Obama: Clinton Won Dirty.... Clinton Campaign: Obama Lost Dirty

One thing is clear: Nevada has to figure out how to do a better job next time.

Barack Obama's campaign is accusing Hillary Clinton's of deliberately violating caucus laws to prevent late-arriving Obama voters from participating.

Obama's campaign counsel, Bob Bauer, said: ""There was a clear disenfranchising effect. We want a full review of this."

He said the campaign received more than 300 complaints from folks who were not allowed into caucus sessions even though they had been in line to register by 11:30, the stated time. The campaign obtained what it said was a copy of Hillary Clinton's caucus manual and what it said were misleading instructions to caucus chairs.

Here's the page from the Clinton caucus guide.

One entry says: "11:30: Deadline for registering (or standing in line to register) to participate in the Caucus. And then: "11:30: Caucus chair closes door."

Nevada Democratic Party rules say: "In order to participate in the Nevada State Democratic Party Caucuses, attendees MUST be in line, or signed in, by noon. At noon, Presidential Preference Cards should be given to any person in line, and after that point, no Presidential Preference Cards should be given to any new arrivals, as they will not be allowed to caucus."

Clinton's campaign just held a conference call alleging that Obama precinct captains engaged in the same type of shenanigans. "As a result, many of our supporters were harassed and intimidated when they tried to register at the caucus," said Robbie Mook, Clinton's Nevada state director.

Mook said the team had discovered "numerous instances of miscounting" to Obama's benefit.

Clinton senior adviser David Barnhart said he was at the Mirage at-large caucus heart and "witnessed...voter intimidation." He said that many union workers told him that they would not be given permission to take a break from their jobs and caucus unless they voted for Obama. He said one woman was told by supervisor that she would not be given preferential shifts unless she voted for Obama.

Barnhart said that before the caucus began, Obama's team formed a "gauntlet" and tried to "intimidate" voters as they entered the caucus room.

Mook said the Obama campaign's allegations were "completely false, and frankly, pretty desperate."

Comments

So what happened?

Obama won the contest.

. . . but that doesn't get reported.

There was no popular vote count.

. . . but hardly anyone understands that (they wrongly think county convention delegates = popular votes).

The doors closed at noon.

. . . but the Clintons shut them at 11:30.

Hillary probably had more numerical support.

. . . but the rules are so weird that we'll never know.

God I hate caucuses.

Posted by southpaw | January 20, 2008 6:42 PM

Sen. Obama's supporters are the biggest crybaby losers, whiners, and blame-throwers this season. I guess that's really what Obama means by "the new politics": whining about losing, taken to the next level.

Posted by JPerez | January 20, 2008 6:58 PM

If Clinton supporters were harrassed and intimidated, as the Clinton campaign says, then why didn't we see any blogs or online reports of this happening from the Clinton supporter point of view? It's been quite rampant from the Obama point of view, starting immediately after the caucus ended.



Also, there's a succinct difference between union intimidation, which is not directly connected to the Obama campaign, and falsehoods in a published rules book from the Clinton campaign.



The Nevada rules are pretty straightforward to me. Everyone must be signed in by noon. That sounds like a pretty clear, well drawn line of difference. The Clinton book doesn't even come close to the requivalent of the Nevada rule. They simply say that doors close at 11:30.

Posted by indieFL | January 20, 2008 7:02 PM

If the Clinton camp believes Obama was "engaged in the same shenanigans" as they, where's the evidentiary Obama Caucus Guide? One thing is for certain, Obama did *not* get behind a lawsuit to block a caucus the way the Clinton camp did days before the Nevada Caucuses. The Clintons are a detestable duo of power gluttons that will stop at nothing in their quest for political dominance. I will emigrate if they get a third term in the White House.

Posted by Kelly | January 20, 2008 7:12 PM

Obama always morphs into a big drama queen and raises some stink whenever he loses an election or debate.

Let him whine and play the race card (again) all he wants. It will only solidify Clinton's already strong standing with whites, Latinos, and Asians.

Posted by JoeCHI | January 20, 2008 7:14 PM

An examination of the rules shows two rules in particular that are of interest: the caucus is called to order at 11:30 AM or after all registration is completed AND no caucus math/viability announcement is to be made before Noon. One thing we learned in Iowa is that the calling to order of the caucus effectively means it has begun, the doors are closed, and no one else is allowed in (which is why the caucus is not called to order until after everyone has registered). There is nothing which says that the caucus cannot be called to order until Noon (instead, the rule says that caucus math cannot start until Noon -- but there is a lot of stuff which needs to occur before Noon, which is why the caucus was to be called to order at 11:30). The Obama camp is crying foul when it should not be -- because a caucus chair obviously called the caucus to order at some point after 11:30 and AFTER all registration had been completed. This is why some of the casino caucus sites were not called to order until after noon because there was so much registration that needed to occur.

Posted by Xavier | January 20, 2008 7:15 PM

Yeah, the Clintons were setting themselves up for this ahead of time, because they knew they were going to strongarm, and they wanted to make it look like the Obama campaign was doing the same -- hence Slick Willy complaining even before the votes were in that there was intimidation on Obama's side. He knew what was coming. But if the press does their homework (doubtful, since most reporters, as we know, are a pretty lazy bunch), they'll see where the facts are.

God, what sleaze the Clintons are. If Obama or Edwards lost, I thought I might vote for them, but not any more. I doubt I'd vote Republican, but I'll sit on my hands before I vote for the Clintons.

Posted by Scott | January 20, 2008 7:18 PM

If Hillary is such a good manager - going into the nitty gritty - as she says, how come she and her campaign can't even get the time right. I ask Americans this : she doesn't even know what the rules are - and you want to elect her as President?

Posted by John Dominguez | January 20, 2008 7:20 PM

Now I understand why nearly 48 hour before the caucusing exercise Bill started making outrageous statements of "Obama campagn planning to coerce voters and planning malpractices".
Simple!
Plan to play dirty but in the meantime plant doubt and suspicion in the minds of the unsuspecting general public about the intentions of your opponents.

Bill, is it greed thus pushes to stoop sooooooo low?

You are shamelessly dirty, Bill! You two will stop at nothing!

May be this will help us:

==============================================
Dear Bill,

We loved Bill Clinton as president.

When you told us you didn't inhale, with that little twinkle in your eye, we believed you and loved you even more.

When you got more than just a twinkle in your eye and a cigar in the -- well, we stuck by you. We rallied against the vast right wing conspiracy and ushered Newt and his fellow reptilians out of office.

Man, the 90s were fun - huh? The Macarena alone... But now we're in a new decade. Web 2.0, YouTube and camera phones; preemptive wars and terrorist attacks. It's a new era. And we've spent 8 years under the thumb of a royal son.

We're ready for change. We have some amazing Presidential Candidates. Edwards, Obama, and of course, the candidate like family to you - Clinton.

I know you want your wife to win. A lot of us want a Democrat in 2008. But you're getting mean Bill. That twinkle in your eye is starting to look more like crazy eye.

You're making accusations that Karl Rove & Co. will eat up and spit back out at us come time for the general election.

You're actually disenfranchising folks this time around, dividing the electorate at a time we need to come together.

And Bill, you're starting to make stuff up. And this time, we're noticing. It's a new era, Bill; everything you say is recorded and broadcast.

So what we're asking, Bill, is that you just shut up.

Just shut up.

Sincerely,

Pretty Much Everyone

http://www.shutupbill.com/

Posted by Joe | January 20, 2008 7:24 PM

It should go without saying that Mook is completely full of shit... and, frankly, JPerez's comments are almost intellectual compared to the norm exhibited by Hillary supporters at the caucus yesterday.

I was an Obama precinct captain yesterday at a school about 15 minutes off the Strip. There were 7 precincts caucusing at our site, with 3 of us in the gym alone. It was fairly chaotic. And I saw with my own eyes many of the dirty tricks alleged by the Obama campaign. Also saw the obnoxious bullying - it was nothing less than a Clintonian version of the "Brooks Brothers mob" at the 2000 Florida recount.

However much Mook and JPerez may wish it to be so, our complaints aren't "sour grapes" or "a little desperate." Every single Obama precinct captain in Clark County that I've been in contact with had the same view I did: Hillary would have won WITHOUT all the dirty tricks, although by a lesser margin in some cases. Being beaten fair and square is something we could easily deal with. Having shit rubbed in our faces in the form of Rovian dirty tricks is another thing.

It was clear that Hillary's Nevada campaign was better organized and benefited from the machinery of the Clark County Dem Party, which provided many of us with party chairs who were unabashed Hillary partisans and who tolerated or in some cases encouraged all manner of cheating.

But means matter as much as ends, and are revealing of character. Voters who have been lied to, cheated, smeared, taunted, or strong-armed as if we were campaigning against a Karl Rove Republican will not soon forget. Remember this in November if you come to us on bended knee looking for donations, volunteers, or votes.

And good luck trying to parry the inevitable Republican dirty tricks in the general. How will you complain about them when you've eagerly engaged in them yourselves?

Seriously, have the Clinton campaign or its cult-like supporters thought at all beyond the next primary?

I remain convinced that Obama is far and away the most progressive candidate, and the one most likely to win with a governing majority in November. The Clinton camp is the party of losing Congress, losing national elections, losing the battle for hearts and minds b/c they only preach to the converted.

BillB

Posted by BillB | January 20, 2008 7:24 PM

Have you ever thought that not all Hillary supporters have the time and luxury to sit in front of a computer and tell their stories? Why do you think all bloggers are invaded by pro-Obama posts? Based on media bias and blogs I though Hillary campaign was in trouble. And it isn't at all. As Obama his supporters are just more vocal. I applaud Bill Clinton and Hillary's campaign for trying to reach everyone. I watched the Cesar Palace caucus on TV yesterday.. it was a big black man who went often on Hillary supporters' side talking to caucusers. I have no idea what he was saying, but if it was me, I wouldn't be comfortable to have such a big guy around. So, yes, I believe it was intimidation again Hillary's supporters. Obama and his campaign promotes verbal bullying style so they can be very aggressive.

Posted by Mati | January 20, 2008 7:27 PM

Joechi,
Obama has never played the race card and built his campaign on that. The Clintons said things that were racially insensitive and Obama SUPPORTERS were upset and questioned their intentions, not Obama. He never released a statement. Here is a man who could talk about being black and get the black vote. He could talk about being biracial and could appeal to both blacks and whites. He could talk about being the son of an immigrant and appeal to Hispanics. He could also talk of being born in Hawaii and living in Indonesia to appeal to Asians, but he never does any of this. He is very inclusive of all people becomes he comes from all people.
It seems as though white people want to say he brings up the race card to find a way to dislike him. However, God sees all and goodness will prevail over evil!!!

Posted by Cammy | January 20, 2008 7:27 PM

If there is a dispute, who do I trust? Obama! Obama has character and is principled. He has been running a positive, up-lifting campaign. His only problem is not having been able to respond to the Clintons' swiftboating quickly and forcefully enough (such as "false hopes" and "fairy tale").

In addition to defending himself better, he should start the conversation of "experience." What experience does Hillary actually have except for the experience of playing political games as usual? The Clintons and Karl Rove are the masters of this game. We have already seen some of this since Iowa. This is not what the country needs.

Posted by Jen | January 20, 2008 7:31 PM

The Clintons are trying to drag everyone into the mud with them. Yes. they do play dirty and are good at it. Is this what we want for our future? On the other hand read Obama's speech today. Outstanding! THIS is who we are!

Posted by B | January 20, 2008 7:31 PM

The official rules for the NV caucus are pretty vague on this, really. You're supposed to be there by 11:30, but registration's not closed until viability is determined by 12:00PM. So if no one's in line anymore and viability's not at issue and the chair organizes a viability count and goes through it, things can be entirely over before 12:00PM.

The Clinton manual's dead wrong about closing the doors at 11:30 regardless of what's going on, though, but it's probably an honest mistake. Clinton staff fighting to enforce that mistake after being told about it is another story. If you watch the silly video on Obama's site about how to caucus (http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/nv_caucus_center/) you'll see that he guided supporters to show up at 11:30... dunno about Obama's coordinator guides, but I doubt he'd tell them to close the doors right at 11:30AM for any reason since he was counting on votes from people taking time off their lunch break right around noon in the casinos.

Posted by Zach | January 20, 2008 7:32 PM

I caucused for Barack Obama in Henderson, NV, yesterday, and this is what I experienced (I realize this is just one caucus site, but from what I've heard from other folks in my community, some of these things were typical):

1) When I arrived, all of the "officials" were wearing Hillary T-shirts, and directing people to their caucus location (there were several precincts caucusing at one school)

2) Despite a clearly posted sign that read "Absolutely no food or drink inside the caucus," the Clinton folks had set up two large tables with sandwiches, cookies, coffee, and other snacks--and a sign that said "for Hillary supporters only." I witnessed an Obama precinct captain very politely inform them that food was not allowed, and that he and his friends had planned to bring food but left it at home when they heard about the rule. The Clinton person's response "A lot of things are against the rules." (see #3 for more on that!)

3) When I introduced myself to the Obama captain in my precinct, he asked me to leave my OBama sign outside, because the democratic party does not allow signs inside the caucus. AGAIN, the Hillary people had dozens of signs, both hand-held and taped to the walls. The Obama captain asked the person in charge of the caucus to have them removed, and she said "I don't have time to enforce every little rule."

4) The vote was very close, with Hillary having a slight advantage. The paper ballots were taken by 3 women with bright yellow Hillary shirts on, counted, and results were announced. It was crowded, and very hard to tell what was going on. The ballots were split between three people, plus a few extras sitting on a chair in the middle of the room. Anything could have happened, and nobody would have known.

5) I think it's important to say this: many of the Hillary supporters were perfectly friendly, and were simply trying to show support and enthusiasm for their candidate. Unfortunately, others were not. I saw many instances of hateful, rude, and/or inappropriate behavior on the part of Hillary people. I realize I was only at one caucus, but there was a VERY stark contrast with the Obama people. Where the Obama precinct captain was engaging in friendly conversation with uncommitted voters and Edwards/Kucinich supporters, the Clinton precinct captain stood in front of the uncommitted section and said things like:
"Who IS Barack Obama? He is from Kenya (wrong) and we don't know anything about him! Do you really think this country should be run by a foreigner with no experience? Hillary has been in the White House for 8 years!"

I raise these issues not as a way of crying foul. I'm glad the caucus is behind us, and I'm proud of how well Obama did in my mostly white retiree community, and in Nevada. Rather, I wanted to point out the differences I see in the attitudes, actions, and character of the two candidates' SUPPORTERS. In my caucus site, on the internet, and elsewhere, I am starting to notice a deep divide between the Obama and Clinton camps, and it's much more than just fierce competition. I know there are exceptions, but there are also fair comparisons. On the average:

--Clinton supporters believe in the "win at all costs" strategy the campaign employs; Obama supporters detest that kind of politics.

--Obama supporters cringe when their candidate goes negative; Clinton supporters delight in it, and in some cases, perpetuate it in their own communities.

--Clinton supporters use fear to motivate their friends to join them, Obama supporters use optimism and hope.

--Obama supporters are fighting for something they believe in; Clinton supporters are fighting for something they feel entitled to -- I can't tell you how many times I've heard the "Barack Obama needs to wait his turn." arguement from Clinton folks in my community.

--Clinton supporters express their intensity through anger; Obama supporters through cheers and expressions of solidarity.

Just my thoughts. From what I've heard I'm not the only one noticing this stuff. And for the record, the real villain of yesterday's caucuses was the state Democratic Party -- what a mess. I hope they do a better job next time.

Posted by RP | January 20, 2008 7:35 PM

Since BIll Clinton said the LV strip caucuses got 5 more votes than anyone else and since Hillary won the LV strip caucuses would she have still won if they only counted as 1 vote? I have not heard this addressed in the news. Just trying to understand these caucus rules.

Posted by Char | January 20, 2008 7:36 PM

Obama picked up 13 delegates to Clinton's 12. And Clinton won? So did Dewey...

Posted by Vince, Sparks NV | January 20, 2008 7:42 PM

Mati,

You are wrong!

You may blow the Billary trumpet but the truth is sugar-coating the evil inherent in this couple isn't at all a panacea to the scandals and dangerous seed of dirty politics they have perpetuated for nearly 2 decades now.
It's really interesting how a certain cross-section is always willing to buy their usual "I have never *#@?& that woman" stuff!
Really! You are now trying to replace Billary with Barack!
No shame at all?
Despite the protests that started coming in so early someone is willing to stick out their neck for Bill!
Or, should I suppose that they have already successfully passed on the mantle to the next generation?

Posted by Joe | January 20, 2008 7:48 PM

I am a member of the Democratic Central Committee for my county in Iowa, was a precinct chairperson, and a precinct co-captain for Senator Obama. Our county had very specific guidelines for our caucus sites and the Obama people were told not to break any of the rules. Clinton field operatives and the Clinton precinct captains wanted to completely ignore the county chairs. If you were a veteran caucus goer/organizer, then things were difficult but you could manage. If you were fairly new to this, the harassing was hard to deal with. One first-time precinct chair who was an Edwards supporter went to check on final arrangements at her caucus site and found the Clinton captain trying to set things up the way he wanted to do them. This story line was repeated all over Boone County and the state of Iowa. I do believe the Clintons want to win at any cost. Senator Obama was an unexpected element in their game plan. We had to abide by the Senator's ideals of repsect, inclusiveness, and empowerment. If this sounds like whining, then so be it, but it is the truth. PN, Democrat from Iowa

Posted by Pam Nystrom | January 20, 2008 7:49 PM

Char said: Since BIll Clinton said the LV strip caucuses got 5 more votes than anyone else and since Hillary won the LV strip caucuses would she have still won if they only counted as 1 vote? I have not heard this addressed in the news. Just trying to understand these caucus rules.

The math Clinton used only applies to comparisons b/w precincts in Clark County (or other large counties) and the at-large precincts. You can see the at-large results here.

Here's the total # of delegates assigned for each:
Wynn: 79 delegates
Bellagio: 62 delegates
Mirage: 69 delegates
Paris: 61 delegates
Luxor: 77 delegates
New York New York: 34 delegates
Rio: 28 delegates
Flamingo: 49 delegates
Caesars Palace: 33 delegates

If you compare those numbers w/ Mark's post on the at-large caucuses you can extrapolate for a few of the districts. Basically, anything below 50 delegates (Caesars, Flamingo, Rio, NYNY) got 1 delegate per 5 caucus attendees. For the others, you have to wait until the total vote #s are out.

I don't know exactly what Bill's math was, but at-large precincts with

Posted by Zach | January 20, 2008 7:53 PM

RP I thank you for your sincere and detailed account of your thoughts and feelings as to what you experienced at the Nevada Caucus. I thank you for the honesty in which you expressed your views and hope you will NOT support Hillary in the General as a result of her actions, tacts, and unethical practices not just in Nevada elsewhere as well.

I hope you vote against her in the general if she becomes the nominee to show your disdain for how she acts, carries herself, and what she represents. No person, no matter what party they are affiliated with, should be awarded the presidency for acting so deviously and maliciously.

Posted by js | January 20, 2008 7:53 PM

Really, the blame for all of this falls on the democrats of Nevada. Obama's people never acted like this in Iowa or NH (though Clinton's people were engaging in a bit of bullying at some NH precincts), so it doesn't really seem like his campaign's doing. From what I've read, it seems like Nevada democratic voters get a bit overzealous and start ratcheting up the intimidation and lying. Neither candidate should feel too sore about the whole thing, whether they be winner or loser. Just move on, and hope Nevada gets a talking to from the national party leadership about making sure their people respect democracy.

Posted by stuart | January 20, 2008 8:00 PM

I just want to thank RP for such a well written post. I'm an Obama supporter here in Illinois. I think your description at the end about the difference between the two camps was very insightful. I read these posts all the time, and I am always struck by the anger and bitterness of the Clinton supporters. It just tells me that if she wins we will be in for at least 4 more years of going nowhere because of the division in this country.
Anyone out there who is concerned about this should go to the Obama website and find ways to volunteer in your community. This is our campaign, and our country. You'll have no one to blame but yourselves if you don't get out and try to make a difference.

Posted by Merri | January 20, 2008 8:03 PM

Here is the hierarchy in Democratic Party,
Bill
Hillary
Clinton supporting high rank Democrats
Democratic Party
Obama supporting Dem. politicians
Obama
What makes us to assume any random candidate from Dem. Party is basically better than any Republican candidate? Especially, when that candidate has shared corrupt spoils with Republicans for a looooong time.

Posted by Mia | January 20, 2008 8:13 PM

Blacks and Hispanics better wise up and realize that both groups get robbed by the white majority in this country. Instead of ripping into each other, they should come together. How hard is this for them to understand? White people are probably watching and smiling at how stupidly those two groups are acting.It's mind boggling that anybody from any either group would think voting for a white woman is a change after hundreds of years of white control of this country. If this logic is not retarded, I don't know what is.

Posted by joseph pierre | January 20, 2008 8:20 PM

I am so dismayed that the Democrats have resorted to such ugliness, and based on what I've seen coming out of Hillary and Bill's mouths ON TV, I have no difficulty believing that they're the ones initiating the ugliness. How depressing.

Posted by elizabeth | January 20, 2008 8:34 PM

What I heard from friends in Las Vegas matches RP's account. People had not done this before and were unclear on rules; counting was haphazard and math hazy.

The senior Clinton campaign staff is capable of all kinds of infamy. But most Clinton people at the local level, some of them my friends, are honorable folks and I seriously doubt there was systematic or organized rigging.

FWIW (remembering tense and confused county conventions many years ago in another state) setting these things up is not easy, especially if the party has a small professional staff. You rely on volunteers and you take what you get. And unfortunately most people who are committed enough to the party to give time to the process are also likely to be passionately involved with one or another campaign.

Posted by c | January 20, 2008 9:10 PM

THANK YOU RP..the same exact thing happen to me in North Las Vegas as i tried dilligently to run the caucus meeting. It became clear to me that the intent of the Hillary Clinton supporters was to ignore the rules and distract me so as i could not run a effective caucus at my location. Well i was prepared for them...all of my actions were done publicly before the group, decent and in order. If anyone tried to ignore or distract i spoke over them to the group that what they were doing was against the stated rules and the behavior would not be allowed. The fact that i was prepared for the Hillary Clinton supporters shinanigans saved our caucus proceedings. If i had not been trained and prepared they would have succeeded in their tactics. It was a shame to watch grown people act like bad little kids...Hillary ought to be ashamed of the message she is sending through her campaign and her supporters. Hillary Clinton and people like her are what's wrong with this country! I'm glad to report we won our precinct hands down 70 Obama supporters to 27 Hillary supporters...9 delegates were awared Obama and 3 delegates were awared to Clinton. At the end of the day the race was a virtual tie between Clinton and Obama. Obama is ahead in delegate count by only 2 points.

Posted by Carolyn J. Essex | January 20, 2008 9:11 PM

I didn't think Obama would stump so low as to being a crying baby? Dude, you can cry all you want, the fact is that Hillary won NV.

Posted by Paul | January 20, 2008 10:07 PM

To the commenter Mati above: "a big black man" was going over to talk to people on the other side? And hence you were intimidated on their behalf? Although, actually you don't even know what he was saying to them?

Happy Birthday, Martin Luther King. Still working on the whole dream bit.

Posted by Sadie | January 20, 2008 10:19 PM

"I didn't think Obama would stump so low as to being a crying baby? Dude, you can cry all you want, the fact is that Hillary won NV."

Strictly speaking, which of the two candidates cried in public after losing an election - Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama?

Posted by Max | January 20, 2008 10:33 PM

How sad the Clintons are willing to divide racial groups and their own party to force themselves back into power. I remember the 90's as one big politcal battle sprinkled with sex and financial scandals, mysterious suicides, missing documents and a dot com boom that became a bust. George Bush is finishing us off. Please no more Bush-Clinton-Bush Clinton. Our country can't take any more!

Posted by Laura | January 20, 2008 10:58 PM

There's a very easy solution to this: get rid of undemocratic caucuses in favor or primaries. Of course, had Nevada done that, Hillary would have won by double digits.

Posted by Jasper | January 20, 2008 11:01 PM

Someone deep down below her feet that Nevada evening was happy hillary chose his favorite color for her dress.

Ok, we get that billary will play dirty.

We also get they will throw supporters (think Harlem) under the bus to win.

But isn't it interesting the GOP doesn't have to make democrats dislike her. Bill's doing it mostly by himself. He may actually cost her the election.

I hope he's got a backup for their anniversary.

Posted by kravitz | January 20, 2008 11:06 PM

Max, LOL... got to remember that one.

RP, thanks for your description, very similar to what I experienced at a Vegas site near UNLV. The tone, demeanor, and behavior of Hillary's supporters were embarrassing and what I would expect from Republicans.

One person stated that Barack represented "the dark side" of the Dem party. Another came up to me and said that he had to "keep an eye on me" b/c I might try to steal votes, after I retrieved a man in an Obama T-shirt from within the crowd of Hillary supporters.

I should add, like RP, that I did have some friendly encounters with Hillary's people, but these were infrequent compared to RP's description.

The "win at all costs" mentality will not add up to a November victory, and that is the one that counts most of all.

BB

Posted by BillB | January 20, 2008 11:32 PM

After reading that brilliant speech, I came across this...

"Hillary, Barack, Experience" Nicholas Kristof - The New York Times
"Alternatively, look at the five presidents since 1900 with perhaps the most political experience when taking office: William McKinley, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford and George H. W. Bush. They had great technical skills — but not one was among our very greatest presidents....

...The Democrats with the greatest Washington expertise — Joe Biden, Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson — have already been driven from the race. And the presidential candidate left standing with the greatest experience by far is Mr. McCain; if Mrs. Clinton believes that’s the criterion for selecting the next president, she might consider backing him."

Posted by kravitz | January 20, 2008 11:44 PM

Hey! for anybody who thinks the NV official caucus book wasn't clear on the door closing at noon:

See page 9. It's in BOLD that the caucus counting may not begin until noon. Furthermore it explicitly states that noon is the cut-off time for getting in line to caucus.

http://obama.3cdn.net/d472e284343e050b79_1im6b5jdh.pdf

Posted by nickolovnia | January 20, 2008 11:49 PM

Obama folk weren't complaining when they won the Iowa caucuses... which are run the exact same way. There were precincts where the chair and all the volunteers were in Obama shirts, and Obama staffers caucused despite being from out-of-state and it being against campaign policy.

The way the caucuses work is that a lot of discretion is left with the chair to decide what's okay and what isn't (in terms of food, signs, cheering, etc.) so it probably worked out half and half benefiting no one.. If you watched the CNN and Fox News caucus sites, you might have noticed plenty of Obama signs... were the Clinton people complaining? Probably not - they were too busy winning!

Posted by Ron | January 21, 2008 12:55 AM

Pam, I am in Iowa, too, and can tell you that the Obama folk in my precinct and all those in the surrounding area were RUNNING THE CAUCUSES and the Hillary people were following the rules, it was the Obama people who were sending Clinton supporters to far-off places to park (despite their age) and letting Obama folk park closer and it was the Obama people who ran our caucus and lo' and behold when it was discovered that an Obama STAFFER who had decided to caucus (despite it being against campaign policy) had forgotten to check in (although she had arrived even before the chairperson!) the chair let her register right then and there...

Posted by Ron | January 21, 2008 12:58 AM

The Las Vegas Review Journal, the state's largest newspaper (and Barack Obama endorser), also printed the 11:30 door closing time, for the Democratic caucuses.

Per the Review Journal:

Doors close at 11:30 a.m. Anyone who arrives after that will be turned away.

I doubt they pulled that time out of thin air, so it must have come from somewhere.

Posted by CalD | January 21, 2008 1:27 AM

Can't we all just get along? I'm an Obama supporter and I am growing increasingly detested with this whole Clinton/Obama hatred. Aren't the Republicans supposed to be the bad guys? Come on Democrats, we aren't going to win in November with this polarization among the two candidates. This is precisely what the Republicans want, the only way they stand a chance of winning in November. Let's not lose it again.

Posted by Erin | January 21, 2008 1:58 AM

I don't recall the Obama campaign getting all worked up over the numerous abnormalities at the Iowa caucuses. It only gets involved after a loss.

Posted by cynic | January 21, 2008 2:37 AM

My unjust treatment as a registered voter and a American citizen at the Nevada caucus by Hillary supporters were more of a Blow - A Blow to justice - than Obama coming in second to Hillary.

As an American citizen,I have a right to assembly and vote without threats and intimidation from anyone, including Hillary Clinton supporters.

When my Constitutional Rights are violated or compromised, under any circumstances, I have a right to defend myself.

Some of the things that took place at the Nevada caucus where I attended were unconstitutional to say the least.

Posted by Alicia Brimage | January 21, 2008 3:12 AM

The Clintons have intentionally distorted Barack Obama's record on a number of issues. People are tired of politicians who lie and distort their opponet's records to gain the edge. Our politicans should be held to a higher standard. We should have politicans who are honest and above tactics which make them look irresponsible and dishonest and one of low-moral character. After all we teach our childrent to be honest and not to lie. Iin otherwords how can you trust candidates to be honest with you when they are not honest on the campaign trail. I can only hope that Barack Obama will not stoop down to their level while trying to set his record straight against the lies and distortion her campaign are trying to spill. These are old time party politics and should be a thing of the past as we move towards the 21st Century, towards cleaner air, cleaner water, cleaner politics. It is a greater duty and in the best interest of the contry for Barack Obama to continue to stay positive and hopeful while attempting to bring this country together and lift it up from fear an a distrust of one another. To continue to show the American people and the world there is another way to run for office other than smear and fear. One can set the record straight against their lies but not in a confrontational way. That is why Obama and Huckabee are so appealing. They are authentic and each in their own way are trying to lead the Americans away from dirty campaigning. How can a country be blessed after all that ugly and dirty fighting, it can't be.

Posted by bacalove | January 21, 2008 6:25 AM

I was at a NV caucus site, and, while the Clintons claim that their completely false manual should be ignored because the party was instructed to let people in until noon, the sad reality is that the NV Democratic party did not send out anyone to enforce the rules. Each precinct was assigned a "temporary chair," but those chairs were amateurs and were often buffaloed by Clinton folks who claimed they had the correct rules. The NV party is extremely weak, and the Clinton people knew that and deliberately exploited the vacuum. That's what happened, folks. The Obama folks are not claiming the outcome necessarily would have been different, only that a thorough investigation needs to be done, so that if NV wants to be taken seriously in 2012 it will correct these problems. After the chaos, if I were advising a candidate in 2012, I'd say "Skip Nevada; its chaotic. It's costly to organize and even if you do a great job, you have no control over the process, b/c the caucuses are so poorly run."

Posted by RaymondA | January 21, 2008 8:42 AM

Wow! For obama to win is almost impossible now if anyone gets a gander at the people here who support him.
He is not the second coming. He has speech writers just like every other politician. The sense of entitlement from barack supporters is astonishing. Are Hillary supporters just s'posed to go away? say, aw shucks, and not vote thier beliefs? Do you think anyone is going to believe this garbage you are peddling about how Hillary supporters cheated?
Its an election, people vote, someone wins and the other candidates are supposed to rise up and cangradulate the winner and they all fly off to the next state.
Your candidate (and Edwards) are showing some ugly flaws in not doing these very basic gestures of fair play and decency.
Sure obama might win everything and sure edwards might make an amazing comeback but be a good competitor in each race.
all this other stuff is nonsense: the same people whining here and saying the process is flawed told the clintons that they were wrong to question the process before hand. Then you guys lose, its not the union stronghold and coronation you keep fantasizing about, and the whining starts again.
Obama says he from Chicago and he can handle the elbows but now you folks think the rest of us should just shut up and vote your way? you live in a fantasy world. There are a lot of states to go.

Posted by Michael C. | January 21, 2008 10:05 AM

Obama has gone dirty. His supporters tryed to intimidate union voters in Nevada, now this sleazy southside Chicago poll is turning and accusing his opponents of what he himself is guilty of.

All spring summer and fall we heard hope hope hope. The media ate it up like candy.

We heard Obama could unite and transcend. The media ate it up like candy.

Now we have facts ... we have numbers.

Obama loses among Latinos.

Obama loses among registered Democrats.

Obama loses among women.

Obama loses among Jewish voters.

Obama loses among Catholic voters.

Plus he is driving a wedge through the party with his Reagan bs and his Democrat for a Day nonsense.

So where is the movement? Where is the unity? What does Obama transcent again?

Obama is a fraud. The media, however, is drinking his kool-aide the same way they drank Bush's for 6 years.

Look at the topic above this one. Ralston out in NV said the Clintons did no wrong. He is the local man on the ground. Obama is just too arrogant to accept losing.

Posted by Stu Stern | January 21, 2008 10:07 AM

I have to say I see these Clinton commenters in a completely different light now that I'm hearing all these accounts of what happened in NV from all sorts of people, independently. I'm not much for conspiracy theories, but I think you have to have a good sense for when a conspiracy is playing out when it's happening right in front of your nose.

I'm not sure if it's working - but the Clintons are trying to pull off dirty campaign tricks and then equivocate. I hope the Obama campaign can get the message out that something really nasty just happened in NV.

And democrats have to ask themselves, are these the people we really want in the White House? The ones who do ANYTHING to win, and then pass welfare reform? (Or risk having the American people see through all of it by November 3rd, and elect McCain?)

Posted by Steve C | January 21, 2008 11:54 AM

I am SO saddened by the tone of this race, by the tone of many of these comments. I thank those who have come forward with their accounts from their caucus sites. Ours here in Iowa were also full of 'shenanigans' from the Clinton camp, but they were minimal compared to THIS!!!

My question to all of you are these; does your candidate bring you to a higher purpose? does your candidate inspire you to act in a manner better than you might otherwise have done? When you wear a campaign button, do you feel glad, mad, sad or scared? If the answers to these questions don't resoundingly convince you that you've got the RIGHT candidate, then look again!!!

I don't care whether your candidate is purple with three genders, find another candidate.

Posted by Mary, Iowa voter | January 21, 2008 3:26 PM

I was at a chaotic caucus site in rural Nevada where Hillary precinct volunteers were using intimidation techiques and touting rules that they claimed were correct. There was one incident of a male Hillary supporter shoving a female teenager who was helping out the precinct chair. I read the official Nevada caucus rules in advance top to bottom ... the Hillary voters were reading from an entirely different playbook and asserting their authority! Hillary's campaign had over 2/3 of the headcount (our precinct had the senior center), so they won in the delegate allocation, but that didn't seem to be enough for some of the volunteers and observers.

I thought it was a little sad - I had volunteered to work the Obama side of the caucus and give the one minute presentation, but we never got that far - the fire dept. showed up because we were overcrowded. I spent most of my volunteer time escorting seniors safely out of the caucus site (a school cafeteria with four precincts and over 500 attendees) so they could get some air.

I did pay close attention to make sure that the count was correct and that both campaigns were allocated the proper amount of delegates. Somewhere in the chaos the two Edwards supporters never got to re-affiliate and make their choice between the two viable candidates. I think the Edwards folks just walked out.

If Nevada ever does this again, I will be working as a precinct chair to make sure that this process runs smoothly and we learn from the mistakes of 2008.

Posted by Candace | January 21, 2008 9:30 PM

The republicans have done a bang up job of attempting to choose the Democratic Candidate for President.
One of my major concerns is, "I know the republicans who are spending a fortune influencing Obama's campaign clearly understand their strategy divides and hurts all good democrat's efforts to educate the public on the issues needing to be addressed by all Presidential Candidates."
Along the same lines; I have a difficult time believing that Obama and his staff have so little understanding and respect for the intelligence of their constituants. The republicans have, wrongfully, spent tens of millions of dollars distorting the voting records and public policy position of Hillary Clinton. Then, along comes Obama who will obviously make unfounded statements and partner up with the republicans to asassinate the good name and voting record of the great and noble Senator, "Hillary Clinton." Shame on Obama and shame on those who stick their head in the sand so as to ignore the life long contribution of Hillary; one who truly loves america and america's common folks; the middle class, the working men and women of our great nation.
Keep up the good work Hillary. I'm sure Heaven has a special place reserved as your reward for a job well done, "Our good and faithful servant." I and my family wish you Health, Wealth, Prosperity, along with a long and Peaceful life.
Victory in 2008!

Posted by Lou Rhinehart | January 30, 2008 12:22 AM

ITHINK YOU ALL NEED TO KISS THE CLINTONS ASS. THEY ARE BETTER THAT GIVEN THE BLACKS EVERYTHING ELSE THEY HAVE NOW. WE HAVE ENOUGH BLACKS IN THIS COUNTRY WE DAMN SURE DONT NEED ONE IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

Posted by Retta | February 17, 2008 10:18 PM

ITHINK YOU ALL NEED TO KISS THE CLINTONS ASS. THEY ARE BETTER THAT GIVEN THE BLACKS EVERYTHING ELSE THEY HAVE NOW. WE HAVE ENOUGH BLACKS IN THIS COUNTRY WE DAMN SURE DONT NEED ONE IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

Posted by Retta | February 17, 2008 10:18 PM

ITHINK YOU ALL NEED TO KISS THE CLINTONS ASS. THEY ARE BETTER THAT GIVEN THE BLACKS EVERYTHING ELSE THEY HAVE NOW. WE HAVE ENOUGH BLACKS IN THIS COUNTRY WE DAMN SURE DONT NEED ONE IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

Posted by Retta | February 17, 2008 10:18 PM

ACCORDING TO THE TABLOIDS OBAMA AND OPRAH HAVE BEEN SECRETLY SEEING EACH OTHER THATS GOOD HE NEEDS TO BE CAUGHT BEING DIRTY.

Posted by lady in white | February 17, 2008 10:42 PM

Watching the Democratic Party right now and all the dirty tactics going on tell me one thing. You've got a big problem and it's affecting the whole country. Some of you would believe anything. I mean anything. You believed Clinton when he looked our whole country in the eyes and said "Monica did not have me for dinner at any time". Didn't you? And you thought it was cute and funny when he said he didn't inhale. Didn't you? And you still nod your head at every word he speaks as he campaigns for his wife, which would put him back into Power. And that's all ok with you guys because you don't have a clue about what the Clintons plan to do to us, the people. You're too busy nodding your head while the lights are turned out upstairs. And now you're watching his wife go into the usual dirty Clinton tactics against this other Democratic nominee. The problem I see with the typical Democrat is that you believe ANYTHING! Except a black man who stands there and says WE can change America. See he says WE. He doesn't say everything HE is going to do without us but to us. He includes US. And that my dear people is something that the Republicans, whose party I left, and the Democrbats, not since JFK, have never done. You can expect a Hillary win to rape us of our money while they do further research on how to make Americans more stupid than they already are. That would be a challenge, I admit. WAKE UP!!!

Posted by SS | February 20, 2008 11:31 AM