NEVADA DEM CAUCUSES SCHEDULED FOR SHABBAT:COULD DISENFRANCHISE MANY JEWISH VOTERS

[restorefreedom]

THE NEVADA DEMOCRATIC CAUCUSES ARE SCHEDULED FOR SHABBAT, WHICH COULD DISENFRANCHISE MANY JEWISH VOTERS

Nevada is home to over 76,000 Jews, many of them observant. Yet the state’s upcoming Democratic caucuses are scheduled on Shabbat even as viable alternative times are available.

By Yair Rosenberg
February 10, 2016

On Tuesday night, Democratic presidential contender Bernie Sanders made history with a landslide victory over Hillary Clinton in the New Hampshire Democratic primary. His 60%-38% win, aside from being one of the most lopsided in the state’s history, made Sanders the first American Jew to win a presidential primary. And yet, in just 10 days, in the very next state to vote, the Democratic primary process is slated to disenfranchise many of Sanders’ fellow Jews.

The Nevada Democratic caucuses are scheduled for Saturday, February 20, at 11 a.m.—that is, on Shabbat. Because Nevada, like Iowa before it, selects its presidential nominees through the caucus system—which requires voters to show up in person, argue for their candidates, and then caucus for them—early absentee voting is not an option. As such, Sabbath-observant Jewish Democrats who cannot make it to the caucuses will have no say in what is shaping up to be a historic primary for both America and American Jews.

http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/197594/the-nevada-democratic-caucuses-are-scheduled-for-shabbat-which-could-disenfranchise-many-jewish-voters

[jwirr]

1. That is terrible. And as a caucus I am assuming that they

cannot absentee vote. Wonder who missed that when they scheduled it?

[restorefreedom]

4. right. but there is this....

According to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, in 2012, when the Republican presidential primary fell out on Shabbat, local party leaders ensured that there was a post-Sabbath caucus for those who could not attend earlier due to religious reasons.

so once again, as with superdelegates, the dems are even behind the republicans....sad.

[boston bean]

2. That damned Debbie Wasserman-Schultz

She did this on purpose. It is a conspiracy. They should cancel he caucuses.

Hey guess what? Caucuses are undemocratic. Thousands who have to work, the disabled and homebound are disenfranchised with every single one.

[restorefreedom]

7. no one is accusing her of that

and i agree that caucuses exclude people

from the article

Sanders himself is famously secular, but he and Hillary Clinton can surely recognize the message of inclusiveness that would be sent by rescheduling the caucuses, even if just to Saturday evening, after the Sabbath ends. (The recent Iowa caucuses took place on a Monday evening.) This would not require offsetting the entire schedule, either. According to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, in 2012, when the Republican presidential primary fell out on Shabbat, local party leaders ensured that there was a post-Sabbath caucus for those who could not attend earlier due to religious reasons.

Surely both Democratic candidates today, as well as the Democratic National Committee—headed by Florida’s Debbie Wasserman Schultz—recognize the unfortunate message that would be sent by maintaining the current schedule, when viable alternatives exist.

[boston bean]

10. I'don't think that will ever happen.

[restorefreedom]

12. i don't think it will either. but we should always be striving

to make voting for all people of all political stripes MORE easy and accessible.

[boston bean]

14. Ok so what about the people that have to work?

It is scheduled. It is the system in place. It will not be changed.

To change it for one group of people and not others is unfair as well.

[restorefreedom]

17. i agree with you that caucuses are exclusionary.

they should be replaced with primaries imo.

but a second session, like the republicans did, would allow the orthodox to vote and maybe also people who have conflicting work hours.

[boston bean]

21. And what about the homebound? Or the people working a double.

Or military members? The list goes on and on.

It cannot and will not be changed at this time due to preparation and scheduling. Changing it now would be a cluster.

[restorefreedom]

33. probably so. about 36% of orthodox are dems

according to pew. not. a huge number but i hate to see anyone excluded

absentee for caucuses...!

[Jim Lane]

59. White women were given the vote at a time when most blacks were still disenfranchised.

People aged 18, 19, and 20 had to wait even longer, until the 26th Amendment. Would you have opposed the 19th Amendment because "To change it for one group of people and not others is unfair as well"?

Adding a second session in the evening would accommodate some additional voters -- observant Jews, plus all the people who have to work Saturday morning. In addition to the emergency workers and others that you find in every state, many Nevadans work in casinos that operate 24/7. I'll offer the wild guess that the percentage of the work force that's on the job (or en route to work) at 11:00 a.m. on a Saturday is higher in Nevada than in any other state.

In a race with several candidates, holding multiple sessions might create practical problems because of the viability rule. (Suppose, in the first session, O'Malley is just above or just below the threshold. His supporters would have to consider the possibility that the second session will be markedly better or markedly worse for O'Malley, pushing him above or below the threshold.) With an effectively two-person race, however, this will only rarely be an issue. Both Clinton and Sanders should easily hit threshold in all or virtually all the precincts.

[artislife]

85. Native Americans were not citizens until 1924 and even that was sporadic.

My Grandfather was a citizen of this country even though they think the Ojibwas have been here a long time.Like really long.

By about A.D. 100, Native American inhabitants of the Upper Peninsula (Ojibwes) were using improved fishing techniques and had adopted the use of ceramics. They gradually developed a way of life based on seasonal fishing which the Chippewas/Ojibwes still followed when they met the first European visitors to the area. Scattered fragments of stone tools and pottery mark the location of some of these prehistoric lakeshore encampments

.
http://geo.msu.edu/extra/geogmich/ojibwe.html

[Jim Lane]

97. Thanks, good point! (n/t)

[noamnety]

37. "It is the system in place. It will not be changed."

This would make a great slogan for the DNC.

[boston bean]

38. It is, it will not be changed at this time. If they want it changed, do so a year before, not 10

days before the caucus.

[noamnety]

39. Again, great campaigning from the camp.

WHAT? You want us to do what? Add two hours to a meeting? We're gonna need at least a year to plan!!!

Gotta wonder how much advance notice they need for a real crisis.


---------
That combined with "We plan to continue disenfranchising lots of people. It's how we've always done business. It would be unfair to give equal rights to any one group as long as we're still discriminating against all these other ones!" is classic.

[boston bean]

42. This has been a crisis, imo, since caucuses were implemented.

I don't disagree they disenfranchise thousands.

That should be clear to you, if you took the time to actually read my responses.

But at this time, it will not be changed. It cannot be changed for one group as it addresses concerns of only one disenfranchised group. It's 10 days before the caucus, it aint going to change.

You want it changed, start on about it a bit before the thing is about to take place.

[noamnety]

54. "You want it changed, start on about it a bit before the thing is about to take place."

We can have a debate about why I, a random person on the internet, didn't work to change the DNC's policy a year ago.

And I can admit that I did nothing but complain about it, a little, online. Guilty as charged - and it sounds like you and I are likely in the same boat there.

But the more important question is what did Hillary do about it in the EIGHT years since she spoke out about how it was disenfranchising thousands of voters? What did she do, what did the chair of the DNC do about it? They are the ones who should be answering to that, not me.

When I asked in a different thread what Hillary had actually done about the Flint water crisis, the answer was that she helped bring it into the public eye by speaking about it. Well, she spoke about the caucuses being unfair eight years ago. Was that all she did? Was speaking about it effective in any way? Did she ever express to the head of the DNC that the current system is undemocratic? If not, why? If yes, why didn't the DNC do anything about it?

If they know for 8 years that a system which THEY control is disenfranchising voters, and they do nothing about it, what does that say about the DNC? To me it says they don't really want the less privileged (the homebound, those who are caretakers, those who don't have the luxury of taking an entire day off work to vote) to have an equal voice in the system.

[boston bean]

55. it wasn't challenged, and it's what we got. There is no changing it this cycle.

To do so would be making exceptions which would be unfair to others who don't get the same exception.

[noamnety]

63. okay, Marco.

Talking point received.

The most equitable thing at this point is to keep as many groups of voters disenfranchised as possible - got it.

[Kurska]

99. Better yet, new Clinton campaign slogan EOM

[boston bean]

26. Ps see the conspiracy taking shape below.

[restorefreedom]

45. interesting that in 2008

hillary campaign apparently complained about the same thing in (i think) iowa. see comment 23. i could not find any info about whether the date was changed. doesn't look like it. then again, hillary is not a jew making history.

also, quote below is very similar to dws big fat lie about scheduling the debates to "maximize exposure"



A party spokesman said the big event is set for that day and time to maximize participation.

"Saturday at 11 a.m. is the best time to increase access as much as possible for Democrats across Nevada to participate in our First in the West caucuses," said Stewart Boss, spokesman for the Nevada State Democratic Party. "Keeping this date is critical to preserving our early-state status in the presidential nominating calendar."

[Rocky the Leprechaun]

41. In Nevada, for next week, Shabbat ends at 6:05pm

So, delay the caucuses until 7pm. Problem solved.

[restorefreedom]

44. easy enough to do. nt

[John Poet]

19. Michigan's last Democratic caucuses in 2004

allowed us to mail in our ballots.... so it doesn't have to be that way.

We've been back to having a primary since then.

[jillan]

25. And you don't think this will effect Hillary?

[NowSam]

78. Very good point

The entire caucus process is extremely flawed.

So. It seems the Jewish vote is split between candidates anyway. Just like many women won't vote for Hillary just because she is a woman, many Jewish people won't vote for Bernie just because he is Jewish.

Bernie should win because he is the better candidate and that is that. Just my 2 cents.

[Fairness4all]

109. You are so right!

Wassermann is hard to stomach in all respects. She is obviously pro Hillary and has made no attempt to be subtle about it!
She needs to be taken to task on this! It would be so easy to change the time or even the date. But no! Now it's too late. Why didn't this surface until the day of the caucus?

[Paulie]

3. A bigger deal than I thought

Nevada caucus often lasts for the greater part of a day, preventing people who must work, who are sick, or who must take care of their children from casting their vote. Absentee voting is also barred, so active-duty Nevadan soldiers lose the opportunity to participate, as do locally-registered college students who leave the state during winter holidays. Nevada’s large active-duty population being barred from the caucusing process has prompted state legislators to rethink holding primary elections. The final criticism is the complexity of the rules in terms of how one's vote counts, as it is not a simple popular vote.

Caucus states...

[restorefreedom]

5. that might be for a ge

according to the article,

Because Nevada, like Iowa before it, selects its presidential nominees through the caucus system—which requires voters to show up in person, argue for their candidates, and then caucus for them—early absentee voting is not an option.


yes very disenfranchising

[Paulie]

6. Yep

I realized after posting. Thanks!

[restorefreedom]

8. i saw your update after i sent mine....:) nt

[jwirr]

9. We have a caucus also but someone was thinking when they

made the rules. We can register on site early in the evening, vote between 7-8 and then leave. They count the votes and announce the winner but you do not have to be there for that.

It is making it easier for me to get my family to go when they can leave as soon as they vote.

[restorefreedom]

11. that sounds like an improvement

this seems like an easy problem to solve, by making an evening session like the (gasp) republicans did.

[dsc]

13. I have complained about this problem for years

lots of people can't make these things, that is why primaries are better.

[restorefreedom]

15. yes. caucuses exclude people unnecessarily. nt

[HooptieWagon]

16. It seems to me, a caucus type mail ballot would work fine.

Just mark your first, second, and third choices and drop it in the mailbox. Inclusive to everyone.

[restorefreedom]

18. great idea! nt

[Eric J in MN]

20. The DNC should require all states to have primaries starting in 4 years.

There are many reasons why a person might not be able to show up at an exact time.

With primaries, people can vote all day.

[brooklynite]

24. ANY kind of Primary?

Open? Closed? Open to Independents as well? Let's not stop the complaining now...

[Eric J in MN]

27. Let the state parties decide if it's an open or closed primary, but let people vote all day. NT

NT

[Blue_Adept]

70. Oh the horror of the DNC making requirements

They'll make those state parties shape up.

[Half-Century Man]

22. DWS is Jewish, she represents a district with a large Jewish population

She knows about travel restrictions and labor restrictions on Shabbat. She knows Shabbat ends at sundown and the caucuses timing would exclude a large block of voters who might conceivably vote for another Jewish person.

The news paper article mentions no objection of appeal being raised by DNC at the state or national level. To be fair, such an objection might have been raised. Who would do so and what counterarguments might have been raised, we will never know. Given DWS's track record this election cycle, it is hard not to see attempts at voter suppression.

[glinda]

29. Voter suppression. Interesting. This should be big news really since it

sadly appears as such.

[Half-Century Man]

32. One answer would go a long way to explain things.

When was the schedule finalized?

[AZ Progressive]

30. DWS strikes again!

[moriah]

66. So you're saying for years now her plan has been...

... to disenfranchise Jewish voters by deliberately forcing the Nevada Democratic Party to hold their caucuses on Saturdays?

http://www.reviewjournal.com/politics/elections/nevada-democratic-caucus-overlooks-sabbath-observers

As I noted elsewhere, this isn't new for Nevada. The 2008 caucuses were also before sundown on Saturday.

Given that this IS a different election cycle with different candidates, I am still searching for anything suggesting that they change the time to after sundown has been stated or refused. In the interim, were I a Nevada resident or able to do something on the ground there, I would consult with Jewish rabbis in the area for guidance on ways to allow those who wish to participate a way that they can within their religious tenets and traditions.

For example, I know driving is usually totally prohibited. Is being driven by a non-Jewish volunteer as forbidden? If it's similar to Iowa, is writing ESSENTIAL to the caucuses (using a pen, writing, or erasing, or tearing of paper is sometimes forbidden) or could they sit with their supporters? If they do have a secret ballot, could observant Jewish caucus-goers be handed pre-marked ballots, and just put the one they support in the hat?

[Half-Century Man]

67. No, I'm saying without some indication that this has been opposed at some point.

It is difficult for me, as a Jewish person, to see this as other than voter suppression, intentional or otherwise.

FWIW, the information that this was an issue in 2008 came out after my initial post. The fact that nothing has been done to correct the situation even though the Jewish population has grown by 10,000 people since 2008 does nothing to alleviate my concerns.

[moriah]

69. Thanks. Do you think any of my ideas...

... to possibly lessen voter disenfranchisement could be implemented successfully? Since you are Jewish, you would know better than I what all restrictions are in place for observant Jewish people who want their voices heard...

I do care, particularly in this election but in all of them, about not suppressing voters of ANY race, color, creed, heritage, religion, or gender.

[Half-Century Man]

72. The simplest way is make a way to caucused after sunset.

A way to be remotely caucused, or be allowed to pre-caucus.

[brooklynite]

23. The Iowa Caucus was on Saturday, eight years ago...

...I don't recall anyone complaining.

[noamnety]

31. Here's a link for you.

It includes this gem:

"You have a limited period of time on one day to have your voices heard. ... That is troubling to me. You know in a situation of a caucus, people who work during that time -- they're disenfranchised. People who can't be in the state or who are in the military, like the son of the woman who was here who is serving in the Air Force, they cannot be present."

Guess who's doing the complaining about the unfairness of the caucus system.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4032588

See post 44 in that thread for complaints about scheduling the caucus to exclude the Jewish population - this isn't a new issue, or a last minute concern they should be scrambling to fix. They've had 8 years to figure out a solution (if they wanted to, that is.)

and another thread about it: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4050215

[restorefreedom]

34. i wish i could say i was surprised. nt

[enigmatic]

35. Thanks for this.

[LuvLoogie]

28. Voting and elections are secular processes.

[Petrushka]

57. Have a heart, Luv! (eom)

[LuvLoogie]

98. Thank you!

[mgmaggiemg]

36. maybe they should flip a coin....;)

sorry had to say it...I look at it this way...if it were held on sunday I wouldn't be complaining....church is really boring compared to elections....I think anyone who thinks they are going to hell (jews don't believe in hell i know) for skipping prayer to do their civic duty....you will not cease being jewish for being civic minded...and God will not strike you down....but hey if you can convince them to do it on sunday why not flip a coin?

[LWolf]

40. Are caucuses

ever scheduled on other religious holidays?

Shine a light on this.

[bklyncowgirl]

43. Was this date in place before or after Bernie Sanders became a candidate?

The fact that Clinton's opponent is a Jew does make this seem suspicious but it could be just the way they do it in Nevada. I suppose that a Saturday date would allow the majority of people, those working a Monday-Friday schedule to participate and that is a good thing.

I also wonder if orthodox Jews are going to be going for the secular, liberal Sanders or the avidly pro-Israel, Clinton. I suppose that pride in one of their own being a major presidential candidate could be a factor but anyone who thinks the Jewish vote is monolithic is probably wrong.

[restorefreedom]

46. one thing that has caught my eye

from the local news

Nevada, the third state to vote in the Democratic nominating calendar, is the first state in the West to make its choice. "Nevada is going to be the first early state that really looks like the rest of America," says Nevada Democratic Party spokesperson Stewart Boss.

that quite, by the guy in charge, is a rallying cry for the clinton campaign, basically trying to minimize bernie's success in iowa and nh

also, nevada was the state that a while back that there was some concern about because the partt was "renting" office space to the clinton campaign. and a quote above from boss is about picking the date to maximize exposure, which of course sounds just like dws big fat lie about the debates.

i don't want to put on, but it is starting to reek. a simple answer as to when they picked this date would answer the question, but like the true voter results in iowa, there is no way we will ever get that.

[restorefreedom]

47. 76,000 jews in nevada

many observant, according to the article. lets just say that many means 40%. that is 30,400 potential observant jews. according to pew, 36% of orthodox jews nationally consider themselves democrats, so 36% of the 30,400 is 10,944. so potentially 10,000 observant jews, in a state that is likely to be very close, may not be able to vote in a caucus with the first jew ever on the ballot.

yup, no problem there at all......

[thesquanderer]

62. It's fewer than that

While I don't like to see any group disenfranchised (and as others have pointed out, the caucuses tend to inherently do that), I think it is at least worth noting that Jews represent only about 2% of Nevada's population, and only a subset of those are so observant that they would have a problem voting on the Sabbath. According to http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/01/us/poll-shows-major-shift-in-identity-of-us-jews.html
only about 10% of Jews identify as Orthodox. So we're talking about .2% of the population (or .56% if you include Conservative as well). And I think even many of these most observant Jews would be able to caucus, if they lived within walking distance of the caucus location, and if caucusing does not require them to operate a device.

Also, the most orthodox tend to be more conservative/Republican than are Jews overall. So a good chunk of the affected population would be more likely to vote in the Republican caucus than the Democratic one, and that caucus is being held on a Tuesday.

So we're talking about a subset of a small group within a small group that are being affected by this.

Of course, it would be better if nobody was affected.

The caucus system probably discriminates most against the working poor, many of whom work night and weekend shifts (or who have second jobs that require that).

[treestar]

76. How ?

If they were held on Easter Sunday I would go vote

[restorefreedom]

82. you are not prohibited from operating a vehicle on easter sunday

the rules of observation for shabbat are quite particular and strict, including driving a car or using public transportation.

its not necessarily the voting, but getting there, that seems to be the primary issue

[Onlooker]

48. I doubt the religious Jews would support Bernie

Seems more likely to be that those who would be disenfranchised are more likely to support anti-gay, violently pro-Israel, sexist Republicans than a Democrat.

[restorefreedom]

49. could be. but about a third of observant jews identity as dems

according to pew research. that is potentially big, esp with a jewish candidate on the ballot.

but more are conservstive in general, as you point out.

[avaistheone1]

65. I think you are confusing religious Jews with orthodox Jews.

I doubt most religious Jewish people would have a problem supporting Bernie. And only 10% of the Jewish population is orthodox.

[Agschmid]

50. Yes, this is why caucuses suck.

There is always a disenfranchised voter group, don't forget all the people who have to work during the caucus they are also disenfranchised.

[restorefreedom]

51. and the infirm, homebound, etc etc etc etc

they are inherently UNdemocratic.

[Agschmid]

52. Yup.

[PatrickforO]

53. Classic Clinton politics. Oh, Bernie's a BAD Jew, AND just in case...

let's make it difficult for some Jewish voters to support him!

Like so many of these shitty things that have been coming up, it might sound like a good idea at the time but if we kick up a fuss about it, we might be able to force change.

Remember that Cyndi Lauper song, 'Time After Time?' This is just like that. Or the movie Groundhog Day. Same old shit, different day. Things that help the American people get attacked 24/7/365 on 1,000 different fronts. This way, they can dilute the strength of the people (which is the only thing the establishment has ever really feared).

[restorefreedom]

56. the thing is, if it was just one anomaly....

there would not be as much of a suspicion. but there hsve been soooooo many issues, scheduling problems, the problems in iowa, the debates, and everywhere there seems to be a clinton operative nearby.

the stench is just overwhelming.

[moriah]

60. Uh, as I said to the above poster...

... the Nevada Democratic Party has always held their caucuses on Saturdays. I sincerely doubt this was to disenfranchise Jewish voters, though I agree it sucks this year.

[restorefreedom]

61. if they have always had it on saturdays,

then this can't be first time people have complained about jewish or seventh day adventists being excluded.

they have had plenty of time over the years to pick a day. its hard to think they truly care about these two disenfranchised groups, if this has been the tradition.

even an alternating schedule with weekdays included would help.

[moriah]

64. I see this article bringing this up a week ago:

http://www.reviewjournal.com/politics/elections/nevada-democratic-caucus-overlooks-sabbath-observers

I think it's because of business interest - more people are off of work.

Would it violate Jewish tenets to merely ride with someone on the Sabbath? If so, maybe ride-shares could be arranged for voters.

[karynnj]

73. this affects only observant Orthodox Jews

Even riding in a car is not allowed - which is why they live in walking distance to the synagogue they attend.
A further problem happens if they have to sign in as writing is prohited.

This really is just another example of how it is impossible to design a caucus that works for everyone. Oddly, Sunday afternoon might have fewer problems as long as it after all church services. Are there any denominations that would limit activities on Sunday afternoon?

[restorefreedom]

80. i don't know about riding

if they could get non obervers to drive people that would be great, if its allowed.

just checked...its not allowed. if a life is not at stake, it is generally considered a prohibition, although some feel that eldery and frail people can accept a ride to get to synagogue

nice thought, though

[moriah]

81. Eh, could the argument be made that many lives are at stake depending on who...

... is elected to the White House?

[restorefreedom]

83. i completely agree! excellent point! nt

[moriah]

58. So now you're blaming her for holding the Nevada Caucuses...

... on the same day of the week they had them in 2008.

Yeah, always has been the purpose of Nevada caucusing on Saturday, I'm sure -- to keep Bernie from ever winning the White House if he ever ran.

Nice try.

[treestar]

77. Insane

To assert they were specifically scheduled for this reason.

Are there even pls on Jewish voters ?

Bernie leads with white people. That evil Hillary wod be better OSS scheduling th on a date disadvantageous to white people

[MineralMan]

68. And what about the Seventh Day Adventists?

They're affected, too.

It's all a conspiracy, for sure... :yawn:

[restorefreedom]

84. i think its unfair to both groups

i am pretty sure you live in a caucus state, but i have to say, not a fan. they make it very difficult for many people, including elderly, sickly, and homebound, to participate in democracy.

i would like to see all caucuses to be replaced by primaries, or at least have an absentee ballot option.

[MineralMan]

89. Our caucus in MN is on Tuesday, March 1, at 7 PM.

I have no doubt that some who might attend will not be able to. I don't disagree about the caucus system. I'd prefer a primary election. But, caucuses are how we do it in Minnesota. I'll be there. I have to be, since I'm the precinct chair. I just put a notice up on the precinct's website inviting people to caucus. I'm hoping for a good turnout. The website link is in my signature line.

[restorefreedom]

90. i hope for a good turnout, too. and no snow in MN on march 1 :) nt

[MineralMan]

91. There has been snow on the ground at

every caucus I've attended in MN. Usually, they've been in February. This year, they were moved to March 1 to make us a Super Tuesday state. Snow at the beginning of March is far from unlikely here. People still get to the caucus location, anyhow. Minnesotan's pay little attention to snow. It's our reality every Winter. Now, a major blizzard would hurt attendance, but I'll be there. Our caucus location is actually within walking distance for most people in precincts caucusing at that location. I do hope I don't have to walk, though, through a blizzard. I'm too damned old for that nonsense.

[restorefreedom]

93. lol. i guess i should know how hearty minnesotans are

from my years of listening to garrison keillor

[MineralMan]

95. I'm a transplant here, originally from California.

After 11 winters, I think I qualify as a Minnesotan. I now understand that it takes 24 hours to recover from a major blizzard, along with some shoveling and snowblower work. One day. We have one of those at least once a year. Anything less, and we simply ignore it and get on with our lives. Sort of. Sometimes. Maybe.

[restorefreedom]

96. wow, CA...major adjustment i would imagine

but sounds like you are one of them, now.

[KingCharlemagne]

71. Were the caucuses held Sunday morning, I suspect the Clunton campaign

would object, given that so many Latinos attend Catholic Mass then. Seems like caucuses by their time-specific nature are bound to exclude some voters.

No one says that American democracy is perfect.

[in_cog_ni_to]

74. How conveeeeeeeeenient!

Couldn't schedule it on a Sunday? For the Christian church goers?

Better yet, why not on a TUESDAY?

Won't matter, Bernie will kick her arse in Nevada too.

Though, if it was me, I could make an exception and go vote. G-D would make an exception for Bernie too!

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[restorefreedom]

86. from what i know of judaism, which isn't a ton,

saving human life is paramount and basically supercedes all religious law. as one poster in this thread correctly pointed out, a good argument could be made that many peoples wellbeing and very lives depend on the outcome of this election, particularly the ge. and since the ge will be won or lost depending on our nominee, voting could be argued as a moral obligation. i don't know how that would fly with judaic law, however.

[in_cog_ni_to]

92. I think exceptions can be made for important things like this,

but ask 2 Jews about it and you'll get 3 different opinions. There's NEVER one explanation for anything.

IMCPO, this election is too important to Not Go vote....for any reason.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[restorefreedom]

94. agreed. nt

[treestar]

75. Oh come on

Last edited Sat Feb 13, 2016, 06:22 PM - Edit history (1)

People can vote. Cite a specific Jewish doctrine that prohibits voting.

[restorefreedom]

87. no driving on shabbat

or riding in public transportation. the getting there is the issue, unless one lives close enough to walk.

[treestar]

105. No exceptions?

Say there is a medical emergency and need to go in ambulance, certainly there are exceptions.

[restorefreedom]

106. lifesaving is always an exception

from the little i know of judaism, life protection is paramount and supercedes rabbinic and torah law if the need exists.

[treestar]

107. Might be worth looking into when it comes to voting

Maybe there is an exception.

It would be tough in the long run to find any day there is no religious problem. Yet this should have been realized or brought up. Each state has these primaries on a particular day, so this one should be changed. Odd it wasn't realized before.

[restorefreedom]

108. i did try and find out about voting

it looks like the primary issue is the transportation of getting there.but given what is at stake in this country, a compelling case could be made that voting is a moral obligation for the greater good.

i would love to see a high profile rabbi or scholar weigh in on this.

yes, they should change it or allow an absentee "ballot" for those who cant make it

[Autumn Colors]

79. Ugh ... too bad they couldn't just change the time

Am I right in assuming that Shabbat ends on Sat. at sunset?

[restorefreedom]

88. correct. yes, moving it to 7 or 7.30 pm would solve the problem

at least for jewish voters, dont know about seventh day adventists

such an easy fix, too......

[DisgustedTX]

100. Vote or don't. Religion need not apply.

Simple.

We can't have it both ways. Get religion out of the political process- all of it.

[Beaverhausen]

101. They were on Saturday in 2008 too

Caucases disenfranchise lots of voters. They are archaic and should be stopped.

[restorefreedom]

102. "they are archaic and should be stopped". WORD!!!! nt

[Beaverhausen]

103. But you only seem to have a problem with the fact that this one is held on Saturday

I guess disenfranchising people any other day of the week is OK with you?

[restorefreedom]

104. you might not have read my comments before

i will and have slammed the caucus process at every opportunity. this one seemed to pose yet another obstacle that i thought worth mentioning.