Why Are Caucuses Held On Saturday When Observant Jews Can't Vote?

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 07:36 AM
Original message

Why Are Caucuses Held On Saturday When Observant Jews Can't Vote?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bluestateguy

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 07:39 AM
Response to Original message

1. Are the caucuses after sundown?

Then it would be OK.

Then again, I'm not really sure how many Jews--who strictly observe the Shabbat--live in Nevada.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Ian David

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 07:57 AM
Response to Reply #1

2. Even if it's only one person, it's still one person too many to disenfranchise. n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #2

3. Not Smart At All

I know Seventh Day Adventists observe the Sabbath as well but I don't know which activities they prohibit...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

tsuki

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 08:45 AM
Response to Reply #2

10. Why, one person? The whole state of Florida has been disenfranchised. nt

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ronnykmarshall

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #1

71. I think they are.

In Iowa they started around 6:30pm, my guess is Nevada does the same.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

goddess40

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 08:02 AM
Response to Original message

4. Because this is a Christian Nation - NOT

but if it is to be changed it will take a lawsuit - it's sad but true. Many whine that we are a litigious nation but it's the only way to get many things done.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #4

5. That Is Part Of The Problem With Week End Voting

Some feel if we had weekend voting more people would vote but you run into problems like this... Maybe if voting went through Monday you would avoid it...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

lapfog_1

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 08:19 AM
Response to Original message

6. Caucuses are stupid.

I'm sure that will offend someone. But the idea that there is a time certain (give or take a few hours) when an entire state can just be somewhere like there isn't other responsibilities is not 21st century or even 20th century... it's 19th century.

We should all be voting, we should have a week to vote on a paper, hand counted ballot. All ballots to be mailed to the voter or at a post office for pick up and then returned by mail or dropped off at a polling location. We don't need to know what happens for a week. Let the paper ballots be counted two or three times, and observed by all parties.

Every voter who feels that they are disenfranchised should be allowed to vote a provisional ballot, and their case heard before totals are announced.

I would go one more radical step (check out Australia)... you can't get a drivers license UNLESS you vote. Every vote should have a "none of the above".

All votes should use the instant runoff voting methodology until there is a clear consensus winner.

It would end all of this "voter suppression" crap from anyone and everyone that engages in it (ok, maybe not ALL, but a lot of it). And that would save me from typing a few thousand words on a late Saturday nite.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

rodeodance

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 08:42 AM
Response to Reply #6

9. I agree with you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LiberalFighter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #6

27. Presidential Primaries and Caucuses are not intended for the public at large.

They are intended for the party faithful.

Delegates are not even allocated based on state population.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Canuckistanian

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #6

51. Makes sense to me

My biggest problem with caucuses is the amount of time (and money) that they take.

Caucuses seem to have taken on a life of their own quite apart from the straightforward selection of a presidential candidate.

I understand that the caucus/primary system was put in place to end the "smoke-filled room" system of secret negociations and power-brokering by entrenched "bosses".

But the only thing that's necessary is an honest, clean vote by accredited delegates.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Tarc

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 08:29 AM
Response to Original message

7. This is utterly ridiculous

How many topics have you spread this across now? We are not a theocracy, we are not Israel, we do not bend the workings of government to suit the whims of particular religious sects. This is a bad as when all the stores used to be forced to close on Sundays, it is a relic of the past.

And if they really want to vote and still be observant, they have this nifty little invention called an "Absentee Ballot".

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #7

8. I Discussed It In Two Topics

"And if they really want to vote and still be observant, they have this nifty little invention called an "Absentee Ballot"."

How can you vote "Absentee Ballot" in a caucus?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Kber

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #7

26. Absentee ballots are not an option in caucuses.

Just saying.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Didereaux

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 08:46 AM
Response to Original message

11. Because Clintons hate jews! (sarcasm folks sarcasm)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

dailykoff

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 08:54 AM
Response to Original message

12. Good question.

Ask Harry and Hilly.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #12

13. In Fairness I Think Caucuses Have Been Held On Saturday As Long As I Can Remember

Edited on Sun Jan-13-08 08:57 AM by DemocratSinceBirth

I wouldn't have brought it up if I didn't see it brought up elwewhere...

It just shows how casual prejudice can be...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

dailykoff

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #13

14. Iowa's was on a Thursday

January 3. And isn't this Nevada's first? Unfortunately what it shows is that Harry and Hilly don't give a shit about anything but roping in delegates.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

hayu_lol

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #13

15. Is this a problem? As a heathen, the chosen day does not matter to me...

for others of various faiths there could be a problem. Still, of all the heads of various religions, I've always found Rabbi's to be the most pragmatic about such things--where modern life does encroach upon religious obligations.

Do we have any Rabbi's here on DU? If so, could we get an explanation of what could be done?

The other solution would be, as one poster on this thread has already said, switch your state to BY MAIL ONLY voting. Here in Oregon we get our voter's handbook a couple of weeks before election day. We fill in our ballot at our kitchen tables(or similar nook and cranny)at our leisure, then either mail our ballot in or drop it off at selective drop points within easy and quick driving distance. So far, our system is one of the best in the country and is worth trying to get. The other advantage is that exit polling is eliminated completely...and the hounds of the media are also held at bay(LOL). I do notice that the only people in Oregon who complain about BY MAIL ONLY voting are Repugnants. Wonder why?

Anyway, there must be a way to handle various proscriptions by anyone's faith to get past this problem--if it has become a problem.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Madam Mossfern

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #15

17. As far as I know it is not forbidden to vote

on Shabbat. The only sticking point would be if a person has to write or use electronic devices to vote or, or course if one has to use a car to get there; and even then there is a way to do it. One could hire a non-Jew (before shabbat and pay them before shabbat) to drive them there and a non-Jew could mark the ballot for them if something like that needs to be done. Maybe someone here more knowledgeable than I knows otherwise. It mostly depends on the local rabbi and his ruling. I'd say his/her ruling but Orthodoxy does not allow for female rabbis.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Adelante

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #17

23. That's interesting

There may not be a ballot to mark at all given it is a caucus and not a primary. I guess it's a matter of crossing the room and aligning with a candidate group as in Iowa. If there is no written or machine ballot, the orthodox voter who hitches a ride might be in the clear to do the rest. Thanks for pointing that out. I realize it would probably need approval from a rabbi, but from what I see of what you're saying, it seems possible.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #17

32. The Problem Is You're Creating An Undue Burden

That's why the Supreme Court has struck down poll taxes and literacy tests...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

hlthe2b

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:14 AM
Response to Original message

16. Seems to me the more broadly impacted group would be

those workers who must work on Saturdays.... With primaries, they can absentee vote. I don't know that there is any accomodation for the many workers who must work on Saturdays. Yet, this would apply to some workers on any chosen day.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Adelante

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #16

19. The accommodation for the workers who work Saturdays is the workplace caucus

Exactly what the lawsuit is seeking to ban. These are being set up in casino ballrooms and are not restricted to casino workers or even union workers. Any worker, say a self-employed plumber, a clerk in an office, a dental technician, etc., can go into one of the casinos and caucus that Saturday.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Debi

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #19

25. True, if the person can provide that they have to be at work one hour before

or one hour after the caucuses are to convene. They have to provide proof that being at work would keep them from caucusing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Adelante

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #25

46. Fun and games, Debi

The student vote in Iowa. The labor vote in Nevada. Nice, huh?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Debi

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #46

52. I don't understand your comment.

Sorry...help..

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Adelante

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #52

63. Sorry

Discouraging voters instead of making it easier for them to vote. This Nevada lawsuit made me think of the efforts in Iowa against the student vote.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Debi

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #63

68. Ahhhhhh now I get it

It is odd especially odd b/c this plan was in place as early as 10 months ago - and some of the folks who are named Plaintiff's voted on the plan (and the plan was presented and accepted by the DNC). So why sue now? :shrug: Chaos?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Adelante

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #68

69. Let's just say

If a different candidate had been endorsed there would have been no need for a lawsuit. Shame.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

hlthe2b

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #19

54. I hadn't realized that.... seems reasonable to me...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LiberalFighter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #16

28. And those that work during the week?

There is always a group that will have difficulties. Everyone cannot be accommodated.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

hlthe2b

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #28

55. For primaries, the answer is absentee ballot... for caucuses...

you are right that there may always be a group that is disenfranchised.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

TankLV

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #16

67. Which is exactly WHY it's GREAT to have it on SATURDAY...

Edited on Sun Jan-13-08 02:32 PM by TankLV

The vast overwhelming - 90%? - MAJORITY of workers are OFF on SATURDAYS...

That's a GOOD thing...

No matter WHICH day or time is selected, SOMEBODY's gonna be adversely impacted. Period.

The object is to make it convenient for the MOST...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Adelante

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:22 AM
Response to Original message

18. Did the plaintiffs object as the caucus plan was being set up?

I don't know the answer to that. But four of those plaintiffs voted in a unanimous vote in favor of the caucus rules. And if they are concerned enough about observant Jews voting to try to ban the workplace caucuses a week ahead of the caucus, after the CWU endorsement of Obama, weren't they concerned enough two weeks ago, three months ago, six months ago, anytime before the CWU endorsement of Obama? If Clinton had won that union endorsement, would we be seeing this lawsuit at all? You may disagree, but I say no. I worked for fifteen years at the political end of a labor union. These things don't just happen out of a sudden concern for observant Jews.

Tough-Guy Politics on the Vegas Strip

Two days after a key Nevada union of casino employees endorsed Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, allies of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, filed a lawsuit to block the special �at-large� casino precincts set up months ago for those very casino employees.

-snip

But the lawsuit, filed by six Nevada Democrats and the Nevada State Education Association teachers� union � whose deputy executive director, Debbie Cahill, is a member of Clinton�s Nevada Women�s Leadership Council � seeks to prevent those At-Large Districts from meeting in next Saturday�s caucuses.

-snip

The state party approved the at-large precincts at its Nevada State Democratic Party�s State Central Committee meeting on March 31, 2007.

According to those minutes and attendance records of the obtained by ABC News (Click HERE), four plaintiffs now suing the state party to stop these �at-large� precincts from convening were in attendance: Clark Party Second Vice Chair Vicki Birkland and John Birkland, Party Third Vice Chair Dwayne Chesnut and Clark County Public Administrator John Cahill.

The �Delegation Selection Plan Review and Approval� including these �at-large� precincts was, according to minutes of the meeting reviewed by ABC News, �Passed unanimously.� The plan was submitted to the Democratic National Committee for approval in August.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/01/tough-guy-pol-1.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Mass

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:29 AM
Response to Original message

20. Who says they cannot vote?

Edited on Sun Jan-13-08 09:32 AM by Mass

They cannot drive to the caucus place, but they certainly can walk, and I wonder whether voting is consider work. You ask a good question, but it would take an Orthodox rabbi to answer it and I am not one.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Kucinich4America

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #20

65. How about public transportation? Is that OK

Provided the bus driver is a gentile, of course, and not breaking a commandment themselves.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

dorkulon

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:29 AM
Response to Original message

21. Look, if you're going to ask and answer your own question...

Just kidding.:hide: I'd guess it's a heady mix of ignorance and lack of consideration.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #21

31. It's Almost Impossible

It's like a poll tax or literacy test... You are creating undue burdens...Observant Jews can't drive nor write on the Sabbath... That means they would have to walk to their polling place and then find somebody to write in their choice the latter which I don't even think is legal... I live six miles from my polling place... That would be an undue burden if I had to walk six miles to vote...And if I was old or physically challenged it would be impossible...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Adelante

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #31

35. There is no ballot that I know of

It's a caucus so it's a matter of crossing from one side of the room to another. It's probably not even necessary to speak. Jews have been getting gentiles to drive them or light their lamps for centuries without a problem, so I doubt anyone will be walking 6 miles to caucus. The elderly and infirm would get there the same way they always do. GOTV

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #35

39. You're Placing An Undue Burden

Edited on Sun Jan-13-08 10:19 AM by DemocratSinceBirth

I realize they can get someone to drive them... But you are placing a burden on one group that you are not placing on another group and that is the textbook definition of discrimination...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Adelante

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #39

45. And the elderly and infirm who have to be driven to vote?

Do we stop having elections? No, we drive them. GOTV

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #45

47. Here's My Beef

I realize it's a small thing but holding a cacus on a Saturday is one instance where you can point to that one religious group is directly impacted in a negative way...

That's all...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

dorkulon

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #47

56. I can understand that.

I'd guess that they put it on a Saturday so people wouldn't have to work--and obviously, Sunday is when all the Christians go to church...

It's unfair, to be sure. The best solution would be to do it on a weekday, but make it a work holiday.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Adelante

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #56

62. That is the best solution

A work holiday.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

hlthe2b

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #62

70. Even holidays will have large segments working....

Caucus format and its inability to accommodate advanced absentee voting, unlike primaries, are always going to disenfranchise someone.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

martymar64

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #31

64. They can drive or write, they just won't.

As an atheist, any rules giving religious groups special rights is against everything this country was founded on.
I don't get any special rights, in fact in some states, like Bill and Hill's Arkansas for example, I'm prohibited by law from even holding public office because I don't recognize an imaginary deity.
People can choose their religion but they cannot choose their race or gender. Are you suggesting that we should two sets of rules, one for religious folks and one for non-religious people?
So who is being discriminated more?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

TheCowsCameHome

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:33 AM
Response to Original message

22. Maybe to keep Joe Lieberman from voting for repubelicans.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

THUNDER HANDS

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:39 AM
Response to Original message

24. separation of church and state

if they want to caucus, they'll caucus. If their religion is more important to them, they won't.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LiberalFighter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #24

29. Just as Amish don't vote in our area.

There were some that were upset with our Congress Asshole. But after it became public that they had registered to vote their leaders strongly encouraged them to take back their registration.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #24

30. It ViolatesTheFirst And Fourteenth Fourteenth Amendment

Edited on Sun Jan-13-08 10:04 AM by DemocratSinceBirth

First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, ((((or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ))) or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Fourteenth Amendment

Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

By scheduling the caucus on one group of citizen's holy day and not another group of citizen's holy day the government is choosing to repect one group's religious beliefs while disrepecting another...That's violates "the free exercise thereof" provision of the First Amendment and the "due process" provision of the Fourteenth Amendment...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LiberalFighter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #30

33. Presidential caucuses are not a government function.

They are conducted by the state parties.

Here in Indiana a caucus was conducted by the Democratic Party this Saturday to elect a candidate for a special election. The Republican Party will be conducting their caucus today.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #33

36. I Realized That When I Wrote It

So the party's are not willing to upheld the rights and privileges conferred upon us by the Constitution...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LiberalFighter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #36

40. Parties are not a government entity

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #40

42. I Realize That

But I would think a political party thought these rights were important...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LiberalFighter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #42

48. What group should have difficulty in participating?

Which day allows the greatest participation?

Are all Jews restricted in participating on Saturday?

Are they absolutely prohibited from participating in a caucus held on a Saturday?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

NashVegas

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:15 AM
Response to Original message

34. As We All Know, The Democratic Party Has a History of Shutting Jews Out of the Voting Process!

Edited on Sun Jan-13-08 10:17 AM by Crisco

:sarcasm:

I find it nearly impossible to believe that this would go off on a Saturday if the Jewish community had voiced an issue, previously - and I find it equally hard to believe the issue was never raised and addressed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #34

43. Nobody Mentioned A Specific Party

Both parties have some caucuses on Saturday...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

chascarrillo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:18 AM
Response to Original message

37. What prohibition is there from voting on the Sabbath?

Can't find one as far as I can see.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LiberalFighter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #37

41. There isn't a prohibition on postal delivery on Sundays

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LiberalFighter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:18 AM
Response to Original message

38. Why are elections held during the week when most people are at work?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #38

44. They Are Usually Held At Night

I realize it's a small thing but holding a cacus on a Saturday is one instance where you can point to that one religious group is directly impacted in a negative way...

That's all...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LiberalFighter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #44

49. So everyone can participate in a caucus held in the evening?

How about those with kids?

Those with other obligations?

Those that can't drive at night due to age or night vision problems?

But are all Jews impacted in a negative way? Are they totally prohibited from participation?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #49

50. It's An Invidious Distinction Because It Is Based On Religious Status

Edited on Sun Jan-13-08 10:55 AM by DemocratSinceBirth

It's an undue burden... For an observant Jew to vote he must hire someone to drive him or her to the caucus site and then have that person physically write down their choice...

What other religious group has such burdens placed on them to vote in a caucus?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LiberalFighter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #50

53. How many observant Jews are faced with this burden?

And again this is a private event that is not part of the government.

The ones that should be arguing to hold the event on a different day of the week are those that are faced with the burden. How many observant Jews are faced with the burden in Iowa? or any other state holding their caucus on a Saturday?

Do you have any facts as to the requirements of Jews in voting? Which groups in the Jewish faith are prohibited?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #53

57. Observant Jews Can Not Drive Nor Use Writing Instruments On The Sabbath

It doesn't matter if one person or one million people are discriminated against...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LiberalFighter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #57

58. How many would participate?

And back it up!

Not all Jews are Democrats either.

Personally I believe you are just grasping at straws on a non issue.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemocratSinceBirth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #58

59. It Doesn't Matter

About seventy percent of Jews are Democrats but the problem is not unique to one party... Both parties caucus on Saturday...

I don't understand your point... Is it that discrimination is ok as long as the target of it is are small in number?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LiberalFighter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #59

60. I guess you will never get the point.

The caucus is not a government run function. It is party run. It is not intended for everyone to participate.

And you didn't answer the question how many Jews would participate? You are making this an issue when they are not making it an issue. And not all Jews are observant. Therefore all Jews do not have a severe burden placed on them. We have at least one Jew that I know of in our local party that is a precinct chair and a volunteer. He drove to the caucus we had yesterday to elect a new party chair. A Saturday with the vote scheduled for 9AM. That is during the so called Sabbath that Jews observe. And it is not the first time he has done this. Or shown up regularly at our monthly meetings held on Saturday mornings.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Kucinich4America

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #57

66. Well that seems easy enough to accommodate.

You either walk, arrange a ride, or take public transportation, depending on the distance to your polling place. And you don't write anything. From my memory of the caucus process, most of the voting is done by a show of hands, or just a head count, and only one person per each candidate's group is writing anything down.

If every single person in the precinct is Jewish, that last part might be problematic, but what are the odds of that?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

fightindonkey

(674 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 12:02 PM
Response to Original message

61. Oh God, It's A Conspiracy!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Irreverend IX

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 06:46 PM
Response to Original message

72. Why are such primitive superstitions worthy of the state parties' respect? nt

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Sat May 04th 2024, 05:45 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.