I didn't know this, did you? How Barack may have won the "young" vote.

[boston bean]

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=3940909&page=1

His campaign offers that advice in a brochure being distributed on college campuses in the state. A spokesman said it's legal and that 50,000 of the fliers are being distributed.The brochure says: "If you are not from Iowa, you can come back for the Iowa caucus and caucus in your college neighborhood."

Given that lots of students in Iowa's colleges and universities are from Obama's neighboring home state of Illinois, the effort could net him thousands of additional votes on caucus night.

It's not the first time Obama has profited from the fact he's from an adjacent state. Illinois residents routinely show up at the candidate's events in eastern Iowa. (The first question Obama took at an Iowa town meeting was from a guy from Naperville.)


Me:

Last night I heard on the news that Oprah was helping him bus these out of state students back into Iowa because they were not there due to Christmas break and putting them up in an armory or VFW hall or something like that.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

1. sigh.

what a bunch of poor losers. Talk about dirty attacks from HIlarians. Again. you'd think they'd take a break, lick their wounds, and try something new.

[boston bean]

2. Is it true?

[H2O Man]

20. It's really sad.

And so unnecessary.

[spanone]

151. guess you don't know how many enemies you have till you win.

[SharonAnn]

34. Obama knows how to organize. Remember his background as a

community organizer.

This is how delegate coutns are achieved, by working a really good "ground game". Hard work, determination to find every possible vote, making sure they show up to caucus, etc. His organization is good at it.

This is really important in places like the Iowa caucus. In some other areas, other tactics may be used more.

Give credit to the guy, he knew how to count the votes, and that's definitely something we need.

[warrior1]

3. If Clinton had done

this it would be on the front page.

[ryanmuegge]

156. You're right there.

I'm no Clinton supporter (actually, I'm glad Obama won), but something about this strikes me as kind of underhanded and slightly less than ethical. Really, it could be argued either way (brilliant organization or unethical and barely legal), I guess, particuarly given that electing the president is a national decision. As somebody else pointed out, though, if the young people were students in Iowa, that's one thing; if most of them were not, then it becomes much more questionable.

This issue is of interest to me because I live less than 5 minutes away from the Iowa border. I considered going out there to a caucus site, but I decided against it since I technically live out of state.

That said, I'm sure any of the candidates on BOTH sides would have done this if they had the money. In fact, I'm pretty sure that Romney did bring in a lot of out-of-state supporters. I'm surprised Ron Paul didn't do this, actually, given how rabid his supporters are (and many of them are young people) Clinton had the money, but perhaps she didn't have the ardent support of young people that Obama has.

[bryant69]

4. If it's legal, than what is the issue?

The same option was available to all the candidates, right?

Or should we be impressed that Hillary was too noble to use this perfectly legal strategy?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[boston bean]

7. It may be legal, but he pushes the envelope and it turns me off from even more.

I wonder how the real democrats of Iowa feel about having their voice quashed by young Illinois residents.

Just because its legal doesn't make it right.

[bryant69]

8. So you wish Obama was as stupid as Clinton?

Maybe stupid isn't the right word.

I also think it's pretty foolish too pretend that college kids don't care about the communities they came from. I went away for school too, but I cared a lot more about my home town than I did about the town I lived in.

Bryant

[boston bean]

11. Listen if you don't see this as something askew, so be it. I happen to disagree

I am not a Hillary support and never have been.

But this does not sound fair, I'm sorry and it just goes to show how corrupt and how easily manipulated our system is and can be.

[alcibiades_mystery]

14. I voted in my college town

I had a stake in that community.

Indeed, would you have students prohibited from registering and voting in their college towns? is that your "fair" solution. Sounds like a good strategy for voter suppression, which is precisely what it is where such policies hold.

[boston bean]

17. No, I am not saying it is illegal, and yes you can obviously vote

in the State you go to college, but not all states.

There is the absentee ballot, as well.

I just do not think it is very fair to bus in students from Illinois, if they were really from Iowa they would have remained there through the holiday break, and try to sway an election that way.

If I were an Iowan, it would really piss me off. Obama, used this loop hole and probably won the caucus that way. I don't want someone who has to use loopholes, for chrissakes he passed out brochures and gave them rides back into the state.

No other candidate did that.

[alcibiades_mystery]

31. You don't know that he won the caucus THAT way

And there's nothing wrong with delivering legitimate voters to polls where they have a legitimate right to vote. These students are IOWANS, because they are duly registered in Iowa and live 4/5th of their lives in IOWA. They have a right to representation in the place where they live.

[RoadRage]

158. If the Cacuses were on Jan. 29th..

and school was back in session, would this be an issue? Those same college students (plus MANY MANY MORE) would have been back from Winter Break.. happily Caucusing away in their college towns.

Obama just did this to even the playing field.. he's campaigning with these kids for months, and then they move up the Iowa date so they won't be in town because of the break?

Also.. this rule is totally legal for ALL candidates.. so Hillary & Edwards easily could have (and probably did) do it as well.

[Orangepeel]

75. It doesn't seem to have pissed the (full time) Iowans off too much

how many of these students could there be, really? Assuming there were any, they certainly couldn't have outnumbered the full time Iowans. And, since Iowa is a caucus where everyone can see who everyone is and how everyone votes, if there were Iowans who were pissed off, it seems to me that we would have heard some noise and there would have been some backlash.

[Hippo_Tron]

147. So they should have to stay in an empty dorm room all break to be entitled to caucus?

I didn't know that not going home to see one's family was a requirement for caucusing in Iowa.

[onenote]

150. and if the caucus was held after spring break, would you have allowed these students to vote?

[youthere]

124. As did I.

[CTyankee]

62. But I think this can be done anywhere, can't it? I am under the impression here in New Haven

that students at Yale could register to vote in CT. And I think my stepdaughter in 2004 was able to claim residency in either Ohio where she was in grad school or back home in Tennessee (she chose Ohio because she felt Tennessee was such a lost cause for the Dems, her vote would be more effective in Ohio).

Maybe I'm wrong on this but it seems to me that this has been done before w/o a lot of screaming...

[boston bean]

74. I guess it's because he and Oprah bused these students from their homes in Illinois

to caucus for him, put them up overnight somewhere.

Now I ask you, if you go home on break, where do you really live.

I am not saying he did anything illegal, but he took this a step further than any other candidate in history.

And I don't find it to be ethical. There are many good Democrats in Iowa who were probably disenfranchised due to his actions.

[CTyankee]

86. But wasn't the caucus open to all? How does that disenfranchise Iowa residents?

If the caucus system allows people to register in their party the night of the caucus, that is a "flaw" in the system, it seems to me, not a flaw in Obama.

I was working for the prochoice movement in CT in 04 and we "bused" in prochoice women to PA to encourage younger women to register and vote. I believe we registered them on the spot. In that case, as in Iowa, nobody voted for these people. They either did or didn't vote on their own...

[LiberalHeart]

89. I agree....it feels like a fix, not something that was fair.

I'm not one who thinks students shouldn't be allowed to vote where they live, but we aren't reading about Obama or Oprah busing in people from, say, California or Ohio so they can vote where they live several months of the year. It's the next state over, HIS state, so it's not really about encouraging *all* the students to vote.

Having said that, I recognize that even the entirely local efforts to get out the vote are focused on getting one's own likely voters to the polls. It's just that this has a different feel to it, like stacking the deck in a way that distorts the view of what happened in Iowa. Does this also account for why the turn out was so much higher than in the past?

I don't understand why so much weight is put on the outcome in Iowa. I don't know that Iowa is representative of the country as a whole. Perhaps it is. But this time around, we are seeing that this vote may have actually been a two-state vote, not just Iowa, and that should be reflected in the reporting.

I also can't help but remember those GOP goons who were bused into Florida during the recount. That colors my thinking about busing people in for political purposes. If the students were so committed to this candidate, why didn't they drive themselves back to Iowa? Were they not so committed after all, but more into the group dynamic? If this was mostly a field trip and not an exercise in Democracy, it makes their votes beside the point. The thing is, we'll never know, will we?

And no, I'm not a Hillary supporter.

[City Lights]

91. It's ethical as long as the students bused in go to school there.

Get back to me if you discover they bused in students living and/or going to school in a state other than IA.

[GirlinContempt]

96. Going 'home' to my parents house for dinner

doesn't mean I live there, and if they were out of town, spending a few nights there doesn't equal living there either.

I don't understand how one persons vote disenfranchises anyone else. Please, explain this.
To disenfranchise is to deprive of voting rights. How does a student voting deprive anyone else of their rights to vote?

[KamaAina]

152. Yale students routinely hold political office in New Haven

nearly all the residents of the city's First Ward are in one of the eight residential colleges (please don't call them "dorms") that fall within its boundaries. Not surprisingly, then, the First Ward alderman/woman is nearly always a Yale student.

[Gloria]

25. What it means to me that a lot of young, "bandwagon" kids who never lost

a pension or found themselves without healthcare at age 50 after being downsized have perhaps unwittingly helped shove the key issue of corporate power off the main stage...This is grim. They don't know what progressivism really is and never will.

What is left to vote for except a "new and improved" version of the same crap? After nearly 8 years of the horrific and explosive control of corporatism, it becomes a repressed issue.

I'm going to work for a local CD candidate against the young DLCer...after that, I'm out of politics. I don't want to vote or work anymore for people who are being shoved at me by the "Villagers." At my age, there is no real choice anymore...it's all windowdressing.

PS-I'm voting for John Edwards in the NM caucus...for the principle of it!!!

[alcibiades_mystery]

33. Oh, so now the dumb young voters are too stupid to get it right, eh?

Why not have an intelligence or 'experience' test before we let them into the polls? That's a good idea!

This is really despicable now. I'm really starting to see what the student movement of the 1960's had to put up with: denial of representation in the college towns, insinuation that the young cannot make good decisions at election time.

It's unbelievable.

You want to revoke the 26th amendment, you go right ahead and try. Until that time, an "inexperienced" 18 year old has as much say as you and all your precious experience in our democratic polity.

[boston bean]

37. Actually you only have to be 17 to caucus in IA. nt

[redqueen]

87. I think in most states you can caucus at 17, as long as you'll be 18

at the time of the GE.

[Gloria]

40. No, not stupid. Young, inexperienced and fallilng for an image without

understanding the message of corporate power being suppressed...and not really understanding what that means in the long run for them.

So, don't misquote me. Shove it.

[FrenchieCat]

114. So my daughter that attends Harvard who will vote should have her

voted discounted because she doesn't understand about corporate powers?

I believe that my daughter understand perfectly.

I think that part of the reason that our young people don't vote is dues to this type of attitude....
the fact that some folks feel like they don't know anything, even if they are in college, many studying exactly the issues that you speak of. Why do you think that students and young people as a group are more likely liberal than folks older than them? Is it because they don't know anything? Maybe its because they do.

I never thought that I would live to see the day when progressives determined that progressive college students were uninformed and might be better off not voting.

[alcibiades_mystery]

136. Of course your daughter understands

The line of argument is outrageous and condescending in the extreme. It positions young people as too stupid (code word "inexperienced") to vote. Any legitimate voter is as capable as any other. That's a foundational principle of a democracy. To suggest otherwise is elitist nonsense at best, and verging towards the "voter aptitude tests" that we all know were used for suppression. It's a disgusting argument.

[Gloria]

141. Are they really liberal in this day and age? Do they know about

Paul Wellstone? Do they know much history at all?

Smart doesn't mean complete understanding necessarily. Today's students are subject to a different media environment and a political era where working class people and unions have been under attack. What you don't know can kill you....

[GirlinContempt]

162. Are you really liberal?

Should you have to prove you are before you're worthy to vote?

Jesus christ.

[ellisonz]

164. Down with the Old Left, up with the New Left!

:eyes:

[alcibiades_mystery]

137. Disgusting

The line of argument is outrageous and condescending in the extreme. It positions young people as too stupid (code word "inexperienced") to vote.

Any legitimate voter is as capable as any other.

That's a foundational principle of a democracy. To suggest otherwise is elitist nonsense at best, and verging towards the "voter aptitude tests" that we all know were used for suppression. It's a disgusting argument.

[KittyWampus]

143. "Falling for an image"? Anyone supporting Edwards as an "anti-corporatist" has fallen for an image

Edwards is a centrist Dem happy to invest in Hedge Funds to amass even more wealth and then pretend he's for the little guy.

He has done NOTHING except talk about evil corporations and it's so obviously pandering.

[PVnRT]

123. Wow

Right, nothing bad happens to college graduates, like when I got laid off from a job, had another one decide to shut down an office overnight, and then had to go stand in the unemployment line in the two years after my graduation from an engineering school. Ahhhh, those were salad days.

And Edwards has only been "pushed aside" if you actually do believe that the Iowa caucuses are the be-all end-all of the primary season like the media does.

[ryanmuegge]

159. I think you're onto something here about many of Obama's young supporters

I'd be perfectly happy with Obama or Edwards (given that they're the best of the "viable" candidates), by the way, so this is in no way a slanted anti-Obama rant from a supporter of a different candidate.

I guess anything that gets people my age involved in politics is good, but I've noticed that a lot of my peers who know and care very little about politics are behind Obama. Much of this, I believe, comes from a mainstream media characterization and storyline of him being a "youthful change agent." Being a phenomenal and inspiring speaker helps him a lot, too, I'm sure, but many younger people that I know became Obama supporters out of nowhere when they previously couldn't even tell you which party controls the legislative branch. Many know (and care) little about his policy positions or the issues, but they support him because they repeat the same old media talking points surrounding him. Most cannot elaborate on their reasons for supporting Obama. I think many of them are mad as hell about the consequences of the war and do not want to support the Republicans as a party because of it, so they just choose the guy the who the media labels "inspiring, youthful, an agent of change," and such. They're angry and all of that, but not enough to really get into politics beyond the surface, it seems. Still, any support for somebody other than a Republican is good. Perhaps it will facilitate a greater political awareness and activism in the future.

Many young people are also Ron Paul supporters, which I find amusing and perplexing. Yeah, his foreign policiy positions and parts of his analysis of the DIRE economic problems (particularly with regard to the Fedreal Reserve cheating to create bubbles due to the loss of manufacturing jobs) are right on, but do they really want some of his other domestic policies to become a reality? Can they even tell you a fucking thing about his other positions? I doubt it. But, hey, as long as they can go to Libertarian Party get-togethers and smoke weed, be angry about something (though not at the corporations rigging the system; they support a candidate who would give the same entities more power), and the girls can wear fashionable, tight t-shirts that say "impeach Bush," in a cute, powerpuff-girleseque font, they're all for being politically active. When it comes to, I don't know, doing some research, reading, or volunteering - the mundane work; the shit that isn't fun and doesn't appeal directly to one's vanity -, they're nowhere to be found (as it may require sobriety and getting up before 7 PM).

[mrreowwr_kittty]

146. Um, those young people are real democrats too. nt

[Scriptor Ignotus]

166. you mean he did everything in his power to win?

heaven forbid. not the type of Democratic candidate I would want running for Prez. :sarcasm:

it was legal. the other candidates had the option to do it. this is nothing short of sour grapes.

[ryanmuegge]

157. The stealing of the 2000 and 2004 elections was probably within the letter of the law, too

I'm not, by any means, saying that's on par with this, but sometimes just looking at the letter of the law isn't always the best approach to determine an act's morality.

[salin]

5. Students vote where they go to college in other

states, and they have always done so in Iowa - the issue appears to be the concern that because the Primary had been moved up so early into January so that students wouldn't be back to school.

As long as they were not importing students who do not go to school in Iowa, I don't see the problem.

But then I grew up in a big college town and am used to students being active in local politics, so that might be why this doesn't seem to be a big deal to me.

[boston bean]

9. Its not like that in every state. How about an absentee ballot from the state you're really from.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

12. when you spend 9-10 months in a state, where are you REALLY from?

sheesh. poor losers. no class. just like their candidate. What did they try against obama? Cocaine attacks, muslim attacks, Rezko attacks, hidden "bad" stuff? Just who showed class leading up to this caucus? It was not Hillary.

[boston bean]

13. You are not working there, mostly, not paying taxes etc. this just

goes to show how easily manipulated our system can be, that is all.

I am NOT a Hillary supporter, so get off that line, will ya.

[alcibiades_mystery]

15. Nonsense

Students invigorate the local economies of college towns and play plenty of sales tax and even income tax when they have part time jobs, as very many of them do these days.

I spent six years in State College, Pennsylvania, the smallish town that is home to Penn State. Students essentially built that community with all sorts of money, tax included. They should have every right to participate in the local government of a place where they spend 4/5 of their lives.

[boston bean]

21. These caucusers were home, get it home, for the holiday break. nt

[Lone_Star_Dem]

26. Visiting their parents/families

I still do that, though not as often as when I was younger. However, I no longer lived there and never had plans to do so again.

This is a really poor argument and legally, they live there for more than half a year, it's their primary residents for all intents and purposes.

[boston bean]

27. It's legal damnit, i agree, but it doesn't make it right. If you

want to believe that fine.

Did you actually read the entire article?

[Lone_Star_Dem]

35. Yes, I read the article

What I'm saying to you is it's a losing argument on your end.

Let me give you an example real fast.

When I came to Texas to attend college I moved here and became a resident. However, if I would have had the chance to vote for someone in a really cool, epic political event, who was also from my home state of California and had made it a point to remind me of that similarity we share. I probably would have.

Would it have been unethical of the person running for office to play up the fact that we were similar in that we came from the same state? If so, why?

I honestly can't see how this crosses any ethical lines. What I see it as doing is getting young people off their bums and making them a part of the process. Something I know Democrats have been trying to do for decades and we've not been doing such a great job. All in all I'm glad it worked and I hope it spreads and they all stay involved for the rest of their lives.

[alcibiades_mystery]

29. Semantic distinction

You truly don't know what you're talking about on this issue, and it's starting to sound like pure sour grapes.

The issue of student voting is extremely important and has been debated with very good points on both sides for quite some time. Students struggled for many years for the right to vote in their college HOMES, where they live 4/5 of their lives for 4-5 years.

You are being totally and utterly ridiculous.

[ellisonz]

165. So by your logic senior citizens shouldn't be given rides to caucus...

If they can't get there by themselves, they disenfranchise ME!

:puffpiece:

[ChairmanAgnostic]

18. my parents were poor. I took out loans, worked, and

lived as cheaply as possible on campus, but I paid taxes, and I worked in my community. and I voted at school.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

19. To be fair..

Most of them do work there. They do pay taxes there and it is their primary residents.

My daughter can no longer be on my insurance policy because she is considered a resident of the town in which she attends college now.

Really, give this one a rest unless they're found to be voting in their old hometowns also.

[ret5hd]

102. They work and pay more taxes than most retirees. just sayin'.

[Bluenorthwest]

47. I know who showed class!

Donnie McClurkin and Hezikiah Walker!
Pure class.
Obama's version of a tour with Michael Richards and David Duke.
Pure class, a vision of Unity and Hope that takes the breath away!

[salin]

24. It has been like that in every place I have lived

but then again, I have lived in a number of college towns/cities. I just don't see the big deal.

[City Lights]

81. What does where "you're really from" have to do with anything?

You have no idea where these students will live when they graduate from college. Some may stay in IA, some may return to IL, and some may move to a completely different state. At what point will you allow them to change their registration status? They're currently spending more time in IA than IL, so why should they be denied the opportunity to participate in the process there? Sounds like sour grapes to me.

On edit: Hillary is "really from" IL too.

[hughee99]

118. IIRC, it IS like that in every state...

I believe there was a federal case a number of years ago that allows college students to vote where they go to college. They can CHOOSE to vote in that state, OR they can vote in the state where they're "really from", but the state must accept a full time college student as a state resident for the purposes of voting (though not, of course, for determining in-state tuition or anything else).

[hfojvt]

119. as a new Freshman in 1980, I voted absentee in my home state

After 4 years though, in 1984, I voted in the state where I went to college. However, it seems very suspect in this case. Especially since low turnout is such a factor. I noticed that Clinton was winning counties in central Iowa and Obama winning in eastern Iowa.

[leftynyc]

6. Something tells me that if

Hillary had pulled this, the outrage on this board would be deafening. At least people should be honest about that. And she's not my candidate. Mine dropped out last night.

[alcibiades_mystery]

16. Pulled what?

Made possible the vote of legitimate voters?

Wow. What a dirty trick! :sarcasm:

[LostinVA]

58. Oh, it would be deafening

And, even she is my candidate, but I also liked yours. And, the system sucks when they have to drop out after one caucus.

[bdamomma]

10. I heard last nite on MSNBC with Keith and Tweety

that 57% of voters were under 30, they want change, and want to change the whole dynamic. Interesting.

[Gloria]

28. Isn't that ironic?? They've "changed the dynamic" to ....the same dynamic??

If you repress the main issue of corporate power, then you haven't changed the dynamic! You're playing the same game, in a different uniform...

[bornskeptic]

104. No, 57% of those under 30 voted for Obama.

Only 22% of caucus participants were under 30.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/index.html#IADEM

[RL3AO]

22. So let me get this straight

someone who lives in Iowa 9 months out of the year, pays income taxes and sales taxes should not be able to vote in the caucus?

[alcibiades_mystery]

30. This is pre-1960's student movement VOTER SUPPRESSION rhetoric

Pure and simple. Students struggled mightily for mere representation in their college locations for years and years, and it was one of the planks of the student movement. The OP is deluded.

[H2O Man]

32. Exactly right.

I remember being a student, and working with the NY Student Association of the State University (SASU) on this exact issue. Having the right to vote in theory does not mean much if you cannot vote where you live and spend your money. I can honestly say that I can't remember a single democrat who was opposed to students' voting in their communities.

[alcibiades_mystery]

And thank you for that, H2O man!!!

Whoop Whoop to the student associations and SDS and all the other groups that came together to make student voting in college towns a reality. You guys were awesome!!!

Yes, it is ironic that some on these boards are now taking the most reactionary pre-student movement positions (there's a post upthread suggesting the young were mere "bandwagon voters" apparently too dumb and inexperienced to vote "correctly"). On this fucking board! Unbelievable.

[H2O Man]

39. It just makes me

shake my head when I see democrats advocating for the denial of students' voting rights. This nation has an ugly history of denying certain groups of people the right to vote. Likewise, there is a wonderful history of people working to create a society where all adults can vote.

I consider the student turn out to be part of the positive potential of our party.

[boston bean]

41. Can you two get enough of eachother. Kudos to you both, OK!

You are both wonderful, insightful, people. Who happen to be ignoring the fact that if your candidate lost because of the same reasons, you would be questioning it.

So keep on patting eachother on the back. I hope it makes you feel better.

[H2O Man]

48. In fact,

I have not picked one candidate. I have donated to John Edwards, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton. And I donated to a couple others.

As a citizen, I feel very strongly about voting rights. It is something that my family and I have had to deal with, in a number of ways, over the years. I find the advocating for the disenfranchisement of select groups to be a dangerous and undemocratic. Our nation has a history of denying non-white and female people the right to vote.

In recent years, we have witnessed the theft of the 2000 election, when black citizens were denied the right to vote and to have their votes counted in Florida. There were similar events in ohio in 2004. I strongly oppose that type of disenfranchisement -- not because I support one candidate today, but because I strongly support the right of every adult to cast a vote and have it count.

I note that elsewhere on this thread, you state that students do not work in the communities they attend college in. While others have pointed out that you are wrong about that, as many students do work, it is perhaps more important that you recognize that people need not be employed to vote. That was, in fact, the mentality of those who suppressed the vote in Florida in 2000.

It is one thing to be upset if your candidate "lost" because voters were disenfranchised. It is quite another to be bitter because college students voted for a candidate you do not support.

[boston bean]

50. The only person I have seen you defend is Barack Obama, get real here.

I can tell who you support, even if you can't.

You do not believe the process was manipulated? Or can be manipulated?

If you cannot admit that then I don't know what to say.

I do believe it and I have been fervent in my convictions regarding electoral fraud. You may want to take a look at the other side and see that some one was disenfranchised when he decided to flood the Iowa Caucus by busing college kids who were home in Illinois for the holidays back into Iowa.

I think it is an ethical question, not legal.

No other candidate did this. An actually if you read the articles regarding this you might see who was really disenfranchised.

[H2O Man]

54. You are confused.

I do not "defend" any of the candidates, as I do not think any of them require defending. I do point out some of the more offensive errors in thinking that I see on some threads on DU. I've also posted numerous positive threads about all of the democratic candidates.

One of the most common issues that social workers confront when dealing with family therapy is when one family member tells another, "You think that ______." No one is in a position to tell another person what they think. It is one of the most basic errors in thinking, and it never leads to anything positive. In our little democratic family discussion, you might want to think about that. You are really not in any position to tell me what I think, are you? Any more than I could tell you what you think. Better that each of us have enough respect to allow one another to speak for themself.

Can a system be manipulated? Certainly. Here is an example: in November of 2004, my 26 year old nephew went to cast his vote in a rural, upstate county. He had lived there for 25 of 26 years, and had been a registered voter since turning 18. And he had voted at every opportunity. However, my brown-skinned politically active nephew had been removed from the rolls, without any explanation. I consider voting rights to be both ethical and legal, and attempts to disenfranchise voters to be unethical and illegal.

[boston bean]

57. I have my opinion on who I believe you support, that will not change

I have watched you on this board long enough.

And I do not begrudge you supporting Obama.

But disenfranchisement isn't only not letting people vote.

[H2O Man]

63. Now you are

simply being stubborn. I do not begrudge you for it. (grin) At least you admitted that you are upset by the outcome last night. I'm not -- I think there were three democratic winners last night, and I think that each of the three has a very good chance of winning. That likely is what is at the root of our disagreement on this thread. No big deal.

You are indeed entitled to you own opinion. But at some point, perhaps in a couple of days, you might want to consider that my speaking out against some of the uglier attacks on candidates is distinct from an endorsement. I have spoken against some of what I consider the worst attacks against our candidates, and not just Senator Obama. However, I do think that there have been more dishonest and mean-spirited attacks against him in the past 6 weeks -- hence my more numerous responses on those.

[boston bean]

65. Okay..... but do you agree that disenfranchisement is not only not allowing people to vote?

I will still hold my opinion, when do you anticipate officially declaring your support for your candidate?

[H2O Man]

70. Well, to be honest,

at this point, I do not feel a need to pick any one of the three. Things could easily change. There are certain things that I like about each of the three better than the other two.

The last time I really supported one candidate in the primary season was in 1988. I supported Jesse Jackson. In 2004, I kind of liked Wes Clark, and thought he and John Edwards might have made the strongest ticket. (Clearly, my primary picks are not usually in the majority column!)

More important to me right now is trying to urge people not to be negative and attack our candidates in the primary season. And, as I do every four years, I will fully support the party's candidate in the general election.

[youthere]

129. I can see where people feel this pushes the line in "fairness"...

but I don't see how anyone was disenfranchised. No Iowans were prevented from participating in caucus. The only ones who participated in caucus are those who met the guidelines for residency. I would agree with the disenfranchising argument if anyone had been kept from voting.

[Little Star]

51. But you have loudly spoken on behalf of Obama. Be honest.

[H2O Man]

55. You might read

the OP I posted on DU:GD before this thread was posted. It might be hard to find, because like the OP I did last week -- which listed what I consider the positives about each candidate -- those threads with positive messages often sink rapidly. But if you make an honest effort, you can find them.

[Little Star]

60. You are going to honestly say you have not been carrying

water for Obama? Okaaaaay. I am sorry but I honestly thought more of you. Go back and read all of your own little comments in threads other than the ones you started and you might be able to see why I see things this way. I still really admire you but you are not facing what you have actually done on this board since things have heated up. It is not that I don't think you have the right to say them but once they are said you own them.
With best regards, LS

[H2O Man]

69. Oh, absolutely.

Hopefully, people can distinguish between responding to some of the ugly, dishonest personal attacks against candidates, and endorsing them. And, in my opinion, there have been far more attacks aimed at Barack Obama in recent weeks, than against any other candidate. More, a small group of DUers have been posting what I consider the most dishonest, divisive nonsense. Do I respond to it? Sure.

At the same time, though I have not felt any need to post this on DU, I had been troubled by a person who had recently been associated with Senator Obama's campaign. When I had the phone calls and mailings asking for further donations, I explained why the money that I would normally be sending him was going to another candidate. Some of the staff I spoke to said they could respect my opinion, while another wanted to argue with me. So I'm used of people telling me that they disagree with me, or that they've lost respect for me. It is of no concern to me, because I am comfortable with my beliefs, and those beliefs motivate my decisions on who to support.

I decided after seeing the attempt to smear Senator Obama on his teen-aged drug use to again send him a donation. However, he is not the only candidate I am donating to. And it doesn't matter to me if people believe that or not.

[Little Star]

107. Have you considered that SOME of those people that you

describe as dishonest and divisive were really not? Some people are not good at expressing themselves. He had me after the 2004 convention, then lost me. He lost me both with what, to me, was smooth sloganeering and I do worry
(although less now) about electability. Are those the kinds of arguments that you consider dishonest and divisive? You really cannot read other peoples mind and hearts. I will let it go at that, I do not want to argue with you. Peace.

[H2O Man]

115. No.

I'm not talking about people who simply favor a different candidate, or who have valid concerns about Barack Obama. I think that there are a number of threads that raise real issues about several of our democratic candiates. There are times when I am tempted to participate in these more. But I try not to.

What I am speaking of are the threads that appeal to people's darker nature. I include things that are racist, sexist, and dishonest. I also have, at times, commented on some of the things I think are foolish, such as rants about accents. I do not include honest disagreements. I disagree with the stances of many of the democrats in office, on issues such as impeachment and the need to end the war of occupation in Iraq. I also disagree with many DUers on those same issues.

[Little Star]

116. It is hard to not participate. Thanks for your response. n/t

[alcibiades_mystery]

138. I have no candidate

And the fact is, you are speculating about reactions if i DID have one, while we are responding to YOUR ACTUAL reaction documented on this thread.

[Gloria]

43. It's not about voter suppression...it's about exploiting younger people

with a fake message of change. It's playing the same game as all the other "Villagers"--don't talk about corporate power as a key issue, let's just play the game the same way.

It's a disservice to do this to the younger generation...they're headed for rougher times than those of us a system that is being taken apart.

Suppression happens in many ways...and one of them is suppressing the discussion of corporate power in a blunt manner....

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

130. So you're saying young people are stupid and don't know any better?

You're saying Obama's like a carbetbagger, right?

Jeez, talk about 1960s style voter suppression rhetoric.

:eyes:

[alcibiades_mystery]

135. Once again, the young being too silly to see clearly

Despicable.

[Gloria]

142. Don't give me that crap. I have guys in this age group in my family..

I see very clearly the complete lack of understanding of money, saving, reading, thinking, and herd mentality. These are guys who graduated from college June 07. One back home, the other in grad school doing trombone, in debt, no real job yet, yet thinking he's going to buy a house (?!).

It's not a question of stupidity. It's a question of many still in the nest or going back to the nest for economic reasons, but not yet connecting WHY they can't afford to live on their own. Or why they don't have health insurance.

It's actually tragic. You think I'm against young people?? NO, I'm not. I don't want the road to get rougher for them, but it will if the hoodwinking continues.

Get of your holier than though crap. There's too much holier than though around here. It's insufferable. It's actually sounds overly defensive.

You're the one calling young people "stupid," I'm not. Exploitation and cynical manipulation is inexusable. This is the party we have now. Face the music.

[alcibiades_mystery]

148. Support repeal of the 26th Amendment

Your post is pretty clear. You don't think people in that age group are really qualified to vote. So, support repeal.

There's no two ways around it. You can't speak out of both sides of your mouth, first saying that the young are consistently hoodwinked into voting incorrectly, then saying you support them. The first implies gullibility, at the very least.

You're an elitist.

[onenote]

154. so are you opposed to their voting at all, or just voting in Iowa in January?

[Le Taz Hot]

23. Taking first place in a Caucus is a whole lot

different than taking first place in an actual primary. There are far too many manipulations and maneuvers available in a caucus situation. We saw that in 2004 and we're seeing it now. We'll see what happens with actual primaries where there's a more legitimate system.

[Blarch]

36. Go sit down

in the corner.

[Little Star]

38. I agree. He used his close proximity (home state )

advantage and now has (the pot of gold) momentum. Same ole, same ole. Yesterday I was wishing I lived in Iowa, today, not so much. Do said college kids get to vote in town or state races? That would really be wrong. Vote in someone and have the real true residents left with that after you go back to your own real home state. I do not blame Obama for using his loop hole, but there is something wrong with our system that allows ANYONE to game it. One more question, do our military get to vote in the states which they are stationed? If not, there is something really wrong with this system.

[boston bean]

52. good post. He gamed the system and we will get what we deserve. nt

[Bill McBlueState]

80. college students are "true residents" of wherever they live

If you spend more than 80% of your life in a state and pay taxes there, why wouldn't you vote there?

[City Lights]

93. How do you know what state will be their "real" state when they graduate?

Sheesh.

What state is Hillary's "real" state?

[GirlinContempt]

105. What's wrong about getting to vote in the community you live in?

I think it would be worse to cast absentee ballots in elections you aren't really following and don't really affect you at the time as you aren't living there.

Should my vote not be counted if I work for a company and I know in a year and a half they will move me to another city in another state? Of course it should still be counted, this is just silly.

[Little Star]

110. Now that was a good point. One that made me think. Thanks.

[GirlinContempt]

113. Welcome

:)

[in_cog_ni_to]

42. It's legal. The kids from the colleges CAN caucus. WTF is wrong with that?

NOTHING. Any of the other candidates could have done the same thing had they had the insight to do so. 17 year olds are also allowed to caucus if they will be 18 by November.

[mb7588a]

44. I doubt that had much effect...

The native Iowa students were likely home in their small communities, where not much was going on, and they were dragged out by their parents and friends. Usually the students are back in class by the time the caucus happens and they're too busy to take 2 hours for a silly song and dance for "democracy".

How 'bout this? ---> Kudos be to Obama for even paying attention to young people!

[bullwinkle428]

45. I don't think Democrats should be going down the road of

voter disenfranchisement, which seems to me is what you're suggesting. The Repukes are disgusting filthy pigs for trying to do that every election cycle, and we would be no better if we did the same...

[boston bean]

46. You don't think what he did might have disenfranchised voters, it works both ways.

No it is not illegal, but it is a bit shady to go and bus students who are from illinois to caucus in Iowa.

[MH1]

99. The "disenfranchised voters" are the ones who didn't show up.

What was the turnout percentage overall? I didn't hear a number, just that it was better than 2004 but "still not very high."

If 90% of eligible caucus-goers had shown up, the impact you are concerned about would have been so tiny as to have been meaningless.

NOT ONE OF THOSE STUDENTS, BY SHOWING UP, PREVENTED ANOTHER IOWAN FROM PARTICIPATING.

So, where is this alleged disenfranchisement?

Why do I even have to write such an obvious statement on this board?

[janx]

49. GO HAWKEYES!

:rofl:

That is all.

:rofl:

[Little Star]

53. Do our military get to vote in the states which they are stationed?

I'm just looking for an answer here, please. Anyone know?

[RL3AO]

56. Not in Iowa. If your not present, you don't vote.

If you worked the evening shift last night, too bad.

[Little Star]

61. Thanks for replying but that was not my question.

[in_cog_ni_to]

73. They vote by absentee ballot...if they aren't PURGED from the rolls by the repukes. n/t

[youthere]

131. They have the choice of voting in their home state via absentee or in the state they are at.

[electron_blue]

59. Well somebody should be courting the college students. And if it's legal, then I have

no problem with it. Doesn't even sound unethical to me - more like clever.

[Little Star]

64. To clever by far for my taste.

[ProfessorGAC]

68. Why?

Why is it too clever?
The Professor

[in_cog_ni_to]

72. Because HER/HIS candidate didn't think of it first!

:hi:

[boston bean]

78. I expect this from republicans, they can take gratification by playing unethically

but Dems against Dems?

He's really lost me.

[in_cog_ni_to]

98. WHY? ALL students vote in the town they're going to school in! Obama did NOTHING wrong! He just

encouraged the young people to vote! Is there something wrong with getting MORE YOUNG DEMOCRATS to vote? I think not.

[alcibiades_mystery]

140. Only when they don't vote your way

In which case, they were too inexperienced and deluded to vote correctly, and getting them to the polls was an act of disenfranchisement. Talk about Newspeak.

I'm ready to puke reading this thread.

[alcibiades_mystery]

139. There's NOTHING unethical about getting legitimate voters to their polling places

You are being absurd.

[City Lights]

84. LOL!

:thumbsup:

[Romulox]

66. This is a really ugly thread. Students have a right to vote where they live.

When they live on campus for 3/4 of the year, they have a right to vote in the city/state where their school is located.

Yes, also in city and state elections. No, there is no requirement that a person pays taxes or works in order to vote (as if college students don't work or pay taxes!) Yes, even if you feel they've voted the"wrong" way. :eyes:

[Little Star]

71. It ain't over till its over. There are legitimate questions

that need to be looked at. Obama has not been anointed king ya know. There are still two other great Dems in this race. Please stop trying to bully the supporters of the other candidates who want to know why they should vote for him after all his shanigans. He has thrown Gays and Lesbiens under the bus, Ted Kennedy, Al Gore, Baby boomers, etc. I want to know why at this beginning point I should shut my mouth and kneel at the Obama throne? I don't believe him. I think his message and the way he bussed in people was not good, fair sportsmanship. I actually trust the dog that bit me better than him. For today, if my guy ends up out then I will support Hillary until I have no other choice. Obama's got some splaining to do imho.
Sorry, but your scolding was a bit much.

[Romulox]

77. This thread is about student voting, and there is simply no question: students have a right to vote

where they reside for the majority of the year.

All the other stuff has not a thing to do with it.

[boston bean]

83. Does the same apply for military people. I don't think so. I am pretty sure they

have to vote absentee in the state they originate from.

So there is a reason for some skepticism regarding students who come from out of state being allowed to vote or caucus.

I know that it is legal. And that is really not my issue.

Obama bused these kids back in from Illinois. That is the problem I have with it. It was gaming the system and it something I expect republicans to do.

[Romulox]

88. Um, yes the same applies to military personnel.

http://www.fvap.gov/laws/legal.html

[boston bean]

90. I think you need to read that again. nt

[Romulox]

92. And I don't think you know what you're talking about.

Domicile = residence + a present intent to remain. For everyone. Including students, and including military personnel.

You're attempting to insinuate a controversy into an area of the law that is well settled. It's pointless.

[peacebaby3]

103. If they are stationed on a military base/post it is Federal property so they don't

live in any other state. Quite different from a college student.

[Little Star]

108. Thank you for the response but plenty of them live off base.

[GirlinContempt]

111. And the link that was provided

says that they can vote in the state in which they live as long as they meet that states residency guidelines.

[GirlinContempt]

109. Doesn't the caucus

usually take place during a time when those students would be back at school anyway?
In what way is bringing rightful voters to the vote 'gaming the system' and 'republican'. I thought everyone accused republicans of preventing people from voting?

Was it in his favour? Sure yeah. Was it wrong, unethical, immoral, or hurtful to other voters? Well, since it was legal, and if it had been the last caucus they would have already been back in the state, I'd say no.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

82. "There are legitimate questions that need to be looked at."

What are they? I've not seen any legitimate questions nor arguments displayed in this thread.

I have seen a few people who are responding emotionally, which is their right, but their emotions don't make an argument legitimate.

[Little Star]

101. Some of my questions are...

how do him and his supporters justify his throwing people he doesn't think he needs verbally out and insulting them at the same time? Do his supporters think he really played on a fair playing field? He didn't have to choose to use residents of his own state. And then there is substance, where is it? I have not been able to find him talking about things of substance that matter to me and I've heard others say the same thing about their issues which are progressive issues like GBLT. He didn't care who he threw out or dissed, only concentrated on how he had the home court. To me it was that smugness that turned me from him. After he gave the 2004 convention speech I was totally enthralled, but when he started campaigning the only thing I could see was a good orator. Don't you supporters wonder why many of us feel that way? Or, is it just easier to call us names than try to educate us on the real issues he supports? Where is the beef? Those are some of my questions.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

117. .

1) How do him and his supporters justify his throwing people he doesn't think he needs verbally out and insulting them at the same time?

I am neither Obama nor am I a supporter of his. Still I don't see how this applies to the point of the college students voting so you may need to expound a bit more.

2) Do his supporters think he really played on a fair playing field?

See my answer above. All points again apply to this question.

3) He didn't have to choose to use residents of his own state.

Are you referring to the students? If so, they didn't have to choose Obama.

4) I have not been able to find him talking about things of substance that matter to me and I've heard others say the same thing about their issues which are progressive issues like GBLT.

See my first answer.

5)Don't you supporters wonder why many of us feel that way?

See my first answer.

For me the issue here is that the students have every right to have participated. They also have a right to vote in the communities where they reside, work and pay taxes the primary part of the year (many don't go back to their parents for more than a few weeks a year and never actually live in those communities again).

[Progressive_In_NC]

132. The real question is what is the value of the bus ride, the meals and who paid for them

I don't care if the students voted, but their votes came a cost. Votes are not supposed to be subsidized with gifts and cash expenses and the like; or by a celebrity.

Oprah says she'll give me a ride to the college town, a place to stay, probably a few meals, and I get to be part of something. Does Hillary or John Edwards need to go out and get Letterman or somebody to give them a chance?

Oprah didn't buy the votes that's for sure, but she sure made it hard for those kids to think about voting for someone other than her candidate.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

153. Just exactly how many of these out of state students do they think there are, anyway?

Iowa does have a higher-than-average percentage of them and I'm sure Obama got the lion's share of of the ones who caucused. But I think people are greatly exaggerating their effect on the outcome of last night. Most college students, in-state or out-of-state, probably didn't caucus at all.

Obama also won handily among the 30-44 demo (who I'm pretty sure weren't bused in by Oprah) and got enough of the older groups to win.

[IsItJustMe]

67. I see nothing wrong with that. The college student's legal residence is where they go to school.

That's where they live. As long as they don't vote in both states, what's the problem?

Just makes sence to me, and I am not a Obama fan.

[VelmaD]

76. My only concern...

is that these same students NOT vote back in their home states as well. I know from personal experience how a person can be on the voter roll in more than one county, or even more than one state. My parents kept seeing my name on the voter roll in my hometown for years after I moved and registered in a different county...and I just got a jury summons from back in Texas and I moved to North Carolina several months ago. As long as these kids don't vote twice, I don't much care where they vote...at least they voted.

[boston bean]

85. Well that is another concern in and of itself. I have no idea if they check.

[returnable]

79. Weak. I remember Tammy Baldwin had to deal with the same crap...

...when she first ran for Congress in '98. After she stomped the establishment candidates in the Dem primary, there was a lot of bellyaching from the losers' supporters that her success was the result of UW-Madison students who weren't "real" residents of the district.

Utter horseshit. They're entitled to vote, and it's about damn time politicians recognized it. The reason the "youth" vote never shows up is cuz no one ever actually courts them. Good on Obama for recognizing this constituency and bringing them into the process.

[City Lights]

94. I see lots of sour faces on this thread, trying to make something out of

nothing.

[book_worm]

95. Oh, that's why he won because he has a smart campaign staff

what a bunch of sore losers you are.

[in_cog_ni_to]

100. It really is a pathetic reaction, isn't it? Obama brought MORE young people into the Dem Party!

Fer shame! Fer shame! *sigh*

[Gloria]

144. Lambs to the slaughter.

If and when they realized how the triangulation will work against them, I wouldn't be suprised if they feel more aliented in the long run...

[paparush]

97. I'm voting Edwards, but I heard about this weeks ago and I thought

Obama was basically just being resourceful..

These guys aren't playing for 2nd place. They are playing to win.

Its within the rules.

Move along.

[kentuck]

106. But will he be able to do that in NH?

If so, then he will be formidable.

[Mountainman]

112. People vote where they live. If students live in a dorm or off campus they have a right to vote

there.


Here in Santa Barbara, CA the repukes play that meme every years. They say that Dems win here because of the UCSB student vote and the student get out the vote drives on campus. They are right and by law the students have a right to vote in the local, State, and Federal elections because this is where they live and this is where they are registered.

Many people live in a place for less time than students live here and they vote where they lived because that is the place of residence during the election cycle and that's where they were registered.

[kentuck]

121. Absolutely correct.

Give him credit for being able to organize them.

[HughMoran]

120. NH doesn't border IL or IA

...so I guess we'll see how he does without those "thousands" of bussed in student. I think this is a non-story BTW.

[PVnRT]

122. It's also not an actual vote

The caucuses are run completely by the parties using their own rules. No election law required. And as others have said, what stopped other candidates from doing this? Is everyone in Illinois (and Minnesota, and Nebraska, and Missouri, and Wisconsin) an Obama supporter.

[Zookeeper]

125. I did know that and took it into account when I saw the caucus...

results last night.

[NashVegas]

126. Who's To Say It Won't Bite Him In the A**?

These are students who won't be able to vote in Illinois. Do we know how many came over (if any)?

[Zookeeper]

134. There are posts in the Biden forum from DUers who caucused...

last night. It sounds like the much larger than usual turn-out created crowding and confusion, which hurt the "second-tier" candidates. Also, apparently both the Obama and Clinton precinct captains promised to turn some of their extra votes over to Biden, but that didn't happen, either because they just wanted to go for the largest numbers they could get and/or because the caucus-goers were newbies who didn't understand how it works.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Post #10:

"I ended up not caucusing at all - neither did Mr. Debi

Biden/Richardson/Dodd were SO overwhelmed by the new registrations (mostly Obama folks) that they had NO chance. Since we are such a small caucus (only awarding two delegates) it was over upon realignment. Had my favorite Biden precinct captain been able to sway ALL the Richardson and ALL the Dodd folks to go to Biden he would have been viable - but the Dodd folks went en masse to Obama immediately which blew that chance and then the Richardson folks split between Edwards and Obama (all the Biden folks went to Edwards).

We had a 42% increase in voter turnout for our caucus - (69 compared to 29 in 2004)."

[Dr Fate]

127. Good. I hope similar plans work well for him in other states. I love to see kids getting involved.

I like Edwards too- and I'll also be glad if he either wins or at least beats Hillary each time.

As far as college kids voting in their campus towns, I'm sure the locals accept the sales taxes they generate- so they shouldnt mind them getting involved in local politics.

[Forkboy]

128. ....

[jakem]

133. Good for him. At least someone can motivate a youth vote!

[mrreowwr_kittty]

145. So how does Clinton explain losing the 30-44 yo vote to Obama?

Did Oprah bus Gen Xers in too?

:eyes:

[alcibiades_mystery]

149. Everyone who didn't vote for Clinton or Edwards was "fooled"

Or got "caught up in a mob action" or "succumbed to a fad."

Everyone who did was clear-sighted and completely rational and voting according to the most exquisite rationality imaginable.

See how that works?

[mrreowwr_kittty]

155. Yeah, and don't forget the pivotal role Donnie McClurkin played in persuading us.

I know I was sure on the fence until a self-loathing homophobic gospel singer came along to nudge me into the Obama camp.

[alcibiades_mystery]

160. I agree that you have good reason to be against Obama

Since I am not an Obama supporter, I don't really care one way or the other.

Personally, I think the McClurkin thing is far overblown, but that's me.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

161. I was actually being facetious. I am an Obama supporter. nt

[Johonny]

163. Hitchhickers?