Texas Caucuses were unruly, undemocratic Joke!

[kennetha]

Check out this description of how the Texas two-step was conducted:

LAREDO, Tex., March 5 -- Roberto Hereda came to United High School on Tuesday night to help elect a president, but instead found an irritated mob that reminded him of "a prison riot."

About 150 would-be Democratic caucusgoers stood outside in the South Texas wind, still waiting for their caucus to begin two hours after the scheduled start time. Some people banged on the windows of the cafeteria and chanted, "We want to vote!" and "We're getting cheated!"

Desperate to control the crowd, a supporter of Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) stood on a chair and propped an old Behringer speaker onto his shoulder. "The people in charge don't know what they're doing, so please be patient," he said through a microphone. "Honestly, we could be here all night."

After hearing that, Hereda scooped up his 4-year-old daughter and walked to his car." I wanted to caucus, but it's too much incompetence," he said. "I've never seen such a mess."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030503168.html?hpid=topnews">This Two-Step Had All the Wrong Moves

What an undemocratic way to choose a nominee. The fact that Obama's delegate lead comes largely from completely undemocratic, unrepresentative caucuses seriously undercuts any claim he has to represent "the will of the people." I think the fact that Hillary has won big primaries and in big diverse states gives her a very powerful argument to make to the superdelegates or automatic delegates.

It seems to me too that the delegates chosen via the Texas caucus should not be seated at the convention.

[cali]

1. bwahahaha. More whining from hillyworld

Tough. The Caucus delegates will be seated. There's a 100% chance of it. And FL and MI? About a 15% chance. Get used to it. You hillbots can't cheat your way to the nomination.

[LeftCoast]

2. Cheat? Who said anything about cheating?

[cali]

5. The OP

said that TX delegates shouldn't be seated. That would be cheating.

[LeftCoast]

9. I don't agree with the OPs argument, but I think it's a little stretch to call it cheating

One, it's not going to happen and two, this is one person's opinion (who AFAIK, is in no way a member of the Clinton team).

Also, the 'hillbot' comments are really not helpful if you want to actually have a discussion. Though granted, it can be argued that the purpose of GDP is anything but to have discussion...

[Snowbot]

7. They sure think they can.

A disgusting lot, all of them.

[LeftCoast]

10. You're painting with an awfully broad brush there

[rug]

12. I like the description "irritated mob.". Sounds like GDP since Tuesday.

[BzaDem]

14. Of course. Disenfrahchising FL and MI is OK. But having superdelegates vote is cheating?

And Hillary supporters are desperate.

What a surprise.

[roguevalley]

82. I am sick of the complaining about caucuses. they didn't expect

this many people but they organized anyway. since there won't be crossover repugs trying to skew our side, this caucus stuff will be more accurate.

[kid a]

3. correct your title: "Caucus at United High School in Laredo was Running Late"

to be fair

[kennetha]

4. Did you read the article?

Check this out:

"Even those rare caucuses that managed to run on schedule experienced turbulence. Both campaigns complained that, at times, the opponent's supporters fought unscrupulously to gain control of the "envelope": a package of materials that allowed someone to serve as the temporary chairman. Clinton's campaign also accused Obama supporters of locking doors early to prevent the opposition from entering."

This isn't just referring to a single caucus. It was a disaster across the state.

[Beregond2]

6. Caucuses

Welcome to the rough and ready world of American politics. It's been this way for 232 years. Are the Clinton supporters just finding this out? Funny, I thought the Obama supporters were supposed to be the unseasoned ones.

It was a disorganized mess at my caucus in WA too, but we still managed to get everyone's votes counted and the delegates apportioned. I'm sure they did in TX too.

[msallied]

72. Fellow Washingtonian here. :)

Our caucus was a loud, chaotic mess, but we managed to bring it together in the end too. :)

[LisaM]

75. Well it was a disorganized mess at our Washington caucus, too, and not run by the rules

I have no idea who the uncommitted delegates switched their vote to, and the Clinton supporters barely got a chance to speak. We had four people speak for Obama, one for Hillary, I did not get a chance to talk, people were allowed to sign in late, etc., etc., etc. It was a disgusting experience.

Also, I checked later (after we had our primaries) to see if they were going to compare the lists to see if anyone had signed in as a Democrat at the caucuses, then Republican in the primary. I'm sure that some people did. King County told me it was a felony, but that no one was going to check the lists. The woman at the voting booth in the primary likewise couldn't tell me if, or how, they would compare the lists. So our caucuses were an undemocratic FARCE if you ask me. They also had less than half the number of people as the primaries did.

[thevoiceofreason]

40. Ours ran quite well, thank you.

Don't blame the system. For years, democrats in Texas have, on their best day, trickled into caucuses. Our precinct went from 4 in 2004 to 139 in 2008. There were not enough volunteers and experienced folks to run everything, so problems arose due to the lack of training. The system is fine if people will just get involved for more than a week or two.

Case in point. In Harris County (Houston), we have about 830 precincts. Each one held its own caucus. The county chairman required that the elction judges only release the "envelopes" to the precinct chair before 7:15. If people had been involved in the past to care enough to volunteer to be (or run for) precinct chair, there: (1) would have been no "fighting for the packet" and (2) would have been an easier process because precinct chairs get specific training for this stuff. In all, we have no one to blame but ourselves.

But, what a joyous day when Texas democrats complain about too many people in the process! Does the process need work? Yes. Did it work Tuesday night? Yes.

As an aside -- for every horror story you have about the caucuses, I can share a great one (we had one precinct convention in Houston that did not finish naming delegates til almost 4 a.m. -- that's dedication!). For every story you have about Clinton people having to leave early, I can share with you stories about Obama people having to go to work. For every story about unruly Clinton people at the conventions, there are similar ones about Obama folks.

Big debates. Heated arguments. Big turnoouts. Welcome to Texas.

[snappyturtle]

50. Thank you. People need to remember Texas had both a primary

and caucus on the same day and the state has almost 25 million people. It is a big state to begin with and the turnout was spectacular. We should all rejoice in this!

[moc]

55. What a nice post! Ours went pretty smoothly in Collin County.

The precinct chair for one of the precincts (two caucusing in the same place) said there were 10x as many people as in 2004. It was a little chaotic with the crowds and kids running around (including my 5yo), but everyone was courteous.

It was great! To know there are so many Dems in historically conservative Collin County was exhilerating. I especially enjoyed seeing neighbors whom I never realized were Dems before!

[demmie]

68. I wonder if we were at the same caucus?

And I wonder if my 7yo was running around with your 5yo?

I'm in precinct 63 in Collin County (Plano). Very similar experience. We had two precincts caucusing at the same time. The other precinct was much more organized.

Ours was a little disorganized, but not bad, considering the turnout. The precinct chair was very overwhelmed, and things moved slowly. But for the most part, people were very friendly and courteous. We were all just amazed and elated at the turnout of Dems in one of the most conservative counties in the US! Overall, it was a wonderful experience.

[moc]

78. Precinct 55 here!

:hi: Glad to hear it went well at other Collin county caucuses.

How long have you been in Plano? If you were here in the run-up to the war, you know how isolating it was to be a Dem in Collin County. Wasn't Tuesday night glorious?

[demmie]

84. Was a lifelong Chicagoan...

I moved here three years ago, from Chicago. Talk about night and day!

I relocated here about 4 months after the 2004 elections. That was miserable enough to live through in a liberal area of the country. I can only imagine how it was to live in Collin County during Bush's first term, and the 2004 elections.

I have felt very isolated since moving here. I almost wept with joy when I walked into the caucus the other night. I talked to many people who've been here many more years than I. I can only imagine how elated they were, after feeling that isolation for so long.

P.S. Since I was still living in Chicago in 2004, I voted for Obama when he ran for Senate. There was a lot of excitement around him, even then, when not many of us outside of the South Chicago area had heard of him before 2004. There was a sense that he would go on to bigger things.

[snappyturtle]

49. WRONG! We had a record, over-flowing turnout and the process

went very smoothly. Sorry, I just don't want people to think it was 'wild'.

[twompy]

63. Across the state?

I participated in the Texas conventions and ours had over 300 people and was run very smoothly. I have read many accounts of different conventions and while some were late to start, I think that most were run good but maybe a little chaotic. The precinct next to mine had over 800 participants. With that many people participating it will always look like "controlled chaos".

[babylonsister]

67. A DUer was at that caucus; it appears the Clinton camp was

unscrupulous in trying to gain control of that envelope:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4890825

[Melissa G]

69. Go to the Texas forum.

It was high turnout, But it was not a disaster across the state.

edit to say: my Texas caucus went fine and I know of plenty that did.
edit for link: http://democracyfortexas.org/wp/?p=98

[endelfam]

8. Democracy in action...

Texas has been doing it this way for a while. It has nothing to do with Hilary or Obama. Before you speak, learn your history. The caucuses were started because ordinary people felt that they wanted a way to come in at the grass roots and get elected to go to the Senate district convention (which will take place in late March.) Before that the bosses controlled access to those conventions and only monied interests got to go forward since they were picked by the party big-wigs. Our precinct chair is a big Clinton supporter, and she spoke eloquently of the need to keep the caucuses for that purpose exactly. The caucus is held at night so most working people can come.

Yes, there were excesses in individual caucuses and places were packed to the gills. I can point to examples of craziness in Houston. One precinct packed to the gills with Obama supporters had to be shut down because the number of bodies exceeded the fire code. All in all, however, things went well considering the fact that the participation in many caucases was up 1000%.

Our own precinct was typical. I was there and I talked to my friends who were in precincts all over the city. In our precinct (255), things started late, but the chair was very careful to balance things. There were two of us as secretaries to oversee credentials--one from each campaign--and to add up the tallies. Obama won our precinct 17 delegates to 13, fair and square. Normally, 20-30 diehards show up. This time we had close to 300. We had long lines but everyone got to sign and a bunch of very excited folk on both sides are going to a convention for the first time in their lives. Most of the Obama folk and another chunk of Hillary's supporters had never even been at a caucus before. This involvement bodes very well for the future of our party in Texas. Dallas has already gone blue and, with Barack pulling in so many new folk, my city of Houston is about to follow.

Stop yer ballyaching and appreciate the fact that democracy can be messy, but it is the only thing that works! Of all people, democrats should know that!

[susankh4]

22. Thank you

for the first hand description.

did you feel everyone was heard?

[powergirl]

31. Same here, Houston

I'm in the Dallas area. Your caucus pretty much mirrored my experience. No fighting - just a lot of time and cramped quarters. If Clinton won the Caucus, they would be touting the visionary and uber democratic way the Texas caucus works. :)

[Jawja]

11. A joke, just like like the notion

of seating the Florida and Michigan delegates when their States held primaries they advertised would not count? :shrug:

[SoCalDem]

13. Bill Clinton didn't mind the system ..TWICE..

perhaps he was a stronger candidate..

Their wacky system has been in effect since 1988, and this is probably the first and only time, they have been attacked ..

HRC's campaign might have served her better if they had not fthought "the whole thing would be over by Feb5"..and put some people on the ground in Texas..

They never planned on Texas meaning anything.. and it bit them on the ass..

I like a president who can plan ahead for any contingency:)

[NDambi]

15. "I like a president who can plan ahead for any contingency "

Me too. Someone that doesn't plan pass Feb 5. doesn't deserve to be in the Oval Office..

Go Bama

[SoCalDem]

16. That's why we are bogged down in Iraq.. piss-poor planning n/t

[ObamaWinsWH09]

19. Hi SoCal

Nice to meet you, I agree with that statement. We have all learned where poor planning will get us.

[SoCalDem]

21. hi YOU.. & welcome to DU

:hi:

[blogslut]

17. Our caucus went fine

I would imagine that the bigger the precinct population, the more opportunity for chaos. We did have record number turnout and a general public, unfamiliar with what it feels like to matter after decades. Fortunately, my election officials were helpful, prepared and unbiased.

I was rather pleased at the end of the day. Precinct conventions have an honorable purpose. The wishes of the people get carried from the precincts to the counties, to the state and then to the national party.

[susankh4]

18. I really fail to see how this can be called "democracy."

I thought our democracy was founded on a system of "one person/one vote."

Too much of what I have heard (and seen) about caucuses looks like incompetance and/or coersion.

[ObamaWinsWH09]

20. You might have a point...

But we can't change the rules in the middle of the game.

[SoCalDem]

23. caucus votes do not count toward the TOTAL vote..only for the remaining delegates

or so I have been told..

The primary voters laid down the numbers..the popular vote and 2/3 of the delegates..

[scarface2004]

24. wrong

the primary vote allows you to attend caucus where you select delegates based on a tally precinct by precinct. i was in 442 and we gave obama 4 and hillary 3.

[SoCalDem]

25. but.. was the tally total ADDED to the primary popular vote count?

That was what I meant.. The delegate assignments can vary a lot state by state, and who knows how they determine the amount of delegates each one gets..

[blogslut]

34. The Texas Delegate Convention is progressive

There's like a bunch of precincts. All those precincts caucus for delegates. Mine doled out 6 for Clinton and 4 for Obama. Those precinct delegates attend the county election on March 29. Delegates are again chosen and the numbers whittled down. Those county delegates go to the state convention in June. At state, there is another delegate election and the winners become the magic 67 caucus delegates from the great state of Texas.

:hi:

[BigDDem]

26. The caucuses were a disgrace

No matter who your candidate is.
I know, I was there.
People stood around for hours and hours, I saw both Hillary and
Obama supporters leave in frustration before they were able to
voice support for their candidate.
I felt so bad for the woman running our caucus. A volunteer who
had been at the poll since 6:30am, people were screaming at her.
Ridiculous.

[catgirl]

27. That's not what I saw on TV

They showed several caucus sites. It was quiet, with people standing patiently in
lines. This is just another Clinton tactic to try to play down the TX caucus which she
will lose.

[powergirl]

28. The caucus can't begin until the last voter votes - and Clinton got most of the delegates in Laredo

And some people were required to wait. The rules provide that people cannot enter the building until voting is over, regardless of the time. So, the polls close at 7:00 p.m.. Everyone who is inside the building at that time gets to vote - however long it takes.

Laredo went for Hillary as did her caucus delegates. In your example, there should have been someone from Clinton's campaign to pass out SWAG or donuts or something to help her voters with the wait. My caucus ran smoothly enough. It took a long time b/c there were so many of us in a cramped space. I am in an Obama supporting area so, we were prepared for our folks. We had stickers, etc. and talked up our candidate while waiting in line to sign in, etc. But many left without participating in the caucus b/c it took so much time.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

29. You're Absolutely Right. They Are A Farce, Undemocratic, And I'm Amazed They Exist At All.

Even now that I'm more used to the concept, it still boggles my mind these ridiculous things exist.

[RoadRage]

30. "All Caucuses shouldn't count... err.. except for Nevada"..

:eyes:

If MY candidate doesn't win it, and there isn't complete order & conformity, i'm screaming that it shouldn't count.

What about NH.. there were a few people there who thought that some voting machines weren't working, and Obama perhaps got screwed. I'm sure you'd be happy to concede those votes as well, and make them "not count".

Ahh.. however, i'm sure in FL & MI - those votes DO count, even though Obama wasn't on one of the ballots, and had far less name recognition with no chance to campaign in the other. But, since those help your candidate - they count.. right?

Try to be a BIT more biased, will you?

[City Lights]

32. Awwww, sounds like someone needs a hug.

Maybe one of your Hillbud's can oblige.

:rofl:

[PassingFair]

33. Waiting for the LAW SUIT...

Anyone know if she's going to take the low road
and try to sue her way to the win?

[Perky]

35. STOP WHINING

[ProSense]

36. Texas doesn't count. n/t

[Inuca]

46. LOL!! n/t

[blocker]

37. IT'S CALLED DEMOCRACY

It goes both ways, and it shows who gets the better organization!

[Tom Rinaldo]

42. The Primary was Democracy

Everyone who participated in the Caucus had to have already voted in the primary. Why have a system that makes people vote twice?

[NorthernSpy]

52. And the caucus is democracy for people who actually give a shit...

... and who aren't just taking five minutes to help game the vote 'cause Limbaugh told them to.

[Tom Rinaldo]

56. That is an elitist position

Just voting isn't good enough for you. Regular voters are just sheep, easily manipulated. It's better to let the people who REALLY know and care about the issus and are willing to prioritize showing up at a special meeting AFTER already voting (rather than take their kids to their scheduled soccer game or go to their second job) have an additional vote to offset the stupidity of the masses who can't be bothered to do more than take 5 minutes to vote.

[NorthernSpy]

70. it's "elitist" not to want Rush and his dittoheads to game our primary?

:shrug:

[kennetha]

38. The Very Idea

That you would have "two votes" one an open plebiscite, with voters voting at their convenience -- early voting, voting through-out the day, etc -- and then have a more restricted "second vote" that is supposed to what -- "fine tune" the will of the people? reward the organized and energized by giving them a chance to win at night what they lost during the day? -- is truly astounding. ANd the fact that the obamamaniacs crow about losing the plebiscite but taking delegates back -- almost by force -- in the dark of night, shows their true colors. Very ugly colors indeed.

[blogslut]

41. Nobody is losing anything at night

Despite what Bill Clinton says. There are delegate alloted as a result of the primary. There are additional delegate alloted as a result of the caucus. Those delegates are added together and distributed proportionally between the two candidates.

[Tesha]

44. Yeah, but they didn't go the way they were "supposed" to go so something (anything!) must be wrong.

'Been that way since 1900, but *NOW* "something must
be wrong!"

Tesha

[NorthernSpy]

43. and yet you Clintonites accept the concept of superdelegates...

Who the hell elected them?

:shrug:


At least any voter can go to a caucus. Thing is, only some voters seem to care enough to do so.

[Sterling]

73. I really hate both of these candidates however

Anyone who thinks giving 2 votes to certain people, or further that somehow the party has the right to say that people in 2 giant states votes don't count is not of the same value system I was raised with. Voting is sacred in a democracy and if anyone wants to complain about how Bush was forced on us in 2 separate elections should care that we all get our chance to be heard EQUALLY. If not you are a sad opportunist that allows their values to change as long as it helps their candidate. Sad. Very GOP.

[NorthernSpy]

39. Caucuses weed out "malicious participation" such as vote gaming by the opposite party...

If you're willing to put up with the hassle of several hours of caucusing, you're probably more committed and better informed than the average person. Simply put, you care more than they do.

[krabigirl]

54. You have to be kidding me.

:puke:

[NorthernSpy]

71. I'm not -- the right really did make such an attempt in the Texas primary...

You see, whether caucus or primary, and whether open or closed, any method of choosing a candidate is imperfect. All of these things have their good points and their bad points.

There is no perfect system.

[VotesForWomen]

45. correct. would we allow caucuses to determine the GE? nt

[Inuca]

47. It is not feasible; otherwise

in an ideal and unconstrained world, I think it would be a damn good idea.

[ctaylors6]

61. I think everyone should stick to rules set at start, but why do you think caucus better than voting?

Just curious. I'm really NOT whining or advocating something shouldn't count. I'd truly like to hear someone's point of view (not related to this particularly election) of why caucuses are better than voting.

[Bongo Prophet]

74. "Caucusing" actually is a form of voting - and the vote is TRANSPARENT

It is actually a precinct convention, not a caucus per se, but in GDP folks don't discuss things so much as shout at each other.
Nuances are lost.
People just want to praise a system if they think it helps their choice, or damn it if it does not.
I hate that.

But, you have an honest question, so I will try to address it in the same spirit!

I helped run our precinct because the chair was injured and did not show.
The pollworkers were overwhelmed by the numbers, because the dem party in Tx has bveen neglected for years - thanks to Dean 4 America, this is changing.

Luckily, Ms Prophet and I had read the rules beforehand, and were the ONLY people in our precinct who knew the process. We made sure it was run as fairly as possible, with checks and balance.

I did the math, (since I had the foresight to bring a calculator!) and had 2 people watch over my shoulder to double/triple check it.From each side.
I gave up my chair and nominated someone form opposite camp, so there would be one from each side running the official paperwork.

ANYONE who wanted could see that it was all above board.

Can we say the same for the votes cast and put into a machine?
NO.


I have a very long version to tell, but that is the crux of your question, in a real world example.
I know you asked in a more structural way, why a caucus is "better than voting" but that is a false premise, or false equivalency, since it IS a form of voting, just more open than slipping a form into a vote counter or in a computer.

Transparency is good.
Maybe if we were talking about paper ballots, with webcams watching every move, and protecting voting boxes like they were gold - THEN we can talk about how great that would be!

[Inuca]

76. My comment was a very general one

and most definitely not relating to the current election season. As the other reply already said, caucuses are as transparent as you can get. But as I already said, I do not think they are feasible when we talk voting on a very large scale, so from a practical point of view no, I do not think they are better than voting. Maybe in some undetermined future, when we will be able to get reliable virtual asynchronous caucusing :-).

[Catherine Vincent]

48. The caucus at my precinct was a mess.

At least before the caucus anyway. I'll bet there were over a thousand people standing in line to enter the auditorium to caucus. My sister and I were in the back and the line kept getting longer and longer. We finally decided to go home. I don't know how long those folks were there but it was probably late in the night.

[dionysus]

51. awww, yer sore you lost again....

here is your banky;

[krabigirl]

53. I agree. It's also biased against people who can't be there.

Single moms with very young children, people who work the night shift, disabled people, etc. Caucuses should be abolished...I can't believe people actually think they are democratic.

[moc]

57. Oh, give me a break. I had both my kids there. My husband is self employed

and he works at night. So, for him to go to the caucus meant he lost income - probably somewhere around $300-400 of income.

[thevoiceofreason]

59. Actually, we had a good system.

I asked of my crowd to allow persons with disabilities, or persons who had to leave before actual delegates were selected, to come to the front of the line to sign in (which is your "vote"). Everyone obliged. Because we announced this early, the representatives from the 2 campaigns then walked the crowd, asking people who indicated that they would leave after signing in whether they wanted to be a delegate (informing them they couldn't vote for delegates if they left, but that they could be a delegate). Both camps had several delegates determined that way.

[Marie26]

58. What is the point of this?

So, you have to vote in the primary to vote in the caucus - so it's not like the caucus gives more people any opportunity to vote. And it basically allows some people to vote twice based on their availability to spend 3 dinner-time hours locked in a room. Caucuses are cheaper, but TX has already paid for a primary, why would they want to pay for a caucus too? Why would Texas even have a nutty system like this?

[thevoiceofreason]

And we don't lock doors in Texas.

The rolls stayed open until the chair announced they were closed.

[Liberal In Texas]

83. I only spent about 30 minutes at the caucus. You didn't have to devote 3 hours if you didn't want

to.

[d.amber]

60. Give them a break

Imagine for a moment that you are a Texas Democrat. Your vote didn't matter last time. You and 4 other people showed up to caucus. You all became the delegates and you were elected chair just because there was no one else.

This year you go and instead of 4 people you are greeted by 250 people. People who want to vote and want to get involved. Who want to be delegates for thier canidate.

Is it chaotic? Did you have enough papers? Did you book a big enough hall? Was it at a friends house? Will the fire marshall shut you down?

And you think this is bad? These kind of crowds are what make a strong party...especially in TX, where they might feel all alone before. How they see so many...

TX could come into play in the future or even this year. This is huge and it's not primaries that gets the ground work and the people involved in the party. It is caucuses.

What TX has done is fair and the turn out is amazing for the party as a whole.

[smiley_glad_hands]

62. There is nothing undemocratic about caucuses.

If anything, a caucus represents the will of the people. You have to be willing to wait and vote in public. You have to really want your voice to be heard and have more bravery as a citizen as compared to anonymously coloring in a circle for a machine to read.

Obama's strength in the caucus format is not without a reason.

[jgraz]

64. .

[wildflowergardener]

65. caucuses

"It seems to me too that the delegates chosen via the Texas caucus should not be seated at the convention."

This is sarcasm, right?

Meg

[Bongo Prophet]

77. I call it "advocacy psychosis" - when "your side" determines the value, instead of principle.

If you see an advocate be for something when it helps, then do a 180 when it does not help their preferred candidate or issue, but the underlying principle has NOT changed, you may be seeing a case of advocacy psychosis.


See Iraq=sovereign state
Or
states rights = Florida
Or
states that matter


and so on.

Now, caucuses.
If one side wins they are great, but if numbers go against, well...

This is more a psychological thing than a philosophical one.
Not like we have mature and interesting discussion here, do we?
It's a shame, really.

[Avalux]

66. My caucus went very well, actually. After I forced them to let us in.

Yes, there were hundreds of people, yes it took a long time and was chaotic at the beginning, but everyone there was able to vote and it was all done above-board. We were not allowed to caucus until everyone in line had finished voting. I'm not sure why people in that article said they were being cheated.

About standing outside - for whatever reason, the election judge told us we had to stay outside until those voting had finished. When I demanded he show me that in writing and then I threatened to call the sheriff, he let us in.

"It seems to me too that the delegates chosen via the Texas caucus should not be seated at the convention." This statement sounds like sore loser syndrome to me.

[Schema Thing]

79. I waited outside for almost two hours in a suburb of Dallas

It was a chaotic mess, no one was even slightly prepared for the turnout.... but I didn't see anything even slightly "undemocratic" about it. Just unorganized.


How is it "undemocratic"? If the tables were turned, would you consider it "undemocratic"? I think not.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

80. if she wins, she'll be the most victimized leader of the free world ever.

[Liberal In Texas]

81. OH Bullshit.

There are probably some anecdotal stories here and there, but by and large they went pretty well considering the huge number of people who attended for the first time. I know mine went well and DUer crispini did a hell of a job running it.

If you were so concerned about the process, why didn't you (and your supporters) holler about it BEFORE Tuesday?

The election/caucus system is what we have. It was no secret how it worked before the primary. And everybody plays on the same field with the same rules. Maybe it should be changed, but not because you didn't like the outcome.

[high density]

85. I hope you Clinton folks take this activism and change the system for the next primary season

I dislike the idea of a caucus as much as anybody, but I have a feeling as soon as Team Clinton throws in the towel, all of this outrage over caucuses is going to evaporate overnight.

[OzarkDem]

86. Obama will probably ask for caucuses in the GE, too

What the hell?

We're almost a third world country already. Why don't we start having elections like one, too?