Clinton Request Violates the Law (TX)

[babylonsister]

Edit to provide working link:
http://www.burntorangereport.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=5384

Clinton Request Violates the Law
by: Matt Glazer
Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 02:58 PM CDT

snip//

The one thing our community, the Clinton campaign, and we has forgotten is that our state mandates when the county convention must happen. According to State Law, the senate/county conventions have a statutory date that they must happen.

Sec. 174.063. TIME AND PLACE OF CONVENTION. (a) The county and senatorial district conventions shall be held on the third Saturday after general primary election day. However, if that date occurs during Passover or on the day following Good Friday, the conventions shall be held on the next Saturday that does not occur during Passover or on the day following Good Friday.

Simply, the request being made by the Clinton campaign is a request for the Texas Democratic Party to break the law. This is a troubling request. On February 18, the Clinton campaign made it a point to say they were "alarmed after learning of the state's unusual provisions during a closed-door strategy meeting this month, according to one person who attended."

Now it doesn't seem like the campaign fully appreciates the ramifications of their request. The Clinton campaign is either requesting the Texas Democratic Party to break the law or they are requesting the party to act as if they are above the law. In either case, we are enabling the Republican Party to attack our state party in November if the party honors the request. We are weakening our position by causing conflict within our party and we may be costing the urban counties thousand to tens of thousands of dollars by making them move the time, date, and location of county conventions that have been planned for months now.

After unprecedented turnout and democratic voter mobilization, now it appears like one campaign wants to set our party back.

This is not to say that some of the Clinton campaigns criticisms aren't justified, but does the cost benefit analysis rationalize the request for the TDP to break the law?

Doubtful.

[tabasco]

1. The queen makes her own law.

Laws and morality can't stand in the way of the royal power grab!

[IndianaGreen]

2. No wonder the Clintons are such chums with the Bushes

They both feel that rules don't apply to them.

[greguganus]

31. you spelled 'scums' wrong. n/t

[AZBlue]

27. ...

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

29. LMAO! That says it all. "Don't they know that I'm the queen?"

[donheld]

3. If she's allowed to break the law now

What will she do once elected?

[Yael]

12. I am thinking scorched earth continues aided by the Bush Cabal power grab.

[thevoiceofreason]

4. Garry Mauro -- the dufuss's dufuss

[anonymeme]

5. Are You Trying to Say That a Mere REQUEST Violates the Law? Obama Supporters Will Stop at Nothing...

Are You Trying to Say That a Mere REQUEST Violates the Law? Obama Supporters Will Stop at Nothing...
Will You?

To paint an ugly, untruthful picture of Hillary!/

[tabasco]

11. If you ask somebody to break the law,

it's conspiracy.

[tammywammy]

13. Why request something that violates the law?

The Texas Democratic Party cannot follow through with her request to delay the senate/county conventions.

[anonymeme]

30. Because Law Is Always a Work in Progress & There're More Ways to Kill a Cat Than Choking It w/Cream!

Because Law Is Always a Work in Progress & There're More Ways to Kill a Cat Than Choking It w/Cream!

That's why. And some people confuse policy with law, there are may good reasons to ask the questions and question everything!

There's nothing illegal about checking the possibilities or testing the waters.

[tammywammy]

35. Asking them to postpone the sentate/county elections

When they legally cannot move them is stupid. Sorry if Clinton was so worried that Texas wouldn't have enough time, then she should have worked on changing the law before now. That's what this is ridiculous and stupid. And considering back in February she was shocked to learn that Texas has a primary and a caucus says a lot about her campaign on this matter.

The 29th is when all these conventions are happening.

"And some people confuse policy with law, there are may good reasons to ask the questions and question everything!"

This is a law, not a policy.

"There's nothing illegal about checking the possibilities or testing the waters."

Right, but they can't change the date of the conventions.

[my3boyz]

6. Law? Hillary doesn't care if she breaks the law! It's her turn and she will

do whatever it takes to win.

[DJ13]

7. The Clintons dont recognize the Party rules, state laws arent important either?

:shrug:

[Yael]

8. Her campaign didn't even know it was a hybrid state

we expect them to know this? Nah. They are just throwing everything (and every lawyer) at every situation to see if anything sticks.

[babylonsister]

17. Yes, goes directly to competence, or lack of...

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/02/18/that-clinton-competence.aspx

That Clinton Competence

You know, for a candidate who says she'll be ready on day one as president, her campaign is remarkably ill-prepared. From today's WaPo:

Supporters of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton are worried that convoluted delegate rules in Texas could water down the impact of strong support for her among Hispanic voters there, creating a new obstacle for her in the must-win presidential primary contest.

Several top Clinton strategists and fundraisers became alarmed after learning of the state's unusual provisions during a closed-door strategy meeting this month, according to one person who attended.

What Clinton aides discovered is that in certain targeted districts, such as Democratic state Sen. Juan Hinojosa's heavily Hispanic Senate district in the Rio Grande Valley, Clinton could win an overwhelming majority of votes but gain only a small edge in delegates. At the same time, a win in the more urban districts in Dallas and Houston -- where Sen. Barack Obama expects to receive significant support -- could yield three or four times as many delegates.

"What it means is, she could win the popular vote and still lose the race for delegates," Hinojosa said yesterday. "This system does not necessarily represent the opinions of the population, and that is a serious problem."

So let me get this straight: The Clinton campaign basically decided to bank almost everything on Texas (along with Ohio), without botheing to do due diligence on the delegate apportoinment procedures there? If she does wind up winning the White House, who's the lucky aide who gets to troop into the Oval Office and deliver the shocking news to her that we've got troops in Iraq.

[Cha]

38. And the first "bank"

of having no plan after not taking it all on SuperTues. If I had been a hilary supporter I would be more than a little perturbed at their ineptness. Too much like bush..unprepared and basing their winning on perceptions not facts.

[flor de jasmim]

19. you don't think her campaign knew? Bill C. won there in 92 and 96!

under the same two-step rules

[Yael]

25. She herself said they had no idea

http://ptoday.blogspot.com/2008/02/hillary-flummoxed-by-texas-rules-bill.html

From Feb 20th:

Mrs. Clinton said she could not begin to explain how the Texas system worked. “I had no idea how bizarre it is,” she said aboard her plane flying from Wisconsin to Ohio. “We have grown men crying over it.”

[WolverineDG]

33. Baloney!

She had to campaign for Bill in Texas in 1992. The caucuses were how he won Texas. To say she was completely out of the loop on this, especially with all the South Texas politicians & TDP power people in her camp, is really a stretch.

dg

[Yael]

36. You think she was just hedging a bet so that people thought she

was less prepared than she was?

[WolverineDG]

32. that just adds proof to her incompetency to be President

she thought she had it in the bag & it would be over by Feb. 5. therefore, why bother brushing up on each state's process? (see also: why bother reading the NIE when the politicallye expedient thing to do is vote for war?)

dg

[cooolandrew]

9. Don't mess with Texas H.R.C. =)

[cooolandrew]

10. Don't mess with Texas H.R.C. =)

[cooolandrew]

14. Hillary breaking thelaw. *shock* It's not true. =)

[derby378]

15. March 29, baby!

I'll see the rest of y'all in Texas 16th Senatorial there - as long as we can just decide where "there" actually is.

[tammywammy]

16. I'm SD 10 here!

:)

They haven't found a place yet either.

[derby378]

18. Wow...

Our senatorial chairs have narrowed it down to two finalists, and I hope they make a decision soon so I can tell all the Obama and Clinton delegates where we're headed.

[tammywammy]

22. I'm sure they've got it narrowed down

Hopefully they'll pick a place this week. Actually, since SD 10 encompasses some of Arlington, they could do it at the Convention Center if it's available. Oops, actually the Convention Center is located in SD 9. :crazy:

[thevoiceofreason]

23. Last I heard we (SD15) are at TSU.

Whoops. Just checked -- now we're at a high school gym/auditorium.

[WolverineDG]

34. at least y'all have lots of places to check

the one place big enough here was already booked! :rofl: Now we're going to have to squeeze in at some school. :wow:

dg

[derby378]

43. If it gets warm enough...

How about turning the Senatorial Convention into a pool party? :hi:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

20. Fuck the law!

:sarcasm:
______

[1776Forever]

21. Who does this remind you of? Ahhhh W??? No - Really?

She is so much like W in the way she handles things it is obvious that if she does get in there will be swinging doors to her big time contributors like Gupta who slept in the Lincoln Bedroom and others who give the Clinton's millions!

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18958566

:hide:

[Umbram]

24. The law shouldn't get in the way of political ambition. (nt)

[Yael]

26. It didn't seem to faze the current administration. Just more of the same...

[rainbow4321]

28. Ya know..this all started with her video spoof of the Soprano finale

She's is taking this mob leader behavior a little too seriously and too far. The video should have been a sign of things/behavior to come.

[Igel]

37. Wasn't it a request

to do X or Y, Y being to move them?

So it turns out Y is an illegal choice, so the dem party in Tx can't choose it. So do X, if it's the right thing to do; X is "verify caucus participants' eligibility". Coming to that conclusion, of course, requires cooperativeness in communication and native-speaker competence in English, two things we can't admit if it suits us for the present.

Note that while many of us were promised that X would happen, apparently it's suddenly unethical or something like that. We'll have the delegates' eligibility checked, for sure. We're promised that. Which means it'll presumably be checked. If it's not inconvenient.

Any guarantee the delegates sent to Colorado will have actually voted dem in the primary? Well, if you believe them now. In other words, a definite maybe.


on edit: forgot a "?".

[DerekJ]

39. kick

[DerekJ]

40. kick

[Exilednight]

41. Hillary did something illegal - I find that hard to believe.

:sarcasm:

[blogslut]

42. Girlfriend better knock it off

Democrats in my state overwhelmed the polls this March. Our ranks increased at least five times over what they were in 2004. Texas has turned blue and now Miss thing wants to take this Democratic victory and turn it into crap.