State explains why Bill Clinton's polling place visits were legal

[MADem]

Last edited Sat Mar 5, 2016, 12:42 AM - Edit history (1)

This will piss some conspiracy theorists off, but that's life. MA law has ALWAYS favored pols in this regard--and the smart ones, as I've said, know exactly where "the line" is:

http://www.wcvb.com/politics/state-explains-why-bill-clintons-polling-place-visits-were-legal/38282842

"No one was prevented from voting," McNiff said about the New Bedford event. "The city and voters were notified well in advance of the event."

Additionally, Galvin is quoted by the New York Times as explaining that poll workers were warned in advance of Clinton's arrival. He told the newspaper that they took the extra precaution because, "You don't usually get a president doing this."...Clinton broke no laws during his visits to the interior of polling places because he was not handing out any flyers or voting materials for Hillary Clinton. He was seen shaking hands with workers in West Roxbury, but not handing out information.

Massachusetts state law prohibits handing out or posting flyers within 150 feet of the door to a polling place. Collecting signatures for petitions or nomination papers is also prohibited within 150 feet of a polling place.

"Galvin" who is quoted extensively, is the Secretary of the Commonwealth. He's in a position to speak authoritatively.

[SusanCalvin]

1. Legal, OK you convinced me.

But from what I understand, it did inconvenience a lot of voters. It impressed me unfavorably, for what my opinion is worth.

[Xipe Totec]

3. Me too. But in the grand scheme there are bigger fish to fry

Big Dawg is now a lap dog.

[SusanCalvin]

8. Heh.

[2pooped2pop]

21. Always been a dirty dog

And a horn dog,

[MADem]

51. Well, it isn't me doing the convincing--it's the state.

No one was blocked from voting--you just have to consider the source in that regard.

I suspect that anyone who didn't support HRC and were set in that view didn't like it, but that's to be expected. That wasn't his target audience.

I've been at polling places where someone in a tight race was out in front shaking hands--it is so common here, in big races and small. Other states have different rules.

[virgogal]

53. He couldn't carry a sign or voting materials but

just his presence is the same as a sign------everyone knows who he is.

Legal,but not fair.

[MADem]

56. Bernie is pretty familiar and so is his wife--they could have done the same

and they were not very far away, either.

[virgogal]

59. Most voters would not recognize Bernie's wife but everyone would know him.

Imagine the brouhaha if he had shown to just to shake hands and chat-----inside the voting site.

Very interesting point you brought up.

[MADem]

61. Clinton didn't go alone--he was escorted by the mayors of

Boston and New Bedford.

[panader0]

103. They both have too much class to do that.

[MADem]

109. No--they come from a state with a population smaller than the size of the city of Boston.

It's not hard to get in contact with your voting public when your universe of voters is so tiny. It's more of a challenge when you're trying to reach millions, not thousands.

They do a great "mega" rally, but they're behind the curve when it comes to mega-GOTV.


And if that's "no class" then you'd better line the Kennedys, Kerry, Warren, and every major high viz politician in MA up and excoriate them, too.

This is what MA politicians do--they grip, and they grin. They say "Nice ta see ya" and "Thanks for all ya sup--po-at," and things of that nature.

[beac]

93. Of course, Galvin is conveniently ignoring that Clinton was wearing an "H" pin and using

a BULLHORN that surely penetrated the 150-ft electioneering barrier.

Galvin is just trying to make this go away.

And we all know that Bill Clinton is effectively above the law, so nothing will be done about it and the asshole will probably do it again in some other state.

[SusanCalvin]

98. ^THIS^

[MADem]

193. Sorry ^THIS^ is just not true. He wore no "pin." He wore a plain brown suit and it

is quite obviously DEVOID of any "pins" or labels.

See, it's sad when people have to invent stuff to make a point. I'm sure that "Waaah--he had on a PIN" routine was passed on from some OTHER web page, and not invented by anyone HERE....but people who have agendas do make stuff up, put it on social media, and people will believe it, but pictures don't lie. There was no pin. There was no button. There was no bumper sticker, flyer, or anything of that nature brought to that rally or those poll visits by Bill Clinton.





The rally was previously scheduled, cleared with MA election officials, and that AND the poll visits were announced on radio, TV, newspapers and social media (I've posted links elsewhere in this thread). The only people feigning outrage are a few redditers trying to make something out of nothing to justify a serious underperformance by their candidate. The dog just isn't hunting.

[SusanCalvin]

194. Sorry I was unclear.

I was referring to the bullhorn, which was definitely true.

[MADem]

197. That wasn't illegal either. You can read his precise comments, at the park, down the street,

in a venue that was requested and approved well in advance, at the links I have provided elsewhere in this thread.

[MADem]

149. You can keep banging the drum, but he broke no laws. He was careful.

I know it upsets you, but that's the way it is. His speech was about the PAST. He colored within the lines.

He was escorted by Mayors who do this kind of thing for a living. They KNOW where the lines are.

Sanders eschewed the option to do the same thing.

Are you mad because BC thought to do it, or are you mad because the Sanders team didn't? Or both?

[beac]

198. though it is probably pointless to reply to your condescending

reply, I am mad because Clinton DID NOT "color inside the lines" (the "H" pin alone proves that.) I am not "mad" at all, in fact. What I am us disgusted by Bill Clinton and his shady tactics, just as I was by him in 2008 when he behaved in a similar unethical manner.

The fact that people who support Hillary cannot admit that Bill Clinton can be a real nasty asshole on the campaign trail is very sad indeed.

[MADem]

203. Your fictional "H" pin (that he was not wearing on his plain brown suit)

did not exist. There are photographs and video of his appearances. I urge you to examine them. I also urge you to get a clear understanding of what constitutes electioneering in Massachusetts law.

And "offering facts" is not a synonym for "condescending."

You don't like my facts, so you are irritated. I can understand that--partisanship can produce strong emotions.

The fact--and it is a fact--remains, he did nothing wrong.

If you believe he did, take it up with Bill Galvin.

[beac]

205. The condescension didn't come from "offering facts"

but from your implication that I was only "mad" that Bernie hadn't pulled the same shady crap as Clinton.

Look, in general, I like you on DU. I think it's better that we stop this back and forth now.

But I would ask that you at least TRY to understand why I was offended by your post and why people were offended by Bill's actions. Ironically, he may have done Hillary more harm than good in the end.

P.S. I know this is replying extremely late in the game but I have been traveling overseas with big gaps in wifi access.

Peace,
beac

[Thinkingabout]

152. What about those chanting Bernie Bernie Bernie very near where Clinton was standing?

[beac]

200. 2 wrongs =/= a right.

And if that is your best defense for Bill Clinton's behavior, it's BEYOND weak.

[Betty Karlson]

199. ^^ THIS!^^

[snowy owl]

81. Did anybody really think his conduct would be even questioned?

Of course not. Influence - isn't that the intention? What else was he there for? More corruption.

[Armstead]

174. Legal but not ethical

[erlewyne]

179. He did the slick willie stoop ...

How low can you go slick willie?

Can you do the NAFTA shuffle"

[Agnosticsherbet]

2. That should put all these pesky complaint to rest.

It won't, of course.
People need outrage, so they will outrage.

[SusanCalvin]

6. No, I'm still pretty annoyed with him.

"Inconsiderate" is the word that comes to my mind.

If it wasn't electioneering, then it was inconveniencing a lot of people for no reason.

Well, I guess some were thrilled to see him. I've never seen the point of being in proximity to people who don't know me from Adam, myself, but my husband has always said I'm not like most people.

[2pooped2pop]

22. Tried to manipulate the outcome

[SusanCalvin]

24. Of course. Otherwise, why was he there? nt

[2pooped2pop]

44. To be fair, i usually takeva bullhorn along when I just want to say hi to new people

To be polite in case some are hard of hearing.

[MADem]

62. No, that rally was to thank campaign workers. It was scheduled,

the town knew about it, the election officials of the state knew as well, and it was not an ad hoc event.

http://www.wcvb.com/politics/state-explains-why-bill-clintons-polling-place-visits-were-legal/38282842

[marions ghost]

67. You can thank workers in other places

It was arrogant and unethical.

[MADem]

69. Sanders could have done the same thing, and he was nearby.

It wasn't arrogant--it was appreciated--and it was not unethical.

MA politicians have done this kind of thing for over a century. He was escorted by local mayors.

There's just no there, there.

The opponent's supporters aren't going to like it, but no one expects them to.

[marions ghost]

74. It was not appreciated by many apparently...

"Sanders could have done the same thing"--you say

Consider that the key distinction is that --he DIDN'T. I don't think Sanders is crass enough or stupid enough. It was a very bad move politically. And it was highly unethical.

They need to update the laws in MA. Way behind, if they actually allow this kind of hucksterism.

[onenote]

76. actually election laws are moving in the other direction

For example, a few years ago Virginia amended its law to clarify that a voter can wear a hat, button, tee-shirt, etc. with the name of a candidate or political slogan.

That obviously wouldn't apply to Clinton, who wasn't a voter, but its indicative of a loosening of election laws.

[marions ghost]

101. Must be Republican changes

--they want LOOSE election laws, for sure.

[MADem]

110. No--Republicans want tight laws. IDs, maybe two forms, let's make sure your

signature matches, hell, poll taxes and tests would be fine with them, too.

[marions ghost]

111. Of course laws that restrict voting are bad

--we are talking here about laws that make it uncomfortable for voters to vote by allowing candidates and their surrogates to grandstand at polling places. Those kind of "loose" laws are not good, right?

[MADem]

113. When I went to vote I had to run a gauntlet of people holding signs.

I mean, come on--get over it. Even the six foot by eight foot Trump sign (and that is how big it was, at least) held up by a bunch of obese goons struggling against the occasional gust of wind didn't move me. My mind was made up.

That's how we do things here in the commonwealth--I've often (especially during midterms) had the opportunity to meet a candidate, usually someone running for a minor, local office, at a polling place. That's politics.

It's not like there was anyone leaning over my shoulder telling me which candidate to pick.

[marions ghost]

121. No, I'm sorry

I'm not used to this and I think the potential for abuse is clear. It could discourage voters from even going to the polls, fearful of being approached. There's no justification for it. Bullhorn behavior is for rallies and political events, not the polls. Especially true if it's an ex-president and his entourage which always is a big deal. No, I don't appreciate the crass photo-op/ rah rah Hillary bullshittery that Bill and Co pulled in Massachusetts. S/he's your candidate, I guess you have to defend this. But it's outrageous--and I'm certainly among many who feel the same way.

Also I don't appreciate calling people "obese goons." Even tRump supporters. I feel sorry for them.
I want their lives to be better, too. I just happen to believe that Bernie Sanders is their best bet, and for the country as a whole. Why hate people of limited perspective? That's ugly and otherizing.

[MADem]

123. Oh please--is this "abuse?"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511415277#post122

It's always "OK" if it's someone you like, the crime of the century if it is someone you don't like.

[marions ghost]

130. What this looks like to me...

re. your pictures of Elizabeth Warren--

--Elizabeth Warren went to her home polling place and greeted some of her supporters. Just like Sanders did in Vermont.

--Bill Clinton, however, took it upon himself to go to 4 polling places where he was NOT voting and proceeded to campaign for Hillary in a very disruptive way, creating a huge spectacle with a megaphone and tying up traffic, which a celebrity ex-president would of course do. Blatant disregard for other voters.

It's different.

[MADem]

134. It's NOT illegal, it's not "unethical," and it is allowed under MA law.

You think Warren wasn't "creating a huge spectacle?" Of course she was--and people loved it. So did the media--they were ALL there.

Except, of course, the idiots who were voting for Scott Brown. They hated it, and found it "unethical" and "wrong" and what-have-you. And they no doubt felt she was blatantly disregarding other voters, too--not just when she voted in the general election, but in the primary, as well:



It's NOT different.

It's MA law.

[marions ghost]

135. She went to ONE polling place

--her precinct where she voted--right or wrong?

If wrong, provide more pix. Show how she went around doing what Bill did.

[MADem]

137. I don't know that for an absolute fact. And so what?

In for a penny, in for a pound.

Not sure why you think "one" makes it "better...?"

When it's not "bad" in the first place.

This is a custom in MA. If you are unaware of it, you don't watch television on election day.

[marions ghost]

173. Going to your own polling place

and greeting your group of supporters is one thing. That's a tradition everywhere.

Making the rounds of 4 polls with your megaphone when you are not voting at all there--is another thing. I doubt there was any need to rope off the street for Elizabeth Warren.

I doubt all MA residents would agree with this abuse of an old "custom."

Compared to what happens where I am, what he did was very wrong. I don't see any way of defending it.

[MADem]

83. Sanders was a short plane ride from Boston or Worcester, where he

could have done grip and grins in stronghold precincts to get voters to turn out. It's not crass and unethical. This kind of thing goes back before the days of Mayor Curley.

He chose not to do this. That's FINE--but it's not like he was prevented...and he was just one state over on Super Tuesday. And he has a plane now. He decided to hang out with the family at home instead. But no one told him he couldn't do a little handshaking down in MA.

As another poster has noted, the tendency wrt election law is to allow more speech, not prevent it. BC stayed well within the rules, and had as his escorts two MA mayors who know what a pol can do and what they can't.

[marions ghost]

99. It is a bad tendency if that is true--

--I see you're from the school of "whatever you can get away with is fine."

[MADem]

116. I think MORE speech is preferable to LESS speech.

And that was some rude snark with the "whatever you can get away with..." comment.

It's how WE do things here. And we have done it this way for eons. BC ain't the first by a long shot, nor will he be the last.

Sanders was a twenty minute plane ride from Boston--he chose not to grip-and-grin either there or Worcester or Springfield. His choice.

[radical noodle]

88. Sanders has done it.

The difference is no one knew it because Clinton supporters didn't raise hell about it.

[marions ghost]

100. Where?

No evidence. With Billy Bullhorn there's plenty of evidence.

[2pooped2pop]

87. Mhm were the campaign workers outside then?

Was the guy he took his pic with who had just voted a campaign worker?. Were there events also scheduled at the other places he interfered at? Has there ever been a thank you party during the actual vote! By a past potus no less?

[MADem]

112. Everything he did--from greeting poll workers, to shaking hands with voters, to

holding his NB thank you rally-- was legal. The commonwealth secretary has said as much. And it wasn't impromptu--it was scheduled.

People don't understand the laws so they made assumptions about what is allowed and what is not allowed.

He traveled w/mayors for a reason--THEY kept him out of trouble.

Sanders could have done the same if he felt like it.

[2pooped2pop]

166. They kept him out of trouble all right

Because all of the aspen trees turn together because they are joined at the roots. Someone posted the rules as they ate written on here. Perhaps you could find them and read them. He broke the law. But he's a Clinton. Laws don't apply.

[MADem]

169. ....Laws don't apply to Warrens, either? smh

[NanceGreggs]

64. And he "tried to manipulate the outcome" ...

... exactly how? And to what end?

Do you think his mere presence caused Bernie supporters to vote for Hillary? If that's the case, then I guess the real problem would be how easily manipulated BS supporters are.

By your estimation, how many Bernie voters who show up at the polls are likely to turn into HRC voters just because Bill shows up?

If he was inconveniencing people by his presence, he was inconveniencing people who were there to vote for HRC as well as Bernie. Or are you contending that somehow only BS supporters were "inconvenienced"?

I'd be really interested in how Bill tried to "manipulate the outcome" - fascinating stuff, I'm sure.

[Fearless]

4. I contend it's extraordinarily unethical. Basically like her entire campaign.

[CharlotteVale]

7. +1

[RoccoR5955]

19. Funny thing...

I looked up the definition of "unethical" in my Funk and Wagnels and saw Billy Ray Joe Bob Clinton's picture right next to it!

[MADem]

63. But it's not. It was completely within the guidelines of MA law. Sanders could have

done the same, and he was close enough to MA to be in Boston in minutes by air. http://www.travelruler.com/flying-time/from/Burlington,+VT/to/Boston,+MA

[Fearless]

72. You're a smart person. You know what "unethical" means so don't play games.

It is unethical.

I did not say illegal.

Unethical.

[MADem]

118. And you are one too--you know what "State law" means, I presume?

How about "A tradition that dates back over a hundred years?"

In MA, you see pols at the polls. If this upsets you, oh well. Don't move here.

It is NOT "unethical" -- it's how we do things. Everyone, from Mayor Curley to Mike Dukakis to every Kennedy who ever ran for office to John F. Kerry to Elizabeth Warren has done some version of this.

We're not afraid of 'speech' here in the Commonwealth.

And Sanders could have gotten off his best intentions, fired up his brand new campaign plane, and been in the city in 20 minutes. He chose to not do that--but NOTHING--absolutely NOTHING, save his own lack of motivation--prevented him from so doing.

[Fearless]

120. I also live here

And it's still unethical.

[MADem]

122. You've not complained over the last hundred years, have you?

These were taken outside the Graham and Parks School in Cambridge (which is a designated polling place) on election day. Note EW's "I Voted" sticker on her jacket.

[Fearless]

133. I would complain regardless of who did it.

It's still unethical, why is this hard to understand??

[MADem]

136. It's not unethical--why is this so hard to understand?

Politicians do this in MA ALL THE TIME.

It's common. It's expected. And when they aren't there, they send surrogates.

Can't believe you're acting all "Shocked, shocked..." about this. This is par for the course.

smh.

Look at this UNETHICAL woman, talking to the PRESS right smack dab in front of a polling place! Holding a rally! Encouraging her supporters!! SHAME ON HER!!!!





and for the irony-impaired.

[Fearless]

142. The frequency at which it happens does not change the fact

It is unethical.

It is coercion.

[MADem]

143. No, it isn't unethical, and it is certainly not coercion. smdh!!!

If you're so easily "coerced" by someone walking around buying baked goods and thanking poll workers, and patting little kids on the head, you have other issues. If someone holding a rally for campaign workers can cause you to change your vote, you'd best vote absentee.

I walked by a massive Trump sign on my way to vote.

It did NOT cause me to vote for him!


I shook hands with John Kerry on election day once!

I would have voted for him ANYWAY!

[Fearless]

146. You really have no idea.

[MADem]

148. Mirror, mirror....right back atcha.

I know the law.

I know he didn't break it.

[COLGATE4]

144. Let's get serious for a moment here. How

in the name of all that's holy is that "coercion"??????

[Fearless]

145. Really now?

Then why go at all?

[COLGATE4]

147. Try reading what 'coercion' actually is.

co·er·cion
kōˈərZHən,kōˈərSHən/Submit
noun
the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats

[MADem]

158. "If you don't vote for mah wife, Ah'm NOT gonna buy this cinnamon roll!"

"And then the Catholic School band won't have enough money for their field trip!!!!"

[COLGATE4]

181. You got it. Clear case of coercion! nt

[Hoyt]

5. Sanders' supporters will just find something else to whine about.

[me b zola]

36. Nah, but waiting anxiously for you all to have a hernia when Trump does it in the general

[NurseJackie]

9. Ha! :-D

[HERVEPA]

40. Very deep and articulate. Impressive in-depth analysis.

[Baitball Blogger]

10. Prepare for the copycats.

[madfloridian]

11. Of course they would say it's okay if Bill Clinton does it. He's President Clinton.

Frankly it was really wrong for him to be at those polling places. It did hold up voting. Some elderly and disabled had trouble waiting.

It was not okay to inconvenience and influence others like that.

It is not a fair tactic.

[SusanCalvin]

17. IOKIYAC. nt

[catnhatnh]

12. Your link is not working

Mc Niff is lying
"No one was prevented from voting," McNiff said about the New Bedford event. "The city and voters were notified well in advance of the event." -
unless you can explain how the voters were notified "well in advance".

Only a partial quote is made of the law and Galvin never addresses the rally with bullhorn 75 feet from the front door.

[2pooped2pop]

23. Didn't he go to four places?

[MADem]

66. Sorry--I mended it.

The rally (to thank workers) was scheduled and not illegal. He wasn't collecting signatures or handing out campaign literature.


FWIW, I have shaken hands with candidates inside a polling location (and then gone on to vote for their opponent).

This is not an uncommon thing.

[bkkyosemite]

13. It was an intentional tactic to use his influence to get the vote for her.

[SusanCalvin]

18. I'm quite sure that was his intention.

Or to disrupt the Bernie vote.

[onenote]

77. And how exactly did he do that?

If he inconvenienced voters, he inconvenienced voters who supported Clinton as well as Sanders.

And, while there are no specific precinct numbers available, the towns in which he appeared voted overwhelmingly for Clinton, so if anything logic would suggest he may have inconvenienced more Clinton voters than Sanders voters.

I have said all along that I didn't think it was appropriate for him to go to a polling place. But the reaction to it has been wildly over-the-top, including the launching of a petition drive that falsely claims that Clinton's actions constituted a "Third Degree Voter Violation Felony", which is a bald faced lie given that Massachusetts doesn't even rank crimes by "degree" and there is no such felony on the books. Mass ranks crimes by "Class" (as in Class A, Class B) and almost all election law violations are misdemeanors. Indeed, while the law prohibits electioneering within 150 feet of the polling place, the penalties for election law violations do not include a separate penalty for such activities -- it falls under "disorderly conduct" at the polls, a misdemeanor that requires a showing that the individual has persisted in their behavior after having been on notice by an election official that they need to stop. The penalty: $100 fine or a month in jail.

But,hey, it sounds so much more serious to claim that he was guilty of a "Third Degree Voter Violation Felony" so why not just make it up.

[SusanCalvin]

91. Didn't say it was the result,

And perhaps his intentions were not as clear-cut as I was inferring.

But, as has been said elsewhere, the bullhorn bit was sure a campaign rally. I think that was arrogant and tacky, if nothing else.

[onenote]

180. "infer" is not a synonym for "I am quite certain"

But if you're beginning to view this with a bit more open mind then good.

We agree it was arrogant and tacky. It was Bill's supercharged ego at work, nothing more, nothing less, imo.

[SusanCalvin]

182. I am aware of the meaning of words,

And I do try to keep my mind open, thank you.

[BlueMTexpat]

107. +1! Good post. eom

[Lucinda]

14. KNR

[TheBlackAdder]

15. Gee, If you want something done right, you've got to do it yourself! Here!

.

Activities in the Polling Location
On Election Day, certain activities are prohibited within the polling location and within 150 feet of the polling place. General Law chapter 54, section 65 prohibits within 150 feet of a polling location, among other things, the posting, exhibition, circulation, or distribution of material--including pasters, stickers, posters, cards, handbills, placards, pictures or circulars--intended to influence the action of the voter. G. L. 54, § 65 (2002 ed.). Consistent with the activities restricted by statute, the implementing regulations prohibit the solicitation of votes for or against, or any other form of promotion or opposition of, any person or political party or position on a ballot question, to be voted on at the current election. 950 C.M.R. § 54.04(22)(d). Accordingly, a person standing within 150 feet of a polling location, including observers in the polling location, may not: hold any campaign sign; hand any person literature intended to influence the voter’s action at the polls; wear any campaign buttons or identifying signage; solicit a person’s vote for or against a candidate or question on the ballot; or, distribute stickers. Circulators of nomination papers, initiative and referenda petitions are also restricted from soliciting signatures within 150 feet of a building entrance door to a polling place. G. L. c. 54, § 65 (2002 ed.). This is true even where the nomination papers, initiative petition or referendum have nothing to do with the current election.

General Law chapter 54, section 65, does not limit the voter themselves from bringing material into the voting booth. They can bring preprinted brochures or pamphlets, or their own notes. The voter may also bring with them a sticker, handed to them on their way into the polls by one of the write-in candidates, to affix to the ballot. However, there are criminal penalties for exhibiting such materials. Accordingly, voters should not display campaign literature while in the polling location. Additionally, it is incumbent on the election officers to check the voting booths regularly to see that no one has left any materials behind. 950 C.M.R. § 54.04(22)(b).

Political Signs
Signs intended to influence the action of voters are subject to both statutory and
regulatory directives. It is well settled that no person may hold a sign that attempts to
influence the voter, or leave such a sign unattended, within 150 feet of a polling location. G. L. c. 54, § 65 (2002 ed.). However, other issues often arise on Election Day relative to the holding and posting of unattended signs. There are no state statutes addressing unattended signs on public property. However, if the sign is on state land, for example on a rotary or highway, the state police will remove it where they believe it to be a traffic or safety hazard. On the municipal level, it is quite common for a by-law to exist, either regulating or forbidding the posting of signs on public property.

Frequently municipalities also have by-laws regulating the posting of signs on private property. By-laws regulating the posting of political signs have included regulation of: the size of the sign, the number of signs on a piece of property, and the time period during which the sign may be exhibited. If the municipality has such a by-law, it is the law in that municipality, and must be complied with. Please check with city or town hall for copies of such rules.

It's that ANY OTHER FORM clause that apparently confuses people! Some people, some really STUPID people!


http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/elepdf/eledaylglsum.doc


It's an MSWord document.



.

[SusanCalvin]

27. Well, Bill *is* a walking piece of Hillary swag... nt

[Raster]

29. As pointed out elsewhere, Bill Clinton IS CAMPAIGN PARAPHERNALIA...

...but not to worry, he was not there to influence anyone's vote. And that bullhorn, HE ALWAYS CARRIES ONE wherever he goes. You just never know when you are going to have to address a crowd.

[SusanCalvin]

32. .

[madfloridian]

35. .....

[Vattel]

41. Interesting

The article only links to the statute itself (sec 65), which just talks about pamphlets and posters and stickers and such. But the implementing regulations prohibit pretty much any promotion of a candidate within 150 feet of the polling place. Was Clinton promoting Hillary? Nah, can't be.

[TheBlackAdder]

42. Code of Massachusetts Regulations 950 C.M.R. § 54.04(22)(d)

.


http://www.mass.gov/courts/case-legal-res/law-lib/laws-by-source/cmr/900-999cmr/950cmr.html

(22) Candidates' and Their Workers' Rights and Restrictions.
(a) Observers. To achieve the legal requirement that the election be held in public view, observers shall be allowed inside the polling place, outside the guard rail, unless they are disorderly or obstruct the access of voters. Observers may keep notes including marked voting lists. If there are so many observers in the polling place that they obstruct voters, they may be asked to cooperate in collecting information. The warden may exclude from the polling place any person who is disorderly or who obstructs the access of voters.
(b) Voting Booths Clear of Campaign Literature. Election officers shall check the voting booths regularly to see that no one has left any literature. The polling place must be kept clear of any campaign material.
(c) Campaign Material. No campaign material intended to influence the vote of a voter in the ongoing election, including campaign literature, buttons, signs, and ballot stickers, may be posted, exhibited, circulated, or distributed in the polling place, in the building where it is located, on the building walls, on the premises where the building stands, or within 150 feet of an entrance door to the building. As used in 950 CMR 54.04(22)(c) and
M.G.L. c. 54, § 65, the "premises" where or on which the building stands means only the grounds in the immediate vicinity of the building, and does not include the entirety of a large parcel of real property. No person shall collect or solicit signatures on nomination papers or petitions of any kind within 150 feet of an entrance door to the building. The police officer shall enforce this rule under the direction of the warden. Access to the polling place must be open and unobstructed and the voters may not be hindered.
(d) Activities at Polling Place. Within 150 feet of a polling place as defined in 950 CMR 54.04(22)(c), no person shall solicit votes for or against, or otherwise promote or oppose, any person or political party or position on a ballot question, to be voted on at the current election.

.

[onenote]

79. There is no specified penalty for violating 54.04 (or 53.03, which is similar)

The only way engaging in such conduct becomes a criminal act is if the person engaging in it refuses to stop after being put on notice by an election official, in which case they can be charged with disorderly conduct at the polls and would be subject to a $100 fine or one month in jail.

https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleVIII/Chapter56/Section46

[TheBlackAdder]

96. There are several other issues at play...

.

Within the 150 foot distance, entering the polling place, with Secret Service security, since no voting transpired...

https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleVIII/Chapter56/Section29

Section 29. Whoever wilfully and without lawful authority hinders, delays or interferes with, or aids in hindering, delaying or interfering with, a voter while on his way to a primary, caucus or election, while within the guard rail, while marking his ballot or while voting or attempting to vote, or endeavors to induce a voter, before depositing his ballot, to disclose how he marks or has marked it, shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars or by imprisonment for not more than one year.

===


Entering the polling place with Secret Service protection...


https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleVIII/Chapter56/Section30

Section 30. Whoever wilfully obstructs the voting at a primary, caucus or election shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars.

===

Inside the polling place, with Secret Service protection...

https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleVIII/Chapter56/Section30

Section 48. Whoever interferes, or aids or abets any person in interfering, with an election commissioner, city or town clerk, election officer, or director of the count or assistant appointed under section six of chapter fifty-four A, in the performance of his duties shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars or by imprisonment for not more than one year.

===


And... for the local officials:


https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleVIII/Chapter56/Section36

Section 36. No person in the service of the commonwealth or of any county, city or town shall use his official authority or influence to coerce the political action of any person or body, or to interfere with any election.

Violation of any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of not less than one hundred nor more than one thousand dollars.

.

[MADem]

141. He didn't interfere with anyone voting or accessing the polling place, though.

The cops have said as much.

The only people griping about this are people who want to make a stink for blatantly political reasons.

Do you seriously think that he was able to "deprive" Sanders voters, while letting the Hillary ones through?

Come on. If he were preventing people from voting, he would have been preventing people from voting for his wife, and for Trump, and for Cruz, etc.

It just didn't happen.

Sanders--or his wife-- could have done the same--why he (or she) didn't, s/he'll have to tell you. Maybe they just wanted a day off.

[TheBlackAdder]

151. Whatever you say.

[MADem]

140. He wasn't soliciting, though.

You gotta hear what he said. He thanked campaign workers in NB for helping his wife. He told stories about how she worked for the CDF and other activist agencies while she went to Wellesley, he talked about how MA was important to the two of them. He knew where the line was.

Like most pols do.

In Boston, he talked to poll workers and thanked them for their civil duty, he chatted up little kids going to school, the lady who was selling baked goods, and many voters approached HIM (not the other way around). He pose for pics, Marty Walsh took them. He signed autographs. He wrote a note to a Cruz supporter's mother (the mother was a HRC fan).

I know this pisses people off no end, but they're gonna have to get over it. Sanders could have done the very same thing. He should have, then we wouldn't have to hear all this whining over a politician being a politician.

[TheBlackAdder]

150. ...or any other form of promotion or opposition... R.I.F.

[MADem]

159. He wasn't promoting or opposing. He was thanking the people of MA for

being so nice to him down the years.

As I've said, he was accompanied by experts, and they know the law.

Sanders could have done the same, and I'll bet he wishes he thought of it.

[Vattel]

16. How did they notify the voters well in advance? By mail? Phone?

McNiff said, "The city and voters were notified well in advance of the event."

Your link doesn't work. So I can't get the full story.

[2pooped2pop]

26. The event? Singular?

I keep reading that he went to four.

[MADem]

54. Try this--I'll check the link I provided and edit if needed.

http://www.wcvb.com/politics/state-explains-why-bill-clintons-polling-place-visits-were-legal/38282842

[madfloridian]

20. Found a working link.

http://www.wcvb.com/politics/state-explains-why-bill-clintons-polling-place-visits-were-legal/38282842

I really disagree with the findings.

[madfloridian]

25. "Conspiracy theorists"?? Really? The facts are not in dispute. What he did was wrong.

If you want to walk a fine line between legal and not legal...fine.

But stop pretending it wasn't wrong and against the rules.

He has a mayor who supports his wife defending him. The Clintons are not above the rules and the law.

[SusanCalvin]

30. Well, it seems they are, actually. But they shouldn't be. nt

[nichomachus]

31. Yeah, all the Clinton gang has are snide putdowns and crap like this.

They can't defend Mrs. Clinton on facts or history.

[MADem]

126. It's only "wrong" when someone you don't like does it.

It's uplifting when someone you love does it, though, isn't it?


http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511415277#post122


a. It was not wrong.

b. It was not against the rules.


c. Don't believe me, ask Bill Galvin.

[nichomachus]

28. So Democratic operatives came to her defense

Shocked, shocked. They know which side their bread is buttered on. If Mrs. Clinton were to get in, their careers would be finished -- and they know it. No one does vinditctive like the Clintons. If you don't get that, you have no idea how dirty politics is in MA.

[MADem]

49. Yes--they went back in time and changed the law to favor Bill Clinton.

Look--he did nothing illegal. Everyone was notified, the events were pre-planned, and he was accompanied by mayors who know chapter and verse when it comes to these regulations.

Your anger is misplaced. Sanders could have done the EXACT same thing--he wasn't all that far from the state. He could have voted in Burlington and headed for Worcester. He chose to not do that.

[MADem]

70. I am from MA. I understand how politics works here. It is a very intimate

process. I have often shaken hands with politicians looking for my vote in polling places and close by them. It's just not uncommon.

[tymorial]

33. So if I walked into a polling place and said pull the lever for Bernie

I will not be thrown out and/or arrested? Give me a break.

[madfloridian]

34. Baloney about the flyers. He was doing worse. He was holding a damn rally....

outside the door of the polling place.

[SusanCalvin]

37. Bingo. nt

[madfloridian]

39. It's one excuse after the other.

That is annoying to me.

[AtomicKitten]

114. He purposely gummed up the works with his entourage at some Bernie-friendly precincts.

Reddit shows he was WELL within 150 ft, in fact, right by the front door with a bullhorn. He entered the precinct and told people to pull the lever for Hillary. His visits screwed up the parking and prolonged the wait time, with some people leaving before voting because they weren't physically up to the wait or had a job to get back to. The fact that he will get away with it speaks more to his influence on the local PTB than anything resembling the truth.

[MADem]

165. You really think Roxbury was going to go for Bernie? Please.

HRC won Boston OVERWHELMINGLY. She also won Bristol County where New Bedford is located. Sanders won the west of the state and Cape Cod.

'Reddit' is wrong about state law. That rally was at a park and it was previously scheduled.

If he "prolonged the wait time" he did so for HILLARY voters too--along with GOP voters. Why is it that only a very few Sanders supporters (who weren't there) are complaining about this? No Trump voters, no Cruz voters, no Rubio voters, no HILLARY voters are complaining about being denied access to the polls....why?

Because it didn't happen.

The police said that the line wasn't held up. They were there, so I tend to believe them.

[AtomicKitten]

170. You're wrong. Read this or not; I don't give a shit.

He was an asshole with a malignant sense of entitlement for doing what he did.

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2016/3/1/1494123/-Bill-Clinton-Mayor-Violating-Polling-Station-Rules-Subject-to-Arrest

http://www.salon.com/2016/03/02/bill_clinton_may_have_broken_massachusetts_law_by_telling_people_at_polling_locations_to_vote_for_hillary/

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2016/03/01/bill-clinton-massachusetts-voting-laws/

[MADem]

171. You do realize that if he was blocking "Bernie" voters, he was blocking HRC voters too.

And GOP ones.

And no one, save a few Sanders supporters looking for an issue, complained.

No laws were broken--the Commonwealth Secretary has said as much. No polls were "blocked" or "closed" either. That's just invention.

Sanders should have gotten off his best intentions and done the same. He didn't, and instead of winning MA by the ten to fifteen points projected, he lost the state.

He's performing below expectations--but that is NOT Bill Clinton's fault...EITHER.

[MADem]

46. As the news report indicates, that's not illegal.

MA law 'is' MA law.

[madfloridian]

47. Wait! MA says it legal to hold campaign rallies outside polling places on voting day??

That is truly amazing.

[MADem]

50. You can read the article at the link. nt

[MADem]

85. The article is quite clear. The event was scheduled, as were the visits to the pollling places. nt

[marions ghost]

68. ^^^^^

right

[MADem]

71. It's not illegal.

If he was collecting signatures or handing out buttons, he'd be fined not more than twenty dollars. But he wasn't doing that.

[madfloridian]

75. Your reasoning escapes me. He was having a noisy rally, blocking voters, right outside...

the door of the polling place in at least one of 4 places. How in the world could handing out flyers or buttons be worse and more nervy than that??

[MADem]

80. It's not my reasoning. Please stop putting it on me like it's a personal thing.

This was a matter of Commonwealth law. The Commonwealth Secretary's office has clarified what he was doing and how it had been previously scheduled. He was walking around w/2 mayors who know their way around election regs.

He was some distance from the "door of the polling place" and the only people insisting he was blocking anyone have quieted down suddenly--maybe because they learned that he didn't violate the law.

Sanders could have done the same--he chose to stay home.

[madfloridian]

82. ......

[MADem]

84. I can't help you. He broke no laws of the Commonwealth.

That IS the bottom line, here.

If it had been Sanders doing it, he wouldn't have been breaking any laws, either.

[oldandhappy]

38. still a nasty business

[MADem]

60. Common in the Commonwealth. Heck, Kennedys have been known to do it. nt

[MADem]

45. Ohio is not Massachusetts. Our laws do make it easy for politicians (or spouses) to interact.

MA voters have, for decades, seen this kind of "baloney." It is not uncommon at all, despite this sudden outrage that has been manufactured about something most people living in/voting in population centers in MA have seen.

But people who were insisting he did anything illegal? They were wrong.

He was the guest of savvy mayors who know the election rules. This was cleared with election officials, planned, and scheduled.

This wasn't an ad hoc evolution.

Bernie--or his wife, or both of them--could have hopped in the car and driven south to MA and done the very same thing.

They didn't, for whatever reason. May have helped, or maybe not. Too late now.

[madfloridian]

48. So MA encourages campaign rallies outside voting place on election day?

That could get very noisy.

[MADem]

52. Sanders could have done the same thing. Or his wife.

This wasn't an unplanned event--it was scheduled, as the article indicates.

[TheBlackAdder]

57. If it's over 150 feet away from the entrance to the building. But you know that already! nt

[JonLeibowitz]

86. Strange how nobody is disputing your analysis in this entire thread. n/t

[Vattel]

92. That is very common Hillary supporter behavior. They just ignore the evidence presented

against what they are saying. I am not an expert on Mass law, but it would be nice to see how Clinton could not have violated the regulations that blackadder has posted.

[MADem]

160. I am--because he's mistaken about the law and what BC did while wandering around

with Walsh and rallying with the NB mayor.

[JonLeibowitz]

161. "wandering around" -- with a bullhorn within 150 ft of a polling place.

[MADem]

163. That was a scheduled rally at a park down the street from the polling place.

People were there because they knew he was going to be there.

[JonLeibowitz]

164. That doesn't negate my point. They were also there because it is a polling place.

[MADem]

167. It was a PARK near a polling place, and what they were doing was not illegal.

You keep trying to play like the distance was significant, but he wasn't collecting signatures or handing out flyers or sample ballots.

He was well within the law. And he was escorted by the NB mayor to ensure he stayed inside the lines.

Just like this primary candidate standing SMACK DAB in front of a polling place, thanking her supporters, and talking to the media:

[MADem]

162. That's not accurate.

He can't hand out sample ballots or flyers.

You're not clear on the law.

Was Warren breaking the law in the pictures I've provided of her in this thread? She's butt up against the school in some of those pictures.

[TheBlackAdder]

172. You know, I posted the law above, read it. Comprehend it! You're not clear.

.


It's almost as though you post things just to keep this OP alive.

You're about 40% of posts.


.

[MADem]

204. I don't mean to be rude, but this is MY thread.

I am responding to people who participate in it. That is considered COURTEOUS in most corners of the internet--so I am not sure why you're griping about my participation level in a thread I started. Maybe you should check yourself?

If you have a problem with that, you can HIDE the thread and not be disturbed.

More to the point, Secretary Galvin has stated, unequivocally, that Clinton violated no laws (neither did Warren, in the photos I provided, or Mayor Marty Walsh, running from precinct to precinct shaking hands with everyone and their mother when he was on the ballot) so I will take his assessment to heart rather than your repeated insistence of malfeasance. You seem to keep forgetting that Bill Clinton is not a candidate for office, he carried no signs, no petitions, he handed out no flyers or voting information, all he did was thank a few people for their hard work. If you don't like that, you need to run for office and change MA law. Good luck if you do decide to do that.

[valerief]

55. I don't care about notified. That means you have to read the local paper or

watch tv "news."

Did Bill Clinton's presence prevent people from getting into the polling place at any time during voting hours? Did people have to stand outside for any more than 10 minutes before being allowed to go inside to vote?

[matt819]

58. Color me shocked

In my small New England town the rules are very clear. No campaigning inside the polling place. And everyone obeys the rules. It's not that hard. And only people detached from real life don't know that. Or the price of milk. Or have to give up food for medicine. Or go without a car. You get the idea. The clintons are not like you and me.

[MADem]

65. Galvin has spoken. And he's the guy who knows the rules.

As do the mayors who were escorting BC hither and yon.

[quickesst]

73. Haven't you heard...

... Hobnobbing is illegal in Massachusetts.

[Hekate]

78. KnRnThanks for the clarification. nt

[highprincipleswork]

89. What a crock that is! If you believe that, then you believe in corruption and Tammany Hall.

I guess I know who you're voting for if you fall for that line of corrupt, privileged garbage.

[mrdmk]

90. Some people do and not only that, they encourage others to do an unlawful acts also

People really need to be careful what they are defending here. These laws were made so people would not get murdered for not voting correctly. President William Clinton and others including Secretary Hillary Clinton put themselves above a common decency law for their own benefit.

Now it comes down to, 'it is not about the law, it is who enforces the law.' Well fuck them and the horse they rode in on, period.

[jpb33]

94. More Misdirection

The whole point of Clinton being there was to inconvenience voters, not to necessarily campaign for Hillary. However, Clinton knew that he would be accused of campaigning for Hillary and the whole inconvenience issue was his goal. Having a former President appear anywhere takes time effort, planning. More cops are put out, peoples movements are limited and areas are blocked off. The whole security issue that a former president requires made sure many people would be inconvenienced. From what I have read many were inconvenienced for a couple of hours and who knows how many people were forced to leave because of Bill Clinton's security measures made going to this particular polling place a challenge.

That was probably the plan by Clinton and the Mayor. Knowing that people would accuse him of politicking and hopefully overlook the fact that his security measures made voting at this particular place inconvenient.

[NurseJackie]

95. Ha! :-D

[treestar]

97. what would be the point of inconveniencing voters

the most of whom were voting for Hilary?

No one considers him being around an "inconvenience." That would cause me to stay at the poll for a lot longer than I normally would have. A lot of people there would think like that.

Honestly the effort to make Bernie a victim of every damn thing Bill does is falling flat. There would be no need for Bill to do these things.

[kstewart33]

104. Oh please.

Will you just let it go?

[MADem]

108. Sanders could have done the same thing--he was a twenty minute flight from Boston and

Worcester and Springfield were closer still. He could have easily hopped on his campaign plane and been anywhere in the state with ease. AND...it was a beautiful day, great flying weather.

He chose not to. That's fine that he didn't want to do it--but there was nothing standing in his way, or in his wife's way, from doing a little GOTV in strongholds.

It wasn't one mayor--it was two mayors--Boston and New Bedford. If you think they don't know the rule book, you don't know MA politics.

[kstewart33]

102. Well, that's one less 'controversy' to scratch off the Hillaryhate list. nt

[Iliyah]

105. K & R

My gosh, the hatred runs deep.

[UtahLib]

106. K&R

[hobbit709]

115. Many things are legal that are of questionable ethics.

[MADem]

117. How nice of you to weigh in on the Commonwealth's election day traditions. nt

[hobbit709]

119. Last time looked this thread was not locked, nor in the hideout group.

That leaves it open for comments. Looking at the replies, I'm not the only one with a similar attitude.

Don't want to hear anything but enthusiastic approval, post it in the group that "Seldom is heard a discouraging word. And the skies are not cloudy all day."

[MADem]

128. I give your post the attention I think it merits, as you have done mine.

No one is preventing you from speaking. Not sure why you're coming at me with a huffy 'tude because I don't agree with you--that's life, you know.

In fact, that is my point--there should be MORE speech, not less. Doesn't make sense to shut up the husband of a candidate for speaking out about how wonderful the campaign workers have been in support of his wife.

If Jane Sanders did the same, y'all would be cheering her on.

No one had any problem when this candidate went outside the polling place on election day 2012 and thanked supporters that I remember: http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511415277#post122

Funny how it's not even the candidate--but her HUSBAND--getting shade about his behavior in this thread.

smh.

More speech, not less.

[loyalsister]

153. Legality and ethics have been at odds in electionvoting procedures for a very long time

Poll taxes and testing were once common and legal. In order to vote, it is legally required that a person who a photo ID.
None of that was ethical despite legality. Electioneering, bullying voters, "no one was visibly prevented from voting" is a very low bar. It's quite possible that some people were discouraged from voting, but you can't prove a negative. Ultimately what matters are basic unavoidable facts. Long lines supress the vote. The presence of authority figures influences behavior.

We don't know if those things influenced the vote, but we do know it is possible. If anyone knows, it's someone who has run for office multiple times.

[Aerows]

124. With all due respect, MADem

You wouldn't even have to be justifying this if it was legal.

Nobody would even be having a conversation about it, which is pretty much what pisses off staunch Democrats when it comes to Clinton.

I don't want a candidate that has to dance around the law, do the tango on justice and ballet for angels on the head of a pin so that what she did was perhaps by the letter of the law absolved.

I want a President.

[MADem]

127. With all due respect, this is only an issue because "some people" don't like Bill Clinton.

Where was the outrage on THIS election day?


http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511415277#post122


One more time:

a. It was LEGAL.

b. Nothing was "wrong" with what he did. He stayed well within the law.

c. Don't believe me, ask Bill Galvin.

smh. The unreasonable anger and the situational finger pointing here just astounds me. If it were Bernie holding that rally, you'd all be cheering and you know it.

[Aerows]

129. We will have to see how this all

shakes out, now won't we?

Peace.

I can't wait for the primaries to be over so that we can all be friends again.

[MADem]

168. From the standpoint of the commonwealth, it's already shaken out .

It's not illegal for a candidate--or a candidate's spouse--to go into a polling place and thank polling workers, or stand right outside (or, in the case of Clinton, down the street at a park which was reserved for the purpose) a polling place and thank campaign workers and supporters.


See?

Cambridge, 2012, primary election:



The sticker on her shirt says "I voted"--and she just had.

[DesertRat]

125. K&R

[Nye Bevan]

131. I have a feeling that those who were chomping at the bit to send Bill to prison,

based on a Youtube video, will not be mollified by this.

[riversedge]

177. I suspect they have no shame and are stil chomping at the bit

to send Bill to prison--or to send any of the Clinton's to jail .

[MADem]

190. I know!

Funny how none of those Trump voters, or Cruz voters, or Rubio voters saw what a few clowns with a snippet of video managed to create from their pot stirring perch at "reddit." You'd think they wouldn't have wasted the opportunity to take a chunk out of some Clinton's behind...but they didn't. Perhaps because it didn't happen like some people are claiming.

[Bradical79]

132. Galvin seems to be ignoring portions of the law

At least going by the segment posted further up thread. It's not new info, or a particularly detailed explanation. It's not even an accurate description of what occurred as the photo of Clinton with the bullhorn shows. Not that it really matters. I'm less annoyed at Clinton now than I am at the multiple people pushing some fake explanation of his actions. I mean, if President Clinton is clearly shown talking to a crowd with a bullhorn at a voting location while the polls are open and someone is telling me he just showed up to shake some hands, I'm not going to believe a word they say.

[MADem]

138. That was a gathering of campaign workers in NB and he was there to thank them, is what I heard.

I wouldn't be surprised if supporter-voters turned up, also, though from what I understand, the event was not advertised in that vein--he was there for the people who had worked on the campaign in various capacities (GOTV, too, I'm sure). IIRC that is how the local news described it--it wasn't a hand shaking/meet the voters exercise. It was a speech at a park up the street from a polling place. It was scheduled too--not ad hoc. The people who showed up had worked for the HRC campaign, and knew he was coming. But hey, if I lived in the area, and knew he was coming, I'd turn out to see him--why not?

In Boston, he was greeting poll workers and thanking them for their work, and also shaking hands with voters. He bought a cinnamon roll at a bake sale to send the band at the Catholic School to Maine, or something. He signed autographs and talked to the children. He posed for pictures and did some grip/grinning, too.

He was the guest of Mayor Walsh for that portion of the day.

[MADem]

188. No, he wasn't ignoring anything. You've been fed some bogus "facts."

Bill Clinton was not at a polling place. He was at a park down the street from a polling place. It was a scheduled event, scheduled DAYS ahead, publicized in the MEDIA, and the community knew it was going to happen, and when it was going to happen.

Here:

http://wpri.com/2016/02/29/bill-clinton-to-campaign-in-new-bedford-on-tuesday/

NEW BEDFORD, Mass. (WPRI) – Former President Bill Clinton is expected to make a campaign swing in New Bedford on Tuesday to drum up support for his wife on the day of the Massachusetts presidential primary, WPRI.com has confirmed.

This article (talking about his stop in Taunton, which was a separate segment of his swing through eastern MA) was written on 1 Mar with an anticipatory headline, and later updated--this is the cache:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:O0zrTnoZBK8J:www.heraldnews.com/news/20160301/bill-clinton-to-campaign-for-hillary-today-in-taunton+&cd=10&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Bill Clinton to campaign for Hillary today in Taunton
Former President Bill Clinton is scheduled to stop today by the Friedman School in Taunton, shortly after 11 a.m., to campaign for his wife and presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton.

And this article talks about how he is going to appear with Mayor Walsh:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache n1waLDTfqkJ:www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/2016/03/bill_clinton_to_stump_with_mayor_walsh_for_hillary_in_boston_today+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Former President Clinton will stump for his wife, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, across Massachusetts today, Clinton campaign staffer Dylan Hewitt told the Herald.

The former president will make four stops in Massachusetts in a sign of the close Super Tuesday race with Democrat Bernie Sanders. The first is with Mayor Martin J. Walsh in West Roxbury.

This was covered in the papers and on TV. It wasn't a surprise, it was scheduled, and election officials and police knew all about it.

[Hiraeth]

139. BILL IS A CLASS ACT !!!

[Eric J in MN]

154. How were voters informed? Why were voters complaining about being

...stuck outside for over 2 hours if they were told that Bill Clinton was going to shut down their polling place?

[MADem]

155. How do you think they knew to show up at the rally at the park?

Osmosis?

And if voters were "stuck outside for over 2 hours" then that means that Cruz, Rubio, Trump and Clinton voters could not vote either...unless they gave a "secret sign" and were passed through? No one was "stuck outside." The line kept moving--even if you don't want to believe that.

Why are the only people who are complaining a small subset of Sanders supporters (most of whom weren't even there)?

Tempest, meet teapot.

[Eric J in MN]

156. Knowing there would be a rally in a park isn't the same as knowing that Bill Clinton

...will be standing inside one's polling place.

[MADem]

157. Now you're trying to insist that THAT held up the line? smh!

Look, you can read about it as well as anyone. He shook hands with polling workers, talked to a few little kids at the school, bought a cinnamon roll, took a few pics, signed a few autographs.

If you seriously want to BELIEVE that he prevented people from voting for, among other people, his own wife, you go on and BELIEVE that.

It's not true, though.

You do realize that HRC won Boston massively? MASSIVELY? Why would he prevent people from voting --for his wife, mostly--during a morning visit to a polling place in Boston, where most of the people showing up were voting for his wife?

smh.

[Armstead]

176. Not earth shattering, but shows how annoying and ethically challenged the Clintons are

[MADem]

185. Ethically challenged....like Elizabeth Warren?

Because she has done the same thing--and right outside a polling place.

Consistency in all things....

[Eric J in MN]

187. It's normal for people to go to their own polling places, including candidates.

It's not normal for candidates or candidates' spouses to go to polling places besides their own.

[MADem]

189. Now you're the arbiter of "normal?"

You don't know MA politics.

[MADem]

186. Which voters were complaining -- save a few redditers making a fake meme?

No Ted Cruz voters complained.

No Donald Trump voters complained.

No Marco Rubio voters complained.

No Hillary Clinton voters complained.


Starting to see a pattern here? That's because a polling place was not "shut down." You've been fed a meme and they want you to repeat it, so that people not paying attention will perpetuate the "Bernie is being victimized" trope (which is getting very, very old, BTW).

The Sec. of the Commonwealth has said his events were scheduled and he broke no laws. The police say no polls were closed and the lines kept moving.

I'm going to believe the locals--and more importantly, the LACK of complaint by anyone save anonymous people with ambiguous video telling us what they want us to see--as well as the election officials and the police in this case.


As for how voters were informed, they have this thing called TV, radio, and newspaper, to say nothing of internet--with something swell called email. It's how people are informed of things nowadays. What, you think all those campaign workers showed up on a whim?

Here--from the RI media (NB is close to RI) on 29 FEBRUARY (which was--if you take out your calendar and check--BEFORE Super Tuesday)

http://wpri.com/2016/02/29/bill-clinton-to-campaign-in-new-bedford-on-tuesday/

EW BEDFORD, Mass. (WPRI) – Former President Bill Clinton is expected to make a campaign swing in New Bedford on Tuesday to drum up support for his wife on the day of the Massachusetts presidential primary, WPRI.com has confirmed.

A person with direct knowledge of the plans confirmed that the visit was being added to Clinton’s schedule, and said the event is expected to take place midday at the Buttonwood Park Warming House. He is also expected to make a stop in Taunton.

smh! It would behoove you to check before repeating these memes. There's a reason this one has deflated pretty quickly--because there is no there, there.

[Armstead]

175. Legal but not appropriate....Its funny how people who support Voting Rights defend this

Knock out a big chunk of time of the polling place, and inconvenience voters so Bill and his entourage can show up and glad-hand for his wife

As usual with the Clintons, screw the rules.

[MADem]

184. What do you have against speech? That's all it is, speech.

And that "knock out a big chunk of time" canard is just wrong and false. Don't believe the fake meme.

If he wanted to "knock out a chunk of time" to disenfranchise Sanders voters, he would have done well to head for Cape Cod or Western MA, where the SANDERS voters congregated in force.

You can't seem to explain how he disenfranchised the Sanders voters, but not the HRC ones, never mind all the GOP voters. You think they wouldn't have complained if they got bigfooted out of the polls?
They didn't complain though--why? Because it didn't happen.

And as for those rules, they ALLOWED what he did. Sanders could have gotten off his couch and flown to Boston or Worcester or Springfield, and done the same thing. He could have been there inside of an hour after voting in VT.

Surely it's OK when Senator Warren does it? And she has.

So.....whatever.

[Armstead]

191. An ex-President holding a rally at a polling place is not the same as...

the mayor stopping by, or even Sen. Warren.

The Secret Service and gawkers create a circus that interferes with the voting process big time.

Sorry if you can't discern the diff.

[MADem]

192. Perhaps you don't realize that mayoral candidates here routinely "hit the polls" on election day.

So do Senate and House candidates. I didn't meet John Kerry at HIS polling place. He lives in a far hoitier and toitier neighborhood that I ever have!

smh!

There is no there, there. This was a ginned up complaint of victimization that just fell flat, mainly because it simply didn't pass the smell test.

Unless, of course, the police and the poll workers and everyone managing the election were "in cahoots" and there was a "secret sign" that allowed the HILLARY voters to magically advance and vote, while all the OTHER voters were kept in line for two hours--or some such nonsense.

It didn't happen the way a few potstirring redditers are claiming. All these events were pre-vetted (as they must be with a former POTUS) and more to the point, they were pre-ANNOUNCED--as the links I have provided in this thread prove.

[Armstead]

195. I'll just leave it at this

No one is clamoring for him to be sent to jail. But he should be called out for interfering with the process. (And I'm pretty sure he knew that.)

I live in the same state. I know that candidates sometimes show up around the polls and shake a few hands.

But an ex president causes much more commotion and makes a circus of it, and also makes it harder to vote because of all the security and hubbub he brings.

It may be technically legal (but it sounds like he did bend a few rules) and is just not appropriate.

[MADem]

196. Well, I'll just leave it at this...

People ARE clamoring--quite wrongly--for just that. And they are wrong.

These stops were scheduled, IN ADVANCE, there was full vetting with the Commonwealth, and Clinton was escorted by the mayors of the localities in question who have Done This Very Thing Themselves.

They know where the lines are.

The Big Lies, that he "shut down the polls" (false), or wore a Hillary pin (false) or did anything "illegal" within the magic hundred and fifty feet (false) have not stood up to scrutiny. The Secretary of State for the Commonwealth has said as much.

The LOGIC of the accusations are what is most stupid--why would he go to HILLARY strongholds, only to prevent them from voting? He wanted to encourage people to come on out, because, once out, a lot of people decide to vote. But he didn't prevent, impede, slow down--anything of that nature. The cops have said the line kept moving. A lot of people turned out to see Bill Clinton, and maybe some of them stayed to vote--if that was their precinct--or went on to their own precincts.

NOTHING stopped Sanders from doing the same, either. Or his wife. They chose not to.

Sanders was projected to win MA by ten or fifteen points. Instead, he lost. This "Bill Clinton BAD" theme was mounted to distract attention from an underperformance in the state by Sanders.

[Vinca]

178. So flyers and petitions have to stay 150 feet away, but husbands are okay in the door.

That's a pretty lame excuse for sucking up to a former president.

[MADem]

183. CANDIDATES are "OK in the door."

And they're "OK" having rallies and press conferences right outside the door.

MA law is what it is. People from outside the state can get mad about it, but the pols here love it.

Some places don't do retail politics--MA is not one of 'em. People like to be glad-handed, people like to be THANKED.

It just is what it is.

[Merryland]

201. what a CROCK. n/t

[MADem]

202. Your input is noted, I guess.

Direct your gripes to Secretary Galvin.

[NCTraveler]

206. Bring the Big Dog to my polling plance on election day.

I would prefer Hillary but would take either. Love it. Building enthusiasm in the party is his goal. Beautiful.