Convention Hangover, Part One

I'm going to try and put all my concerns about the SD17 Fort Bend Convention in one place, over several blog posts. I had been warned by a good Fort Bend Democrat on Thursday night to expect a "blood bath" and massive amounts of chaos. He warned me to bring a copy of the Texas Democratic Party rules to the Convention and to familiarize myself with Roberts Rules of Order. I took his advice and thank goodness I did.

Some people say the rules of the Texas Democratic Party are arcane, but I read through them a couple of times prior to the Convention (really it's Articles IV and V that apply so it wasn't a hardship to read through that small amount and get ready to observe and participate) and also, some helpful stuff on the TDP website. Particularly, the Supplementary Advisory, the Advisory to Challenges, and the Convention Slideshow were helpful. I printed all that off and took it with me to the Convention on Saturday.

Sign-in was well-organized, but I was immediately alarmed that they didn't have a pre-printed list of delegates and alternates for my precinct. I was told that ours could not be located, but how is that? We mailed in our packet with the list of delegates and alternates, and in addition, two people in our precinct (one of them being me), emailed the entire list of delegates and alternates to the Fort Bend Democratic Party Secretary. I had a list with me of our delegates and alternates, so I assigned one of our Obama alternates to work our sign-in and ensure our folks signed in correctly, checking IDs and voter registration cards.

I wondered how widespread this problem was - the lack of preprinted delegate lists. So, I wandered up and down the sign-in tables. It was a little hard to get an accurate count, but it looked like 24 of 54 precincts were using blank sign-in sheets instead of ones with pre-printed names. Could be a few more or a few less. Now, I need to tell you that a few weeks ago I learned that 50% of the packets from the precinct conventions in Fort Bend could not be located. That could be because the packets did not contain information about where to mail them. I would never have dreamed my precinct was one of the ones they didn't have. But, when I heard about the 50% problem, I emailed our delegate and alternate list to the Party. My larger point here is how do we know that those who signed in yesterday were actually delegates and alternates? We don't, because we didn't have a list to compare them to. We had to go on the honor system, which leads me to . . .

I was wearing a Hillary t-shirt and a Hillary sticker. Four Hillary supporters who arrived at about 10:20 and later to an empty sign-in area, asked me where they were supposed to sign in. I explained sign-in had been from 9 a.m. to 10 a.m. These four separate people, who arrived at four separate times, all told me the same story: they had gotten a reminder call about the convention and that sign-in was from 10 to 11. Hmmm. I wondered later if they were all from the same precinct. They all said the caller did not identify himself. Which leads to . . . .

the establishment (or lack thereof) of our temporary and permanent roll. Our first order of business was to establish the temporary roll of delegates, but that was not done. The Convention started with the Credentials Chair giving his report, which started out something like this, "we had five challenges and most of them were from Hillary people and were without merit." I actually think it was more inflammatory than that, but I'll sanitize it somewhat. Yes, he is an Obama supporter. Why inject presidential preference right off the bat? Well, his "report" was rambling and full of opinion and commentary. I expected professionalism. He alluded to something that happened in the Friday night Credentials meeting (supposed to have been at least 24 hours prior to the Convention, not the night before, according to Party rules) where the Committee's existence was challenged. Also, it was obvious that meeting had been chaotic, and he admitted as much from the podium. I learned he sent the committee home before reading all five challenges that had been properly submitted (that fifth one - that was not heard - was from my precinct and would have resulted in an Obama advantage, which I agreed to because it was fair.)

Turns out the challenge to the committee's existence was actually quite a big deal. I met the Credentials Parliamentarian who had been sent by the TDP to assist with our Convention. He attended the Friday night meeting and warned them repeatedly that they were meeting without the authorization of the County Executive Committee and were in danger of having all of their work invalidated. Which would mean the whole convention could be overturned and not seated at the State Convention, because it is the Credentials Committee that does the work that certifies the permanent roll of delegates. They chose to go ahead with their work.

On Saturday, the Parliamentarian restated his concerns that the Credentials Committee had not be appointed by the precinct chairs at the last CEC meeting. Several people on Credentials confirmed that the Committee had not been appointed at that meeting and that, in fact, there were fluctuations in the committee makeup over several weeks and there were emails to prove it. The Parliamentarian repeatedly offered the suggestion that the best solution, one that would clear up the whole thing, was to get the precinct chairs together right then and there - recess the convention - and have them certify the Credentials Committee. At every point when this was brought up, the leadership did not choose to go that route.

It was during one of my discussions about this with a convention "advisor", the Parliamentarian, and several others, that the Credentials Chair came over and asked us what we were trying to do, what this had to do with the big picture and did we want him to dance a little jig (and he started to mockingly dance one). I replied that we were trying to make sure that the rules were followed and since one of his own committee members had raised this challenge to the Committee's existence, we needed to be sure our whole Convention would not be in danger of having a challenge at the State Convention.

Now, the Credentials Committee and the Chair of the Convention were going to proceed without bringing each challenge from Credentials to the body of the Convention for a vote. TDP rules require that. Prior to the Chair accepting the "report" of the Credentials chair, a delegate raised two points of order asking that her challenge be brought to the floor. The Credentials Chair said he was not bringing the challenges to the floor because the majority report was that the challenges did not pass, and that if she wanted to protest, she was welcome to do that later, but that what they were going to do right now is move on. She was warned that a third point of order would not be heard.

I went to the front mic and raised a point of order and read the TDP rules that stated that each challenge had to be approved by the Body prior to the establishment of the permanent roll. I was told that we were not going to open up the chaos of the credentials committee to the entire floor. There was some back and forth, with the rules being re-stated, members of the Convention booing because they were already ready to go home (this was about 11 a.m. after a 10 a.m. start time), and finally a couple of challenges were rehashed in front of everyone, Credentials went to a back room to do Lord knows what and finally some resolution to a few people's challenges. I can tell you that all five challenges were not brought to the floor for a vote - because the one from my precinct was not.

Was there a permanent roll established? I'm not real clear on that. I know Credentials did not meet to establish that the roll was true and correct. At one point we were told by the Convention Chair to look around at our delegation and determine if who was supposed to be there were actually the people who were there. And then he did a roll call of precincts and each precinct stood up and hollered. Yeah, I'm serious. That was the verification of the roll.

Credentials did not meet to determine the poll - the percentage of people who signed in for Obama and Clinton - until about 4 pm as Nominations was about to do their work. The point was hammered on many times during the Convention that it had to be done, but there appeared to be low awareness about that from the leaders of the convention.

That's about it for my Credentials concerns. Several Credentials Committee members voiced their concerns that the way the Credentials Chair chaired the Friday night meeting was in the same manner as he spoke and acted at the Convention - running over those who brought up objections and concerns, injecting his opinion and losing his temper.

There is more I have to say about the rules not being followed at our convention, so stay tuned. I have no idea if anyone will challenge the results of our convention based on the Credentials Committee problems, but we were clearly warned by the Parliamentarian that there were grounds for that.

Oh, and Parliamentarian for our Convention? We didn't have one.

SD. Committee Chair Encourages Protests

I will let him remain unnamed but a chair of an important committee in
SD 17 Fort Bend continually did not follow the rules. When challenged
with a point of order, he would say that if anyone wanted to protest
later they could, but he was going to do what he wanted to do.

He came and found me and two others who were talking about a problem
and asked what we were trying to accomplish and did we want him to
dance a little jig.

Very condescending and out of line.

This was when I was talking to the parliamentarian sent by the TDP.

There were some irritated and unhappy people and I was not the only one.

Some things happened here today that could cause a challenge to
seating of our delegation at the state convention.

Sent from my iPhone

UPDATE: more on this here.

Not Following the Rules

TDP rules not followed today. Many challenges and points of order.

Very disappointing.

Sent from my iPhone

Is Credentials Committee Legit?

Fort Bend SD17. Credentials Committee members were not approved at the
last CEC meeting. This is required by TDP rules. Parliamentarian has
advised that the work of this credentials committee could be
challenged at the state level because they were not a duly appointed
body. Which would mean the whole convention would be void because the
permanent roll was not accurate.

Sent from my iPhone

UPDATE: more on this here.

Liveblogging SD 17 Convention Fort Bend

Subtitled: screwups

Although my precinct turned in its packet and we emailed our delegate
list in twice to the Fort Bend Democratuc Party, there was no printed
list of delegates at sign-in. I counted roughly 24 precincts with no
preprinted lists. No clear way to know if the people who signed in
were elected delegates

This was three and a half hours ago. Much worse things are happening.

Sent from my iPhone

DSCC Hearts Rick Noriega

Lovin' this "on the road with Rick Noriega" from the DSCC. This is the Rick I know. The "you get the brisket and I'll get the ribs and we'll share." Ha! The staff workout in Memorial Park. Most campaign staffs get fat on pizza, and here Rick is leading the charge at a 7 a.m. team workout!



Oh, and we did it! Rick won Feingold's Progressive Patriot poll! Texas is big and bright (even at night), and we pulled this off, no problem. Ca-ching. $5K to Rick!

Politics Makes People Do The Strangest Things

Yes, this is weird.

What is this person doing?

And, will we all be doing it our SD conventions on Saturday? Whatever it is this person is doing. That weird thing.

Toby Goodman. Crime DOES pay!

Former State Representative Toby Goodman was slapped with a hefty $10,00 fine by the Texas Ethics Commission, which sounds like a quite a bit on money, but it really isn't.

According to the Austin American-Statesman, Goodman paid his wife $69,200 in rent and $8,700 in fees for an Austin condo. He also paid her $33,000 in rent and $7,580 in utilities for a Cedar Park home.

So for stealing over $100,000 of his donors money, he was fined $10,000, only 1/10 of the amount that he stole. And that $10,000 fine can be paid...(wait for it)...with his donors money, or better yet, with the money he stole. What a sweet deal.

This is as if someone stole $100,000 from a bank and got caught. Then simply paid a fine using the same money he stole. And never repaying the money he stole. All is now forgiven.

The Ethics Commission wanting to look tough on white collar crime is doing a terrible job of it. They cannot demand that Goodman return the stolen money, but they can assess a very hefty fine of $110,000 to cover the amount and the fine. Or they could assess a fine of $10,000 if he agrees to return the money.

This would not be the first time the TEC has made such an arrangement. Former State Rep Hupp was fined $5700.00 or was given the option to amend her reports and only pay $1000. She eventually paid $5700.00, using her donors money.

For now, Goodman only has to pay $10,000 after stealing $100,000. So for Goodman, crime did pay!

Spending Campaign Cash: TEC Fines Goodman $10,000 On Real Estate Deal

Former Rep. Toby Goodman (R-Arlington) has been handed a $10,000 fine by the Texas Ethics Commission for paying "rent" to his spouse for a second home in Austin. While it is legal to pay spouses rent for separate property that is in the spouse's name only, Goodman's "rent" payments were to cover a loan on property that was in both of their names.

Lawmakers elected from outside Travis County have to obtain housing during the legislative sessions. Many maintain residences here year-round, but state law does not allow them to profit by converting political donations into investments.

Goodman is appealing the TEC rulining and this would be why:

As for Goodman, the ethics opinion noted that a violation is a Class A misdemeanor punishable with a $4,000 fine and up to a year in jail.

The Travis County attorney's office did not return phone calls seeking comment about whether it plans to file criminal charges.

State law, however, allows Goodman to pay his $10,000 fine — if he loses his appeal — out of campaign contributions.

"I don't believe he has any," said Ed Shack, Goodman's lawyer. "I believe he's given them all away."

Paying your Ethics Commission fines out of your campaign cash is a sweet deal, when you can swing it. This is called "getting away with it."

Also, paying Ed Shack out of your campaign cash is usually a win-win-win. You get out of your problem with the TEC, you don't pay your fine out of your personal funds and Ed Shack gets richer.

This is lose-lose for Goodman. Now way Shack loses.

I Agree With Geraldine

Ferraro is not happy that Obama compared her to Wright in his speech on race. He sure can talk pretty, can't he? Except that he sometimes is tone deaf at best, and condescending at worst.

Here's Ferraro, who I ardently admire (and she is not even an "old aunt " of mine):

"To equate what I said with what this racist bigot has said from the pulpit is unbelievable," Ferraro told the Daily Breeze newspaper an interview published late Wednesday night. "He gave a very good speech on race relations, but he did not address the fact that this man is up there spewing hatred."

"What this man is doing is he is spewing that stuff out to young people, and to younger people than Obama, and putting it in their heads that it's OK to say `Goddamn America' and it's OK to beat up on white people," Ferraro also said of Wright. "You don't preach that from the pulpit."

[---]

In the interview Wednesday, Ferraro said she had "no clue" why Obama referenced her in the speech. She also expressed surprise the Illinois senator said he had heard his white grandmother utter racist remarks.

"I could not believe that," she said. "That's my mother's generation."

You go, girl! Now, I will say that it doesn't surprise me when anyone of any generation says something that is racist. We are not in a post-racial situation today, and I'm not even sure what that means. Post-feminism? Post-partisan? Post Toasties?

What Not To Wear While Doing Your Taxes

Watch TLC's What Not To Wear.

This is going to take lots and lots of episodes. Fortunately, I have them on the DVR. (What? You are not recording it on your DVR?!!)

While watching, I can get ideas on how to spend that enormous tax rebate check.

For a peek inside a real life What Not To Wear experience, read this - Austin American Statesman writer goes on the show!

Sadly, even Stacy and Clinton can only make this horrible chore only slightly more tolerable.

You Are A Click Away From Helping Rick Noriega Get Free Money

Seriously, no kidding. You just have to go here and select Rick Noriega as the Senate Challenger who you would like to get $5K from the Progressive Patriots Fund with Russ Feingold as the Chair.

It's totally a no impact thing on you. You don't have to donate money and you can use one of your secondary email addresses if you are worried about spam in the future. All you have to do is give an email address and zip code.

Plus, Rick is CLEARLY the best choice! :) (I'm biased.)

Early results show Rick in the lead! In the 06 election cycle, Texans did a great job of working these types of PAC polls with money attached. Let's do it again and get us one step closer to getting rid of Bush lapdog John Cornyn (he's a U.S. Senator from Texas, in case you didn't know. He's got extremely low name recognition, so I thought you might need a reminder.)

Murtha Endorses Hillary Clinton

Very cool. The U.S. Congressman with the last name that is almost the same as "Martha" (musings is partial to that name) has endorsed Senator Hillary Clinton for President.

I thought this was interesting:

Last month, Murtha said he would not choose sides in the race and pledged to be “very careful in my evaluation of both candidates.

Rep. Murtha chose the right side (not to be confused with the Wright side - hold your comments, I know that was tacky) :

In Tuesday’s statement, Murtha offered a glowing endorsement of Clinton.

“In 10 months, President Bush will leave office. Our country is worse off today than when he took office over seven years ago,” Murtha said. “Senator Clinton is the candidate that will forge a consensus on health care, education, the economy and the war in Iraq.”

Yay, Hillary! The consensus candidate. Yes, we will!

Things I Have Learned On The Internets About Hillary

She is bipolar.

She is a crybaby because - gasp! - her campaign dares to question the results of the banana republic caucus elections on March 4th. Where is Jimmy Carter when we need him to ensure fair and accurate elections in our Third World state?! I Got Me a Rock and Roll Caucus, It's a Free For All!

She should direct her supporters to STFU because they dare to question the Obamanation campaign.

But these dear bloggers want us all to "Come Together" (wait, the Beatles were B.B - before birth - of most Obamanites, right?) when Rev. Wright's disciple is finally crowned Savior of All He Surveys.

I've hunkered down and all I am reading is In the Pink Texas and going to my Hillary meetings. Yes, Virginia (er. . . Pennsylvania), there is still a Hillary campaign in Texas.

I "Hope" People "Change" Their Minds

Thought yall might be interested in this from Vanity Fair's James Wolcott. Consider this Part II of Hope Turns Into Whine. People need to get a grip. I 100% think Hillary is best for the future of our country, but we all need to move forward as Democrats no matter who is nominated.

The Sorrow and the Pity Party

Look, I understand the knocks against Hillary Clinton, truly I do. There are no flaming arrows fired her way that I haven't seen traverse the air before, no bill of indictment drawn up containing charges with which I'm unfamiliar. Reciting her sins and liabilities has become a familiar refrain, but if it's the Gregorian chant you live by, if you find Hillary Clinton such an insupportable choice for the Democratic nomination that you prefer to suckle your pride and idealism rather than soil your conscience should she be at the top of the ticket, fine, have fun with that. But, please, I beg of thee, could you at least spare the rest of us your longwinded, preeny, pious dirges?

I have, in sorrow, come to the conclusion that should Hillary Clinton be the Democratic nominee, I will not cast a vote for president. I live in Virginia, which she has no realistic chance of carrying, so perhaps it takes little courage for me to make that decision, should it be necessary. But given that I am politically active, that I teach government to adolescents, that I encourage them to participate, it is truly in sorrow that I find I must make this decision.

I will try to explain, if you care to keep reading, why I have made this decision.

Explain, the Kos Diarist proceeds to do, for numerous earnest, soul-searching paragraphs.

This is personal statement. No one else has read it. My wife is out of town, and will neither read nor recommend it. Were she to read it, she might disagree on some details, but she is so angry at the Clinton campaign right now that she might well append comments with language and expressions far stronger than those I am using.

And I realize that in posting this I may sunder some friendships. There will be those who accuse me of various transgressions.

I have to live with my conscience. For months I have at times sought to put the best case on things that bothered others. No longer.

Let me be blunt. As I look at the campaign run by Hillary Clinton, not just the words and actions of her surrogates and employees, but her own words and actions, I have regrettably come to the conclusion that based on that campaign, and in light of that campaign her record as a Senator, that she is morally unfit to be President of the United States. Thus I cannot and will not support her, should she achieve the nomination of the Democratic party.

Because, IN SORROW, I have come to this conclusion, for the duration of this election season I am likely to write about things others than the presidential contest, I will not be completely silent. I will comment on stories and diaries by others. I will devote my own efforts to things like house and senate races, or policy matters like education.

IN SORROW. At some point I may have to explain to my students why I have made this decision. At least two of my current students read all of my diaries, and are likely to ask me about it in class. I will be challenged on the apparent contradiction between this decision and my pointing out to them that if one does not participate in a political contest then one acquiesces in the outcome. It is a sign of my sorrow that I being to see on too many things that matter to me insufficient difference between Hillary Clinton and John McCain to be able to justify voting for one or against the other.

Lawd, you'd think it was Judgment at Nuremberg, with all this lofty, Oscar-caliber emoting. The Kos Diarist is hardly alone in the tender feeding of personal grief and regret. Consider this pair of melancholy babies from Andrew Sullivan's blog:

A reader writes:

I never thought in a million years that Hillary Clinton could make me hate her as much as I do now. I am an Obama supporter who was kind of OK with the thought of voting for Hillary if need be. Now, I think I'll stay home if she steals this by daring to call Obama's tactics like those of Ken Starr. The sense of entitlement that she and Bill are displaying right now is amateurish and awful.

I'm moving in a few weeks and I've decided to lighten the load by throwing out Bill's narcissistic biography and her book as well. They don't deserve the place of prominence they've had on my bookshelf.

Please keep doing what you're doing.

Another writes:

I'm so depressed. I cannot decide which would be worse, four more years of Republican presidency or four more years of Clinton drama. I don't really have anything else to say.

If only returning to the womb were a viable escape option from Hillary's taloned deathgrip! Probably such posts are indicative of the low morale pervading Sullivan's side pocket of the universe, his readers mirroring and amplifying his own downcast, defeated mood in a dispersed pity party. Hillary Clinton's bounce-back on March 4th had Sullivan drowning his sorrows ("I just had a Jager shot, and hope to get drunk very soon"), and staggering like a ghost through the stricken ruins of his dashed hopes, lashing out at Hillary like Sebastian blaming everything on "mummy" in Brideshead Revisited. Or perhaps Sullivan is closer in the depth of his despair to Sebastian's lover Kurt, sadly, bitterly contemplating his wounded, pus-ridden foot. For Sullivan, Hillary is the psychic pus that torments him so (she's not just any old "monster,"she's a "fratricidal maniac"), Obama the healing, uplifting ointment.

Roll that around in your head awhile.

For some intellectual clarity and sanitary relief, not to mention a respite from all this rhetorical emo, repair to NYCweboy's day-after analysis of the March 4 primaries, with this passage in particular worth directing to those tender hearts intent on cleaving to their innocence:

High toned notions of "respectable" campaigning aside, political arguments are not ice cream socials: things are bound to get rough, a little ugly, more than a little mean. My own suggestion: toughen up. If you're prepared to get into it with people you disagree with, great; but if you plan to complain that such-and-so is unfair or mean or beyond the pale, don't expect much sympathy. Neither side is innocent here, and things will get worse before they get better... and that's before John McCain's "we will respectfully and politely call the other side terrorist loving pantywaists" approach to campaigning comes into play. You want nice... look elsewhere.

As political disciples of Saul Alinsky, Hillary and Obama don't need to be told the facts of life, but such instruction seems to have eluded Obama's supporters, many of whom seem to be in a hurry to go from hoping to moping, from feeling better about the future to feeling sorry for themselves. God forbid she wins Pennsylvania--that'll really give these crybabies something to cry about.

Prius Owners For Hillary!

Owning a Prius is supposed to scream, "I'm for Obama!" But this latte-drinking, Hillary-loving Democrat is the proud owner of a 2008 silver Prius. It's so cool. Watching the fuel gauge go down is like watching paint dry.

I'm paying back the planet after my five and a half years as an abusive Tahoe owner.

Al Gore, I've been wanting one of these since I saw you and your slide show in Houston!

Now I gotta read the manual and figure out how this thing works . . . .

Breaking: Obama Says He Will Not Accept VP Spot

He made this statement Friday night in Wyoming, ahead of the caucuses there today (where he is expected to do well as he has in other caucus states.)

Obama was asked by a television reporter, "Can you ever see yourself on the same ticket as Sen. Clinton?"

And the freshman Illinois senator replied: "Well, you know, I think it’s premature. You won’t see me as a vice presidential candidate -- you know, I’m running for president. We have won twice as many states as Senator Clinton, and have a higher popular vote, and I think we can maintain our delegate count."

Well, I guess that clears that up.

A note on cacuses, including ours in Texas: How do these not disenfranchise the sick, elderly, disabled, those who are out of town on business, those who work during caucus hours, those who have to be at home to care for small children, etc? I knew people in all these categories who couldn't go to or stay to sign in at their precinct convention in Texas (because of the long sign-in process).

I know these get Democrats together face to face to be active in the Party. But at what cost to those want to vote, but can't? We've solved that with mail-in ballots and early voting in the regular elections, but how can caucus participation be increased to include those who are unable to be there?

The Latest From The TDP: Elections Judges Are Resigning

They are resigning in order to attend their precinct conventions (at the request of both presidential campaigns). Texas Democratic Party Chair, Boyd Richie clarifies that election judges may still attend their precinct convention if they assign a clerk to deliver the ballots to the counting station. They can also submit a letter to the person who chairs the precinct convention to request that they be considered for a delegate position. We don't need chaos at the polls on e-day, or our election results challenged because we don't have qualified workers at the polls. Not just anyone can be an election judge. You have to be trained for that, and there are not extra trained people waiting around to be called into service at the last minute.

This issue arises, in part, because many precinct chairs also serve as election judges, when in reality, these are two different jobs. The precinct chairs should be spending election day getting out the vote in their precinct by calling and knocking and dragging people to the polls.

To: Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama
CC: Democratic County Chairs and SDEC members
From: Boyd Richie
Re: Democratic Election Judges

It has come to my attention that several Democratic Election Judges have
resigned their positions so that they may attend their precinct conventions
to caucus for you. Many stated that they received calls from your campaigns
stressing the need for them to attend the convention. I certainly
appreciate that each of your campaigns is working hard to try to maximize
participation by your supporters in the Precinct Conventions. However, I
hope that you both understand that these actions by your campaigns may leave
the Democratic Party without trained election judges on March 4th, thereby
creating problems at the polls and potentially jeopardizing the election.

While it is true that Election Judges are required by law to deliver the
ballots and supplies from the election immediately upon closing the polls
(TX Elec. Code Sec. 66.053), it is possible for them to designate one of the
clerks to be responsible for delivering the ballots (TX Elec. Code Sec.
66.052). The Election Judge could then attend, or even chair, the Precinct
Convention.

If the Election Judge is not able to attend the Precinct Convention, but
still wants to be considered for a delegate position, he or she may submit a
letter to their Democratic Precinct Chair stating the Judge's desire to
become a delegate. If there is no Precinct Chair, or if the Judge serves as
Precinct Chair, he or she may submit the letter to someone attending the
Precinct Convention. The following information must be included in that
letter: name, mailing and email addresses, phone numbers, voter certificate
number (if known), presidential preference, ethnicity, age, and whether the
Judge is gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, or disabled.

I ask you both to have your campaign workers take this matter into
consideration and encourage our Democratic Election Judges to work the
election. Without Election Judges, it is possible that some polling
locations may have to be closed and precincts consolidated at the last
minute, which would create confusion for the very voters and precinct
convention attendees your campaigns are trying to motivate.

Boyd Richie, Chair
Texas Democratic Party

Quit With the Hillary Bashing Over the Precinct Convention Rules

Any of the haters of Satan plan on running your precinct convention? Any of yall notice how Boyd Richie sends daily updates to the rules of the precinct convention?

I may have to run my convention, so let's review: IT'S PRETTY DAMN CONFUSING. And, it's not Clinton's fault that it is confusing.

We can't do some of the the things we've done in the past, like add delegates later. Apparently that was illegal.

Also, we cannot start the convention until every voter has voted. Meaning a late start to some of the conventions. NOT 7:15.

And, contrary to the training I got at a very large mock precinct convention, you cannot hold a combined precinct convention, if more than one precinct is combined at one location.

And, thank goodness Hillary's campaign demanded clarification about provisional voters. Because that prompted the TDP to send not one, but two documents out yesterday explaining that in detail. We may get to hold TWO precinct conventions if the provisional voters make a difference in the way the delegates are allocated.

But, still no answer to another Hillary camp question- there's a rule that the precinct convention location can be changed??? What's the deal with that?

Do all precinct chairs and/or wannabe convention chairs know all of this?

All of the whining bloggers are supposedly all about fair elections and not having the vote stolen. Oh, and our candidates are not supposed to be wusses and they are supposed to have legal teams ready to challenge any irregularities.

So, go Team Hillary! Thanks for demanding the conventions are conducted legally and that the rules are clarified.

And whiners, get over yourselves.