Whoops! Texas students who signed the list verified that the candidates weren't who they voted for.

[Abacus]

Volunteers who worked the Jester Center caucus on Tuesday are suspicious of at least one of the caucus lists, the precinct chairman said late Thursday night. At least three students who signed the list verified that the candidates attached to their names were not the candidates they voted for.

Government senior Ray Skidmore, precinct chair for the voting precinct that includes all UT dorms, said one of the caucus volunteers on Thursday noticed almost identical handwriting on one of the caucus sheets. Volunteers were recounting the caucus numbers Wednesday and Thursday, Skidmore said, just to double-check before turning them in today. Information from all caucuses - forms and the official delegate counts - are due to the Travis County clerk's office today by 6 p.m.

When recounting, the volunteer noticed a whole list had Sen. Hillary Clinton written in similar handwriting in the presidential preference column for each of the six voters on that list. Skidmore started calling each of the voters on the list when he reached finance senior Ronesha Holmes, who told him she did not write Clinton as her preference; Holmes said she was instructed to leave that line blank.

...

As he continued calling people on the list Thursday, he found that two other students, history and pre-med sophomore Abigail Cheney and government sophomore Adam Aldrete, said they did not fill in a presidential preference and that Clinton was not who they would have listed.

http://media.www.dailytexanonline.com/media/storage/paper410/news/2008/03/07/TopStories/Caucus.Chair.Uncovers.Discrepancies-3258732.shtml

[C_U_L8R]

1. I'm not surprised at all.

The Clintons are the worst.

[Breeze54]

2. Excuse me but someone in that precinct

may have signed in wrong information but you blame the Clintons for what that person may have done?

You are ridiculous. Grow the hell up.

[Texas Hill Country]

4. OH BS... its not clintons fault, and the TX Caucuses were a mess

I saw crap like that all over the place...


ooooooooo and 6 signatures for hillary in the middle of Austin... like that even made a dent.

[DemBones DemBones]

7. Yes, Bill and Hillary went to Jester County, Texas to steal three votes.

Get a clue, will ya?

I can't stand Obama but I wouldn't blame him for a supporter pulling a stunt like that.

[DemBones DemBones]

3. Ronesha Holmes apparently filled in her own name because

she claims she was told to leave the "presidential preference" column blank. The other two just say they didn't fill in a presidential preference.

:wtf: did they go to the caucus FOR if they chose not to fill in a presidential preference?

That's just weird.

Of course nobody should have filled in the form for them but they'd better check all the damned forms to see how many other dumb UT students there are. Anybody looking for people to scam just got a list of three to try.

[HooptieWagon]

5. Clinton DID instruct her volunteers to make sure they controlled the signup sheets

[yourguide]

10. I was just thinking the same thing...

no wonder they wanted control of the sign in sheets.

[Zachstar]

18. And even if Clinton had nothing to do with this. Her words put her DEEP within the radar...

That is why you don't say stupid shit like controlling the process.

[DemBones DemBones]

39. "Controlling the process" means "Don't let people vote on behalf of other people."

I would think they'd be told to do a head count and compare it to the vote count and to be damned sure that they didn't give out any extra sheets.

It's got to be a lot like proctoring a test, except with rowdier people.

I'm sure Obama's people had the same instructions, unless he's a fool.

[Not the Only One]

36. win at all costs

The ends justify the means with the Clintons.

[anonymous171]

6. Remember how they were instructed to seize control of the sheets?

Now we know why.

[Abacus]

8. That's what occurred to me also. /nt

[DemBones DemBones]

11. No, we know that they didn't want this sort of thing to happen

but three girls were too dumb to fill in a presidential preference when they were at a caucus and some unscrupulous person filled it in for them. It could have been an Obama supporter trying to make Clinton look bad as easily as a Clinton supporter. We will probably never know.

[ecstatic]

9. And the cheater still lost. Ha! nt

[DemBones DemBones]

14. You mean Hillary Clinton went all the way to Texas to steal 3 votes?

What a lame idea. It could have been an Obama supporter trying to make Clinton look bad as easily as a Clinton supporter.

If those 3 Obama supporters had had the SMARTS to fill in their form, it wouldn't have happened.

Why were they at a caucus if not to fill in the form?

[Zachstar]

12. Sickening! This needs to be fully investigated.

I am not saying Clinton was directly involved. However this MUST be stopped now!

[DemBones DemBones]

16. Yes, we should appoint a federal prosecutor to see why 3 girls didn't vote

and someone filled in their vote for them. :eyes:

[Zachstar]

21. Yes...

No only because there could be many others but because what happened was a spit in the face of the election process.

[SoxFan]

25. Election fraud is sooo cute!

Let's get back to screaming about who called who a "monster" in a Scottish paper...

[DemBones DemBones]

30. Stealing 3 votes is pretty trivial and hardly worth the FBI going in.

The students didn't write down their presidential preference, so it's their fault, but I don't think it calls for a fine or prison sentence.

Somebody caught it. We're all glad of that. I don't want Clinton to have 3 votes that the girls didn't intend to give her.

One of three things happened:

1) a dirty, rotten Clinton volunteer did it, trying to swing the election (with 3 votes!)

2) a wonderful, angelic Obama volunteer did it , trying to make Clinton look bad (Hmm. . . not so angelic. . .)

3) either a Clinton or Obama volunteer did it, thinking that those girls had indicated they were supporting Clinton (i.e., an honest mistake.)

I don't really think the volunteer deserves a prison sentence, either, though a fine might be appropriate and Dean Wormer should put it ON HIS PERMANENT RECORD!!!

:rofl:

[Abacus]

31. "The students didn't write down their presidential preference, so it's their fault"

I wasn't expecting to see that sentiment here.

[DemBones DemBones]

37. They are VOTERS and if they screw up, yes, it's their fault, even

if they are college students. If you're old enough to vote, it's your responsibility to do it correctly.

Sorry that you don't like it but that's how voting works. Suppose they'd had voting machines and pushed the wrong buttons. Whose fault would that be?

Now, if they'd had misleading ballots, like the infamous butterfly ballots in Dade County in 2000, and the poll workers refused to help, as voters testified, than it was not the voters' fault. Poll workers are supposed to answer questions and assist disabled voters when requested to do so.

[Abacus]

40. It's their fault if someone else writes in their voting space?

[DemBones DemBones]

42. Yes, because they should have filled it in themselves to VOTE. nt

[SoxFan]

32. How many precincts in Texas?

How many vote counters per precinct?

How many vote counters who missed this sort of thing?

But it's good to see that the Hillary camp thinks that election fraud is clever and cute.

You stay classy, Chappaqua!

[MagickMuffin]

13. One has to wonder if Hillary instructed them to do this

Since SHE did instruct them to "Take Control" of the packets.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4842509

I hope they are able to sort this fiasco out.

As my precinct secretary I could have easily taken out the sheets that were for Clinton, but I guess I have something called ethics.
I turned in my paper work Wednesday to my county HQ's, exactly the way I received them, everything was on the up and up with me.

Although, I was accused by Clinton supporters at the convention/caucus that I would monkey with the results.

I believe in DEMOCRACY, so no tampering done by me.

[HooptieWagon]

15. seems like plenty of evidence to charge Clinton volunteer controlling signup sheet with fraud

[DemBones DemBones]

22. It could have been an Obama supporter trying to cause trouble, you know.

The Obama voters weren't smart enough to know to write "O-b-a-m-a" on their form.

If they had been, it wouldn't have happened. They should check all the forms to see how many other dummies there were but 3 votes is not much of a fraud case even if they can determine who did it.

[ctaylors6]

17. I think there are still people caucusing in Garland and Arlington.

The caucuses were understaffed in many locations. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that someone running a caucus was voted to run it because of hair color or number of vowels in last name. There are probably hundreds of stories of minor issues. Some may be nefarious/fraudulent or could be innocent screw-ups. Texas has never had such well-attended caucuses and, frankly, it showed.

Please note: I'm not in any way saying the caucus or its result shouldn't count. I'm just acknowledging it didn't go swimmingly in many cases.

[OzarkDem]

19. Surprised? The caucus system is very loose and disorganized

That's why Obama targeted caucus states because they were easier to hijack.

[DemBones DemBones]

23. Yes, and because it's been shown that people feel peer pressure

to vote for the black man when others know how they're voting. Dems don't want to be seen as racists, but don't worry about people thinking they're sexists, as has been well-demonstrated here at DU.

We should have one nation-wide primary and NO caucuses in the future. Shorten the campaign season so people aren't bored to death.

[OzarkDem]

26. Agree, he figured out how to work that system

but sadly it won't work in the GE. Voting rules will be more strict, for good reason and it will be harder to turn out people who may not even be registered to vote.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

27. Yes, let's have secret voting so more racists will vote for your candidate

Which is justified because there is sexism.

:eyes:

[DemBones DemBones]

33. Uh, secret ballots are the law in this country, except in those crazy caucuses.

Secret ballots are better because some people are good at convincing/pressuring people into voting with them in a caucus or meeting.

Would you raise your hand and vote against your boss in a meeting or caucus?

Some bosses wouldn't care but I've only had one I would have been willing to vote against in a meeting.

Would you vote against your significant other? Your best friend(s)?

THAT'S why we have secret ballots.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

34. Fair points but your initial post was complaining about racists not being able to vote in secret

Funny, at the caucus I volunteered at in San Antonio, 2/3 of the people there were perfectly comfortable voting for Clinton in public. I guess they weren't worried about the Obama supporters there thinking they were racists. :shrug:

[DemBones DemBones]

41. I didn't say anything about "racists being able to vote in secret." I said that some voters

would feel pressured to vote for Obama to show that they were NOT racist, even though they really wanted to vote for Clinton. It would have a lot to do with the racial make-up of the crowd at the caucus, in most cases.

If Obama were white, then people might feel pressured in a caucus situation to vote for Clinton to show that they are not sexist.

I don't think people should vote based on race, sex, candidate's marital status or sexual orientation, hair color, shoe size, height, etc. Some will, anyway, but voters should vote based on candidates' positions on issues, experience, and any other factors that might be relevant to the job. (You probably wouldn't vote for someone who has to use a wheelchair to be dogcatcher, for example. But FDR made a great president. He also hid his wheelchair use from the public; sadly, a candidate might have to today, too.)

[jackson_dem]

20. Something fishy is going on in caucuses

Washington and Texas are two states who had both a real vote and a caucus and their results are very revealing.

Texas primary: H 51, O 47
Texas caucus: O 56, H 44 (with 41% of the vote in)

Washington primary: O 50, H 47
Washington caucus: O 68, H 31

In Texas there is a 16 point swing and in Washington a 34 point swing.

[CreekDog]

24. Egads your math

:spank:

you are certainly adding numbers twice in here.

19 point swing in WA

7-9 point swing in TX

[DemBones DemBones]

29. Yes, the Obama people are stealing votes in caucuses or

at least pressuring people into voting for Obama.

Those numbers are VERY fishy -- and here the Obamaniacs are whining about 3 votes being stolen from 3 students who weren't smart enough to fill out their form!

The students couldn't have attended a caucus in TX unless they'd already voted in the primary so even first-time voters should have known they needed to vote at the caucus.

[bicentennial_baby]

35. You do know that the awarding of delegates works differently

in the different states, right?

Washington: 100% of delegates awarded from caucus results, 0% from primary

Texas:

How Texas' 193 "Pledged" Delegates Are Allocated -- Primary/Caucus Hybrid

* 126 delegates are "primary-chosen" delegates, allocated based on the results of votes cast on March 4. The 126 delegates that are allocated by the "regular" primary system will be the only ones that Senator Clinton and Senator Obama can add to their tally after March 4. These 126 delegates are divided based on the voting strength of each candidate in the 31 State Senate Districts across Texas.

Later today, I will have an exhaustively extensive post that looks at each of those 31 State Senate Districts to try and see where either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama may hope to play strongly.
* 67 delegates are "caucus-chosen" delegates, allocated at the state convention.

Overall, the vast majority of delegates that can be won in Texas are based on the voting totals -- because the "caucus-chosen" delegates are only assigned based on who shows up to the local precinct conventions the day of the election. We explain below.

An Explanation of the 67 "Caucus-Chosen" Delegates

There is a four-page document provided by the Texas Democratic Party that explains how the 67 "caucus-chosen" delegates are picked and allocated. If you really, really want to know how this works, you can read it by clicking here. Here's the most important points, though:

* This process rewards whichever candidate organizes its voters to attend the precinct conventions after the polls close.
* Delegates that work their way through the precinct and county/district conventions are free to switch their candidate support at any time until the state convention -- but normally (and especially if the race is still undecided at the time of the state convention in June) -- delegates won't switch.

Here, now -- for those true political junkies out there -- is a summary of how the Texas caucus system works:

* 42 at-Large delegates allocated by the "caucus" system. The allocation of these 42 delegates (by candidate preference) is based on the presidential preference expressed state convention delegates (who are chosen at their precinct and county conventions) when they sign in at the state convention June 6.

Let's do an example: 100 people attend a precinct convention (which is held 15 minutes after the polls close). 80 of those attending the precinct convention support Obama, and 20 support Clinton. Let's assume your precinct gets to select 5 delegates to the County Convention. 4 of those Delegates would be "pledged" to Obama, and 1 would be "pledged" to Clinton. Those 5 people go to the County Convention.

At the County Convention, the same process is repeated. Let's say there are 100 people at the County Convention -- these are the 100 delegates that were chosen at all of the precinct conventions around the County. At the County Convention, let's say 75 are "Obama precinct convention" delegates and 25 are "Clinton precinct convention" delegates. Based on the county strength -- the percentage of statewide Democratic votes that came from your county -- let's say your County gets to send 4 delegates to the State Convention. 3 of those delegates would be "pledged" to Obama, and 1 would be "pledged" to Clinton.

The identical process is followed at the State convention. Let's say 100 delegates go to the State Convention -- these are the 100 delegates that were chosen to represent their candidate at the County Convention. Of these 100 delegates at the State Convention, 66 (2/3) vote for Obama and 34 (1/3) vote for Clinton. The 42 at-large delegates are split along this percentage division -- so Obama would have an additional 28 delegates (2/3 of 42) attend the DNC Convention, while Clinton would have 14 delegates (1/3 of 42) attend the DNC Convention.

I grossly under-represented the numbers at every convention level for illustrative purposes; if you can follow this logic (and I've tried as best I could to help you), you'll understand the main point: this process awards whichever campaign has the best grassroots effort to get their voters to stay after the polls close and attend the precinct convention. This is truly a process where the numbers build up -- and yes, it's crazy. But we're Texas -- what would we be if we weren't at least a little crazy.
* Also, 25 pledged "super delegates" allocated by the caucus system. The 25 pledged "party delegates" are party leaders, Democratic Mayors and Legislators. They are all allocated along the same lines as the delegates attending the State convention. Using the 2/3 to 1/3 split I described above, 17 of the 25 delegates (2/3) would be for Obama, and 8 delegates (1/3) would be for Clinton. As a note, only a candidate receiving a 15 percent threshold may receive votes.

http://www.burntorangereport.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=4877

[DemBones DemBones]

43. Do you mean that Washington voters have to vote in the primary and the caucus

for their vote to count? Or do they only have caucuses?

I think having to vote in a primary and a caucus is too much, especially for people who work nights or are older and/or have health problems. Getting to the polls once is hard for a lot of people and I'm guessing you can't vote absentee for caucuses?

[Yael]

28. "Get control of the signin sheets and tell everyone to leave their preference blank"

Then fill them all in for the Queen of Virtue and Honesty.

:rofl:

[AtomicKitten]

38. Clinton and Election Fraud used in the same sentence -- what a surprise.

not