1500 People who showed up to caucus TURNED AWAY

[FSP-Rebel]

Pretty pathetic how they didn't have any extra accommodations available considering the state chair had been predicting major turn out for like a week now.

 

[splint]

The GOP will have no one to blame but themselves in November.

NOBP

 

[jemuf]

Also, state officials were projecting this kind of turnout. So they should have been better prepared.

Don't even argue with scotusman. All his posts have about the same tone. He's one of those guys who likes to be the downer, the deliverer of bad news. Someone opened a rule book and he stepped out.

scotusman: "There's only one way to do everything. Innovation is for Steve Jobs types not the common man. And I'm the authority on this stuff. Hell I'm the authority on pretty much everything."

 

[JJ2]

Hopefully the Ron Paul people were more motivated and got there early. Maybe this helps us?

College kids on a Saturday morning? Forget it. The people who came late and were turned away at these locations were our people.

 

[thoughtomator]

If you think they have legal liability from fire codes, just wait until you see their legal liability from denying qualified individuals the equal right to participate in an election.

If pursued properly this can bankrupt everyone involved in the decision as well as the organization responsible for the debacle.

 

[SCOTUSman]

So it's better to just let them NOT VOTE AT ALL? You know what. Never mind.

If you are going to ask questions like that and cop an attitude, which you are seemingly doing...then I'll ask one, but I'll answer yours. Yes. I'd rather have people not vote than a fire break out and people die and then I get sued for their deaths. I'd choose that option every time.

So how about you, if you want to ask EXTREME questions. Would you rather have everyone get to vote, and have 200% capacity and people get hurt and have to assume legal liability?

If I was in the same situation, I would have done the same thing. I don't want to be attached to any liability like that. No brainer.

 

[NoOneButPaul]

The GOP will have no one to blame but themselves in November.

NOBP

More and more I hope Paul runs 3rd party...

After everything that's gone on I don't see how he can't.

If he focused on California and California only he could spin it to the GOP that he's trying to take Obama's best state as a 3rd party to help the GOP win, or at least force Boehner to pick the President.

 

[surf]

i got back from my caucus and there was barely enough room. my precinct caucused in a stairwell, but somehow we did get everyone in.

when it comes to turning people away we can only hope that they weren't our people.

 

[SCOTUSman]

If you think they have legal liability from fire codes, just wait until you see their legal liability from denying qualified individuals the equal right to participate in an election.

If pursued properly this can bankrupt everyone involved in the decision as well as the organization responsible for the debacle.

No it couldn't. This is where people simply don't understand a caucus. A caucus is not an election that is sanctioned by the state. State election laws are not applicable. There is no right to vote in the caucus. The state party can make all the determination they want under their rules (whether they fairly apply them or not...or ignore them). It is just like a local convention. That is simply all a caucus is...a local convention (on the most localized scale) with a straw vote....You can't show up to the libertarian party's convention and if they dont' allow you to participate as a registered libertarian say they are breaking election laws. Now if they use state resources, ballots, etc. and use the elections office to conduct a primary...then you bet your butt there would be legal issues involved.

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

You cannot have people put in danger. There is a legal liability issue. If you fill in way too much, what else can you do?

They should have planned ahead and had multiple caucus times for areas like that, but once they didn't plan ahead, there is nothing they can do. I would have done the same, as I would want zero legal liability by having that many people in one place at once.

1st, the GOP predicts MASSIVE turnout yet is ill prepared for massive turnout

2nd, They could have had it outside

Weather for Kennewick, WA

]61°F | °C

There is NO excuse for disenfranchising voters. None!

 

[NoOneButPaul]

If you are going to ask questions like that and cop an attitude, which you are seemingly doing...then I'll ask one, but I'll answer yours. Yes. I'd rather have people not vote than a fire break out and people die and then I get sued for their deaths. I'd choose that option every time.

So how about you, if you want to ask EXTREME questions. Would you rather have everyone get to vote, and have 200% capacity and people get hurt and have to assume legal liability?

If I was in the same situation, I would have done the same thing. I don't want to be attached to any liability like that. No brainer.

You aren't wrong in your logic, but the main focus or point should be that this type of situation shouldn't have happened to begin with.

They should have planned for this and because they didn't 1500 people didn't get to vote- that's a serious issue.

Best case scenario, about 750 were Paul supporters...

 

[SCOTUSman]

I think that should be challenged if they violate their own rules and hold themselves out as being representative and get state benefits and monopoly protected by ballot access and debate access.

Maybe there is an exception to the laws, but this seems like a major antitrust type situation.....

I agree. There should be an independent group within the GOP that enforces the party's rules on the local, state, and national level. Whether they agree with the rules or not...if they are in place when it is time to vote and pick delegates...well that is the rules. If they are changed through the proper processes, then they can do that, but you have to use the rules you have. PERIOD.

However, who enforces their own rules, themselves. They can apply them or ignore them willy nilly. Nobody is going to say anything because the rules don't mean sh*t.

 

[kathy88]

1st, the GOP predicts MASSIVE turnout yet is ill prepared for massive turnout

2nd, They could have had it outside


There is NO excuse for disenfranchising voters. None!

I saw your tweet Michael. There is no excuse. We work so hard and it's so corrupt.

 

[Texan4Life]

http://blogs.mcclatchydc.com/washin...rned-at-least-1500-away-from-wash-caucus.html

[QUOTEBenegas said it quickly became apparent there weren't enough volunteers to check everyone in — which in most cases involved looking up their voter registration on a list provided by the county auditor and helping them find their precinct number, and that the rooms they booked were filled to capacity.

And the party was under pressure to finish by 11:30 so that results could be tabulated and turned over to the state party.

"We did pull the leadership aside and said, 'What are we going to do?'" Benegas said.

The only choice apparent was to close the doors and turn an estimated 1,500 people away, he said.

"I am extremely sorry we could not accommodate everyone," he said. "I apologize to those folks who we had to turn away. We fit in as many as we could, but we had more than we could physically fit in the rooms."



Read more here: http://blogs.mcclatchydc.com/washin...500-away-from-wash-caucus.html#storylink=cpy]

This is so fucked up on so many levels.[/QUOTE]

WTF?

this is an election... not like they were lining up for a fucking free tshirt!!!

 

[SCOTUSman]

You aren't wrong in your logic, but the main focus or point should be that this type of situation shouldn't have happened to begin with.

They should have planned for this and because they didn't 1500 people didn't get to vote- that's a serious issue.

Best case scenario, about 750 were Paul supporters...

Exactly. This shouldn't have happened, but it did. Why? Because as we have seen time after time after time after time. From literally every state thus far, the GOP is the most inept, idiotic group of individuals that we so tirelessly try to be a part, yet they continually tear us a new one. I don't get why we do this.

I bet most of them were RP people, probably wearing shirts, hoodies, etc. I'm sure the volunteers told the state GOP this...ad played into their answer. I'm hoping these were old, Romney supporters that were showing up the, but who knows.

I will say this, it seems that from the early bird exit polling in the past caucus and primary states. RP people usually get there earlier...so we can hope?

 

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

They cannot use safety precautions or liability as a legal excuse, because turning away voters and denying them their chance to vote would actually increase the risk of public outrage or political riots.

 

[TheGrinch]

I agree. There should be an independent group within the GOP that enforces the party's rules on the local, state, and national level. Whether they agree with the rules or not...if they are in place when it is time to vote and pick delegates...well that is the rules. If they are changed through the proper processes, then they can do that, but you have to use the rules you have. PERIOD.

However, who enforces their own rules, themselves. They can apply them or ignore them willy nilly. Nobody is going to say anything because the rules don't mean sh*t.

That still doesn't excuse disenfranchising 1,500 voters, who you expected to show up... The government and parties just love to use this "incompetence" excuse.... It always comes down to emphasis of "we failed you", not "we failed you", like it should be...

It's rather sickening that you're defending them disenfranchising voters by not preparing for the turnout they expected...

 

[Cyberbrain]

Amazing that the guy in that article could think disenfranchising 1500 people was the right call. Why didn't these people DEMAND to be able to participate?

 

[pacelli]

Also, state officials were projecting this kind of turnout. So they should have been better prepared.

I agree

 

[SCOTUSman]

That still doesn't excuse disenfranchising 1,500 voters, who you expected to show up... The government and parties just love to use this "incompetence" excuse.... It always comes down to emphasis of "we failed you", not "we failed you", like it should be...

It's rather sickening that you're defending them disenfranchising voters by not preparing for the turnout they expected...

LOL. Whatever you say. I'm not defending anybody. But lets personally attack each other. People just don't understand the caucus process. How it isn't an election sanctioned by the state. There is no civil rights violations or the like involved.


If you want people to vote whenever during the day, ask for a primary.