It never fails, it is the small stuff, the details that always expose the most true character of our candidates.

Maybe winning at any or all cost will turn too costly?

Nevada's state voting laws say this

Employees are allowed one to three hours on election days to vote if they do not have "sufficient" free time outside working hours, depending on the distance between work and the polling site. Employees must apply for time prior to Election Day. Employers may designate the specific time employees may take.

Your use of the word "disenfranchisement" to describe workers having to vote outside the workplace - the way most of americans, Democrat or Republican, do - is inaccurate, slanted, and not terribly responsible.

Dammit, Hillary is not my first choice. I wish to God people would treat her fairly so I could concentrate on the candidate I'd prefer.

I'm waiting for Hillary's paid campaign workers to come here and start making comments that all seem to be written by the same person. First they start with how they're a retired teacher, then they'll say that they just don't trust Obama's inexperience, then they'll mention that it's time to vote a woman into office just because she's a woman, then they mention Hillary's experience - as if anyone has experience to be president if they weren't one before...

The whole Presidential election is rigged to disenfranchise millions of voters.

We need to go to a true one person - one vote system.

You know, Paul, I really wish I was sweetly naive enough about politics to think that you can get through the primary by reinforcing Republican narratives in the press and then get anyone to listen to you when you try to challenge them in the general.

FFS, Hillary is not my first choice. I know a lot of people who have been in the trenches of this shit for decades who are Obama and Edwards supporters and who are taking bucketloads of shit from swaggering bullyboy online Obama and Edwards supporters because they're trying to point out that America should be focussed on the bloodbath of incompetence and base bloodletting they're staging on the right and instead Democrats are demanding attention for endless sexist crap about Hillary.

Oppose her if you oppose her. Oppose her strongly if you oppose her strongly. Just don't be such a sexist jackass about it, as if only kool-aid swilling estrogen-addled Hillary supporters could possibly object to Democrats pushing Republican frames.

This isn't a minor campaign tactic or a matter of sexism. A core Democratic principle is making it as easy as possible for people to participate. Trying to interfere with that makes me wonder what other core principles she doesn't share. I go back and forth between figuring I can hold my nose to elect the first woman, and thinking of a third party protest vote. This is one of those protest vote days.

I said above, Eric, I agree with that, and I probably wouldn't have gone this route.

I still maintain that disenfranchisement was an inaccurate, inflammatory and inaccurate word to use here, and that if Mr. Stein were behaving like a journalist rather than an advocate he wouldn't have used it.

When these sites were signed off in August by 4 of the 6 litigants in the case and only objected to when their candidate was not endorsed by the Culinary Union, that is disenfranchisement. If it was so unfair, it was unfair in August. To change it now is obviously a way to keep people from voting for Obama.

Cheryl,

Actually, "disenfranchisement" is defined as denying people the right to vote. This lawsuit--which I agree shouldn't have been filed--took issue with the fact that only the culinary workers were allowed to caucus at their place of work. Big difference.

thank you