I wonder what the basis would be, given that the process is the same as it was in years past and everyone knew about (except the Clinton campaign, apparently) long in advance. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/election2008/story/29019.html Clinton aides threatened lawsuit over Texas caucuses, officials say USTIN — The Texas Democratic Party warned Thursday that election night caucuses scheduled for next Tuesday could be delayed or disrupted after aides to Hillary Clinton threatened to sue over the party's complicated delegate selection process. In a letter sent out late Thursday to both the Clinton and Barack Obama campaigns, Texas Democratic Party lawyer Chad Dunn warned a lawsuit could ruin the Democrats' effort to re-energize voters just as they are turning out in record numbers. Spokesmen for both campaigns said there were no plans to sue ahead of the March 4 election. "It has been brought to my attention that one or both of your campaigns may already be planning or intending to pursue litigation against the Texas Democratic Party,'' Dunn wrote in the letter, obtained by the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. "Such action could prove to be a tragedy for a reinvigorated Democratic process.'' Democratic sources said both campaigns have made it clear that they might consider legal options over the complicated delegate selection process, which includes both a popular vote and evening caucuses. But the sources made it clear that the Clinton campaign in particular had warned of an impending lawsuit. "Both campaigns have made it clear that they would go there if they had to, but I think the imminent threat is coming from one campaign,'' said one top Democratic official, referring to the Clinton campaign. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity. Another Democratic official who was privvy to the discussions confirmed that Clinton representatives made veiled threats in a telephone call this week. "Officials from Sen. Clinton's campaign at several times throughout the call raised the specter of 'challenging the process,' the official said. "The call consisted of representatives from both campaigns and the Democratic Party.'' The source, who asked not to identified by name because he did not have authorization to speak about the matter, said Clinton 's political director, Guy Cecil, had forcefully raised the possibility of a courtroom battle. But Adrienne Elrod, Clinton's top Texas spokeswoman, said campaign and party officials had merely discussed election night procedures and that the campaign was merely seeking a written agreement in advance. She could not elaborate on the details of the agreement the Clinton campaign is seeking. "It is our campaign's standard operating procedure that we need to see what we are agreeing to in writing before we agree to it,'' Elrod said. "No legal action is being taken. We have no reason to take any legal action.'' Obama spokesman Josh Earnest said the Obama campaign had no plans to sue. "We're confident that by working closely with the Texas Democratic Party and the Clinton campaign we'll have a caucus that Texans can be proud of — because every eligible voter will be allowed to participate and have their vote counted in a timely manner," Earnest said. The letter to the two campaigns did not specify what procedures or rules might trigger a lawsuit. But one party official said the campaigns were most concerned about the caucus process, or, as the party refers to it, the "precinct conventions.'' Texas has 228 delegates, the biggest single cache remaining. But only 126 delegates are doled out based on the selection voters make at the ballot box. Another 67 delegates — more than in many states — are to be apportioned based on the number of people who participate in the caucuses that begin in over 8,000 precincts once the polls close at 7 p.m. (The remaining 35 are so-called "superdelegates'' free to support whomever they choose). Clinton campaign aides have argued that caucuses favor Obama, whose campaign organization has turned out overwhelming numbers at caucuses in other states. Democrats have described the enthusiasm in Texas, as evidenced by the record turnout among early voters in the most populous counties, as a sign that the party is undergoing a revival after years of decline under virtually unchallenged Republican rule. "If it is true that litigation is imminent between one or both of your campaigns and the (Democratic Party), such action coule prove to be a tragedy for a reinvigorated democratic process that is involving a record number of participants here in Texas and across the nation,'' Dunn, the state party lawyer, wrote.
I guess that because our primary typically happens after we know who the nominee is, I had never heard of the caucuses after the polls close. It had never been an issue since I was of voting age. Has it always been like this? If so, seems stupid that they didn't simply do their homework. I get at least 3 fliers a day in the mail from Obama reminding me of the caucuses. I've seen nothing from Hillary's side.
Man, litigation would turn off so many voters. Just makes her look even more like the win-at-all-costs, desperate candidate.
Talk about getting desperate. But if your down I guess you will try anything even if it looks bad. I don't see how this will attract more people to vote for her in Texas. Here is another one. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080229/ap_on_el_pr/texas_caucus_challenge Clinton may challenge Texas vote rules Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign has raised the possibility of a challenge to Texas' primary and caucus rules just days before the contest, drawing a warning against legal action from the state's Democratic Party. Top strategists for Democratic rival Barack Obama said Friday they supported the party's action, suggesting the Clinton campaign was trying to block the reporting of caucus results. Aides to Clinton said earlier this week they were alarmed at the lack of clarity about many of the caucus rules and expressed their concerns on a conference call with Obama's staff and state party officials. Texas has a two-step voting process, with a primary and then caucuses shortly after the polls close. Specifically, Clinton aides questioned a provision allowing caucus attendees to vote to move the location if they choose to do so, and whether people who had cast so-called "provisional ballots" in the primary would have their votes counted in the caucus. They also expressed concern about the automated phone system precinct chairs would use to call in the results of each caucus, saying the party hadn't yet trained anyone to use the system properly. Clinton political director Guy Cecil said he asked party officials to spell out the rules in memo form and to send them to both campaigns. "We want to see the results in writing, and we reserve the right to challenge something if we don't believe it reflects something that was discussed on the call," he said, insisting that if there were clear problems with how the caucuses were being run, "you are allowed to say something about it." Cecil on Friday denied that the campaign planned to sue the party, which will manage roughly 8,700 caucuses Tuesday evening. "There were no veiled threats of lawsuits of any kind," Cecil said of the conference call. Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said the Clinton campaign was trying to minimize the results of the caucuses. The former first lady and her team have made clear their unhappiness with caucuses, believing that they cater to the hard-core party activists who tend to support Obama. The Illinois senator has won 13 caucuses so far, while Clinton has won just two. "This takes it to a new level, which is they don't want the people who are participating in those caucuses to have their results reported in a timely fashion. And I assume that's a very self-serving decision," Plouffe said. Texas party officials said they believed Cecil was threatening legal action and wrote a letter to him and to Obama senior strategist Steve Hildebrand reflecting that concern. "If it is true that litigation is imminent between one or both of your campaigns and the Texas Democratic Party, such action could prove to be a tragedy for a reinvigorated democratic process that is involving a record number of participants here in Texas and across the nation," party attorney Chad Dunn wrote. "Litigation regarding the TDP could cripple the momentum of a resurging Texas Democratic Party and ultimately the November 2008 election." The letter also noted that many of Clinton's senior campaign advisers in Texas had helped to develop the rules governing the state's caucus system. A Texas party official also noted that former President Clinton won the state's caucuses in 1992 and 1996 following the same rules. Texas has 193 delegates up for grabs Tuesday. Of those delegates, 126 will come from the primary, and 67 from the caucus.
The way she is going right now she won't have a chance in 2012 or 2016. It sounds like she's laying it all on the line.
Actually, the Obama drones remind of this group of kids in my high school who all wore U2 shirts thinking they were cool until one day they all started wearing REM shirts which made them cooler.
I'll say it again: As little as I think of Hillary, she won't do it. I am surprised at the blowing smoke. Maybe she thinks it will all be forgotten after she concedes and the general election starts. One thing for sure is if Obama becomes president and Hillary becomes Senate majority leader, the relationship may be very frosty.
If one attains a state of pure anger equal to that of the angry buddha their physical body will explode into a ball of divine (and really angry) fire.
Poor Hillary. She stayed with Bill for political ambitions cough to run for President. She couldn't have expected Obamania! The "does he need another pillow?" line was hilarious.
True - but is it the kind of coverage she wants? It seems that hearing "Clinton might sue" is just going to turn people off from her. But who knows - maybe it'll motivate her base to vote contribute or something.
What would happen in this situation if Clinton historically performed better in a caucus situation. Would she still sue?
My sister's friend has a brother working for the Obama campaign and through the grapevine I had heard that Clinton's people were apparently unaware of the Texas hybrid system earlier this month and were scrambling to get the word out to their supporters down here. This was back before the Obama rally.
I find that a bit suspect (the notion of the Clintons not understanding the primary system in TX, not your sister Oski). I believe Bill Clinton won both TX primary's in 92 and 96 under the same system. In fact I believe the Clinton's team helped set up the primary/caucus system in use today.
It was pretty widely reported that the top Clinton people only learned about how the system works sometime in February. That's when they started discounting the value of Texas as well. Remember, they had no post Super-Tuesday plan *at all*, so it's not terribly surprising. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/17/AR2008021702461.html
