But wait...

[aymn27]

Villere says, "Second, candidates for delegate in Louisiana historically have run on one or another slate, but not on multiple slates. This year, however, many candidates ran on more than one slate. There was significant overlap, for example, between the McCain and Pro-Life slates"

Does this mean that say John Doe could be on McCain's Slate, Romney's Slate, Thompson's Slate, and the Pro-Life slate?

So then technically that means that Ron Paul was limited to only one vote because no other "slate" put them on it?

That is some underhanded bullcrap.

The fact is...Ron Paul won in every district and the LAGOP figured out a way to make it look not so...

 

[hueylong]

No no no no no. A slate just means that somebody was handing out a sheet of paper with 15 names on it and asking people to vote for those 15 names.

Some of McCain's delegates had their name on more than one sheet of paper. Has nothing to do with "underhanded bullcrap" or anyone having their name on the ballot more than once.

 

[Melissa]

No no no no no. A slate just means that somebody was handing out a sheet of paper with 15 names on it and asking people to vote for those 15 names.

Some of McCain's delegates had their name on more than one sheet of paper. Has nothing to do with "underhanded bullcrap" or anyone having their name on the ballot more than once.

are you sure ask Jenn about this might actually be true that some names were on more then one--if I am wrong sorry

 

[aymn27]

No no no no no. A slate just means that somebody was handing out a sheet of paper with 15 names on it and asking people to vote for those 15 names.

Some of McCain's delegates had their name on more than one sheet of paper. Has nothing to do with "underhanded bullcrap" or anyone having their name on the ballot more than once.

Yes..I understand that it means that their name was on more than one handout..but how can they be on the "mccain" slate and the "thompson" slate at the same time? I suppose the way around all this is that they are technically all "uncommitted"...

what would have helped us would have been a "2nd Amendment" slate, and a "lower taxes slate" and have our folks on all of these....

damn they're good at this...!

 

[hueylong]

A slate just means that somebody was handing out a piece of paper with 15 names on it.

 

[jenninlouisiana]

yeah, exactly, they are all "uncommitted" and because of that you can be on as many slates as you are asked to be on. One guy told me he was "uncommitted" and on 4 "slates". Crafty sons of bitches...

 

[Melissa]

yeah, exactly, they are all "uncommitted" and because of that you can be on as many slates as you are asked to be on. One guy told me he was "uncommitted" and on 4 "slates". Crafty sons of bitches...

ok so does that mean your name could of also been on the 3 slates if they would have let you as the OP is suggesting or is Huey right because when I was on the phone with you I took it as the OP idea

 

[nathaniel]

The "slates" are basically a no-nonsense guide for single-issue voters. It provides them a list of people who will vote favorably for their issue. That is why there is crossover. There are potential delegates who are for example "pro-life" and are also "pro 2nd amendment;" therefore their name would appear on both slates.

The slates are there for convenience of the caucus go-er who is unfamiliar with the people running.

 

[hueylong]

Think of a slate, as a "flyer" -- some people had their name on more than one advertising flyer.

 

[aymn27]

No no no no no. A slate just means that somebody was handing out a sheet of paper with 15 names on it and asking people to vote for those 15 names.

Some of McCain's delegates had their name on more than one sheet of paper. Has nothing to do with "underhanded bullcrap" or anyone having their name on the ballot more than once.

It may not be illegal..but it sure as hell is unethical...I would call it underhanded "used car salesman" tactics. Oddly enough...isn't our new governor ushering in "ethical reform" -- he certainly needs to address his party first and foremost...

Being a man of my word, I find it absolutely abhorant that a person would knowingly be on a McCain slate and a Romney slate at the same time. It makes him a liar.

 

[aymn27]

The "slates" are basically a no-nonsense guide for single-issue voters. It provides them a list of people who will vote favorably for their issue. That is why there is crossover. There are potential delegates who are for example "pro-life" and are also "pro 2nd amendment;" therefore their name would appear on both slates.

The slates are there for convenience of the caucus go-er who is unfamiliar with the people running.

I would have no problem with special interest slates having crossovers..but I think we're talking about individual candidate crossovers here as well...that is total BS (on the part of the delegate)

 

[freelance]

This year, however, many candidates ran on more than one slate.

No, it doesn't mean that one delegate appeared on multiple slates. What it means is that John McCain, for example, could have had Jane Doe on the McCain slate and Johnny Be Good on the PLPF slate. The CANDIDATES crossed more than one slate, not the individual delegates--that would have clearly been illegal.

 

[aymn27]

No, it doesn't mean that one delegate appeared on multiple slates. What it means is that John McCain, for example, could have had Jane Doe on the McCain slate and Johnny Be Good on the PLPF slate. The CANDIDATES crossed more than one slate, not the individual delegates--that would have clearly been illegal.

are you sure?..that is not how I'm understanding it and I would really like to know!

 

[nathaniel]

I agree that it is a bad system and lends itself to deck stacking. The important thing to remember is that this caucus is about going to the State convention where many other things will be voted on other than president. Lots of the delegates have minimal interest in the presidential race compared to setting the party platform for the state, upcoming local races, and various ballot initiatives.

 

[donniedark0]

Every slate had the same list of delegates on them, they bolded the delegates that were FOR whatever candidate or the shady "Pro-Family/Pro-Life" slate - ie: the Ronald Reagan slate.

And, just to stick the knife in further, a photo of Ronald Reagan and Nancy Reagan on that slate...wait....gets better, "Win one for the Gipper" I wish I were kidding, but I'm not.