Kerry Delegate Problems

[saracat]

In my state there has been a problem with the Kerry campaign removing delegate candidates and approving people who were not supportive of Kerry.We are left with Lieberman supporters! And our Kerry people were dissed! Usually the campaign doesn't get involved, tho' they have the right to, and the State committee votes for the candidates.We have a lot of pissed people who think this is very "Republican".Are their any other states experiencing this , or are we unique?

[Renew Deal]

1. Where are you?

[JI7]

2. why would Kerry campaign want those not supportive of Kerry ?

and isn't it only states that can decide election laws. i don't see how the kerry campaign has any control over this. and what state is this in ?

[saracat]

4. Delegate Rules

I don't want to say because we might have Press problems, but If you are in a primary state, it is part of the DNC rules regarding that the Delegate selection can be decided by the candidate. The candidate(PROBABLY HIS CAMPAIGN)can "remove" those persons considered not"worthy" of consideration. Another reason used is the affirmative action platform of the particular state indicating how many minority delegates must be considered. But in this case the roster ended up much less diverse than the original list was.The candidate or his campaign can even strike elected delegates if they don't meet with their approval.
It was my impression that this privilege is rarely used but it sure is being used in this case. Over 45 people were struck including state legislators and other community leaders.The thing that is infuriating most people is that we aren't even considered "worthy" of running after weeks( and in some cases years) of supporting Kerry we can't even be considered to run for delegate, while others who supported different candidates, Lieberman and Dean were most notable, (and they won NO delegates)are almost designated as they are put on the list as two delegates and we only have a choice of two!This is only an example but is illustrative of the problem.I don't know why they are doing this but we are surely going to complain.

[JI7]

5. press problems ?

why would you have press problems for something that you say is allowed according to dnc rules ?

[saracat]

7. Press

Because,since the right of delegate strike is rarely used, It appears very elitist to people and a story like that would not be beneficial to Democrats.

[JI7]

9. so it's a rare thing

so tell us which state it's in. there is nothing illegal about it according to you. and since they did do it and you are telling us they did why not tell us which state ?

[saracat]

11. Local candidates

Because it would not be beneficial to our local candidates for either our state or national party to look bad. It would also not be beneficial to the Kerry campaign to look as though they played games.It can be legal and still stink! We have already had press sniffing around about this as many of our State Commitee are unhappy.We don't need this issue to cloud our ability to get rid of Bush and elect Dems in our local elections.

[JI7]

13. i don't see how it can look all that bad

those delegates will have to vote for kerry at the convention anyways. even if they haven't always supported him. since lieberman didn't win any delegates maybe they just thought they needed to get some people to the convention who supported lieberman. in any case it doesn't seem all that big an issue. and certainly not one that would hurt the democratic party.

[saracat]

18. Believe me

it is a very big issue to the people who supported Kerry and find themselves dismissed out of hand. It is a question of thanking those people for their support not rewarding the people who did not support the candidate. They are called Kerry delegates for a reason. They are supposed to be the people who supported Kerry.
I am concerned about the effect this will have on the grass roots. Many of these people will now vote for Kerry but won't do much more and that is a shame as we need their support not only in this campaign but in local and state races as well.

[JI7]

20. so it's about personal feelings ?

so they weren't chosen to be delegates so they will not work for the campaign ? well, it seems they cared more about themselves being delegates and going to the convention than about the campaign as a whole. i supported kerry for a long time and i'm not expecting to be a delegate. i know it's not just about me.

[saracat]

22. Personal Feelings

Of course it's about personal feelings. But it is not so much about going to the convention as being able to run for delegate, and the State committee having an opportunity to vote. This is not democratic. The Kerry Delegates were elected by the primary, not the Lieberman or Dean Delegates.

[JI7]

23. it doesn't seem to make any difference

they still have to vote for kerry don't they ? if you were more specific such as just telling us which state it was it might help to understand the situation more.

[saracat]

24. Forget it.

Obviously you don't have this problem in your state or if you do ,you don't know about it. Yes, Kerry Delegates must vote for Kerry. But that isn't the point. The point is the who what and why they vote for Kerry, and no one needs to know what state to understand the situation.I begin to wonder why you want to know!

[JI7]

25. not always,

some people run as a delegate just so they can attend the convention. they don't care who they are a delegate for. delegates in the end are often released by losing candidates to vote for the winner anyways.

[jpgray]

3. What state, which members of the Kerry campaign? (nt)

[saracat]

6. Campaign Answer

Each state has a person assigned to it from the national campaign and allegedly these people contribute to the decisions. By the way, did you know that the Kerry Campaign has a policy of not giving out the campaign email addy's to anyone? So I guess you can forget about emailing Marybeth Cahill!

[jpgray]

14. I'm sorry, but you must substantiate your claim before I will believe it

We occassionally see disruptors here, so it is generally expected when one makes such a claim one backs it up.

[saracat]

15. Disrupters

It is because of the disrupters that I am hesitant to name the state.I know freepers troll these boards for ammo and I don't want to give them any more than I probably have with this post. I just wanted an answer from someone familiar with the delegate selection process in their state.Look at the DNC Rules if you want to back up my claims ,and you might check your states party platform as well.

[JI7]

17. that makes no sense

you don't want freepers to know about something, yet you post it on a board. the information you don't want them to know is still on the board for all to see whether you name the state or not.

[saracat]

21. I agree.

I shouldn't have posted at all. I was just upset and wanting to know if this was occurring elsewhere. I was stupid. But at least they won't know where in order to check it out!

[mobuto]

16. What are you talking about?

I have the email addresses of about thirty people at the Kerry campaign, although not Mary Beth Cahill's. I'm not at all surprised that she or other staffers don't broadcast them; they don't want their mailboxes filling up with spam, Freeper crap, etc. But I know from experience that if there's a reason for you and them to be in contact, they'll freely give out their addresses. And anyway, even if you don't know the exact addy, the formula is pretty damn simple to guess.

[saracat]

19. Email

They refused to give out specific emails to our State Commitee. I don't know who your email addy's are too, but I was told this by one of our former state chairs who is trying to deal with this.

[mobuto]

27. Um

Who at the Kerry campaign refused to give out their email address? Who is the former state chair?

[saracat]

40. I didn't ask for the addy's.

The former state chair made the request for them to the campaign worker assigned to our state. He was told NO addresses were available. I cannot give out his name as that may reveal the state.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

42. And, remind us, why would revealing what state it is be so terrible?

lol

[mobuto]

76. Then we are at an impass

If you want to do this via PM that's fine. But without any information at all, its kind of hard to find out where the problem is and how to fix it. If I knew who at the Kerry campaign you guys were dealing with, or maybe even just the state involved, I just might be able to help you. But in the abstract this is impossible to deal with. If you don't want the whole world to know, send me a private message.

I promise not to call Matt Drudge. ;-)

[ProudToBeLiberal]

8. You're being very vague here

If you want help, be a little bit more forthcoming

[saracat]

10. Vague?

The only thing I am being vague about is the identity of the state. The only thing I wanted an answer to is wether any other state was experiencing Kerry campaign intervention in Kerry Delegate selection.

[Old and In the Way]

12. Very odd. This is an anonymous forum. If you don't want to tell us

what state, then your posts are pretty meaningless.

[MaineDem]

26. Am I correct in assuming ...

you're talking about delegates to the national Convention??

[saracat]

28. Absolutely

You are correct.

[no name no slogan]

29. It's called "politics as usual"

...and it can be very disappointing to many people who have not participated before. And it happens in just about every campaign, no matter who the candidate is.

In primary states, the slate for the national convention delegates is often nominated by the campaign organization in that state. There's very little democracy involved most of the time-- and that goes for both Republican and Democratic Parties.

It can be a little better in caucus states, as each potential delegate has to move up through successive conventions to get to the state level. Although I've also seen it happen where a supporter of a candidate who has dropped out is often selected for the winning candidates slate in a show of "unity", or as a favor to gain the support of the losing candidates' supporters.

This is nothing unusual-- just part of the horse-tradin' that goes along with politics. Winning a seat for national delegate often involves as much politicking as it does running for elective office. In some states these are very high-prestige seats and are handed out to high-profile supporters and volunteers, by the people who run the campaign. Unfortunately it looks like you're in one of those states.

[saracat]

32. Thank You

You seem to be one of the only people on this forum who understand what I am talking about! I think I am in one of those states too, and it is very sad as we used to have a different philosophy.

[goodhue]

30. sorry to hear about this

Sounds like rule is being applied in peverse way. For those not familiar with Rule 11.E. of the DNC Delegate Selection Rules for the 2004 Democratic National Convention, here is the link . . .
http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/delegate_selection/rules.pdf

[saracat]

33. And thank you for establishing this link

for establishing this link.

[saracat]

34. And thank you for establishing this link

for establishing this link.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

31. I'm highly sceptical of what you are saying.

Given the fact that it just makes no sense whatsover for the Kerry campaign to remove Kerry supporters and replace them with Lieberman supporters, and you are unwilling to say what state it is, or back up your unsupported assertions with any evidence, it seems unlikely that this is really true.

[saracat]

35. If you would read

posts 29 and 30 you will see that there is precedent for what I am stating.The fact that someone does not possess the experience and knowledge of a situation does not give them the right to infer that another poster is a liar. Maybe you can't figure out why the Kerry Campaign would remove Kerry supporters and replace them with Lieberman supporters but there are obviously more sophisticated people who can. And that still doesn't make it fair or right.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

36. I read them

I accept for the sake of argument the proposition that you believe what you are saying is true. Therefore, you are not a liar.


However, I still don't believe that what you are saying is true.


If you were willing to share some details, we would probably be able to demonstrate where your analysis of the situation is wrong. Since you are not willing to do that, all we can do is either believe you, or not. I don't.

[saracat]

38. Be as skeptical

as you want. Whatever would lead you to believe that I want you to demonstrate where my analysis is wrong? I KNOW what happened in my state. All I asked was whether others had experienced problems with delegate selection. Period. I f you don't know the answer or don't have that problem wherever you are, why are you getting so worked up? I didn't ask for any advice on how to "Fix" anything. If anything can be accomplished I am relying on those in my party to "fix" it.And if it can't be done, shame on both the campaign and the party, but we will survive.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

41. Of course you don't want anyone to show that you are wrong.

Who likes being shown to be wrong?

"why are you getting so worked up?"

What makes you think I'm 'worked up'? People post things on DU all the time that I don't believe.
Just because I comment about it doesn't mean I'm 'worked up' about it, lol.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

44. lol

I thought you said I was the one getting 'worked up'?

:hi:

[saracat]

48. You were.

I'm bored.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

58. So to summarize, you accuse the Kerry campaign of acting very "Republican"

and then when someone asks you to provide any type of corroborating evidence, and voices skepticism because you refuse to, you say they are 'too ill informed to debate' and 'know so little about the political process', and finally try to avoid discussion by saying you're 'bored'.


I'm even more skeptical now than I was before.

[saracat]

60. It is very "republican"

to deny the State Committee the right to vote a any except selected candidates.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

63. But did the Kerry campaign really do what you accuse them of?

That's what I'd like to know.

[saracat]

67. They say they did

Or at least they admit they were aware of it and tried to justify it on affirmative action grounds until they realized the proposed list had a preponderance of white males!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

68. Well I'd like to read the statement the Kerry campaign made

when you say they 'admitted it' but you are unwilling to corroborate your statement. Why?

[saracat]

70. They don't issue written statements.

This was said via phone by the Kerry staffer who helped pick the delegate list. BTW I just checked our delegate list and realise our state committee has NO vote at all on any of the Kerry people as all positons only have enough people nominated to fill the slots.Example-3 slots, 3 nominees. 4 slots 1 alternate 5 nominees.This is an election?
You want collaboration vall Kerry HQ at [phone] and ask them if they know of any state where the Kerry delegate candidtes were winnowed down to exactly the number required so that the State Commitee couldn't really vote a choice.And BTW ask them if they know of a state in which more than 50 Kerry supporters were eliminated. Gee, maybe they'll tell you what state!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

71. I don't believe the Kerry campaign 'admitted' to what you say they did.

Since you can't tell us what they said, we have no way to judge the accuracy of your characterization. Common sense dictates that the Kerry campaign would want Kerry supporters at the convention. What you are saying makes no sense. You may believe it - that doesn't mean it's true.

[saracat]

72. I TOLD YOU

you what they said. "They participated in the selection" They said it to me and I see no reason for them to make up something they know I think is unfavorable to them .I also said you could call them and ask about delegate situations of this kind. I gave you a phone number.Use it. Call the staffer assigned to your state and ask how the procedure is done and if they have done it. Don't take my word for it ask them!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

73. LOL, you characterized what you say they said.

You didn't provide a verified transcript or a recording.

I don't believe your characterization, whether you believe it or not, and despite what you may think, the burden of proof is not on me to prove that the Kerry campaign is not acting 'very "Republican"' as you put it.

[saracat]

74. Through the looking Glass

Doea anyone record all their conversations? .Particularly with people they know? Believe what you want and don't let reality hit you on on your way out.Best of luck. Bye

[Feanorcurufinwe]

75. I'm just pointing out that your characterization of a conversation you say

took place is a far cry from corroboration.

[ieoeja]

37. Mending Fences?

Replacing less influential Democrats with more influential Democrats regardless of who it was they officially backed when their name was put on the ballot?

[saracat]

39. Maybe

but at the risk of alienating the most ardent of the Kerry supporters.And the Kerry supporters who were kicked off were in some cases more influential than the people who made the list.

[batesboys]

45. Same thing in my state

This is politics as usual. Not right but it happens all the time on both sides. Lot's of angry people here, too same as in past years.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

46. And will you reveal the dark secret of what state you are talking about?

lol

[saracat]

49. Don't answer that.

I don't need to know and it frustrates the heck out of some of the loiterers ! Giggle!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

53. Yeah it was a trap, better avoid it!

Wouldn't want to have the discussion related to the real world in any way, let's keep it in the realm of fantasy.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saracat]

47. Wow! An Intelligent Answer!

Finally.Someone who knows whereof I speak .Thank you. It may be politics as usual, but it is particularly vile this year with all the newbie participation and we need those people to win!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

64. But is it true?

This anonymous, uncorroborated post is just as credible as your original anonymous, uncorroborated post.


I'm not saying it's not true, I'm asking for some information that will help us to determine if it is true.

[Cuban_Liberal]

50. This doesn't pass the 'smell test', IMO.

Something's REALLY weird about the secrecy involving what state you're in. It just doesn't pass my 'gut check'... :shrug:

[saracat]

51. What doesn't pass "the smell test"

are all those people who "need" to know what state. Why the need to know? What would you do if you did know? Are you spies? I didn't ask for help.I asked a comparative question. There is something wrong here and its not me.People are asking for info for which they can have no use.WHY??????

[Cuban_Liberal]

52. Then why not just give it, and be done with it?

It's this air of mystery that shrouds it that has people questioning the credibility of your story. Furthermore, I can't believe that the Democratic Party can change the results of an election; if they tried to unseat a lawfully-elected delegate in MY state, I'd be you $10 to a stale donut that our AG would have this in court so fast it would make your head swim! That's the other part of your story that doesn't pass the 'smell test', frankly.

Tell a story that makes sense, and provide information that can be verified, if you want to be believed and receive advice.

[saracat]

54. Because I didn't say

"they are unseating lawfully elected delegates" I am saying they are choosing who can "run" to be Kerry Delegates in the At Large process. And most of the Kerry supporters were excluded by the campaign, who has the right to do so.But it still stinks. Because the people who will end up representing our state didn't support Kerry.They will vote for him but that isn't the point. And our state committee has only the choice of those selected candidates to vote for at large.I believe that our voice has been taken from up. There is no "mystery" look up the DNC Rules on delegate choice. This is politics , about which you seem to know very little, and I think it stinks.

[Cuban_Liberal]

55. This is the first time you've explained it CLEARLY.

If you'd said in your initial post what you said now, and explained it as clearly, this would have been a significantly shorter thread. What was the purpose in this rant? Why didn't you just say you don't like the party rules for a-large delegates, and be done with it?

I know at least as much about politics as you do, I assure you.

[saracat]

57. Thank you

but I don't have a problem with the Party Rules on At large Delegates. I have a problem with the Campaign,and probably the State Prty interfering with delegate choice outside of the elective processof our State Committee.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

61. Yeah, that's the part of your story that is so hard to believe

and that's why we want to find out if it's true.

I can easily believe that people in your state party have maneuvered to exclude Kerry supporters as delegates, instead, installing folks in the 'Good Old Boy' network. I find it very hard to believe that the Kerry campaign did so, however. For the simple reason that it would not be to their advantage if nothing else.

[saracat]

66. And that is the part I don't want

to believe either.But both the Party and Kerry HQ tell me it is true.However I believe it is more the State Party than Kerry HQ because I find it hard to believe that the campaign knew anything about many of the discredited people. Only the state Party could have been familiar with all those names. In fact I find it hard to believe the Campaign knows much about the selected names.They did say they knew about the Leiberman supporters. But I think that the State Party picked and the Kerry Campaign okayed it. But it is still wrong and will hurt in the long run.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

69. Well, at least you seem to understand why it is hard to believe.

[Orangepeel]

59. the campaign approved all the delegate candidates in my Fl county

for what it's worth, they didn't strike anyone in either of the congressional district caucuses hosted by my county, although state rules allowed them to strike, as long as they kept but 12 in each district (three candidates for each position)

[saracat]

62. And that is the way it should be.

It used to be that way here. I am glad that your state is fine.

[Orangepeel]

65. LOL!

I'll bet that's the first time anyone on this forum said that anything related to voting in Florida is fine!

I signed up as an Edwards delegate, and since he didn't get any in my district I wasn't on the ballot. But, like you, I would have been annoyed if they had struck anyone, especially those that had supported Kerry early!