Donald Trump

[Marc]

He knows that he is not gonna play much longer as he wants to be Sheldon Adelson , and you know what ????? He is !!!! He gets to call this election !!!!!!

Marc,

I can't wait until the coin drops and you find out Sheldon and The Donald are in cahoots.

I think The Donald visited Sheldon (the recent visit) and told him, "Save your money, Sheldi, and don't worry. As president, I'll take care of Israel." And Sheldon, being a businessman... you know...

Promoting Israel is all Sheldi really wants out of politics.

Michael

Coin drops ????????? It dropped like on m first post and my consistent point for the next 100 pages my man !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sheldon already let him in the club , Rubio will pick a Trump endorsed VP .

Finally , you are coming around !!!!

[Marc]

DT wants what Shelly has , they made their deal and DT gets to be on Team Shelly !!!!!!!!!!!

Marc,

You mean Donald Trump wants to be No. 2 to Sheldon?

In your dreams.

The way he's doing it, he gets to be kingmaker and king at the same time. Let's see if Shelly can top that one.

btw - You are right about one thing and I will come around to that.

Shelly is better than Sheldi as a nickname.

Michael

See the difference is is that Shelly will spend his dollars , Trump won't spend his for this election cause he aint even in the game . The game is raising and spending . Trump is talking ( masterfully I might add ) , but aint spending .

Now when someone gets to a few billion ( they say 10 , but it aint 10 , its like 2 or 3 ) its ok but 27 billion thats serious .

DT has a few billion , and will be the ONLY dude ever who has his net worth go up after an election , he is and will make money off this shit , thats what is so funny . No one wants to see this .

Now Shelly boy who is an actual HIGHLY LIQUID billionaire , cannot even spend his coin fast enough . Think about it , buddy gets 3 billion on his 27 and tons of liquidity too while DT is real estate rich , and regardless what anyone is gonna spout about NY real estate going straight up forever , that does not happen - EVER .

DT aint putting no skin in the game , Sheldon Adelson is , has , always does and always will . Israel , yeah - he runs shit from his Vegas office and he runs US foreign policy towards Israel from the Sands .

DT has not even bought time on commercials , has no ground game and no desire for such .

Why spend money , why not make it ??????

Thats how you go from 3 billion to 27

They both know this .

[Marc]

Whistling past the graveyard?

http://www.redstate.com/2015/12/23/despair-christmas-credo-republicans/

Finally , a journalist who understands US politics !!!!

I hardly ever get quoted here ( for good ) , but I will take this as compliment towards me Brant for posting an article stating what I have been stating all along !

Gracias ,

[Brant Gaede]

But I don't didn't think of you.

--Brant

low blow, ho, ho

[Marc]

Goodnight OL , God Bless our leader MSK .

He blesses us all with his love and honesty .

Merry Xmas folks ,

God Bless this community , and all the brilliance on this site .

Lastly ,

ZERO chance so calm down folks .

Merry Xmas President Rubio too and Happy Chanukah Mr. Adelson

[Marc]

But I don't didn't think of you.

--Brant

low blow, ho, ho

yes you did !!!

But its ok , so I called this nomination and election correctly which I add about myself the cliche " even a broken clock is right twice a day "

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

If we were to make a soap opera out of this thread, I suggest a title:

As The Crow Grows

Marc's a sweetheart, folks. He really is. And I recently learned a secret about who in his family loves Donald Trump--now it all makes sense...

One of the best things about Marc is that he's a good loser. (Albeit, he's a world-class winner.) Good thing he's such a good loser when it happens, though, because he's gonna be sorely tested...

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Thought for the day:

 

The same people that said I wouldn't run, or that I wouldn't lead or do well (1st place and leading by 21%), now say I won't beat Hillary.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

December 25, 2015

 

I'll let each one interpret this according to their own crow er... values and analysis...

 

 

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

If we were to make a soap opera out of this thread, I suggest a title:

As The Crow Grows

Marc's a sweetheart, folks. He really is. And I recently learned a secret about who in his family loves Donald Trump--now it all makes sense...

One of the best things about Marc is that he's a good loser. (Albeit, he's a world-class winner.) Good thing he's such a good loser when it happens, though, because he's gonna be sorely tested...

Michael

As the Crow Groans?

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Even the homeless:

 

 

Here's the blurb on YouTube:

 

You just never know where Donald Trump supporters can be found

 

The support for Donald Trump's remarkable Presidential campaign seems to extend all the way to the homeless of Skidrow as a homeless woman carrying signs supporting Trump in 2016 is seen being escorted away from the Los Angeles Mission where they were serving Christmas dinner to the residents of the area

WWW.TMI.BUZZ

 

Now that's voter passion. Like a person (one Danny G) said in the YouTube comments: "When homeless people stand up and say we care more about fixing the country than they do about a democrat welfare spreading maniac, it is time to listen."

 

I bet that lady is going to vote, too.

 

 

Michael

[Selene]

.

Would like to remind you that this thread is not about the eventual Nominee , nor about my "love affair " with the Latin Cuban Rubio . It is about who gets to sit in the chair - thats it . Reading some of the ridiculousness on this thread though makes me feel like commenting about who I believe will win . Yeah , its Rubio and its pretty freaking clear to me ( and political insiders who just are not spouting propaganda ) that he will win .

Let me explain to you how I believe the first 4 states go .... and no ... I do not believe that they will go Trump , Trump , Trump , Trump .....

If you really studied the important things , the money , the lack of spending , the ground game you would easily understand why Trump is getting ready to bid farewell .

Maybe after NH , maybe on Super Tuesday . Who cares .

Trump knows this , the smart money knows this , I know this .

You will know it soon .

Agreed.

Therefore, this would be a good spot to mark The Marc's statement about the lack of The Donald's seriousness based on The Donald's campaign not investing in a ground game as being a significant indicator of The Donald's shallow campaign.

A...

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

btw - Don't worry your pretty little eyes about Hillary beating Trump. He used to bribe her and knows where plenty of her skeletons are buried. She has dirt a mile long and I have little doubt he is sitting on it to spring it at the right time.

 

When he says (over and over) that Hillary wants to run against anyone but him, that's what he means.

 

I realize the following tweet from Trump is a few days old, but does anyone have any doubt, any doubt at all about what it means?

 

Hillary, when you complain about "a penchant for sexism," who are you referring to. I have great respect for women. BE CAREFUL!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

December 23, 2015

 

 

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

Dirt on Hillary won't stop her from winning the election. Everybody knew Bill was a liar in 1992. He got elected anyway. Obama is so dirty a good shower would turn him into a white man--or at least an Arab.

--Brant

a lot of voters just want to be bribed--money, power, sanction: one, two or three or any two or all three

[Marc]

If we were to make a soap opera out of this thread, I suggest a title:

As The Crow Grows

Marc's a sweetheart, folks. He really is. And I recently learned a secret about who in his family loves Donald Trump--now it all makes sense...

One of the best things about Marc is that he's a good loser. (Albeit, he's a world-class winner.) Good thing he's such a good loser when it happens, though, because he's gonna be sorely tested...

Michael

I like " As The Nomination turns " a little bit better !

I am a very good loser indeed !!!!!!!!! And I really like to lose here but don't get me started about fantasy , we gotta live in reality guys !

[turkeyfoot]

“I’ve had my fill of fucking intellectuals,”

http://tinyurl.com/zouavkw

“I love Trump,” he says. “He’s not an intellectual. He says he’s going to make America great again, that excites me. I got so excited I went out and bought a tricycle. I can’t hardly walk, but I bought a tricycle on just hope. I got it in August—end of October, 14 miles I was going on it, my Trump hat on backwards, going down the highway.”

In a nut shell, this explains what has eluded me about the Trump rise. Its not about Trump, its a projection for getting even with the vile things people believe they suffer in their lives. A emotional reaction based on a stirred up sense of gumption. The intellectual attempts to explain but cant put a finger on it. Its the feeling of, "its Friday, the end of a long work week, Im free to do what I want. Theres a party, Im want to be part of it."

Theres no real difference between the popularity of Obama (08,12) and Trump (16) or their philosophies. Or I should say I dont see it. Theres a rising tide of mediocrity in politics, one will soon replace the other.

In other words theres no real substance to the whys and wherefores of a Trump supporter. Its more my guy can beat yours. The American voters acumen didnt change overnite.

[william.scherk]

William, are you under the impression that the Republican Iowa "caucus rules" are the same as the Democratic Iowa "caucus rules?"

No.

Yeah cause how could 2 Canadians know anything about US politics , right ?

There are some differences between the two caucus processes -- mostly to do with finicky means of ensuring 'proportional representation' all along the way -- and when which preferences are 'locked in' and announced. But the basic process is the same: go to caucus, listen to pitches ... vote, count, and thereafter follow party-rules to select representatives who will participate at the next level of the process. One level 'selects' the next, from precinct to county to state convention. The actual human delegation to Cleveland will be selected in process, but those selected must be in proportion to the actual secret tallies taken at precinct level, as I understand it, GOP-style.

The most essential caucus rule differences are intra-party, between the 2012 GOP process and the revisions since then. Basically, what was a 'straw poll' is now a binding secret ballot. The votes are locked-in, more-or-less.

Since we are discussing the Republicans, the differences with Democrats are not meaningful to that which interests us in Trump v Cruz v Other Losers in Iowa. Though of course we may have misunderstood Adam's question. He has yet to follow up.

The word-phrase 'ground game' is dropped here a few times. I am sure we are reading all the sametyu wide range of analyses about the respective ground games of the hopefuls, those who are fascinated by the nitty gritty. Every partisan will be talking a good game, but the game is contingent upon that talk turning into precinct show-ups.

To give this a simple frame, consider what each candidate wants to have happen in a single precinct -- and then multiply that by the number of precincts.

Trump wants to bring a larger group of precinct-voters to 1600+ locations, under the leadership of an able and resourceful precinct 'captain' at each place. Every other hopeful wants to get to the precincts with their own well-led turn-up. They each want an able persuader to deliver the caucus stump statements. They each want no waverers under their wings. The only limits on the larger pool of show-ups are to be either registered or registrable Republicans.

Imagine being that array of putative Trump precinct captains. It is you and your knowledge of your precinct that might make the difference. Whatever 'game' is being played right there, right now, if we could zoom down and see it, this is the most interesting, where talk meets walk. You have to beat the other guys in every way. Every single 'lead' from the campaign intake valves has to be filtered and cajoled and instructed to do what the campaign wants: deliver committed numbers to the necessary margin. They are all fighting hard for the committment. Turnout. Turnout. Turnout.

Now, no one is saying that Trump will get schlonged in Iowa -- he is on the leaderboard. So, although there might be a great deal of crowing from certain quarters, there will be no crow-eating upon the tallies February 1st. Except maybe for Marc and the other unpleasant party-poopers of late.

So, turn all the confident talk of the Cruz-ers and Trumpeters into show-ups. Who has strong evidence that candidate A or B has it in the bag across all metrics right now? If you have it, show it.

One thing is certain, though. Trump is going to win the presidency.

Yeah, there is that.

So, win or lose a plurality of Iowa's one percent of convention delegates, Trump will be tromping on in all directions. I cannot see the scoreboard of electoral votes from November next year, let alone the actual results of his ground game in the first heat of primaries. You appear to have political clairvoyance of great range. You are one contextually certain pundit. The all-seeing all-knowing pundit of OL!

That said, it is good entertainment to see lip-smacking relish upon imagining a thoroughgoing schlonging on that yet distant November night. Oh, the giddy anticipation. Such is love of man and country.

I'd say maybe let your giddiness build over the months, Michael, as Trump stomps from one schlonging to another. Postpone full orgasmic crowing until at least the run-up to July, no? You may want to keep exhuberant joy and schadenfreude under firm control, releasing it in increments as events vindicate you. No one will be mocking you when you do that fully justified victory strut ... in the future. To do all your strutting now seems premature, at least to these jaded eyes. But you are the clairvoyant, so what do I know. I predicted Romney would get schlonged, but that might have just been a lucky stab in the dark, despite my own pundit vanity.

I am looking back at earlier winners of the Iowa Republican caucuses over time. Can we remember those who stormed or squeeked to victory upon that straw-poll triumph, like, oh, Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee ... ?

As for Hillary's held-back-till-2016-because-Trump skeletons, and her inevitable mauling at the hands of the short-fingered vulgarian, yeah. All he has to say in their debates is "Your husband schlonged a whole lot of hotties, Evita von Cankle-face, and you just sat on your disgusting toilet vagina. Bill spooged on Monica's dress and you swallowed it. Why didn't you ditch him, you liar and murderer? What were you doing in the bathroom?!!"

I mean, she is just going to fall over, right?

Edited December 26, 2015 by william.scherk

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

The next theory floating around the intelligentsia (the ones who brought you the string of "Trump's campaign will collapse this time" merriment) is cute.

I could quote, but it's all over the news. The establishment press machine is running with it.

The theory goes that since Trump's image (and self-image) is based on him being a winner, if he loses Iowa, his campaign and his will to fight will collapse.

(yawn)...

Michael

[Selene]

“I’ve had my fill of fucking intellectuals,”

http://tinyurl.com/zouavkw

“I love Trump,” he says. “He’s not an intellectual. He says he’s going to make America great again, that excites me. I got so excited I went out and bought a tricycle. I can’t hardly walk, but I bought a tricycle on just hope. I got it in August—end of October, 14 miles I was going on it, my Trump hat on backwards, going down the highway.”

In a nut shell, this explains what has eluded me about the Trump rise. Its not about Trump, its a projection for getting even with the vile things people believe they suffer in their lives. A emotional reaction based on a stirred up sense of gumption. The intellectual attempts to explain but cant put a finger on it. Its the feeling of, "its Friday, the end of a long work week, Im free to do what I want. Theres a party, Im want to be part of it."

Theres no real difference between the popularity of Obama (08,12) and Trump (16) or their philosophies. Or I should say I dont see it. Theres a rising tide of mediocrity in politics, one will soon replace the other.

In other words theres no real substance to the whys and wherefores of a Trump supporter. Its more my guy can beat yours. The American voters acumen didnt change overnite.

Salon?

Really?

A...

[Selene]

Trump wants to bring a larger group of precinct-voters to 1600+ locations, under the leadership of an able and resourceful precinct 'captain' at each place. Every other hopeful wants to get to the precincts with their own well-led turn-up. They each want an able persuader to deliver the caucus stump statements. They each want no waverers under their wings. The only limits on the larger pool of show-ups are to be either registered or registrable Republicans.

So, William, who is excluded from caucusing that day?

Second, who is "registrable" at the point of caucus?

A...

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

“I’ve had my fill of fucking intellectuals,”

http://tinyurl.com/zouavkw

“I love Trump,” he says. “He’s not an intellectual. He says he’s going to make America great again, that excites me. I got so excited I went out and bought a tricycle. I can’t hardly walk, but I bought a tricycle on just hope. I got it in August—end of October, 14 miles I was going on it, my Trump hat on backwards, going down the highway.”

In a nut shell, this explains what has eluded me about the Trump rise. Its not about Trump, its a projection for getting even with the vile things people believe they suffer in their lives. A emotional reaction based on a stirred up sense of gumption. The intellectual attempts to explain but cant put a finger on it. Its the feeling of, "its Friday, the end of a long work week, Im free to do what I want. Theres a party, Im want to be part of it."

Theres no real difference between the popularity of Obama (08,12) and Trump (16) or their philosophies. Or I should say I dont see it. Theres a rising tide of mediocrity in politics, one will soon replace the other.

In other words theres no real substance to the whys and wherefores of a Trump supporter. Its more my guy can beat yours. The American voters acumen didnt change overnite.

Geoff,

I sense your disappointment and perplexity.

Of course there has to be emotion involved in an election. If a politician bores folks, they won't bother voting for him or her.

But the one mistake all the word folks (who keep coming up with one boneheaded theory after another) keep making (including the folks you quoted) is that they think Trump supporters are not listening to them because Trump supporters are stupid (or emotional, or anything except rational, etc.).

What they refuse to grok is that they have lied so much so often, it doesn't matter what they say. Yeah, I suppose Trump supporters want to get even, but the deeper truth is Trump supporters just want them out of the way. It's like firing someone who keeps screwing up and lying about it.

Is there any guarantee the new hiree will do the job right? No. But if he comes with a resume like Trump's, the likelihood is strong.

In other words, their motivation is not revenge. Their motivation is that the wordsmith intelligentsia folks are irrelevant. Every damn thing they say is irrelevant. Everybody knows that whatever comes out of their mouths will only have the purpose of manipulation through covert persuasion and deception. That's all it's ever been. So it's all bullshit.

This is what might make Trump supporters appear unintelligent. They don't engage with the studious erudite liars any more. The words of the intelligentsia are irrelevant to them. They mock the studiousness of the liars because they are toying with them and responding to being baited. I don't know of a single Trump supporter who would want his brain operated on by a brain surgeon who had not studied long and hard.

Ayn Rand said, "Don't bother to examine a folly--ask yourself only what it accomplishes."

This is exactly how Trump supporters now treat the intelligentsia and the chattering class.

And they have a great archetypical image in their minds: Trump looking sternly at the intelligentsia (including all those screw-up politicians), pointing a finger and saying: "You're fired."

They feel he's doing that in their name.

And he is.

Michael

[william.scherk]

Trump wants to bring a larger group of precinct-voters to 1600+ locations, under the leadership of an able and resourceful precinct 'captain' at each place. Every other hopeful wants to get to the precincts with their own well-led turn-up. They each want an able persuader to deliver the caucus stump statements. They each want no waverers under their wings. The only limits on the larger pool of show-ups are to be either registered or registrable Republicans.

So, William, who is excluded from caucusing that day?

Second, who is "registrable" at the point of caucus?

Let us set the scene, Adam. A Grand Old Party Caucus. A registration table. A resident of New Jersey with a trolley of Rand books and a happy smile. At the next table, a young child clutching her Democratic Party registration for two counties over. A matron, having her name crossed off The List, while she hears the lady besides her say, "I would like to register. My precinct captain is a drunken whore and a liar but she said I could show up and vote my ass off. What kind of ID do you need? I live in the trailer-park down by the river and am a taxpayer. I looked at the map and I think I am in the right place. Why didn't that bitch phone me? I am going to switch my vote to Trump. Cruz can shove it."

Over there, Adam, are the resources with which to answer your own question. You prefer the Socratic method of going to source, querying the other guys on the front porch, and good for you. Since Marc and I are prevented by the Information Wall from dark-web USA election information, you can rest assured we are utterly irrelevant to the entertainment here, and not just because we have no vote. You don't have a vote in Iowa, but that doesn't stop you from informing this precinct on Interesting Things in Iowa.

In other words, probing for knowledge is a good thing. It keeps us honest.

I am going to ask you one question, Adam, and hope you can switch from Socratic to plain discussion.

Thirty-five odd days out from the tallies, what do you think interested Iowa spectators should be focusing on? (in other words, what parts of the story, ground-game, numbers speculation, turn-out history/expectations, other campaign-announced targets and metrics, indicators, and so on).

You will no doubt have a good gestalt on the Iowa contest, Adam. You probably have some perceptive observations to help orient less-informed spectators and fans. I wish I would hear more of that from you, and less of the suggestion the Canucki contingent are a bit dim and misinformed where it counts.

In other words, I think you are the kind of political junkie who will enrich discussion with real neat shit, surprising facts, instructive comparisons, shrewd assessments. I wish you would get to that neat shit. You will do a better job than me with no dog in the race.

Edited December 26, 2015 by william.scherk

[Marc]

.

Would like to remind you that this thread is not about the eventual Nominee , nor about my "love affair " with the Latin Cuban Rubio . It is about who gets to sit in the chair - thats it . Reading some of the ridiculousness on this thread though makes me feel like commenting about who I believe will win . Yeah , its Rubio and its pretty freaking clear to me ( and political insiders who just are not spouting propaganda ) that he will win .

Let me explain to you how I believe the first 4 states go .... and no ... I do not believe that they will go Trump , Trump , Trump , Trump .....

If you really studied the important things , the money , the lack of spending , the ground game you would easily understand why Trump is getting ready to bid farewell .

Maybe after NH , maybe on Super Tuesday . Who cares .

Trump knows this , the smart money knows this , I know this .

You will know it soon .

Agreed.

Therefore, this would be a good spot to mark The Mark's statement about the lack of The Donald's seriousness based on The Donald's campaign not investing in a ground game as being a significant indicator of The Donald's shallow campaign.

A...

Spell my name correctly and maybe I will answer the question.

[Marc]

Cruz wins Iowa ,

The next 3 , Trump ( possibly gets 1 ) , Cruz maybe another , maybe a surprise but who cares , Rubio gets one .

Bush , Cruz , et al kind of Rally with Rubio and then there are only a few left .

Trump makes his deal from now to then .

Just a scenario that looks likely

DT goes out his way , DT is a winner and he don't want be zero for Super Tuesday and with no advertising , no spend , no raise ,no ground game in place ..... uhhhhhh......... I really am not that smart , its just pretty there if you all wish to focus ,

yeah I know ....

What about Reagan

What about Lincoln

What about the kid from Hawaii

what about blah blah blah

#NotPresident Trump

[Selene]

.

Would like to remind you that this thread is not about the eventual Nominee , nor about my "love affair " with the Latin Cuban Rubio . It is about who gets to sit in the chair - thats it . Reading some of the ridiculousness on this thread though makes me feel like commenting about who I believe will win . Yeah , its Rubio and its pretty freaking clear to me ( and political insiders who just are not spouting propaganda ) that he will win .

Let me explain to you how I believe the first 4 states go .... and no ... I do not believe that they will go Trump , Trump , Trump , Trump .....

If you really studied the important things , the money , the lack of spending , the ground game you would easily understand why Trump is getting ready to bid farewell .

Maybe after NH , maybe on Super Tuesday . Who cares .

Trump knows this , the smart money knows this , I know this .

You will know it soon .

Agreed.

Therefore, this would be a good spot to mark The Mark's statement about the lack of The Donald's seriousness based on The Donald's campaign not investing in a ground game as being a significant indicator of The Donald's shallow campaign.

A...

Spell my name correctly and maybe I will answer the question.

Point taken The Marc has spoken and will be heeded...

[Selene]

Trump wants to bring a larger group of precinct-voters to 1600+ locations, under the leadership of an able and resourceful precinct 'captain' at each place. Every other hopeful wants to get to the precincts with their own well-led turn-up. They each want an able persuader to deliver the caucus stump statements. They each want no waverers under their wings. The only limits on the larger pool of show-ups are to be either registered or registrable Republicans.

So, William, who is excluded from caucusing that day?

Second, who is "registrable" at the point of caucus?

Let us set the scene, Adam. A Grand Old Party Caucus. A registration table. A resident of New Jersey with a trolley of Rand books and a happy smile. At the next table, a young child clutching her Democratic Party registration for two counties over. A matron, having her name crossed off The List, while she hears the lady besides her say, "I would like to register. My precinct captain is a drunken whore and a liar but she said I could show up and vote my ass off. What kind of ID do you need? I live in the trailer-park down by the river and am a taxpayer. I looked at the map and I think I am in the right place. Why didn't that bitch phone me? I am going to switch my vote to Trump. Cruz can shove it."

Over there, Adam, are the resources with which to answer your own question. You prefer the Socratic method of going to source, querying the other guys on the front porch, and good for you. Since Marc and I are prevented by the Information Wall from dark-web USA election information, you can rest assured we are utterly irrelevant to the entertainment here, and not just because we have no vote. You don't have a vote in Iowa, but that doesn't stop you from informing this precinct on Interesting Things in Iowa.

In other words, probing for knowledge is a good thing. It keeps us honest.

I am going to ask you one question, Adam, and hope you can switch from Socratic to plain discussion.

Thirty-five odd days out from the tallies, what do you think interested Iowa spectators should be focusing on? (in other words, what parts of the story, ground-game, numbers speculation, turn-out history/expectations, other campaign-announced targets and metrics, indicators, and so on).

You will no doubt have a good gestalt on the Iowa contest, Adam. You probably have some perceptive observations to help orient less-informed spectators and fans. I wish I would hear more of that from you, and less of the suggestion the Canucki contingent are a bit dim and misinformed where it counts.

In other words, I think you are the kind of political junkie who will enrich discussion with real neat shit, surprising facts, instructive comparisons, shrewd assessments. I wish you would get to that neat shit. You will do a better job than me with no dog in the race.

I stopped reading after the first sentence...

Again, in the Iowa Republican Caucus to be held in approximately 32 days, who will be deemed registerable at that precinct on that day?

Second, who is excluded from voting in the caucus on that day?

A...