The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

I attended the caucus in my appointed place and chaos is the word for it. The chairman had no clue, was wearing an Obama T shirt showing who he was supporting and told us to just fill in our names and they would fill in the rest of our information the following day so as to make the process faster. I told them there was no way I would allow them to fill in my information so I filled it all out myself. Others let them do so, how do we know what they put on there? I am a delegate and since the caucus I have received emails from the Obama camp telling me thanks for my support and now it is time to take down Hillary and McCain,funny thing is when I signed that sheet I put that I supported Hillary Clinton. I find it strange that now everyone thinks I was in support of Obama.

The sign in sheets were home made and no one was checking Id's or voters registration cards. So how did they know these people were even supposed to be there and signing in?

I voted in precinct 4250 in Fort Worth, Texas and have never seen such mayhem. People were walking out by the 100's because no one knew what they were doing.

I am working with someone to find these sign in sheets to see if my name says I am a Obama supporter, seems that something is amiss here as I am being contacted by the Obama camp and not the Hillary camp for donations now.

Cheryl C McNeil

Check out this Texas "Two Stepping" video:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=R6HfDRrmO8k

Fbcx- Oh crap! My typo! But at least I caught it first: I typed "won" where I should have typed "own"

Guess I caught the fbcx disease of submitting
before checking.

Dear fbcx: You say: "How is it that you plan to run the country if you can even run your won election process?" AND "We all need to be very very afraid of the next four years."

1. Uh, I think you mean to say, "if you CAN"T even run..." As in: "how is it you think you can criticize if you CAN'T even check for typos?"

2. This, from a Republican, a Texan, no less! GWBush ran a very disciplined campaign, runs a very disciplined administration. And yet, total screw up!
If you are afraid of the next 4 years, after GWBUSH, where have you been for the past eight?????

fbcx-I am afraid that it still was not the comment the DNC was looking for,

you will need to try again!

BUT, they WANT your Opinion to Count! ;~)

I apologize for the double post. Guess I caught Democrat disease and voted twice.

As a Native Texan and a Republican, I find this argument and the Democrat Party managed vote quite amusing. Tell me again: "how is it that you plan to run the country if you can even run your own election process?" My observation is, if either one of your candidates wins the general election in November, we all need to be very, very afraid of the next 4 years.

What I want to know is what is the American people going to do when their pre-printed tax forms come in the mail for them to sign?? Or when their taxes go gradually up?? Up to 52% at a time according to your income..(Heaven forbid you are trying to put your college kid through college) What is a little $4,000.00 compared to $45 grand or more for a college student? I just barely paid off mine and I am putting my kids through college. What's going to happen if we have no more weapons and we get attacked again like in 2001 and we have no way to defend ourselves?? What about the $379.99 I paid for gas in my car to go to work today? For 2 jobs. What about the bad mortgage that most people have? Oh, and lets not forget the price of food, Any idea how much these college kids can eat when they bring their friends over for a cram night, a good $200.+ or more a week in groceries.
You know, for as long as I can remember Which has been a long time... Politicians have constantly slammed each other..But what truely gets to me is that We the people should really be worried,(Are They),OUR precious politician whomever we decide in private to vote for,
Are they really going to take care of the real issues, and not how they are slamming each other.. Seriously..Blog after Blog is the same ole thing one bash after another.. Lets outdo the other..
We are Americans aren't we all in this together?? No matter who we vote for??
We still breathe the same air, we still put our pants on one leg at a time just like the other person.

As a Native Texan and a Republican, I find this argument and the Democrat Party managed vote quite amusing. Tell me again: "how is it that you plan to run the country if you can even run your own election process?" My observation is, if either one of your candidates wins the general election in November, we all need to be very, very afraid of the next 4 years.

Once again, like a few other rational people who have chosen to post to this site, I find myself lamenting the horrible quality of discourse in these posts. I could criticize the terrible writing, but that would simply be snobby and beside the point--these things are, after all, written in haste. Rather, I criticize the venomous sniping and shallow thinking evidenced here. Grow up, people.

Cheap shots may provide momentary satisfaction, but they won't keep John McCain out of the White House, which is where he'll be in 2009 if Democrats can't unite behind WHOEVER the nominee is. So, you think you have a gripe against HRC or BHO? You may end up learning the hard way that those gripes pale into insignificance compared to those you'll almost certainly have against a McCain administration, which will be, a least by comparison to an Obama or Clinton administration, very much a third Bush term. Keep the big picture in view. For heaven's (and our country's) sake, cool off . . .

After careful consideration and much deliberation I have decided that the time is right for a third party to form in American Politics. I don't mean the greens or Ralph Nader. I believe that it is time for Hillary Clinton to renounce her membership in the Democratic Party and register the Feminist Workers Party (FWP). Her two strongest avenues of support for the Presidency are blue collar workers and women. Those groups combined with her strong support from Latinos, along with the 10% to 20% of African Americans, who have managed to resist the messianic appeal of Barack Obama could provide the margin of success for her third party candidacy.

This in my opinion would lead certainly to the most competitive Presidential election in the Countries history. This scenario could easily throw the contest into uncertainly in regards to which of the three candidates would be able to win the most popular votes and which candidate could carry the most States leading to a free for all in the electoral college.

If the country is truly ready for change as is the consistent message of Mr. Obama and his supporters then surely this would lead to the greatest change that could be imagined.

I also am miffed as to why the Democratic Party supporters would so quickly abandon Hillary Clinton, who has for most of her adult life been a stalwart supporter of that Party. Where is the loyalty that she cultivated and so richly deserves, and secondly how could so many African Americans who prior to the entrance of Opra and Obama into the race, were big supporters of Hillary and Her Husband Bill, but now have totally abandoned them in favor of Obama.

If loyalty is not a two way street, I believe it is time for Hillary to consider abandoning the Democratic Party and considering how truly to impact the political process in America for the good of the country, without regard to the Party.

I believe that her voice must continue to be heard through the general election process and that the Democratic Party is not in a position to give her the platform that her ideas deserve and warrant.

The democratic party is now so divided as the result of Barack Obama candidacy that they cannot allow anyone other than Obama to win the nomination for fear of a backlash by African American voters, so that they really have no easy way out of this dilema which they have created for themselves through many missteps not the least of which is the debacle in both Florida and Michigan.

After watching videos on youtube about what went on at the Texas Caucus the problems, chaos and cheating, they should throw out the results and go with the primany numbers. They should divide the delegates appropriately.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=texas+caucus&search_type=

Mrs. Clinton may be capable of leading the country but her comparison of her democratic challenger to the republican nominee is an indication of how this lady does anything to get in power. Basically she will do anything get in power including denying peoples' vote for change. I don't understand why those Mrs. Clinton's supporters fail to see her changing behaviour, e.g. one minutes she was praising Obama by saying "i am honoured to run with him" and the next morning she was yelling " shame on you, shame on you". Who want a leader like that?

For those who think that Mrs. Clinton won in Texas, here is the link you might want to check. http://trailblazers.beloblog.com/archives/2008/03/cnn-obama-win-texas-beats-clin.html

We need a leader who has integrity and a vision, who is not hungry for power.

Uhhh, Maybe Next Time, they won't try to do Two-Steps to Reggae and Polkas! ;~)

At the Iowa caucuses I personally observed cheating by the Obama campaign & afterwards heard other stories of Obama campaign people cheating the process to take delegates away from Hillary Clinton. It seems the Obama people have been trained/coached on how to cheat the process and I deplore their 'win at all costs' attitudes and actions.

The caucus system needs to be banned, it is too easy to lie, cheat & steal to skew the results. Many first time caucus goers (from all candidate groups) swore when they left that they would NEVER attend a caucus again they were so fed up with the shenanigans and rule breaking - this is not good for the Democratic party.

To those Hillary supporters in states with upcoming caucuses scheduled - please be sure you get the 800/888/866 phone number to call to report these type of problems right away (i.e. during the caucus - be sure to bring your cell phone) & don't be afraid to stand up for what is right.

For the life of me I just don't get it. You have a primary election and the vote is counted and then you hold a second one after the polls are closed which is attended by about 4 percent of those who had already voted and you consider this meaningful and democratic and representative and above all, fair? So because some had the opportunity and wherewithal to both vote AND attend a caucus (can you vote absentee at a cuscus?; does your employer give you time off to attend a caucus during your work hours?; are you possibly and allegedely intimidated by others at a caucus?:) your vote counts twice. This is an insane way to run elections. I am an Obama supporter, but even I can see that something's rotten in Odessa. There is no way one person's vote should count more then another's for the same election. Craziness.

Just for the record, our caucus down in Austin was rather hectic and very crowded (around 750 folks showed up), but entirely lacking in the vehement partisanship that is being widely reported elsewhere. A Clinton supporter was elected as chair, an Obama supporter as secretary, and each table was worked by a member of each camp. We shared water, election results from other states, and good conversation with our "opponents," and it was all very polite and friendly, despite strong passions on both sides. We didn't finish up until after 11PM, but a lot of people still stuck around for the delegate selection. Obama won 67% to 33%.

Hillary is doing a wonderful job of getting exactly what she wants now - another Republican president for four more years. She now knows she can't logistically win the nomination in 2008, so she's set her sights on 2012, and making sure a republican gets in this year so the climate will be even more pro-democrat then. She is the DEFINITION of cynical politics.

She has unapologetically torpedoed the democrat candidate selection by going racist, going negative, doing all of mccain's work for him. By being a democrat attacking Obama, it makes everything stick. It will be very difficult for her to "take back" anything when Barack becomes the nominee. She has made a concentrated effort to drain, sipon, tap, or ridicule all the enthusiasm Obama has generated.

McCain steps in, uses Hillary's screaming harpies for his own means and just leaps right off the platform she's created for him. He sails through a one-term presidency where civil liberties erode farther, social services decline and the wealthiest americans become even more of a de facto aristocracy (Clintons included).

And then she jumps in in 4 years with "I told you so" and gets the presidency she so richly deserves for going on USO tours and stealing a quarter of a million dollars from the white house ("I'm sorry, that china/piano/antique chair/lincoln's pillow/armoir weren't for us to take with us? Well I reckon we just didn't know!")

Please. Her Royal Clinton is so divisive and hate-inspiring, so depraved and ambitious, that she has willfully, maliciously and cynically torn down the only uniting force in American politics in the past 50 years, because SHE THINKS ITS HER TURN.

Obama needs to just say what we already know:

"I've won this nomination. I've won it from sea to shining sea. I've taken attacks from every angle and avenue. I'm not a John McCain clone and I actually have a chance to defeat him. I don't drag 8 years of infidelity and scandal with me everywhere I go. My accomplishments are equal to or better than the senator from New York's in every category, in quality, quantity and benefit to the Country. Go make another act of congress to dedicate park, Hillary, that's all you've accomplished as a senator. Its time for you to step down and save your own face, and save the face of the democratic party for us to have some chance of success in November. If we keep destroying each other, there is no chance we will take back the white house, and in four years, we're right back here."

Obama, 08. Couldn't be clearer.

The Texas caucus results should be thrown out! I was there! Secure voting was not attainable. Many that did not vote in the primary voted in the caucus. ID's and voting cards were not checked and each site was disorderly and chaotic. Then, you had groups of people being passionate about their candidate. The environment was intimadating as well as unsecure. There is no way these votes will hold up if challenged. This process defies the democratic principles of voting. If we were overseeing democratic voting in another country, we would say it was corrupt. If I were Obama, I would not want the taint of any caucus vote to get me nominated. THAT would be taking the high road...

Obama should start saying "We play by the rules, and we win. We don't lose and then try and change the rules. And when the rules say 'don't play here,' we don't play there and then try and change the rules ex post facto. I am a winner."

As usual, the two-sided Obama supporters have to come out attacking glosski for pointing out that Clinton won more votes. Isn't Obama the one convincing the superdelegates to go with the "will of the people" because the majority voted for him? So that only applies outside of TX since there he won more delegates and that's the most important thing?

As for irregularities in the caucuses in Texas, you should check out how many bloggers are posting their experience. There are quite a few irregularities pointed out.

What a joke glosski, trying to make your point by using math in an equation that's not yet complete. 42,000? Seriously?

2/3rds of the delegates from Texas are won in the primary, 1/3rd from the caucus. Obama kept it tight in the primary and when its all said and done will blow her away in the caucus. He deserves the delegates allotted to him because his supporters take the time to show up.

And plthomps, there were plenty of problems related to the caucs, but don't act as if it was all an issue with an Obama supporter. I was elected temp secretary and the chair was an Obama supporter as well up here in suburban Dallas. If any of the Clinton supporters said we weren't fair or proper they'd fail a lie detector test.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/local/stories/DN-crenshaw_06pol.ART.State.Edition2.4607828.html

I can't understand how they say that it depends on the number of Delegates now it is the popular vote. Which is it?
Even though Obama did not take certain states if you look at the results she did not win with the result that was stated that she was to have.
The races only show me that the number of states that Obama has won will represent the most of the American people.
But then again the big corporation and big businesses are in the states that Clinton has won.
It will be the same old politics if she is is in office.
Obama has united this country and wants to improve it for the American people.
It will be a hard thing to do after the last 8 years but with the people getting involved, we have a chance.
Stop listening to the the half truths and check out and find the truth for yourselves.
I hope PA. and MI. will open do this before they vote.
WE NEED A CHANGE!!!!!

Time is of the essense at this point. 6 weeks of haggling and "he said, she said" crap will divide the party further. It is already seriously divided. AGAIN THE PARTY HAS LOST THE ELECTION! Either the super delegates start going toward the person who is ahead NOW, or it is a certainty, MCCain will be elected in November.

Wow! What an "eye opener."

The Clinton campaign and their supporters really aren't Democrats at all; with their true colors showing, they talk like and act like hardcore, so-called Christian right wing, southern hood-wearing hoodlums.

It is no wonder so many Clinton supporters are threatening to vote Republican if Hillary can't hold her Democratic facade.

Stooping to anything; saying anything; lying. We accept this as politics? The politician who can get the best lie to "stick" wins.

Already, I am satisfied that win or loose, Barack is the best person to lead the country. Without him, we gain nothing not even the names will change.

Will there be rioting if she manages to steal this nomination?

is it not funny that adult lose their personal integrity, when supporting someone else who dont even know that they are alive. you would think that people who are not in personal competition would not lose their sanity over weather someone else wins or loses.
if you are a democrat why do you care weather hillary is a woman or a man, or what obamas inherited middle name is. these two senators would be just fine, nothing would change in their lives like nothing changed for J F Kerry when he lost to Bush. he is still a US senator a rich man. The Clintons are more pro-black then most blacks so if you are supporting them because you hate the "black guy" then you are supporting the wrong candidate. Obama is the most Christian fundamentalist of all democratic Senators. he belong to UCC Christian church but you can find this out without me telling you. and believe me his place is history is save. so dont lose yourself in your blind loyelty to someone who is not even aware of you (it is like fighting in the name of God) learn what this fact tells about the human nature. maybe what we want is the strugle for its own sake and policy differnce would do.

any case dont lose yourself

Stovepipe1: at this point, with the math the way it is, if Clinton "wins the popular vote" then the superdelegates, like the rest of us, should watch dumbfounded as cats sprout wings and chase robins across the sky, clouds turn into cotton candy and drop gently to earth while children squeal in delight, the speed of light in a vacuum becomes variable, hell freezes over, and all sorts of other impossible fantasies come vibrantly to life!

Those of us in the reality-based community, on the other hand, are planning for a more probable future: one in which Obama wins the popular vote and the supers do the right thing (we work to elect Obama), or Obama wins the popular vote and the supers sell their souls to Billary (and we take to the streets in Denver like they did in Chicago in '68).

So if Sen. Clinton winds up winning the popular vote (assumming Fla. and Mich. are counted, and Pa. is going to make up a big margin)), what should superdelegates do?

Glosski,
CNN has called the caucus a solid win for Obama and several news organizations now have Obama winning the Texas delegate count by about 3 at the moment. You also make this statement: "Clinton already has more super delegates than Obama and can win this election with those super delegates." Yes, Clinton has 30-50 more announced superdelegates, but there are still about 250 up for grabs. Obama will almost certainly need only about 100 of those to wrap up the election. There is no way that Clinton can catch him in pledged delegates. That's the math.

Igivens:
Lies are anything you don't agree with.
Truth: Clinton got over 100,000 more popular votes that Obama
Truth: Clinton got more delegates from the primary process
Truth: Obama will PROBABLY win the caucus
Truth: Obama will PROBABLY get more delegates from the caucus process
Try reading the article you are commenting on: they have only completed 41% of the count on the caucus so how is it that he WON more delegates?
Truth: neither of the candidates can get enough delegates to win the nomination
Truth: Clinton already has more super delegates than Obama and can win this election with those super delegates
Opinion: if that's what it takes to make sure we don't turn the presidency of this country into another episode of American Idol, so be it

The question I have for the majority of people posting comments is what example are we setting with the name calling and opinion bashing. I hope we are more mature than our children that we correct for doing these things. We get mad at politicians that spend more time criticizing and character smearing rather than addressing the issues, but we follow that same trail ourselves.

Honestly, I disagree with parts of every one of our candidates (democrat and republican), but I would rather discuss the issues than hear a bunch of name-calling from people that are supposed to represent our country.

Mr. Obama's middle name is Hussein, but the earlier post is correct in that does not categorize him or make him Muslim. It means that his middle name is Hussein and that's all. Those that took issue with it are trying to trump up press, just like those that made issue with Mrs. Clinton using Rodham as part of her name. Who really cares? Let's look at the real issues.

It's time the nation grew up and elected our president based on their leadership, and forgot about skin color, lineage, gender, or even age..... That is our hiring policy for the rest of the country. Let's not be hypocritical and decide who is best for the American people.

glosski--

Primary: Winner +101,029 votes Clinton
C = 1,459,814
O = 1,358,785
Caucus: Winner +5,298 votes votes Obama
O = 23,918 (1.76% of Primary voters)
C = 18,620 (1.28% of Primary voters

you have the delegate counts for the caucus. Over 1 million people took part in the caucuses. If Obamas 56% holds up than he will end up with 560,000 votes to Clinton's 440,000 votes. However, since you had to vote in the primary before you could vote in the caucus, I would imagine that popular vote for the caucus doesn't count.

Numbers don't lie glosski, but you do.

Obama won more delegates. I haven't seen a requirement of the DNC where the total votes from the Primary is what wins the nomination. Tell me again, is it delegates? I'm a bit fuzzy.

You need to get more batteries for your brain.

numbers don't lie - Obama was able to convince more of his people to participate in the second process while Clinton was able to do so in the first process:

Primary: Winner +101,029 votes Clinton
C = 1,459,814
O = 1,358,785
Caucus: Winner +5,298 votes votes Obama
O = 23,918 (1.76% of Primary voters)
C = 18,620 (1.28% of Primary voters)

If you still think that Obama came out the winner in this state, you may need new batteries in your calculator.

OBAMA WON MORE DELEGATES IN TEXAS COUNT

GO OBAMA

"Obama won more support from Texas caucus-goers than Clinton. Based on the state party's tally, Obama's caucus victory translates into 38 national convention delegates, compared to 29 for Clinton.

And though Clinton won more delegates than Obama in the primary, 65 to 61, Obama's wider delegate margin in the caucuses gives him the overall statewide delegate lead, 99 to 94 -- or once superdelegate endorsements are factored in, 109 to 106. Obama won more support from Texas caucus-goers than Clinton.

Based on the state party's tally, Obama's caucus victory translates into 38 national convention delegates, compared to 29 for Clinton."

The people have spoken Obama '08

For all the democrats out there...after this election, caucuses are going to be banished from the process.

This year, people will not stop voting for a democrat due to the nominee, they will not vote democrat due to the mess the democratic party has made of the nomination process.

PS. If I could vote, I'd vote for Hillary Clinton. If I were her, in 4 years, I'd go independent. But she is too loyal, she won't do that.

The caucus I attended in Fort Worth had a temporary chairman who identified himself as a Clinton supporter. A young woman who stood up front he identified as the Obama supporter, temporary secretary of the meeting. He rudely told her to sit down, and proceeded to tell a raunchy joke about the Restroom in the airport in Minneapolis which is now a memorial to a Republican senator. It went downhill from there. No preparation. No order. Chaos. Many of us were first time Democrats, and once is enough. In Texas, at least, saying "stupid democrats" is being redudant.

Major Precinct Problems at 558 in Houston, Tx on March 4th

The Obama person stole the packet from the Precinct chairman at 558 before
the regular voting was done. She used her own sign- in sheets for people to sign before she opened the packet with the
NCR Sheets sign- in sheets in it. I reported it to the Precinct chairman who didn't want to"get hurt"

The Obama person didn't check any of the people's Ids or stamped cards to see if they had voted or belong at that location.

She did not form lines. She put out a bunch of sheets on some tables and everyone rushed over there and then she told them that they weren't voting on those sheets that they were "a sign-in sheet".

A lot of people did not write in their choice for president.There was no control over the sheets. Someone could have picked one up or written in the blanks

There were 379 people there. Obama people were screaming at the Hillary
people. I heard that this happened at most of the Precincts.

Obama is not muslim, but Christian. If having a single middle name is sufficient to form complete opinions about a candidate, this country is in serious trouble indeed.

Please hold the massive misinformation. I want none of that.

Also, 'winning' a state is decided on the number of delegates won, not the total number of votes. Weird - but that's our out-dated system.

kevinlarmee:

So, Obama SUPPORTERS can use his middle name, but if I use his middle name, I am automatically "filth", "slime", and I should go back (a) put on the white sheet, (b) do my kkk thing, (c) intimidating Muslims, and/or (d) under my rock?

As for being a "Clinton fan" I would not vote for her in a million years. Try again.

"Chaos" seems a strong word. A bit breathless, don't you think?

"Barack HUSSEIN Obama" is the best man possible for America & the world

...and he's already won, so get used to it,
so go back and put on the white sheet, and do your kkk thing, or go around intimidating Muslims (tho maybe your great grandparents were the victim of religious hatred)...i.e. "jake" go back under your rock...you're filth, and you're slime (and you happen to be a Clinton fan)

So, IF Barack HUSSEIN Obama wins Texas on March 29th, that counts as of March 4th only (in order to keep any Hillary DIANE Clinton winning streak intact), right?

So, are you guys in the national media going to finally stop "reporting" that Hillary "won" Texas?!

Sheesh! What's the excuse for this misreporting of the Texas results? "Hillary told us to do it..."? Come on, ya'll - you apologized like crazy when you called NH in advance for Hillary - I want to see the same for Obama.

This misreporting of the Texas results has had a serious impact on the race, and the failure of the media to admit its own screw-ups (yes, you need to admit that Hillary spun you HARD) is a real problem, calling into question the integrity of journalists and of our politics/politricks in general.