Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

OFB challenges NV caucusers based on their accents

Not to pre-judge the matter, snort, but having the OFB complain about fraud every time they lose a primary is getting a little old. Check the latest one over at Big Orange. Maybe yes, maybe no. If there's substance to the Obama organizer's report, no doubt the matter will come out in court. (If so, it would be interesting if the general tenor of OFB threads at Big Orange was introduced at trial. Witness impeachment, anyone?)

The Clinton operative herself had a Brooklyn accent and I overheard her mention having been from New York. When she stood to be counted in the middle of the room, I objected and asked her if she was actually from Nevada. She said yes. I talked to the chair and asked him to ask her name and find her on the list. He asked her her name and checked the list, and she was not on it. At this point the chair said, "well, I can't ask for ID." I said, "She can't participate if no one will vouch for her." At this point a Hispanic man wearing a Hillary shirt said she was his wife. While that's not impossible, it was also improbable--but I had no way to verify or object further.

Challenging a snowbird when there's no way to back up your challenge seems rather impetuous to me. Why pick a fight you can't win?

Another piece of "evidence" is that the complaint lines to the Obama campaign were jammed. Seems a leetle bit circular to me...

Anyhow, time will tell if NV pans out, unlike NH.

0
No votes yet

Comments

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

From the Kos post linked above, the OFB caucus operative's assessment of Clinton tactics:

"there is no question that Hillary was running a scorched-earth, no-holds-barred campaign in which all of her surrogates were instructed to cheat in every way possible."

As an strategy for winning, surprisingly effective over the centuries; against Republicans, it might even work. Better approach than Unity, for damn sure.

Clinton/Edwards '08. Hmmmmm.

Sarah's picture
Submitted by Sarah on

Ten days off the internetz ended for me Saturday.

One evening at Kos and I am ... committed ... to John Edwards.

I've supported him since I found out he was running again. I've always thought the 2004 ticket was upside-down, and I still believe something happened to John Kerry to take the fight out of him. Whatever it was didn't happen to Edwards.

Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama, to my mind, is no different than McCain/Thompson or Romney/Huckabee.

It won't move the country away from the death grip we've been in since 2001, and it won't give us anybody in office who'll stop the investor class from raising their demands for more money -- it's blood money already, between the price of oil, the profits on the wars, and the insurance-industry's routine denial of necessary health care.

We've got to stop caring first and most about money, and get back to caring first and most about people. Otherwise it won't matter who we elect, because whatever we end up with won't really be the United States of America anymore.

We can admit that we're killers ... but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes! Knowing that we're not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

Don't actually think there's any need to worry about any combination of Clinton + Obama getting in the White House, that combo strikes me as a stone loser against any Republican ticket. Add up the negatives and there's just too much to overcome.

We'll know more after SC but the polls are softening for Edwards and the media won't improve and the money's drying up and, well, very depressing is what it is.

Possible that admiring Reagan, for whatever reason, will be Obama's "George Allen Moment" and the predominantly Democratic voters on Feb 5 will be turned off enough to move somewhere else, maybe Edwards will pick up some steam.

If I can't have him on top of the ticket I'll take him as VP, anything but HRCBHO. As to the difference between R and D, may not be much except for SCOTUS but there is that and another reactionary or two would be a bigger, longer term problem than anything the R's have done so far.

I really like Edwards. Sigh.

Submitted by [Please enter a... (not verified) on

Honestly, after the stunts he's pulled throughout his campaign--summary: displaying admiration for the right and scorn for the left--I don't want him anywhere near the presidency. The worst sin he committed was denying John Edwards his rightful chance to become the nominee. I'm telling you if Obama had chosen to keep his damn ego in check, Edwards would be the leading candidate right now.

I am so damn terrified about Clinton as our nominee. She will be up against McCain, the corporate hack press, and the rabid right that has been itching for this fight since 1992. When you combine that with the fact that there are several Dems who will simply refuse to vote for her, the only chance she has is to rally the left (i.e. champion progressivism and dismiss the right). I honestly can't see any other way, especially knowing full well the GOP will rig the election as they did in 2000 and 2004. Our only saving grace is that she seems the type to do what it takes to win.

Clinton/Craig '08: Unity--Wide Stance Version!

hobson's picture
Submitted by hobson on

I'm not sure McCain can inspire Florida and Ohio type election manipulation but, I take some comfort in the idea that Dems know how to rig elections too.

Update: After reading the comments at Kos all I can say is Oy. This is the group that is going to unite Americans behind common causes?

intranets's picture
Submitted by intranets on

"I’m not sure McCain can inspire Florida and Ohio type election manipulation"

Umm... I disagree!! He (who-must-not-be-named) is even talking about his dark arts here.

You should not take my warnings about Grandpa McCain lightly. If Rove was the brains of GOP chicanery then this guy is the hands, dick, and mouth of all things corrupt.