The Real Story Behind That Las Vegas Debate Crowd By Someone Who Was There

[ClarkUSA]

It is as many of us suspected. The NV Democratic Party machine packed the audience with Hillary ringers:

'I am so disappointed with the Democratic Party of Nevada. These folks are not Democrats, they're Hillary supporters.
The audience was an embarrassment and I am ashamed to be from this city. No wonder we elect mob lawyers for Mayor.

The audience was basically divided into two sections. One side was UNLV, the well behaved section and the other
section was the Hillary (oops, I meant the DNC) section. The DNC section is where I was seated and it was filled with
Hillary supporters. The guy next to me said he was for Edwards and lied, because the only person he cheered for was
Hillary. Loud, obnoxious, women were sitting behind me that talked throughout the debate and sneered "trial lawyer"
every time Edwards spoke and called Obama "arrogant". I wanted to turn around and tell them that I guess they didn't
have the nerve to call him "uppity".

The Democratic Party in this State is controlled by two people, Rory Reid, who was its past Chairman and Dina Titus,
who ran for Governor in '06. The same Dina Titus that lost to the most incompetent politician in Nevada politics, in
a year that the Democrats swept into office. This State's Party is in disarray and the '06 election is proof enough for
everyone paying attention. All the people seated around me were given tickets by the Party and the ones I talked with
said that they worked in Dina Titus' campaign for Governor. Rory Reid and Dina Titus are Hillary's biggest backers in
this State and will use their control over this Party to win the caucus for her.

The audience that were around me behaved like they were at a boxing match at Caesar's Palace, cheering for Hillary
and booing her two closest opponents, John Edwards and Barack Obama. Real Democrats don't boo Democrats.
Obama and Edwards looked like they backed off and just sat this one out, since they were not allowed to contrast
themselves against Hillary. The audience members weren't informed, sophisticated Democrats, who could make
their own decisions. They were followers who want to be in the lead. Our lousy Party leaders in this State, who
could not win an election that the Democrats dominated in '06, are leading them.

I came out of the event solid Obama, loving Kucinich and respecting Edwards.'

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/11/16/32040/765

I predict Hillary will win the Nevada caucuses by hook or by crook -- no matter who wins Iowa and NH.

[itsrobert]

1. Finally. Good old fashion honest analysis from somebody that was there

But here comes the bots....

[Egnever]

59. I was there and that post bears no resemblance to reality.

This person is full of shit.

[ClarkUSA]

65. So your reality trumps her reality?

Who's full of shit?

[Egnever]

68. When she calls Dina titus a loser in the same breathe as

she says good dems dont boo other dems I would say she is.

[ClarkUSA]

71. Titus did lose an election against a sexual assaulter/illegal immigrant employer

And I agree with her about good Democrats not booing other Democrats. There has been no other
presidential debate in which that has happened to my knowledge.

If that's the criteria with which you're judging her diary, then we're going to always disagree. Besides,
I have close relatives who are Democratic party activists in Las Vegas and they don't have the glowing
opinion of Dina Titus that you do. She's not universally admired, you know.

[Egnever]

79. Sure she did

that makes her a loser?

Did your family member donate to her campaign? Did they help to get her elected in any way? Dina lost the money game and this state only just recently started to turn blue we are 6k votes ahead of the pukes here now. And still the only paper here in town is a wholly owned puke rag. Not easy to overcome those odds but she came damn close.

Just curious whats your families beef with Dina? Cause in the dem party here she is pretty well respected. She has been standing up to the pukes here for years in the state legislature.

I am fine with disagreeing with you cause clearly you know little or nothing about the reality on the ground here and only want to believe that somehow the fix was in to make hillary look good by the dem party here. It wasnt.

And I stand by my statement that the poster in the original post is completely full of
it.

[ClarkUSA]

94. Loser is a fitting term, then.

I'm sure the OP source would think you're full of it, too. You know, for a person who allegedly doesn't
support Hillary, you sure defend her long and vigorously.

[MsMagnificent]

113. Funny exchange:

ClarkUSA wrote: "Titus did lose an election against a sexual assaulter/illegal immigrant employer"

and Egnever's response was: "Sure she did -- that makes her a loser?"


Ummm.... well, yeah since she LOST :rofl:

[ClarkUSA]

126. Definitely worth a DUzy.

:rofl:

[watercolors]

98. I figured that, another Hillary basher! nt

[ooglymoogly]

109. You seem to forget or are unaware that all of us in the hinter

were also part of the audience though we could not participate but none the less could see what was going on. It is clear to me as I am sure with many others that not only was the audience fixed so was AIPAC insider Wolf lizard brain. All you have to do is note how Kucinich was treated as well as the other no Hill candidates

[ClarkUSA]

128. Thank you for corroborating the OP source's story.

You are the second person on this thread who was there and agree with LV Pol Girl. I'm glad that
it was obvious to you that the fix was in with the audience. Hillbots want to convince us otherwise
but it isn't working, is it?

[Reno.Muse]

146. Rory Reid was right in the middle of the front row, facing Hillary

Who do you think was behind the failed Faux News debates that the Nevada Dem Party was going to host before Dems nationwide drummed it out of its lousy existence? The Hillary/Reid camp. So they got their way in LV last week to make up for it.

I am a Democrat here in Nevada and I've seen nothing but corruption in our state party for years. And don't try and tell me to fight it. I tried, along with 100 others in a rural county and we were squashed out of existence in order to keep the corrupt in place.

Dina Titus was disliked by many before she bulldozed and threatened her way into a run for Governor and she failed against the now most embarassing Governor in America, Jim Gibbons. http://www.votegibbonsout.blogs.com/

Titus is just like Hillary, their egos won't let them get out of the way from taking everyone down with them.

Rory Reid, son of Harry Reid, needs to keep his entire family in their lobbyist jobs and Hillary will make sure that happens. These people make me sick.

[ClarkUSA]

129. Oh, and the girl with the planted CNN question is a former Reid staffer, one of many, I'm sure.

From a NYT article last night.

[Auggie]

2. Exacty why applause or audience reaction should not be allowed in debates

[hedgehog]

5. Agreed. nt

[Egnever]

60. It wasnt allowed it was encouraged

I was there.

I agree though it should not have been.

[RaleighNCDUer]

122. In other debates I could guess reactions from the applause or cheers.

This is the first I've seen where 'boos' were part of the mix.

Why is that?

[calteacherguy]

3. I was right. nt

[BootinUp]

4. if this comforts folks I guess it serves someones purpose.

Of course there was a DU'er there with quite a different report who isn't even a Hillary supporter.

see this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3725977

[incapsulated]

15. I prefer good old fashioned

Illegal drugs, myself.

"democrats don't boo democrats"

Very fucking ironic coming from a Kos blog, given their BOOING of Hillary.

[rinsd]

6. Here's a post by a DUer who was there. That Kos poster is a die hard Obama supporter

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3725977

[Cameron27]

8. You beat me to it.

I'll take the word of DU member on this.

[BootinUp]

11. I beat both of you. :-)

[Cameron27]

18. You did!

Aw shucks, I totally missed your post. :-)

[saracat]

42. Any DUer who says what you want to hear is truthful.Others , who do not are deemed untruthful.

How convienent. Either or both scenarios are as likely to be tue. Eye witness accounts can conflict. But evidence that the Clinton campign is not above such schenanigans lends more credence to the original post.JMHO and by no means unbiased opinion.

[rinsd]

46. The DUer in question seemed even handed and candid

Most fake anecdotes posted by DUers come with obvious agendas.

[calteacherguy]

10. That poster is only talking about one person. The OP is referring to the big picture. nt

[BootinUp]

13. There is more in the thread. nt

[calteacherguy]

25. Indeed there is!

Egnever (1000+ posts) Fri Nov-16-07 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #34
40. Tickets were hard to get

And the way of getting them was not widely known. You had to submit your name to a list and I believe names were drawn at random. Having said that about the only way you would have known this would be to be connected in some way to the dem party here.

I got mine through knowing someone. Or really I should say I got on the list through knowing someone. I had to submit my social security number birthdate name address and email. I wasn't contacted with how to get in till the day before.

Now Once again let me say that hillary has a lot of support here in the upper dem echelons. And I don't think its a stretch at all to see that reflected in the crowd last night.

sandnsea (1000+ posts) Fri Nov-16-07 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #40
41. Most crowd are told to be quiet

and not respond until the end of the debate. I do not for one minute believe people just spontaneously decided to boo Edwards, you can say it as many times as you like. People just aren't like that.

You've laid it out clearly. The NV Dem Party had control of the tickets, they support Hillary. They decided to shut down any attacks on her, whether you will ever be privy to that information or not. The End.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3725977

[rinsd]

27. And sandnsea was wrong (shocking but it happens often)

The were no calls for the audience to remain quiet before this debate though that has been an admonishment at other debates.

[calteacherguy]

28. No, but that's what they SHOULD have done.

As it was, a large part of the so-called "debate" became nothing more than a staged act for Hillary supporters.

[rinsd]

30. Sure. I have no problem with the audience being told to remain quiet.

But few DUers had a problem when at the ALFCIO people cheered or groaned.

Or at the Yearly Kos debate.

Could it be that because Hillary was not the object of scorn and all these cries of bad behavior are only so much bullshit?

[BootinUp]

38. Try this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3725977#3726032

Egnever (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Nov-16-07 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #6
13. Honestly I would have to look at the specific clip to remember

There were several instances though where candidates were booed and in most cases it was due to the crowd not wanting to hear infighting between them. The crowd was very against attack politics last night but in almost every case last night after the initial boo's against the attacking they were rewarded with agreement after the points were made.

It was really sort of strange to watch actually. The crowd was definitely not there to hear the candidates fight, but were very open to listening to what all of the candidates said. I saw a lot of head nodding for all the candidates as well as a lot of disagreement on specific issues from people who appeared to support the candidate they were disagreeing with at the time.

It was very heartening actually as it really seemed as though the crowd was weighing what each candidate said for the most part with very few blind followers at least in my immediate vicinity in the crowd.

[calteacherguy]

41. It is not suprising that's what a pro-Hillary crowd would want.

It's always to the advantage of the frontrunner not to have any of the candidates attacking each other. No surprise there.

[BootinUp]

43. It is not surprising they spotted hypocrisy either. nt

[BootinUp]

I guess its too much for people to demand

issues be discussed and not lame ass attacks filled with hypocrisy and unfounded accusations.

[calteacherguy]

49. Issues were being discussed, but the crowd showed a clear bias.

If they came to hear issues discussed they should have done more listening and less heckling...for example, Obama's thoughtful yet straightforward respose to the driver's license question.

[rinsd]

19. The Kos poster referred to in the OP is a diehard Obama supporter.

It would be like asking you for an opinion on Edwards or Obama or Hillary or Biden during the weeks you were supporting them.

[Adelante]

47. LOL

:D

[BootinUp]

50. rofl

:rofl:

[Cameron27]

78. !

:spray:

[ClarkUSA]

93. "Diehard", rinsd? You are assuming that because that makes her claim easy to disparage..

You are also assuming things about me you are clueless about in order to disparage me. Supportive
remarks do not a supporter make.

But you and your buddies keep on with the sniggering. It's a cute thing I used to do in high school.

[MethuenProgressive]

17. I'll believe our fellow DUer before any kos blog.

:dem:

[HughMoran]

106. Oh, no! Reality bites! Oh, well - let the "I'm being persecuted" folks let off steam

It's all they have left - hot air :eyes:

[graywarrior]

7. It's funny how intelligent people were able to pick up on that.

It just seemed so staged.

[BootinUp]

9. spontaneous is what it sounded like to me. n/t

[MethuenProgressive]

12. The blogger accuses Clinton supporters of being racists ?!?!?

...called Obama "arrogant". I wanted to turn around and tell them that I guess they didn't have the nerve to call him "uppity".

There you have it: kos has played the Race Card. :puke:

[msongs]

20. my grandma used to call me uppity quite often cuz I didnt buy into her religion of choice nt

[goodgd_yall]

14. Thank you for the inside view n/t

[msongs]

16. depends on whether you believe the biased "reporter" - and the comment

"Real Democrats don't boo Democrats" would mean a lot of people on DU are not real democrats based on the posting things about clinton that are way worse then even the most awful booing.

personally I think audiences at these phony, fabricated, and manipulated scam discussions being passed of as debates ought to not cheer or boo anybody except maybe the moderators. it is time to take these events out of the hands of corporate pimps and give them back to people like the league of women voters or somebody else who doesnt have a cable news network to promote.

[calteacherguy]

23. Agreed! nt

[ClarkUSA]

26. I doubt most DUers would be rude enough to boo anyone at a Democratic debate

Posting anti-Obama, anti-Edwards, and anti-Clinton insults on this forum is a far cry from
political ringers making a mockery of a Democratic debate by loudly booing Obama and
Edwards everytime they criticized Clinton. I hope it doesn't happen again -- against any
Democratic candidate in any presidential debate forum.

****

"personally I think audiences at these phony, fabricated, and manipulated scam discussions being
passed of as debates ought to not cheer or boo anybody except maybe the moderators. it is time
to take these events out of the hands of corporate pimps and give them back to people like the
league of women voters or somebody else who doesnt have a cable news network to promote."

You have a great point there. Is anyone at the DNC listening??

[RaleighNCDUer]

123. Posting in a public forum after the fact is NOT the same as

booing during the event.

Nobody is going to tell me who I can or cannot rant against while posting, but I would NEVER boo someone during the debate - I'm too interested in actually listening to it.

Obviously, many Hill-bots are not.

[ClarkUSA]

127. Exactly. Thank you.

Logic is clearly not a Hillaryworlder strongpoint.

[durrrty libby]

21. Nice try...but a lie

[Forkboy]

39. We can all go home now folks...durrrty has spoken.

:crazy:

[Cha]

22. So how were these

"Plants" able to take over the "DNC" section?

[ClarkUSA]

96. This is how.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3729174&mesg_id=3729174

[Cha]

114. Those freakin'

manipulators..oh, but, I'm sure miss diamonds and BIG pearls knew nothing.

snippets~
"There were only 2000 available tickets. 1000 of those tickets were given to the Nevada State Democratic Party, of which I was a member in 2005 and 2006. The other 1000 tickets were given to UNLV. Now here is where it gets interesting. The 1000 tickets given to the NSDP were given to people who were in high ranking positions, of which several of my friends are involved with the NSDP. Those friends were able to go to the Debate at Cox Pavilion. Some of my other friends who are not as involved in the Nevada State Democratic Party were excluded. So you have the State Party who pre-selected who they wanted to go. Many of the people in the NSDP are very sympathetic to Sen. Clinton. It's no secret, its just a fact of the State Party. According to my sources, not only did they pre-select who went to the Debate, they actually based it on the percentage of the various minorities in the state. So 15% of the people had to be Hispanic, 10% had to be African-American, and there were various other groups which were required to be selected by the Nevada State Democratic Party. Now I am not charging that their intentions were not good, I think we need to have minorites at the debate. What I am opposed to is pre-selecting the audience, and those who are pre-selecting the audience at the debate are overwhelmingly in favor of Sen. Clinton. I think it was clear when you watched the debate that there was a VERY PRO-HILLARY CLINTON audience. Clinton was applauded many times, but Obama was booed several times. It was not because Obama was a giving wrong answers, it was because the Pro-Hillary Clinton supporters pre-selected by the Nevada State Democratic Party were being rude and disrespectful of not only Obama, but John Edwards and Dennis Kucinich. You could see it very clearly during the debate.

So what happened to the UNLV tickets? Didn't they go to students? Not exactly. About 100 or so tickets did go to the students, and they held a lottery which selected certain students for the Debate. The other 900 or so tickets actually went to UNLV staff and professors and their family members. I am not joking, this is what I have been told by a very reliable source in Las Vegas.

So you have only well connected members of the Nevada State Democratic Party and the Staff at UNLV, and about 100 actual students at UNLV who were in the audience. So, please explain this to me like I am stupid. Why, one day before the debate, did CNN and the Nevada State Democratic Party change the location of the Debate from the Huge Thomas and Mack Center to the Cox Pavilion which is about 10 times smaller, and why did they gave the tickets to only the well connected Democrats in the Nevada State Democratic Party, and to the Staff of UNLV, with the remaining 100 being selected by a "lottery"? Is that really an accurate representation of Las Vegas or Nevada? Why were regular Nevada Democrats not allowed to come and watch this debate?..."

Thank you, so much, for this Clark! I'm glad we don't have to rely totally on what cnn and her supporters have to say about hillary.

This is bookmarkable!~

[illinoisprogressive]

24. I read that this morning. I think this will come back to bite Hillary in the behind.

[durrrty libby]

31. When something has no teeth, it can not bite. But keep dreaming

[aquart]

32. Because you believe this "impartial" report without a single doubt or question?

Yet Hillary supporters are the unthinking beings who just want to be led.

[aquart]

29. Hillary supporters are NOT Democrats?

Is there, perhaps, the tiniest touch of bias in these remarks?

[CnAnPB]

34. You beat me to it n/t

:)

[CnAnPB]

33. "These folks are not Democrats, they're Hillary supporters."

I read the rest of the post with a skeptical eye after reading that.

[Cameron27]

35. Yeah, that kind hinted where the poster was coming from lol

Welcome to DU:)

[creeksneakers2]

36. The word of one guy on the Internet doesn't make much of a case

Here's how the Nevada Sun says the questioners were chosen:

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/sun/2007/nov/14/566667431.html

(SNIP)

They will be selected by staff at CNN, which is carrying the debate. And whom the network will tap has been something of a mystery.

Advocacy groups, including AARP, the ONE anti-poverty campaign and the Culinary Union, say CNN staff asked them to recommend members of their organizations.

The cable network wants uncommitted Democrats who are likely to attend the caucus and were willing to submit a question in advance, said David Bohrman, CNN's Washington, D.C., bureau chief and producer of Thursday's debate.

The 100 will be picked to sit in the "red zone" - the designation by CNN staff for the seats directly in front of the stage at Cox Pavilion at UNLV. From their ranks, some will be chosen to pose their questions to candidates.

(snip)

Democratic Party officials at the state and local level say they've been left in the dark.

[RaleighNCDUer]

131. That's talking about 100 out of 2000 - a sub-set of the total audience.

and says that CNN was making the decisions about who that 100 would be.

There is nothing in that to dispute the big picture, the 1000 NSDP tickets and the 1000 UNLV tickets.

And it doesn't help that your link ALSO claims that the attendance was fixed by CNN.

[EV_Ares]

37. Thanks for posting on this from someone who saw it with their own

eyes. That is what they were saying tonight also on CNN & MSNBC. Evidently it was pretty obvious.

[Beaverhausen]

44. We all heard it with our own ears. All a candidate had to do was start to...

...mention Hillary and the boos started. It's obvious the crowd was stacked in her favor. They were rude and stupid. I just proves the OP is correct.

[EV_Ares]

52. The way she is running this campaign is getting hard to take and I am

beginning to get to the point if she gets the nomination not knowing if I can support her. Not this way.

[Egnever]

57. oops mispost

[ClarkUSA]

48. A number of media folks/journalists suspect there was a fix in, too.

Michael Scherer of Salon, NBC's political guru Chuck Todd and Ed Schultz, for starters.

cherer said in his debate live blog:

'Edwards begins going after Clinton again, charging that she takes money from lobbyists and represents
"corporate Democrats." It's pretty predictable stuff, but some in the crowd start booing again. This is
suspicious. The possibility of noisy Clinton supporters disrupting the debate seems more and more likely.
At some point, there should be an investigation.' http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/11/16/dem_debate /

Todd noted there was something fishy in his post-debate blogging:

*** Those boo-birds: A final Clinton vs. Obama point… Hillary really benefited from the audience responses.
An organizer for the debate told First Read that each campaign received 22 tickets, while the state party and
UNLV invited the rest. But just how many of the rest were Clinton supporters? Because their booing when
Edwards or Obama confronted Clinton was distracting to the candidates and threw them off. The audience
was supposed to play a role via the questions they asked; instead, they played a MAJOR role in helping Clinton
have home-field advantage. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/default.aspx?p=2

John King mentioned Hillary's strong Reid ties the other day, too. Those on the political beat
may not all come out and say it, but they all know. Hell, I'm not surprised by the Democratic party machine
supporting one of their puppetmasters -- I've got family there who are Dem party activists who
have told me tales of unbelievable political backscratching/favors.

[Texas_Kat]

74. INteresting that Chuck Todd is the Political director of MSNBC

A rival network who wasn't hosting this event and has come under some fire for Russert's handling of the last debate. Was he there? doubt it....

Was Scherer? or Ed Schultz? ANYONE?

I suspect it's a bit of network rivalry with a dash of 'armchair' quarterback from pundits who want to stir shit. Keeps the advertising dollars rolling in, doncha know.

[Cameron27]

77. I think it was part network rivalry

and part lining up behind Matthews and Russert. The only one who had any objectivity was KO, but of course he's been dissed here as a "Hillshill." At least nobody's called him senile yet.

[ClarkUSA]

85. Not really.

That's his job, to comment on political goings-on. Scherer of Salon.com was liveblogging and is their top political
reporter. I think Chuck Todd must have been there - he talked about what went on in the Spin Room after the debate
on his post-debate rehash TV segments. Schultz has been a loyal defender of Democrats including Hillary on TV this
year so he's okay. The NYT political blogger also had questions. Even if they weren't there, so what?

I can't see the motive you're surmising given that these men who reached the same conclusions were from disparate
media outlets. Since all three make it their careers to cover political events, I'm inclined to give merit to their collective
impressions because they happen to jive with someone who was there in the audience (see OP) and to my brother's and
sister-in-law's reports on what happened. They live in Las Vegas, are Dem party activists and have friends who were
in the audience last night in the UNLV section. The friends saw and heard it all. Can everyone be wrong in their
impressions except for Hillary Clinton boosters? I doubt it.

[Forkboy]

40. I didn't watch, but from what I've read everyone lost and everyone won.

:silly:

[rucky]

117. It's all true. n/t

[FreeStateDemocrat]

45. She can buy and rig the Dem coronation but she gets blown out in the general.

Her coronation will cost us badly in the Congressional races. But by that time the Democratic Party will belong completely to the corporations so it will not be my party anymore. I will then bid a bitter adieu, AMF and just forget about the entire crooked system.

[EV_Ares]

53. Who knows, she could bring down the democratic party like Bush is

doing to the republican party. Maybe there will end up being some other party out of it.

[venable]

141. i pray you're wrong, but if the party ends up being made in her image,

I, too, will check out. ( i say this now, because I believe it, but who knows what I'll think when confronted with Huckabee or Romney or the worst of the worst, Rudy)

i am loyal to core, traditional democratic values, and fair play. if the party ends up leaving that, I leave the party.

who knows, maybe she'll get the nomination, have a dark night of the soul, and come back as a traditional democrat, kicking the moneylenders out of the temple, and telling the corporations that there is a new sheriff in town.

i doubt this will happen, but if it does, I'm back in the game. if it doesn't, oh dear.

[ileus]

51. Hillary will win them all not just Nevada.

[laureloak]

54. Another good reason NOT to support the Hillary crowd.

[marlakay]

55. had a feeling it was fixed

sounded that way as I was listening on radio and not watching it so from different viewpoint.

[oasis]

56. Look at the Nevada polls. Hillary leads by a ton. No surprise she has more Dems

supoorting her at any political event.

Duh.:dunce:

[ClarkUSA]

64. First time I ever saw "supporters" loudly boo other Democrats during a debate

It's a specious argument to link 50% support with piss-poor coordinated behavior aimed solely at the only two rivals of Hillary.
After all, I didn't see the combined supporters of Obama and Edwards boo Clinton's attacks.

[oasis]

69. More than likely payback from the previous debate. The "boys" had it coming.

;-)

[RaleighNCDUer]

124. Because they booed her in that debate?

Funny. Must have missed it.

[Egnever]

70. which atacks would those be?

you just dont want to see reality

[ClarkUSA]

76. The same attacks that everyone in the media and elsewhere saw.

My eyes aren't lyin'. Your reality sounds unreal to me.

We will always disagree.

[Egnever]

83. post one

Your eyes don't seem to see much but your head seems to be easily swayed. post one!

Or cant you come up with one?



Senator Clinton defends the system, takes money

from lobbyists, does all those things.

(AUDIENCE BOOING)

Theres one from John Edwards attacking clinton that drew boos.

Here i'll help you even heres a link to a transcript.


http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2007/11/sweet_las_vegas_dem_debate_ful.html

get back to me when you find the attack lines from clinton that weren't given a justifiable amount of disgust from the crowd.

[ClarkUSA]

87. WTH should I?

Your idea of unfair attacks seem to only extend to anyone who criticized Clinton and not the other
way around so anything I'd say would be discounted. Sorry, I won't play your reindeer games,
especially since you seem to prefer insults to dialogue.


Like I said, google it. I won't be your thread distraction mule.

[RaleighNCDUer]

125. She doesn't defend the system?

She doesn't take money from lobbyists?

He was telling the truth, and she, in return says he is mudslinging.

THAT deserved some boos, if anything, because telling the truth is not mudslinging - but impugning her opponant, claiming he is using Republican talking points, claiming he is doing something he is not, that's just so...

rovian.

[Egnever]

58. Complete horse shit post

From someone who was there!

The Nevada dem party has issues to be sure but the idea that this debate was intentionally stacked is ludicrous.

A new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation statewide survey of 304 likely Democratic caucus goers in Nevada (conducted 11/9 through 11/13) finds Sen. Hillary Clinton leading Sen. Barack Obama (51% to 23%) in a statewide primary; former Sen. John Edwards trails at 11%, Gov. Bill Richardson at 5%. All other candidates receive less than five percent each.


What the hell would you expect from a room full of dems from nevada a kucinich bias?

The person with the original post is a tool and totally biased against hillary.

I say this as someone who is totally biased against hillary yet not so blinded as to make wild claims like this tool does.

Take a breathe go back and listen to the crowd reactions at the beginning of the debate as the candidates are brought on stage. If the poll above is to be believed if anything Obama was over represented.

Also the fact that the tool that wrote this garbage bashes dina titus leads me to believe this person has never had any involvement in the dem party here other than pontificating. Dina titus may have lost the election for Governor but she is one of the hardest working reps i have ever had the pleasure of meeting, and shitting on her makes the op look like a complete idiot.

[ClarkUSA]

61. Says you. I and many others here, there, and in the media disagree with you.

My eyes - and those of others - were NOT lyin' last night. For all I know, you're as much of a "tool"
as the Kos diarist you impugn without knowing.

[Egnever]

62. your eyes werent there

nor do your eyes like the actual amount of support hillary has here.

My eyes dont like the amount of support she has here either but that doesnt change the fact that its there nor does it change the fact that if anything in a crowd where acording to recent polling she should have enjoyed over 50% support she fell well short of that if crowd reaction when the candidates were introduced is any judge of the amount of support that was actually in the room.

You werent there. I was. You gonna try to convince me now that your eyes could see better through your television screen than mine did at the actual event?

[ClarkUSA]

63. The Kos diarist was there. And my eyes could see just fine, thanks.

Candidate's supporters don't normally boo other Democrats during a debate. For example, supporters of other candidates
(specifically those of Obama and Edwards, who were attacked by Hillary) didn't boo Hillary (because they weren't party plants,
no doubt).

My brother and sister-in-law are longtime residents of Las Vegas and state party activists. Let's just say that I've heard things.

[Egnever]

67. I was there

And I am no hillary fan and the people were boing at percieved unfair attacks and were encouraged by CNN to be boisterous before the debate began.

I will say I was shocked when they told us to make as much noise as we wanted while the debate was going on.

But the idea that it was somehow a set up that hillary had a larger representation than any other candidate is silly. She is polling as high as 53% here WTF do you expect?

[ClarkUSA]

72. Yes, so was she and members of the media who were there had the same fishy impression.

Funny, I haven't heard from anyone but you that the audience was encouraged to be "boisterous".

I have little doubt that the synchronized boobirds in the audience were plants. They weren't subtle. As for "unfair
attacks," it is interesting that only Obama and Edwards were perceived of as unfair only when they criticized Clinton.

Look, I appreciate your perspective but others who were there - both in and out of the media - disagree with you
and their accounts are very compelling.

[Egnever]

73. What did hillary say that was atacking other candidates?

other than in the mildest terms I missed it. The loud boos followed clear attacks such as comparing her to rudy. And there was plenty of aplause for all of the candidates.

I dont like hillary much at all but that doesnt mean I have to pretend something went on there that didnt.

[ClarkUSA]

75. Oh please.

Are you serious? Hillary's attacks on Obama and Edwards are the theme of the post-debate cycle and
it isn't a mass figment of the media's imagination. Read the news stories. Google Hillary Clinton.
That's reality for ya.

And Obama was not comparing her to Rudy, he was rightly comparing her framing of the issue to the
way Republicans frame the issue of payroll tax adjustment as a tax increase on the middle-class. She
sounded like a Club For Growth candidate for awhile there.

[Cameron27]

81. I can't believe that you actually think that you

have a better take on what happened in the audience than Egnever, who was sitting right in the middle of it. Someone who doesn't even like Clinton. I don't know what to say. I don't think I've ever seen anything like this happen before.

[ClarkUSA]

88. I don't know Egnever and I'm supposed to believe him over someone else who was there, too?

His is only one perspective.

I can't believe that you'd think I'd trust my relatives - who live in Las Vegas and have friends who sat in the UNLV section -
less than some DUer I don't know. And yes, I do trust multiple media/journalist sources with the same suspicions as the
OP source and my own lyin' eyes - and those of many here and elsewhere - more than Egnever's single perspective, too.

[Egnever]

84. post the freaking attacks if they are all over the place

Sheesh. Your a thick one aren't you? I don't like clinton one bit but the crowd was not overly in her corner they just didn't want to hear attack politics.

Your denial based on your candidate worship or whatever it is is astounding.

I couldn't give a rats ass what the pundits are saying wherever you see them saying it I came to the conclusion that most pundits are full of it a looong time ago.

they want a controversy they want a horse race they get ratings from any kind of controversy real or perceived they can come up with why am i not even the least bit shocked that after Clinton's question plant story from last week there are some out there that want to somehow tie a couple of crowd reactions to some grand conspiracy theory perpetuated by the clinton camp.

[ClarkUSA]

90. Repeat: Google it. You seem obsessed with cataloging attacks. I'm not.

And what's with the insults?? What's astounding is I've told you several times now that we disagree and you still persist with the personal insults
and arguing over a point where we clearly see things very differently. I won't dialogue with people who are nasty like you. See ya.

[Texas_Kat]

80. Which media members were there?

Chuck Todd? Nope... he was pontificating as usual from his perch... inside the Beltway.

[ClarkUSA]

91. What's your point?

And I thought I watched Todd say what transpired when he was in the Spin Room during
yesterday's post-debate TV segments.

[Catherine Vincent]

66. Remember what I posted in your thread?

Judging by the comments from some here, that's why I said it.

[HughMoran]

107. Agreed

The bias is really showing through here - credibility goes right out the window.

[TheWebHead]

82. you gotta call the liberal radio shows on monday

especially since Ed Schultz was already suspecting what you're saying... Thom Hartmann probably as well. Between the planted questions and the planted audience, I fear next we're going to see Hillary loyalty oaths and goons searching the parking lots for opposing bumper stickers a la Bush

[Bo Bike]

86. Quit you wining!

Talk about the issues and you wont get booed. Throw mud and take the risk.

Clinton has what, a 54% approval among Nevada dems, what do you expect? Obama got booed because he compared her to repugs. He should have got booed for that. Quit your crying and hope your candidates stick to the issues and they wont get booed in the future.

[Major Hogwash]

89. Nevada is as crooked as the Mississippi river is long.

That's why the guy who set up Simpson for the robbery told the FBI at the same time what he was up to - so the state would have to prosecute!

[ClarkUSA]

92. More On That Nevada Debate Crowd

Check it out:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3729174&mesg_id=3729174

They don't call CNN the Clinton News Network for nuthin'.

[Perry Logan]

95. The other candidates sure played into their hands, didn't they?

[tom_paine]

111. Well, Perry, Bush-style Gestalt-based propaganda ALWAYS takes it's victims

by surprise. The audacity of it, you see.

That and the denial. This can't be happening, surely they wouldn't do that, no one could be that vile.

That is why Bushigandists always win, at least for a while. That is why Hillary has adopted their strategy of The Big Lie and Gesalt-based Propaganda. Phony questions, maybe some phony Clintonistas psoing as reporters to round it off? Tossing undesirables from their campaign rallies (perhaps a pre-signed loyalty oath would fix that problem).

I have said it before and I will say it again: Hillary made me happy and rather excited when she stated that she would "fight the Bushies", and maybe she will, but how she has wholeheartedly embraced Bushigandist techniques is extremely disturbing and has soured me on her further.

It is not surprising that the other Democratic candidates were blitzkrieged by Hillary's Bush-like tactics. Hell, after seven long year, damned near EVERYONE still cannot wrap their minds around what bad people the Bushies are.

Yes, Hillary will represent a brief respite from Bushie vampirism. But now I see she is far too much like them (still quite different, so I am NOT arguing that they are the same or even close), just close enough to be troublesome and to ensure the continuance of the Imperial Amerikan Status Quo of Tyranny, Lies, and Thefts, even IF she is allowed to have the Amerikan Throne which I think is designated to be Guiliani's, no matter who we vote for (yet, I will vote, just in case I am mistaken). In any case, thank you for highlighting a continuing problem. People are simply disarmed by Bushiganda, no matter WHO is wielding the Mighty Wurlitzer of Bush or the Less-Mighty-Wurlitzer of Clinton.

It just doesn't compute for most, even after people's faces have been shoved in shit time and time and TIME again.

So I am not surprised the other Democrats stuck their collective chins out to be uppercutted by the "trap" of Sen. Clinton. That's what we seem to do do every time the Bushies ask them to "stick their chins out", like the 2004 Democratic Convention.

Please feel free to cut and paste your customary "91% unity post" below, Perry. Here's a space for it:

[desi]

97. Hold on a damn minute here...

"I am so disappointed with the Democratic Party of Nevada. These folks are not Democrats, they're Hillary supporters."

This is all I had to read to see where this person was coming from. Since I and others PROUDLY support Senator Clinton I/we are not Democrats? I don't know him/her or you but I will PROUDLY put my DEMOCRATIC Party loyalty, LIBERALISM and anti-war stance against BOTH of you any day of the week. I and other DEMOCRATS will SUPPORT whomever we damn please, for whatever damn reason we choose to, and this bullshit about us not being "true Democrats" and "true progressives" is frankly getting tiresome.

"I came out of the event solid Obama, loving Kucinich and respecting Edwards."

I am of the opinion that this person was not as undecided as they would have you believe.

To add: Just saw THIS: "The audience members weren't informed, sophisticated Democrats, who could make their own decisions." NO Comment!!!!

[Cameron27]

99. It's a biased hit piece IMO

[ClarkUSA]

102. Thanks for the unbiased viewpoint.

But I understand.

[mtnsnake]

103. Hear hear!

Hard as it is to believe, half of the posters at KOS are about as credible as so many of the anti-Clinton naysayers here on this forum who throw around lies and innuendo about the Clintons as if it were confetti.

[DCKit]

100. I'm not going to read the replies. Just here to relieve my conscience...

THAT debate was not a debate. It SUCKED. Biden was laughing because he knew he wasn't going to be called on.

I don't care that anyone's favorite candidate was able to let loose with a few talking points, the real candidates were shut out along with everyone else. It was all about the talking points THEN pearls vs. diamonds.

Our current government is bullshit, the polls are bullshit and any MSM debate it bullshit.

It's time to take it back.

[Cameron27]

101. I absolutely agree with you about that.

The lower tier always get much less time to get their points across. Completely unfair at this point in the primary IMO.

[madmunchie]

104. Totally obvious that this was Politics at its worst, Audience was sooooo stacked

How stupid do the networks think we are? I am not for Hillary or JE, I frankly am not sure who I will end up with, I was hoping for Gore, like Kucinch and like Biden. That audience was not playing by the "rules" like let the candidates answer and refrain from applause. This was so ignore by these people. I was ashamed for them.

[HughMoran]

105. Lol - doesn't make Edwards answers any more convincing

This Monday night quarterbacking is hilarious!

When your fellow does poorly, blame it on being persecuted. I only noticed the audience twice and the applause was deserved both times.

[wisteria]

108. Despicable and this makes me want to support her even less. n/t

[ooglymoogly]

110. Rec because it was obvious that what Clark was saying

is the truth

[Gman]

112. Fuck you NV Pol Girl

"These folks are not Democrats, they're Hillary supporters."

Fuck you NV Pol Girl. Just fuck you.

[balantz]

115. Bad move in my book.

Glad to support another.

[New Era]

116. I was at the...

I was at the pre-rally outside the debate and it was disgusting just like the debate itself. There is also evidence that the Hilary campaign went to a temp worker company and hired people to come rally ( which IMHO should count as buying a vote ). Not to mention they ( as well as the Obama campaign ) were breaking the guide lines set forth by the state party for the rally zone.

I was also lucky enough to go the Jefferson Jackson dinner and was also equally disappointed. Dennis Kucinich drew the straw to speak first but they had Richardson speak first instead and Hilary did not draw last but she got to speak last anyways. The most deplorable part was when Hilary got up there to speak, out of nowhere crowds of people started running through the aisle waving her signs ( as well as passing them out to every table ) and responded in unison at different times during her speech. The music went up louder, the cameras went on and the crowds rushed the stage. It was scripted, it was fake, and it was disgusting. A few of the candidates left the dinner due to the out right rudeness of the crowd. I truly hope this state gets it together and gets Reid and Titus out of the leadership roles. The Nevada caucus will be a joke ( and don't even get me started on them choosing Hilary supporters to be the precinct captains ). I used to not have anything against Hilary but after this week and seeing the way her campaign works, I can't help but to dislike her.

[ClarkUSA]

119. Thank You for the corroborating account of what happened at the LV rally/JJ dinner!

I have family friends in LV who had the same experience as you and the OP source.

And here's to a warm welcome to DU!

:toast:

[sufrommich]

120. If you're going to claim there is"evidence"

like this: "There is also evidence that the Hilary campaign went to a temp worker company and hired people to come rally ". You should point it out,otherwise,it's just a slur.

[New Era]

130. Evidence was a bad choice of a word

I actually heard John Hunt, the chair of the Clark County Democrats, say this in a conversation ( He also referred to Hilary as Madam President ). I personally have no proof his claim and in hindsight I was a bad move to include it in my original relpy. I was not out to slander Hilary but to bring my observations of what happened at the debate/JJ dinner.

[TAZller]

121. Evidence that HRC hired temp workers to rally?

That would be disgusting. Please explain?

[Reno.Muse]

147. Rumor has it that Jack Carter (Jimmy's son) may run against Harry Reid

when he is up for re-election. I will beat the pavement for him this time. It's time for the Reids to stop telling us how to think and vote in this state! They are all at the lobbyist's trough.

[robbedvoter]

118. As someone without a personal beef in this, I was glad DK's answers drew applause

I also noticed other good answers - sometimes Biden's, sometimes Hillary's, sometimes Obama's drew applause. The crowd seemed engaged rather than biased to me.

[hayu_lol]

132. Based upon the posts on this thread, it seems obvious that...

Hillary is running a complete campaign. Makes me wonder what the rest of the candidates are doing with their time and money.

Those anti-Hillary folks might find it educational to watch the audience during the Bush speeches. They cheer and boo too--right on cue. Try getting in to those speeches if you can.

Those who claim that they won't vote for our nominee in the GE if it is 'this person' or 'that person' may as well not vote at all. None of these candidates are perfect--our job is to attempt to find the best of the bunch and then support that candidate. If you can't do that, then you are on the wrong site.

Try and keep the repugs from continuing the dismantling of America...vote for the Dem nominee.

[ClarkUSA]

133. Update: All six of CNN's "undecided voters" were Democratic operatives

CNN hits bottom and digs: All six debate questioners appear to be Democratic Party operatives. So much
for "ordinary people, undecided voters". To paraphrase Junior Soprano, CNN is so far up the DNC's hind end,
Howard Dean can taste hair gel.

In a nutshell, CNN's six "undecided voters" were:

A Democratic Party bigwig
An antiwar activist
A Union official
An Islamic leader
A Harry Reid staffer
A radical Chicano separatist


http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2007/11/cnn-plants-questions-to-protect-hillary.html

[TAZller]

134. So what...

And ALL of Wolf's questions were written by CNN operatives. You expected a lack of bias at a DNC sponsored CNN officiated "debate". Did anyone? I expected to see how candidates performed within the limited biased environment we were given. Give me a different environment and I might be able to see something different.

[ClarkUSA]

135. Yes, I expect a lack of bias at a DNC-sponsored debate.

You don't, eh? Interesting.

[TAZller]

136. Not what I said...

A DNC sponsored CNN officiated event to include "Democratic Opperatives" isn't beyond my realm of expectation as far as these things go.... If it was an RNC/Fox event, I woud expect a Republican bias. I guess my expectations are based in reality as your quoted piece confirms.. Yours aren't, eh? Interesting.

[ClarkUSA]

138. I don't subscribe to The Politics of Cynicism. That's why I support Obama.

Thanks for the explanation of your perspective, but I'm not that jaded yet to agree with you.

[TAZller]

139. Then I am even more confused....

In regards to the piece you posted, and my "So, What?", how does your Audacity of Hope lead you to interpret the piece of "Democratic Operatives"?

[ClarkUSA]

140. You got me.

What are you talking about, again?

[TAZller]

143. Your point of post #133 is_______?

I am sure you have one, but it escapes me.

[ClarkUSA]

144. We would be terrible ballroom dance partners.

lol

[TAZller]

145. only because you keep testing your dancing shoes...

and you two-step is not particularly flattering.

[ClarkUSA]

148. No, it's because you keep tripping over your own feet.

So, I'm dumping you. See ya.

[AzDar]

137. Thanks for posting this: it is tremendously important for voters who won't get

the opportunity to witness a debate 'live' in their home state.
Hillary's bullshit 'Rovian' phrases; or her own personal booing claque (for the other candidates, of course), seem almost un-Democratic....certainly WAAAAY too close to the bullshit tactics of obfuscation and distraction we've had to endure for the past 7 years, for this Dem to stomach.
No More Clintons! No More Bushes! No more taking it in our tushes!

[ClarkUSA]

149. "No More Clintons! No More Bushes! No more taking it in our tushes!"

I love it.


:rofl:

[jenmito]

142. Yet I heard John King, George Stephanopoulos, and others, say the audience was evenly divided

among all the candidates. :eyes:

[ClarkUSA]

150. lol! Woof's protegé and fmr. Clinton chief of staff are so-o-o credible.

:rofl: