http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Triangulation_Clinton_camp_pitting_Blacks_against_Hispanics

Clinton pivoting her campaign on Latino racism:
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Clinton_Pivoting_Her_Campaign_on_Latino_Racism

Can we beat them? Yes, we can! Si, se puede!

Posted by: zrarieh | January 12, 2008 7:38 PM | Report abuse

The cauci should be held in government education establishments where the non-partisan NEA would diligently guard against any favoritism.....

In reality, olding them in casinos is ok and it certainly illustrates the warm connection between the left and organized crime. It would be really appropriate for them to be held in Indian owned casinos.

Bclinton and Reid would really feel at home.

Posted by: VirginiaConservative | January 12, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Back when Hillary was "inevitable" these rules would have benefitted her. Her campaign must have figured they would have a lock on Nevada.

Now that she doesn't look at her complain:

  • Caucuses "disenfranchise" voters.

  • The Culinary Workers' endorsement of Obama was unfair.

  • The creation of "at-large" precincts for workers is unfair.

  • Her opponents are always "piling on" her.

  • The compressed calendar out of Iowa into NH was unfair because she wouldn't have time to stop Obama's momentum.

  • College students being allowed to caucus or vote in their college towns is unfair.

  • The large number of black people in South Carolina make that state unfair to her.

  • "Open" primaries where independents can vote are unfair to her campaign.
  • Gee, have I missed anything else? The spin out of Nevada will be Obama "cheated" her out of a victory.

    Sour grapes and tough noogies.

    Posted by: jade_7243 | January 12, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse

    Looks like a loser. Sour grapes.

    Posted by: mnjam | January 12, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

    Five to Two, Billary gets her way!

    Four to one, Edwards cries this time!

    Obama caught Gambling Campaign finances, Even Money!

    Take a lesson fron OJ, sometimes what happens in Vegas, can actually keep You in Vegas!

    Posted by: rat-the | January 12, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

    The comments to this entry are closed.

     
     
    RSS Feed
    Subscribe to The Post

    © 2010 The Washington Post Company