Search


PDF Archive search engine
Last database update: 05 March at 08:18 - Around 76000 files indexed.


Show results per page

Results for «caucus»:


Total: 53 results - 0.045 seconds

MA Latino Democratic Caucus -Internal Rules - Final 100%

MASSACHUSETTS LATINO DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS INTERNAL SUB-COMMITTEE RULES These internal rules are guidelines for the leadership and membership of the Massachusetts Latino Democratic Caucus to manage the internal affairs of this sub-committee of the Massachusetts Democratic State Committee.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2015/10/24/ma-latino-democratic-caucus-internal-rules-final/

23/10/2015 www.pdf-archive.com

Caucusres 96%

RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE CERTIFICATION OF A SUSTAINABLE FOOD AND AGRICULTURE  CAUCUS IN THE CALIFORNIA DEMOCRATIC PARTY  WHEREAS, California is the number one agriculture state in the United States, feeding California, the  country, and the world; the California Democratic Party has a Business & Professional Caucus, a Labor  Caucus, and a Computer & Internet Caucus, but does not have a Food and Agriculture Caucus; and over  400 members of the Democratic State Central Committee applied for the certification of a Sustainable  Food & Agriculture Caucus in July of 2009, an application which is still pending in the Rules Committee;  WHEREAS, persons who practice sustainable food and agriculture, including farmers (rural, urban, and  suburban), ranchers, farm workers, nutritionists, food preparers, food processors, food distributors, and  food servers, and persons seeking to support sustainable food and agriculture, are an underrepresented  demographic in the Democratic State Central Committee of the California Democratic Party, and without  a Caucus;  WHEREAS, a Sustainable Food and Agriculture Caucus would greatly benefit the California Democratic  Party by assisting the Party in outreach to this demographic, and energizing participation in, allegiance  to, and enthusiasm for, the California Democratic Party and its candidates;  THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Sonoma County Democratic Central Committee urges the  California Democratic Party to promptly certify a Sustainable Food & Agriculture Caucus.  BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Sonoma County Democratic Central Committee urges other DCCs to  join the Sonoma County Democratic Central Committee in urging the California Democratic Party to  promptly certify a Sustainable Food & Agriculture Caucus.     Offered by Paul Apffel on January 6th, 2011 to the Marin Democratic Central Committee ‐ passed.  Offered by Yannick A. Phillips on January 11th, 2011 to the Sonoma County Democratic Central  Committee ‐ Chair Stephen Gale calls for vote ‐ passed.   

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2011/03/31/caucusres/

31/03/2011 www.pdf-archive.com

Absentee Request Form 94%

The NDP will send all of the Presidential Preference Cards on March 2rd to the appropriate county chair or if there isn’t a county chair to the person in charge of the requesting voter’s caucus.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/02/09/absentee-request-form/

09/02/2016 www.pdf-archive.com

Election MDP Latino 90%

Communications Team Coordinator (Any-Gender / 1-year term*)   * - pending approval by Caucus membership A motion will be presented at the October 24th election to provide 2-year terms for coordinators of the Campaign Organizing Committee and Outreach &

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2015/10/24/election-mdp-latino/

23/10/2015 www.pdf-archive.com

Rules of Procedure - Leeds MUN Conference 2015 89%

Delegates wishing to discuss substantive matters with the Chairs should do so either by written note or during an unmoderated caucus.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2015/02/15/rules-of-procedure-leeds-mun-conference-2015/

14/02/2015 www.pdf-archive.com

SfC-2016-Agenda 87%

The Grand Plan Lunch Education For and Through Democracy (by Derry Hannam) Disabled persons' caucus Co-ops in Brighton:

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/06/18/sfc-2016-agenda/

18/06/2016 www.pdf-archive.com

Geijsel CortesBarragan 2016 A Dishonest Election 86%

        Are we witnessing a dishonest election?    A between state comparison based on the used voting procedures    of the 2016 Democratic Party Primary for     the Presidency of the United States of America            Axel Geijsel  Tilburg University – The Netherlands      Rodolfo Cortes Barragan  Stanford University – U.S.A.      June 7, 2016         “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you  cannot fool all of the people all of the time.” ­ ​ Abraham Lincoln    “No one has yet figured out a straightforward method of ensuring that one of the most revered  democratic institutions – in this case, electing a U.S. president – can be double checked for  fraud, particularly when paperless e­voting systems are used.” ­ Larry Greenemeier, ​ Scientific  American                  Summary Statement     Given the stakes in the outcome of the​  ​ American presidential elections, ensuring the  integrity of the electoral process is of the utmost importance. Are the results we are witnessing  in the 2016 primary elections trustworthy? While Donald Trump enjoyed a clear and early edge  over his Republican rivals, the Democratic contest between former Secretary of State Hillary  Clinton and Senator Bernard Sanders has been far more competitive. At present, Secretary  Clinton enjoys an apparent advantage over Sanders. Is this claimed advantage legitimate? We  contend that it is not, and suggest an explanation for the advantage: States that are at risk for  election fraud in 2016 systematically and overwhelmingly favor Secretary Clinton. We provide  converging evidence for this claim.     First, we show that it is possible to detect irregularities in the 2016 Democratic Primaries  by comparing the states that have hard paper evidence of all the placed votes to states that do  not have this hard paper evidence. Second, we compare the final results in 2016 to the  discrepant exit polls. Furthermore, we show that no such irregularities occurred in the 2008  competitive election cycle involving Secretary Clinton against President Obama. As such, we  find that in states wherein voting fraud has the highest potential to occur, systematic efforts may  have taken place to provide Secretary Clinton with an exaggerated margin of support.      Different outcomes in primary states with paper trails and without paper trails     Data procurement​ : Given the potential that the underlying voting number has been corrupted,  we had to restrict our analysis to a proxy: the percentage of delegates won by Secretary Clinton  and Senator Sanders. To group states according to the accountability of the vote, we used  Ballotpedia and created two groups. First, there are 18 states that feature voting procedures  wherein the accuracy of electoral results of a primary ballot vote are backed by a paper trail.  Second, there are 13 states that do not have such a paper trail.     Analysis​ : ​ The [​ data​ ] show a statistically significant difference between the groups. States  without paper trails yielded higher support for Secretary Clinton, (M ​  = 65.13%, SD = ​ no paper trail​ no   = 10.41%) than states with paper trails (M ​  = 48.53%, SD = ​  = 16.00%), t(29)  paper trail​ paper trail​ paper trail​ = 3.21, P = 0.003,  d = 1.19 [Figure 1]. As such, the potential for election fraud in voting  procedures is strongly related to enhanced electoral outcomes for Secretary Clinton. In the  Appendix, we show that this relationship holds even above and beyond alternative explanations,  including the prevailing political ideology and the changes in support over time.     Supplemental analysis on caucus states:​  Does the pattern seen in ballot states occur in caucus  states? By the very nature of caucusing procedures, caucus results are generally thought to be  more trustworthy. However, in the current Democratic caucusing cycle, Iowa and Nevada had  caucuses widely alleged to have involved a considerable level of voter suppression and  potential fraud. We examined the [​ data​ ] and found that these two states had far higher support  for Secretary Clinton, [M ​  = 54.71%, SD = ​  = 3.44%] than the other caucus  fraud allegations​ fraud allegation​ states, [M ​  = 31.61%, SD = ​ = 9.98%], t ​  (11) = 3.13, P =  no fraud allegations​ no fraud allegations ​ independent­means​ 0.009, d = 3.10.    Anomalies exist between exit polls and final results    Data procurement​ : We obtained exit poll data from a ​ database​  kept by an expert on the  American elections.      Analysis​ : On the overall, are the exit polls different from the final results? Yes they are. The ​ data  show lower support for Secretary Clinton in exit polls than the final results would suggest, [M ​ exit   = 54.38%, SD = ​  = 13.95%; M ​  = 57.52%, SD = ​ = 13.87%], t ​  (23) = 3.49, P =  exit​ final​ final ​ dependent­means​ 0.002, d = 0.71.​  ​ While an effect size of 0.71 is quite substantial, and suggests a considerable  difference between exit polls and outcomes, we expected that this difference would be even  more exaggerated in states without paper voting trails. Indeed, the effect size in states without  paper voting trails is considerably larger: 1.50, and yields more exaggerated support for the  Secretary in the hours following the exit polls [M ​  = 62.93%, SD = ​  = 8.80%; M ​  = 65.68%,  exit​ exit​ final​ SD = ​ = 9.52%], t ​  (9) = 4.68, P < 0.001. In contrast, the effect size is much smaller  final ​ dependent­means​ in states with paper trails, [M ​  = 48.28%, SD = ​  = 13.94%; M ​  = 51.69%, SD = ​ =  exit​ exit​ final​ final ​ 13.77%], t ​  (13) = 2.27, P = 0.04, d = 0.58.  dependent­means​   Irregularities are unique to 2016    To show that the pattern of votes may suggest a systematic effort to undercut Senator Sanders,  we must show that no such patterns were in place in similar elections. Given that Secretary  Clinton lost to President Obama in 2008, their data is a natural control and the best possible  point of comparison for the 2016 data. Thus, as we did for 2016, we tabulated the percentage of  delegates won in each state by (then Senator) Hillary Clinton. The ​ data​  show that, contrary to  the 2016 data, there is no evidence that primary states without paper trails favored Senator  Clinton in 2008, P = 0.38. As such, the patterns of 2016 are different from their best point of  comparison.     Conclusion    Are we witnessing a dishonest election? Our first analysis showed that states wherein the voting  outcomes are difficult to verify show far greater support for Secretary Clinton. Second, our  examination of exit polling suggested large differences between the respondents that took the  exit polls and the claimed voters in the final tally. Beyond these points, these irregular patterns  of results did not exist in 2008. As such, as a whole, these data suggest that election fraud is  occurring in the 2016 Democratic Party Presidential Primary election. This fraud has  overwhelmingly benefited Secretary Clinton at the expense of Senator Sanders.         Figure 1. Percent of support for Clinton and Sanders by state voting paper trail  status.     Appendix, Supplemental Analyses, and References       

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/10/28/geijsel-cortesbarragan-2016-a-dishonest-election/

28/10/2016 www.pdf-archive.com

ECOSOC'19 Convention Flowchart 85%

(lunch break) Caucus Point or Order!

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2019/01/26/ecosoc19-convention-flowchart/

26/01/2019 www.pdf-archive.com

Final OpenForumNotes (1) 84%

Act on the agenda as a caucus.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/11/14/final-openforumnotes-1/

13/11/2016 www.pdf-archive.com

Open Forum notes, 11:11:2016 84%

Act on the agenda as a caucus.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/11/13/open-forum-notes-11-11-2016/

13/11/2016 www.pdf-archive.com

Still-Report-750-transcript 82%

Carpenter rolled out the idea on or about January 15th, 2016 - 17 days before the Iowa Caucus.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/03/31/still-report-750-transcript/

31/03/2016 www.pdf-archive.com

BDC 2015 - New Kent Town Hall Invite 82%

Company Representatives The VA General Assembly’s Business Development Caucus in conjunction with The New Kent County Chamber of Commerce Invites you to a regional business town hall for the purpose of identifying pro-business legislation to be introduced in the 2016 session of the General Assembly.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2015/09/23/bdc-2015-new-kent-town-hall-invite/

23/09/2015 www.pdf-archive.com

PAotDPP2016 81%

  Noah Clay Dawson ​ .

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/03/28/paotdpp2016/

27/03/2016 www.pdf-archive.com

ECOSOC'19 Convention Rules of Procedures (RoPs) 78%

For example, moving from Formal to informal or caucus.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2019/01/26/ecosoc19-convention-rules-of-procedures-rops/

26/01/2019 www.pdf-archive.com

delegate.binding.analysis.v.1 77%

This distinction generally happens in the caucus states.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2012/05/15/delegate-binding-analysis-v-1/

15/05/2012 www.pdf-archive.com

SCCPreviewNewsletter (2) 74%

The items have been selected from a list of roughly 80 resolutions passed by caucus attendees this year.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/12/07/sccpreviewnewsletter-2/

07/12/2016 www.pdf-archive.com

Draft Rules of MDP 2016 State Convention 68%

In accordance with the allocation formula in the Plan, the Clinton caucus will elect 8 at-large delegates and 3 at-large alternates, and the Sanders caucus will elect 7 at-large delegates and 3 at-large alternates.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/06/16/draft-rules-of-mdp-2016-state-convention/

16/06/2016 www.pdf-archive.com

BERNIE FLYER 59%

As chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Bernie worked across the aisle to “bridge Washington’s toxic partisan divide and cut one of the most significant deals in years.” In 2015, Democratic leadership tapped Bernie to serve as the caucus’ ranking member on the Senate Budget Committee.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2015/08/25/bernie-flyer/

25/08/2015 www.pdf-archive.com

f 56%

Founded by Josh Cohen, a campaign veteran who has previously worked at SEIU, the Democratic National Committee, and Obama for America and Brad Bauman, former Executive Director of the Congressional Progressive Caucus who brings over 15 years of campaign and crisis communications experience, TPG will bring aggressive and creative solutions to today’s political and legislative fights.

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/05/16/f/

16/05/2017 www.pdf-archive.com

Purdue at Cs 2012 53%

A Workshop Sponsored by the NCTE/CCCC Latino/a Caucus Alex Hidalgo Kendall Leon All Day:

https://www.pdf-archive.com/2012/03/10/purdue-at-cs-2012/

10/03/2012 www.pdf-archive.com