Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What the heck? Are people really trying to lay this one on Mitt???
What the heck? Are people really trying to lay this one on Mitt???
Some are.
As a Republican and a member of the party of personal responsibility I do not agree with them. Virginia law on signature requirements have been in place for many years, failure to follow them by the Newt campaign was a major fuck up.
>>>>
What the heck? Are people really trying to lay this one on Mitt???
How is it the establishment's fault if Newt didn't have a good enough organization to get enough legal signatures in Virginia?
How is it the establishment's fault if Newt didn't have a good enough organization to get enough legal signatures in Virginia?
Why be such a stickler for the rules when he did submit a lot of signatures and it is clear from polling that a lot of people would vote for him if the election were held today?
And the fact the Lt. Gov. of VA is also the chairman of Romney's campaign in the state makes it all a bit suspicous, doncha think?
The thing is, this is so unnecessary. Romney will probably outlast most of the FIVE opponents he got excluded off the ballot. (It wasn't just Newt, it was everyone else, too!)
Using a technicality to acheive a goal you couldn't get in fair play never sits well with anyone.
It's almost like Romney wants a third party to draw away all those Conservative votes....
Sounds like you ARE laying it on Romney.
And saying that the laws of Virginia should not be followed ... in order to make up for the failings of someone who is supposed to be spending this year convincing the nation that he is ready to be president.
Virginia following its laws is somehow Romney using a technicality?
That's pretty heavy. I need time to let that sink in.
How the heck is it Romney's fault that Newt effed up in Virginia?
As a Republican and a member of the party of personal responsibility
>
And there will be calls throughout the land for an "Activist Judge" to throw out the law as enacted years ago by the Legislature of the Commonwealth of Virginia so that those who did not follow the law are granted special dispensation to be on the primary ballot.
Something that if it was a Democrat doing it would be resoundingly opposed.
>>>>
What the heck? Are people really trying to lay this one on Mitt???
>
And there will be calls throughout the land for an "Activist Judge" to throw out the law as enacted years ago by the Legislature of the Commonwealth of Virginia so that those who did not follow the law are granted special dispensation to be on the primary ballot.
Something that if it was a Democrat doing it would be resoundingly opposed.
>>>>
Exactly!!!!
>
And there will be calls throughout the land for an "Activist Judge" to throw out the law as enacted years ago by the Legislature of the Commonwealth of Virginia so that those who did not follow the law are granted special dispensation to be on the primary ballot.
Something that if it was a Democrat doing it would be resoundingly opposed.
>>>>
Exactly!!!!
Maybe. But this kind of dirty tricks is exactly the kind of laws the courts should strike down.
If your argument is that you have a requirement so that Joe Blow with a tinfoil hat can't get his name on the ballot, that's one thing. But these are NATIONAL figures, some of whom poll in the double digits.
But couldn't even get .003 of the nearly 4 million registered voters to sign a petition with MONTHS & MONTHS of advance notice.But these are NATIONAL figures, some of whom poll in the double digits.
But these are NATIONAL figures, some of whom poll in the double digits.
But couldn't even get .003 of the nearly 4 million registered voters to sign a petition with MONTHS & MONTHS of advance notice.
That's some powerful candy-date there.