Tags: 2008 Presidential Election, Caucuses, Democrats, Nevada, President, voter disenfranchisement, Voter Intimidation
By: wdporter
According to the article below, BILL Clinton seems to define voter intimidation today in Nevada.
Does anyone get this feeling that the Clintons had a lot at stake here? Seems the intimidation worked better for the Clintons, because she won:
Does anyone but me find the whole Caucusing concept the opposite of Democratic?
Tags: 2008 Presidential Election, Caucuses, Democrats, Nevada, President, voter disenfranchisement, Voter Intimidation
By: wdporter
WSJ article and a The Nation article (fair and balanced as usual) which talk about the Clinton camp’s efforts to suppress the casino workers’ votes in Nevada, after their unions endorsed Obama.
Of course Clinton doesn’t miss a beat and accuses Obama’s camp of orchestrating Voter Intimidation (via union bosses staring down employees if they dare to go Clinton).
Suppressing the vote by disenfranchisement and voter intimidation is never taboo if it fits the right interests. If Republican candidates every did anything resembling suppressing an inner city vote…or having church leaders intimidate members into caucusing the right way, we would all NEVER hear the end of it.
“…It seems my hypocrisy knows…no bounds.”
The opinions expressed here represent only their respective authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of any of the other contributors to this website. All work not otherwise cited on this
site is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License
