Local Clinton backers may challenge delegates

The fight for Democratic delegates in Texas is not over.

After marathon senate district conventions last weekend where thousands of supporters of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton took part, some local Clinton backers are now saying that Obama got too many delegates.

They point to how the credentials committees set up for senate districts 9 and 10 handled challenges to the results of the primary night caucuses.  Their charge: some challenges were handled unfairly in order to favor Obama.

With the senate district conventions now over, their final option would be to challenge the delegates that were elected to go to the state convention in June.

“I would hope that Obama wouldn’t want to win when people didn’t follow the rules,” said Jason Smith, a local Clinton supporter.

Smith is planning a meeting this Wednesday for any Clinton supporters that might be pursuing a challenge. Several delegate challenges could come out of Tarrant County, he said.

“We are not persuading or dissuading people from filing," Smith said. "We just want to give them information.”

State Rep. Lon Burnam of Fort Worth, an Obama backer, doesn’t seem to have much patience for these accusations from Clinton supporters.

“They’re beginning to come off like poor losers,” Burnam said.

(photos from local senate district conventions courtesy of Flickr.com)

-Aman Batheja

Comments

[Michelle]

I think they're coming off a lot worse than just poor losers -- it's creating a chasm between otherwise friendly and fairly united Tarrant County Democrats.

Clinton actually won in my precinct, but the Clinton delegates still challenged the results! It didn't work in our precinct; in fact, their challenge of their own win resulted in Obama actually gaining a vote after the Credentials Committee took a harder look at our caucus voters. Karma can be so sweet at times.

Seriously, though, it led me to believe that Clinton is so desperate at this point that the "challenge everything" strategy has been invoked by her campaign in hopes that Obama loses some delegates by technicality.

It's "silly season" in the race, alright.

[Leaning to the middle]

If you saw how the grouped precincts sitting behind us at SD10 operated, then you might understand some of the challenges. It didn't help when the nitwit convention chair didn't even understand some of the rules as written in the party rulebook for 2008. We finally had to get the party attorney to interpret one issue for our precinct... after the chair gave us one answer, the credentials judge gave us a different answer, the credentials judge gave another precinct yet a different answer... it was obvious the right hand didn't know what the left hand was doing, and maybe didn't really care.
Here's a thought... WHEN A DELEGATE ASKS YOU A QUESTION AND YOU REALLY DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER, FIND OUT FROM SOMEONE WHO REALLY DOES KNOW RATHER THAN JUST SPOUT OFF WHAT YOU "THINK" IT MIGHT BE!!

[Paul H]

She'll stop at nothing. Nothing! Sore loser. (watch your back, Barack. It won't be a vast right wing conspiracy that's back there!)

[Perplexed]

I am perplexed. How can anyone think the caucus system is fair? The entire system is corrupt. To say that Clinton folks are being sore losers is silly. Sounds like the republicans in Florida in 2000. The supposed winner doesn't ever want a question to be raised. IN AMERICA VOTING IRREGULARITIES ARE NOT IGNORED. For anyone to say that fighting corruption in voting are hiding away from the facts. I am embarrassed that we even have this corrupt system.

[Kiddiecar]

Personally, I am turned off by the whole electorial process. This circus has got to be turnded around, made more civil and the process of running must be limited in time.

This charade has got to go.

[disgusted]

I've finally given up on the Democratic party. From the candidates to the local party people, I have lost trust in all of them. No one seems to know what they are doing. I'll be an independent this time around.

[A Proud American]

Right is right, wrong is wrong, no matter which candidate you back--and I back neither. But I would hope the delegates are distributed fairly in this instance and everywhere. No one should be ashamed to stand up for their rights, and no one should act as if this is shameful.

[Susan]

The Clinton machine's sense of "entitlement" is now spilling out all its ugly bile -- as Hillary heads toward history's dustbin of "most bitter and ungracious losers in all of Democratic Party annals".
(Remember back a year ago how Hillary was being packaged and sold as totally "inevitable" and how Queen Hillary's coronation would be solidified by all the primaries bunched up on Super Tuesday, Feb. 5th....)
It's increasingly obvious that she's willing to deploy every ugly and sleazy tactic imaginable -- destroying the Democratic Party when it's on the verge of victory -- in an effort to defeat Obama in the general election and, thus, hand the election to McCain.
......In her singularly selfish, personal-power-driven world, this would tie in with her vision of then becoming the Dem nominee in 2012 against a President McCain runnning for re-election.
A President Obama would mean that she'd have to wait a long 8 years to try to become the Dem nominee once again.
Putting up with the policy differencs between McCain and Obama for 4 years is of NO concern to her -- as long as it fits in with her obsession of a President Hillary.
Is there really any wonder why Hillary runs a mammoth 30 points behind both Obama and McCain in the category of "trust" in every single poll everywhere in the country?! -- Susan & my two daughters, Jenny and Nicole

[donald]

the whole system needs to be overhauled. I think that the Clinton camp needs to keep in mind that this is the same system that put her husband in office.

[Don]

They're made because they thought they relly won the primary, but if not for the number of republican cross overs that vote for clinton. they wouldn't have won it either.

[David]

Funny how a democrat losing in the primaries to another democrat is being a "Poor loser", however when a democrat loses to a republican in the presidential race, the election has been "stolen" by the republicans. Why wasn't Gore labeled a "poor loser"?

[John Goodwin]

It's not a being a poor loser when you didn't get a chance to vote because the Obama Delegation took over and held their own caucus after they sent everyone home. Many of us who were supporters of Clinton never got the chance to even vote. What makes it worse is when Obama is given more Delegates when he didn't earn them fairly. The Obama Campaign overloaded the Caucuses with people who did not vote in the primary giving him a sizable lead over Clinton. The Democratic Party now refuses to investigate this and remove any Delegates that violated their own rules. They refuse to count your votes and verify your votes. Some of us are trying to make that happen, but they ignore us and block us at every turn. I was even threaten for challenging my caucus, and the Democratic Party refuses to investigate that as well. We are not being sore losers. We are trying to make sure every vote is heard fairly and making sure every vote count. I am starting to not trust the Democratic Party as well because my individual rights are not important to them. My vote is not important to them, and frankly neither is yours that is why you need to let them know that every vote should be verified and counted because every voice who voted is important.

[Ashley]

I just received a letter in the mail today from a Clinton supporter who wants to challenge the number of Obama delegates elected at our Senatorial Convention. I believe this is both absurd and a waste of time. Many supporters of both candidates took the time out to participate in the Caucus, and now Clinton wants to cry "wolf". I am a full-time worker and student, but found a way to make time to support my candidate of choice, Senator Obama. Clinton dismissed the caucus, thinking she had Texas tied up with the primaries, and is now has egg on her face and wants to change the system. It's not fair that myself and many others spent ENDLESS HOURS at our Caucuses and Senatorial Convention to make this happen. It's not fair to her supporters who I fear will no longer be taken seriously because of their candidate's need to win at all costs. If you don't like it, work harder in the upcoming states. Don't challenge what took dozens of hours to achieve, be a big girl and look forward get ready for the upcoming battles. I hope news of these challenges reach Pennsylvania and other upcoming primaries and caucuses, let them see who they're really voting for in Clinton.

And by the way, for those who feel Clinton hasn't been given a fair chance, listen up: At the Senatorial District 23 Convention, a convention that overwhelmingly supported Obama, several precincts, including my own, elected to send Hillary delegates to be fair. IMAGINE THAT! I know of at least 4 precincts in our convention that allowed this, that means we gave her 4 delegates for the State Convention that she didn't earn. As an Obama supporter, I'm sick of being fair. If it weren't for my strong desire to see a Democratic president back in the oval office, I would have stopped participating long ago. If Hillary is unable to handle the procedures and laws established in Texas and in other states to be nominated, what makes her supporters think she can handle being President?

[Gayle]

There are many reasons to challenge the results. My voter credentials were not checked at my precinct caucus or at the Gaylord the day of the conventions. Our precinct lost a delegate to the state convention b/c many of the delegates (21% of our precinct) didn't show up at the Gaylord, thus forfeiting votes that would have truly represented the people who stayed to caucus on 3/4. Basically, we went from 2 to 1 delegate due to apportionment. The sound was hideous and most of us past the middle of the room had no idea what was being said most of the time. The stories I heard from precincts in Wautaga and Keller made me wonder why they weren't being challenged. (I represented a Haltom City precinct). After this faulty "funneling down process", the delegates to state are not truly representative of those who showed up election night. How can this be fair or even legal? It needs to be discontinued.

[Lubbock Democrat]

Look, you are all missing the point. It's not just Clinton voters who were cheated, it was Obama voters too, specifically in El Paso, wher ethe At LArge Delegate allocation was not proportionate to the sign. THEY WERE CHEATED!!!! So Obama supporters, are you just going to ignore that? Should you ignore that? I am a Clinton supporter and the same thing happened here in Lubbock. Sign in % was 56% Clinton to 44% Obama...At LArge split should have been 6-4 right? Right. But ALL 10 were allocated to Obama, violating the State Rules. The only "balancing" that was to be done with the at large, was for affirmative action goals, according to the rules, and the Lubbock Nominations Committee did a great job at following that portion of the rules, but the Obama people took over the committee (which was chaired by a Clinton person but was shoved out basically). Article IV, # 9 sections (a) & (b) of the State Party Rules which states:
9. Balancing Delegations.
(a) In selecting Delegates and Alternates at all levels, the Nominations Committee and the
Convention itself shall make every effort to select persons so that the delegation as a
whole shall reasonably reflect the political preferences (in non-presidential years) or
the presidential preference (in presidential years) and the proportion of women, young
people, and minorities present in the district or state.

• This again, states "reasonably reflect...the presidential preference" present at the convention." The only thing that was to be balanced with the At Large Delegates was gender and race. The Nominations committee did NOT follow the party rules and procedures and the clarification from State was a miscommunication according to what they were told by Committee Members.

(b) At least one-third of the Delegates and one-third of the Alternates of any delegation
elected at any level shall be of the sex opposite to that of the rest of the delegation.

IF you are a Democrat, and you are concerned about the party and what it stands for, then you will support ALL challenges for the fairness of all members of the party. Current polls show that Clinton supporters will not vote for Obama if he gets the nomination...this is one of the biggest reasons why...the cheating that has been going on throughout all the caucuses. The caucus does not allow for all Democrats to attend due to needing babysitters, or they work the night shift, or they are too eldery to attend, or lack of transportation, etc. The caucus IS NOT a democratic process; it strictly allows more room for error, separation of the party and cheating!!!!! The caucus is a circus. By the way, for those of you who think Republicans are only crossing over to ruin it for the Dems, you are wrong. I and many others I know crossed over because we are Liberal and need to see the war end, and need to see that TORT reform ends now! Obama can't win Ohio and Florida...therefore, he will NOT beat McCain. Do you want a Dem in office, or are you just so in love with a "man" and what he portrays himself to be, a man of change, yet he has raised his children in a church that promotes racism. Yes, that is a future generation being taught segregation. How can you support that? You can't ignore that. We need to be focusing on community, not segregation.