Questionable activity at the polls

[Fash]

I have a question for you based on my last trip to vote.

In my opinion, the only 2 things they need to keep track of is: How many people voted, and Who voted.

My polling place was doing something that raised my suspicion through the roof and then some... In addition to how many and who, they were keeping track of the order in which everyone voted.

Do they have any right to do this?

I have been considering that I might ensure this does not happen next time, and I just wanted to get your opinion.

Thanks,

[Noysyrump]

The ballot box automatically organizes the ballots in wich they were inserted, so its just a matter of matching the numbers from the list to the ballot to see who voted incorrectly and pay them a little visit.


No seriosly I dont believe they SHOULD be able to, but thats just me... And every ballot box I've seen was just that, a cardboard box. But I would be worried if it was a machine that could count them in order.... You could perhaps just loiter so that a number of people come and go before you do..

[Fash]

We have fancy electronic voting machines, and since one person actually 'starts' the ballot for you, the timestamps would all line up in nice order according to their list of voters.

[Funkmasterr]

We have fancy electronic voting machines, and since one person actually 'starts' the ballot for you, the timestamps would all line up in nice order according to their list of voters.

Thats how it was here starting last election as well.

[Noysyrump]

Then it is in fact time to start worrying. E-mail, or snail mail your governor to express your discontent. Call Rush on friday and bring up the subject. then hope and pray you do not vote incorrectly.


It has been 8 years since I voted, so no clue if it's like that here in Cali too. (missed the 2004 vote because of life issues.. )

[Truant]

I have a question for you based on my last trip to vote.

In my opinion, the only 2 things they need to keep track of is: How many people voted, and Who voted.

My polling place was doing something that raised my suspicion through the roof and then some... In addition to how many and who, they were keeping track of the order in which everyone voted.

Do they have any right to do this?

I have been considering that I might ensure this does not happen next time, and I just wanted to get your opinion.

Thanks,

I don't know how things work up there, but I will share with you how they are here in Tx.
Before you get your ballot, your name is written by the volunteer on a form that is numbered. You then put your signature in the next column. The names on this sheet of paper are in order from the first person that voted to the last. There are 2 (sometimes more, we've been redistricted several times) tables that have the alphabet divided, so there are seperate sheets for the first and last halves of the alphabet. It has been this way as long as I can remember (I'm 26), and I was at the polling places as a very young child as my parents volunteered for most elections.

Is something like this what you are talking about? Do they normally do something different?

[Funkmasterr]

I have a question for you based on my last trip to vote.

In my opinion, the only 2 things they need to keep track of is: How many people voted, and Who voted.

My polling place was doing something that raised my suspicion through the roof and then some... In addition to how many and who, they were keeping track of the order in which everyone voted.

Do they have any right to do this?

I have been considering that I might ensure this does not happen next time, and I just wanted to get your opinion.

Thanks,

I don't know how things work up there, but I will share with you how they are here in Tx.
Before you get your ballot, your name is written by the volunteer on a form that is numbered. You then put your signature in the next column. The names on this sheet of paper are in order from the first person that voted to the last. There are 2 (sometimes more, we've been redistricted several times) tables that have the alphabet divided, so there are seperate sheets for the first and last halves of the alphabet. It has been this way as long as I can remember (I'm 26), and I was at the polling places as a very young child as my parents volunteered for most elections.

Is something like this what you are talking about? Do they normally do something different?

That is how things were here previous to them going to what fash is talking about. I can't say I'm very fond of the idea myself.

[Winnow]

Is this from that movie where the bank robbers were all wearing masks of U.S. presidents?

[Noysyrump]

Is this from that movie where the bank robbers were all wearing masks of U.S. presidents?

*tear* I miss some of those guys...

[Fash]

I don't know how things work up there, but I will share with you how they are here in Tx.
Before you get your ballot, your name is written by the volunteer on a form that is numbered. You then put your signature in the next column. The names on this sheet of paper are in order from the first person that voted to the last. There are 2 (sometimes more, we've been redistricted several times) tables that have the alphabet divided, so there are seperate sheets for the first and last halves of the alphabet. It has been this way as long as I can remember (I'm 26), and I was at the polling places as a very young child as my parents volunteered for most elections.

Is something like this what you are talking about? Do they normally do something different?

I don't remember it being like that before... What I remember is that they have the big book of people, you tell them who you are, they find it in the book and you sign next to your name... Then you vote. That's it. Obviously someone paid attention to the number of people who were voting, but since it was the old style machine, they would've had no way to see how I voted...

This last time, with the new machines... there were 3 people involved... One to say 'ok thats number 220,' one to find me in the book and have me sign, and the third person had another list of all the voters and said 'hes 220? ok, got it' as she recorded my number in line.

I just want clarification that they have no valid reason to do this before I make a stink about it...

[Boogahz]

It sounds, to me, like it is just another way to prevent voter fraud. I don't see them using the info to target you, but you might want to buy some more foil to build a bigger hat just in case. Maybe a nice big Sombrero would be fitting.

[Fash]

It sounds, to me, like it is just another way to prevent voter fraud. I don't see them using the info to target you, but you might want to buy some more foil to build a bigger hat just in case. Maybe a nice big Sombrero would be fitting.

How on earth would that prevent voter fraud?... It wouldn't do anything more than having the one big list of voters and signatures.

I'm glad you don't see them using the info to target me... that's nice.

[Winnow]

They'll use it for jury duty.

Seekrit: if you don't register to vote, you don't get pulled for jury duty in some states.

Instead, the incentive should be, "register, vote, and you won't be pulled for jury duty"

[Funkmasterr]

They'll use it for jury duty.

Seekrit: if you don't register to vote, you don't get pulled for jury duty in some states.

Instead, the incentive should be, "register, vote, and you won't be pulled for jury duty"

Um, at risk of sounding prejudice here, you do realize who the majority of people doing jury duty would be in that case, right? lol.

[Boogahz]

It sounds, to me, like it is just another way to prevent voter fraud. I don't see them using the info to target you, but you might want to buy some more foil to build a bigger hat just in case. Maybe a nice big Sombrero would be fitting.

How on earth would that prevent voter fraud?... It wouldn't do anything more than having the one big list of voters and signatures.

I'm glad you don't see them using the info to target me... that's nice.

I cut out some of my post which probably should have stayed in...actually, I didn't realize I never put it back when I cut and (attempted to) pasted it

Local elections since the electronic machines came into more widespread use have been plagued with inconsistencies. A person could go into any location and vote without showing anything, or go into the wrong precinct to vote on purpose. They would say that they had moved, made a mistake, did not know that the location changed, whatever. This would allow people to vote 10-15 times if you could convince one person of your story. By having three people check the information and confirm that your name was on the list in the same location, they have a better record of WHO voted, not who you voted for.

[Funkmasterr]

It sounds, to me, like it is just another way to prevent voter fraud. I don't see them using the info to target you, but you might want to buy some more foil to build a bigger hat just in case. Maybe a nice big Sombrero would be fitting.

How on earth would that prevent voter fraud?... It wouldn't do anything more than having the one big list of voters and signatures.

I'm glad you don't see them using the info to target me... that's nice.

I cut out some of my post which probably should have stayed in...actually, I didn't realize I never put it back when I cut and (attempted to) pasted it

Local elections since the electronic machines came into more widespread use have been plagued with inconsistencies. A person could go into any location and vote without showing anything, or go into the wrong precinct to vote on purpose. They would say that they had moved, made a mistake, did not know that the location changed, whatever. This would allow people to vote 10-15 times if you could convince one person of your story. By having three people check the information and confirm that your name was on the list in the same location, they have a better record of WHO voted, not who you voted for.

Here we still have the people at the tables that you have to check in with to verify you are at the right location, they cross your name off the list, then you go to the fancy machine.

[Truant]

I have a question for you based on my last trip to vote.

In my opinion, the only 2 things they need to keep track of is: How many people voted, and Who voted.

My polling place was doing something that raised my suspicion through the roof and then some... In addition to how many and who, they were keeping track of the order in which everyone voted.

Do they have any right to do this?

I have been considering that I might ensure this does not happen next time, and I just wanted to get your opinion.

Thanks,

I don't know how things work up there, but I will share with you how they are here in Tx.
Before you get your ballot, your name is written by the volunteer on a form that is numbered. You then put your signature in the next column. The names on this sheet of paper are in order from the first person that voted to the last. There are 2 (sometimes more, we've been redistricted several times) tables that have the alphabet divided, so there are seperate sheets for the first and last halves of the alphabet. It has been this way as long as I can remember (I'm 26), and I was at the polling places as a very young child as my parents volunteered for most elections.

Is something like this what you are talking about? Do they normally do something different?

That is how things were here previous to them going to what fash is talking about. I can't say I'm very fond of the idea myself.

Just to be super clear here...I'm not being a smartass. What I said, and what Fash said are the same thing. Both are tracking: who, how many, and what order. Unless I'm really misunderstanding, I'm not sure how the two are different. If you read it a different way, if i was unclear, or if it is obvious to you that I misunderstood Fash...please let me know.

I don't remember it being like that before... What I remember is that they have the big book of people, you tell them who you are, they find it in the book and you sign next to your name... Then you vote. That's it. Obviously someone paid attention to the number of people who were voting, but since it was the old style machine, they would've had no way to see how I voted...

This last time, with the new machines... there were 3 people involved... One to say 'ok thats number 220,' one to find me in the book and have me sign, and the third person had another list of all the voters and said 'hes 220? ok, got it' as she recorded my number in line.

I just want clarification that they have no valid reason to do this before I make a stink about it...

Here they stamp next to your name in the book, and then use the form for your signature. Whether it's machine voting, or paper ballots...it's the same process. Honestly, I don't see how having the order of the voters as being any possible threat to you. They had your name anyways. What can knowing that you came in between John and Sally on the list possibly mean?

They'll use it for jury duty.
Seekrit: if you don't register to vote, you don't get pulled for jury duty in some states.
Instead, the incentive should be, "register, vote, and you won't be pulled for jury duty"

If you've been talking all this shit in all the presidential threads and you aren't even registered to vote...you deserved to be kicked in the fucking balls.

[Noysyrump]

Truant the complaint is that they are checking the names off in order with a matching ballot. So that, if so inclined, they COULD match up ballots to names... very uncool. I firmly believe they NEED to have your name listed.... but to add anything into the records that could possibly match your vote card to your name is VERY 1984.


Big Brother is watching.

[Winnow]

They'll use it for jury duty.
Seekrit: if you don't register to vote, you don't get pulled for jury duty in some states.
Instead, the incentive should be, "register, vote, and you won't be pulled for jury duty"

If you've been talking all this shit in all the presidential threads and you aren't even registered to vote...you deserved to be kicked in the fucking balls.

I'd agree if that were the case.

[Funkmasterr]

Truant, fash is talking about a machine doing the ballots, you are talking about the old way it used to be where a person handed you a ballot which you turned into another person, unless I misunderstood.

[Truant]

Truant, fash is talking about a machine doing the ballots, you are talking about the old way it used to be where a person handed you a ballot which you turned into another person, unless I misunderstood.

I was talking about both (actually all 3). I remember three different ballots. The old punch kind. The scantron (sort of) kind. And the purely electronic kind.
The entire procedure was the same for all, you just picked up a different kind of ballot (or electronic cartridge).
Also, noone was ever, ever supposed to touch your ballot when you were finished except for you. Excepting of course someone who required physical assistance or something. The punch kind got scanned through a machine, which recorded it. Then you dropped it into a lockbox that was used in the event of a recount. The scantron kind get scanned through a machine, which records it. Then it drops it into it's own lockbox all in the same process. The electronic kind, you plugged your cartridge in, which recorded it and erased it. Then you set it in a box beside the machine and they would be recycled for further use. (note, there are HUGE criticisms here with the electronic system because there is ZERO paper trail in the event of a recount). My point is, noone ever took your ballot from you. Someone stood there and helped instruct you with which way to insert it, but they were not to touch it, ever.
If there is seriously this level of inconsistency at our polling places, I have even less faith in the accuracy of our election process. :\

Truant the complaint is that they are checking the names off in order with a matching ballot. So that, if so inclined, they COULD match up ballots to names... very uncool. I firmly believe they NEED to have your name listed.... but to add anything into the records that could possibly match your vote card to your name is VERY 1984.
Big Brother is watching.

First of all, no. The people with the books and the people that actually count the ballots (even if it's just electronic) are completely different people. The ballots are taken by a chairperson from each district to a seperate location (1 per county) where a seperate group of people record and report.
Second of all, I didn't discern that Fash was concerned about that at all from his post. I don't know if you're leaping to a different conclusion, or if i'm simply misunderstanding. As I read it, he's concerned with the fact that they have record of what order people voted in (and I pointed out that it's been that way here for as long as I can remember).
Fash, what exactly is it that you were concerned about? if you wouldn't mind.

[Ashur]

"They" don't give a shit about the order you vote in. There is nothing "questionable" about this.

There's just varying procedures to make sure they don't screw anything up procedurally and accidentally "disenfranchise" you. Where I vote they have like 3 different voting precincts or so voting on site where there are often different ballot issues. They have to make damn sure they set you up with the right slate of items to vote on and they undoubtedly have other checks to ensure the number of people they've processed through the check-in process meets the number of ballots recieved.

Ever seen a medical operation where anyone was opened up recently? These are the most educated people on the planet and they have like 3 people counting and acknowledging individual instruments and or the stuff they use for controlling bleeding has been removed. It sounds a lot like the guys doing oil changes. Why? I'm pretty sure I trust any of them to count to seven, but it's procedural and it's a safety net to make sure no one fucks up by accident. Same thing.

[Fash]

I had no issue with the old machines... There were no timestamps. The issue I have is the electronic nature of things now. I'm a reformed hacker, ok? Among many other things, I once had root access to a jpl.nasa.gov box... I always look at the evil possibilities of things.

If I have a database of votes + timestamps, and I have a list of voters in order... do I need to fill in the blank?..

My mind would be at peace if they only had the votes + timestamps, and an unordered list of voters. The ordered list is something they DO NOT NEED, and SHOULD NOT WANT in the interests of transparency.

Ok, I guess VV wasn't the best place to look for advice.

[Funkmasterr]

I had no issue with the old machines... There were no timestamps. The issue I have is the electronic nature of things now. I'm a reformed hacker, ok? Among many other things, I once had root access to a jpl.nasa.gov box... I always look at the evil possibilities of things.

If I have a database of votes + timestamps, and I have a list of voters in order... do I need to fill in the blank?..

My mind would be at peace if they only had the votes + timestamps, and an unordered list of voters. The ordered list is something they DO NOT NEED, and SHOULD NOT WANT in the interests of transparency.

Ok, I guess VV wasn't the best place to look for advice.

Yeah, lesson well learned.

[Xyun]

Hey everyone,

I'm reporting in from one of the Obama field offices in Clark County, NV. My girlfriend and I just came back from being the precinct captains at our caucus, and the scene here is ugly.

Everyone is reporting election irregularities on the part of the Hillary campaign. There is widespread cheating and voter suppression going on all over Clark County--and it's obviously coming in from the top down. Whether it made enough of a difference to swing the election is another question--but there is no question that Hillary was running a scorched-earth, no-holds-barred campaign in which all of her surrogates were instructed to cheat in every way possible.

To be clear about the caucus process here: caucus doors opened at 11am today; people are allowed to file in and register on location until 12 noon, at which time the doors close and no one else is admitted. Those registering were given non-binding ballots to fill out to help assess in case of problems with head count. At this point, the total number of people in the room are counted. Viability is determined (15%), and then the viable sections have 20 minutes to convince the uncommitteds/unviables. Final counts are then made.

Here are just a few of the irregularities from the Clinton campaign that have come to my ears, before I tell my own story. Word on the ground is that we have video of some of these shenanigans as well.

* UPDATE: The wording of the actual Party rules are unclear. At this point, it appears that the Hillary campaign may simply have interpreted the rules differently, rather than deliberately engaging in voter suppression. Regardless, however, the State Party interpreted the rules in our favor. No less than foureight Obama captains (including myself) have reported that Clinton operatives tried to close the doors at 11:30--a full thirty minutes before the doors were supposed to close. In some cases I am hearing they actually succeeded, and voters were turned away before more knowledgeable people could get there to reopen them. The Clinton campaign had obviously told their people to be there by 11:30--and they knew that the higher the turnout, the worse for them.
* At least two reports of Clinton operatives telling the uncommitteds and Edwards supporters, once their numbers were deemed not viable, that they had to leave. Whether these tactics succeeded or not, I do not know. Obviously, the Clinton campaign knew that voters not already in her camp were unlikely to join her camp (I know from my own experience that I convinced many more undecideds than my opponent Hillary operative), so they attempted to suppress their vote.
* At least one report of Clinton operatives telling Obama supporters with viable numbers that they were not viable, and had to leave. From what I hear, some of those voters did in fact leave.
* At least two reports (including my own) of disabled voters being coerced into the Clinton camp against their will, or even having their voter card filled out for them against their will.
* A few reports of probable out-of-state Clinton operatives being counted among the voters--though since checking ID is illegal, and other Hillary operatives from in-state would vouch for them, it's impossible to say.
* At least one report of two large men standing outside the door checking voters for whom they would support, and telling all Obama people they were at the wrong location.
* At least one other report of Hillary operatives doing the check-in, and telling all Obama supporters that they were not on the list, could not register at the location (not true), and that they could not caucus.
* At least one report of ballots being filled out in advance for Hillary in mass.
* At least one report of Hillary supporters saying that the caucus location was just the Hillary room--and that Obama supporters had to go to a faraway location.
* At least one report of a voter registration list only in Spanish, and only with Hillary supporters on it. Obama supporters later found the registration list with the rest of the people--in the garbage can of the ladies restroom.
* Several reports of Hillary signs on the registration table, and Hillary supporters in Hillary shirts doing registration.

And there's much, much more. It's only just getting started to come through. How many of these tactics worked is unclear. Certainly, aggressive Obama volunteers like myself should have nipped many of these in the bud, but we're actually counting on concerned citizens who care--not machine operatives trained to cheat and brought up in the nearly criminal Nevada machine and the ruthless, conscience-less Hillary campaign.

Here's my story:

I got to the location at 10:30am and set up. The Hillary people were already there. In charge of them was a 60-ish woman with a slight Brooklyn accent. Here were the irregularities in my precinct alone:

* The Hillary operative tried to force the doors to close at 11:30am. KK was outside greeting people, and she overheard the Hillary campaign mention that the doors would be closing at 11:30am, and she went to talk to the precinct chair. So we intervened and said that that was absolutely not legal by the rules. She then started screaming at the chair to close the doors. When he read the rules that they were open until 12noon, she said that "that's not what I was told, other campaigns were spreading misinformation." We stood our ground, and the doors remained open.
* A man in a wheelchair came in with his daughter, and said he was an Edwards supporter. When his daughter began to wheel him to the middle of the room, the Hillary operative tapped her on the shoulder, took the wheelchair and took him to the Clinton corner. I rushed over from talking to an undecided voter and objected loudly, but his daughter was a Hillary person. The Clinton operative said, "I don't control what he does; she does." At that point I said to the man, "Nobody controls you. If you want to vote for Edwards, you have every right to go to the center of the room. Do you need help?" He looked at me plaintively, but said nothing as his daughter dragged him farther back into the corner and just shook his head.
* The Clinton operative herself had a Brooklyn accent and I overheard her mention having been from New York. When she stood to be counted in the middle of the room, I objected and asked her if she was actually from Nevada. She said yes. I talked to the chair and asked him to ask her name and find her on the list. He asked her her name and checked the list, and she was not on it. At this point the chair said, "well, I can't ask for ID." I said, "She can't participate if no one will vouch for her." At this point a Hispanic man wearing a Hillary shirt said she was his wife. While that's not impossible, it was also improbable--but I had no way to verify or object further.
* One voter who hadn't even finished registering said that she was undecided, and the Hillary operative physically escorted her to the Hillary side. I went to talk to the woman, but she was immediately surrounded by 3 Hillary supporters who would not let me in, and I had to attend to others registering at that point (our operatives were outnumbered by hers 2-1).
* Hillary supporters were doing check-in, and a Hillary sign was behind them. I forced the sign off the table, and I went to the front desk to verify that everything went according to the rules at checkin--but if nothing else, the necessity of doing so prevented me from doing other needed work.

Even so, KK and I managed to convince 6 undecided/Edwards voters (Edwards & uncommitted both lacked viability in my caucus), while their cheating, ruthless operatives only convinced two--and our caucus outperformed the field, garnering 4 delegates to her 5. It was intense--and it was war. I knew what the Clinton operatives were up to, and they knew I knew. It was bloodless war; I almost feel pity for the goodhearted Obama volunteers who were unprepared for the level of sociopathy that I expected--and encountered--from the Clinton campaign.

--------------------------------------

After being a part of this campaign, doing this work, and seeing this level of viciousness from a supposedly Democratic candidate, it will be a cold day in hell before I do any work for anyone in any way associated with Hillary Clinton. At this point, even my general election vote is in question. I am furious almost to the point of nausea. There are so many young, idealistic activists here who are absolutely crushed--not because we lost here, but because of the way we "lost." Disillusionment is running extremely high--and I doubt very much of many of them will be back in 2008, or ever again. Illegal and immoral campaign tactics like this aren't just reprehensible: they also come at a cost to the party in the long run.

Leaving behind the triangulating, DLC politics of the Clintons, this crap leaves me with just one question: with Democrats like these, who needs Republicans?

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/ ... 790/439573

[Boogahz]

The whole caucus process is fucked up. Why can't they just VOTE? There is no way in hell I would sit in some convention hall with people from each "camp" preaching to me about what I need to do. They were not present during my life experiences which help to determine who I will vote for.

[Wulfran]

Your whole process seems whacked to me: we don't fuck around with machines (that could be programmed to possibly come up with the result the manufacturer/programmer wants), we just have a list of names on a ballot and mark an X beside the name we want with a pencil. These are then counted by gov't employees who are overseen by volunteer reps (scrutineers) from each party. Yes, some people are too stupid to mark the X properly and the possibility exists for fraudulent counts but it would take subborning of both the gov't employees and the scrutineers.

The way you guys complicate this process (and it seems to vary from state to state) seems to be asking for problems, misunderstandings and ouright confrontations over the procedures (i.e. the court challenge over the way votes were counted in Bush vs Gore).

[Fash]

Your whole process seems whacked to me: we don't fuck around with machines (that could be programmed to possibly come up with the result the manufacturer/programmer wants), we just have a list of names on a ballot and mark an X beside the name we want with a pencil. These are then counted by gov't employees who are overseen by volunteer reps (scrutineers) from each party. Yes, some people are too stupid to mark the X properly and the possibility exists for fraudulent counts but it would take subborning of both the gov't employees and the scrutineers.

The way you guys complicate this process (and it seems to vary from state to state) seems to be asking for problems, misunderstandings and ouright confrontations over the procedures (i.e. the court challenge over the way votes were counted in Bush vs Gore).

It's whacked enough to pose the question... do they actually want the will of the people to prevail? or do they want to control and skew the system to their preferred conclusion? just who are 'they' anyways?

[Ashur]

they want to control and skew the system to their preferred conclusion

[Boogahz]

I figured this was as fitting a thread as any to post my experiences with the voting and caucus here in Texas.

The poll procedure was straight-forward, but the ratio of Democrat to Republican was pretty obvious based on what could be seen as soon as you walked in. There were two to three people working the table for Democrat voters, and there was nobody actually AT the Republican table since the one guy there was apparently bored out of his mind and handing out "I Voted" stickers.

I just got back from the caucus at my precinct location. We had 37 Democratic delegates (from the Caucus, not counting the delegates available from regular voting) from this precinct alone. I signed up, and I may be participating as one for the first time on March 29th. I figured I might as well go "all out" to participate in the process. The caucus was scheduled to begin for Democrats at 7:15 and Republicans at 8:00. I think the number of Republicans that showed up were outnumbered by the party representatives there to run the process. I talked to a few of the older people that were there tonight, and most had always participated in the caucus procedure (this was my first time to go back for them), and they had not seen that many people since the McGovern campaign (1972?). Now, Austin is a LOT more blue than the rest of Texas. That is one reason there are more delegates up for grabs here.

Some of the Hillary people were trying to kind of "bully" their way into the front and to organize people as we waited for the last people to actually vote, but nobody was listening to them...for some strange reason. Later, the non-committed part representatives (which just happened to have the guy with the "biggest" voice) got everyone organized and ready to move into the building...but there was a "small" problem. The building was not able to hold more than about 40 people, and there were well over 200.

They moved into the laundry room which was a bit bigger to complete the process, and it became a sort of assembly line. People were divided into groups based on who they were there to support, and the Obama group was easily 3x the size of the Clinton group. The Democratic party reps ended up letting the Clinton people go through first, and there was some light heckling involved as they moved forward with their eyes on the ground (was kind of funny to watch the people that tried to take control do this too).

I actually left before the other ballot issues were discussed because my feet were starting to hurt like hell, and I still needed to eat dinner. When I was first learning about the "process" involved in voting while I was in High School, I never would have pictured being involved in a Caucus in an apartment complex laundry room. I would actually like to be able to participate in the delegate process to learn more about how it works, if nothing else

[Winnow]

I never would have pictured being involved in a Caucus in an apartment complex laundry room.

Was anyone trying to do their laundry while this was going on?

[Boogahz]

I never would have pictured being involved in a Caucus in an apartment complex laundry room.

Was anyone trying to do their laundry while this was going on?

no, but I was wishing I had taken a pile of towels that are stacking up

[Gzette]

Boogahz, you're in the same precinct as me. I was there. 78741 4 lyfe! I always saw you were from Austin, but i didnt know we were practically neighbors. I was the guy hitting on the girl from the Obama campaign. Got her number!

My favorite part: when they moved it to the laundry room and all the people that had lined up started walking through the bushes. One guy said "Hey don't trampled the bushes!" then this guy next to me said, "That's why we're all here!"

Democracy

edit: just had to say I could've run a better and faster caucus out of my garage, by myself.

[Boogahz]

Boogahz, you're in the same precinct as me. I was there. 78741 4 lyfe! I always saw you were from Austin, but i didnt know we were practically neighbors. I was the guy hitting on the girl from the Obama campaign. Got her number!

My favorite part: when they moved it to the laundry room and all the people that had lined up started walking through the bushes. One guy said "Hey don't trampled the bushes!" then this guy next to me said, "That's why we're all here!"

Democracy

edit: just had to say I could've run a better and faster caucus out of my garage, by myself.

Did you go through early or late in the lines, and yeah, I could think of many other ways to better run it myself. I wanted them to use the "tip jar" to go get some kegs or something with as long as we had to wait. Which girl from the Obama campaign? Not the bleach blonde one going around signing people up for del's I hope!

I'm down off of Oltorf & Pleasant Valley.

[Gzette]

I went through early. I was helping a handicapped guy get to the front and used that as an excuse to get to the front myself ... not really but there was this old fat Hillary supporter who was yapping about how no one should be able to cut in front of her until i explained that the guy was in line for Obama and would not effect her spot in line at all.

It was not the bleach blond, she had more sandy blond hair. I doubt I'll call her, as she decided not to be a delegate because she had gotten up early. After all the volunteering she had done, i was thinking, "what the hell?" still ...

I'm at Oltorf and Parker Ln. in the neighborhood over there by some crack houses.

I was thinking about beer too ... all the people outside reminded me of a keg party.

[Winnow]

I went through early. I was helping a handicapped guy get to the front and used that as an excuse to get to the front myself

You're the same as that guy in Titanic that grabbed a baby to get himself on the lifeboat!

[Boogahz]

hehe, yeah, I saw when people were trying to get them to move so he could get in. Nobody would move! I had no problem waiting until the end, so I was still hanging out with some of the people behind most of the cars. I'm not sure which person you were hitting on, since I seem to have been in the same area of the crowd that the other one and the dark-haired guy with glasses were signing people up in.

It was interesting, and apparently it was mentioned somewhere in regional/national news, because a family member in Kansas asked if that was my precinct location that they heard about, lol

I think I am at the other crack house area! Actually, I think that we may live on opposite sides of the "woods" that they use for deals and "Testing the Product."

[Sueven]

THEY'RE COMING FOR THE RON PAUL VOTERS