Perry files suit to challenge Virginia primary ballot rules.

[paperview]

Oh, and for the jarhead who just made a fool of himself, castigating me while he made a major fail: Something like 4.5 million voted in the general in Virginia.

Over 1.7 Million voted for McCain.

 

[paperview]

Nothing unusual here.

119K voted in the primary
Half a million voted in the general election.

You may have a reading comprehension issue.

2008 February Republican Presidential Primary Unofficial Results

https://www.voterinfo.sbe.virginia....b-494e-8c2e-599fed2df7c6/unofficial/1_s.shtml

Wanna try that again, Slappy?

Need a number for a reading comprehension specialist....you got one for me?

Sorry about that.

I posted my previous comment at the same time as your oops. Cross-post,

You're forgiven.

 

[uscitizen]

I thought right wingers were against frivilous lawsuits?

 

[JoeB131]

I thought right wingers were against frivilous lawsuits?

I don't see this as frivilous. The fraud on the part of the RPV is kind of obvious here.

 

[Conservative]

Do you have a cite that's what he actually said?

still looking for a link to the statement, but pretty much every source is reporting the statement contained that number.

Press release is here: The Page by Mark Halperin | Perry Challenges VA Ballot Decision

Thanks. Yup, Perry's people fucked up that number.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I thought right wingers were against frivilous lawsuits?

I don't see this as frivilous. The fraud on the part of the RPV is kind of obvious here.

You realize that the lawsuit by Perry does not challenge the 10,000/400 requirement that has been in effect for over a decade.

The lawsuit challenges the requirement of requiring signature gatherers to themselves be qualified voters.

And instead of filing in state court for state law, Perry has run directly to the federal courts.


>>>>

 

[uscitizen]

I thought right wingers were against frivilous lawsuits?

I don't see this as frivilous. The fraud on the part of the RPV is kind of obvious here.

Ahh I am reminded of Butterfly ballots and hanging chad, but the other side is whining now.

 

[paperview]

I thought right wingers were against frivilous lawsuits?

I don't see this as frivilous. The fraud on the part of the RPV is kind of obvious here.

You realize that the lawsuit by Perry does not challenge the 10,000/400 requirement that has been in effect for over a decade.

The lawsuit challenges the requirement of requiring signature gatherers to themselves be qualified voters.

And instead of filing in state court for state law, Perry has run directly to the federal courts.


>>>>

He's FED UP!

 

[paperview]

still looking for a link to the statement, but pretty much every source is reporting the statement contained that number.

Press release is here: The Page by Mark Halperin | Perry Challenges VA Ballot Decision

Thanks. Yup, Perry's people fucked up that number.

Yep.

I mean really. Was he or his press person drunk at the time or something?

 

[WorldWatcher]

>

What I find odd that Perry's filing bases the challenge on the requirement of signature gathers being qualified voters in their own right is a violation of the First Amendment. Yet in the filing itself Perry admits that his campaign failed to follow the requirements of the law.

The law states that 10,000 qualified voter signatures are required (400 from each district), yet Perry points out that he only submitted 6,000 qualified voter signatures. (Page 4, Item #18)

Since he didn't submit the required number of qualified voter signatures anyway, then the requirement on the gatherers seems a moot point.


>>>>

 

[paperview]

>

What I find odd that Perry's filing bases the challenge on the requirement of signature gathers being qualified voters in their own right is a violation of the First Amendment. Yet in the filing itself Perry admits that his campaign failed to follow the requirements of the law.

The law states that 10,000 qualified voter signatures are required (400 from each district), yet Perry points out that he only submitted 6,000 qualified voter signatures. (Page 4, Item #18)

Since he didn't submit the required number of qualified voter signatures anyway, then the requirement on the gatherers seems a moot point.


>>>>

I noted that earlier, WW.

I swear to god, someone has to be on drugs or stone cold drunk on Perry's legal staff.

 

[JoeB131]

I thought right wingers were against frivilous lawsuits?

I don't see this as frivilous. The fraud on the part of the RPV is kind of obvious here.

You realize that the lawsuit by Perry does not challenge the 10,000/400 requirement that has been in effect for over a decade.

The lawsuit challenges the requirement of requiring signature gatherers to themselves be qualified voters.

And instead of filing in state court for state law, Perry has run directly to the federal courts.


>>>>

That would tell me he met the other requirements, and they used that as their basis of disallowing him.

 

[candycorn]

Frivolous lawsuit.

From the guy who rails against frivolous lawsuits.

When he loses, I wonder if he'll volunteer to pay Virginia's expenditures that it took to kick his ass out of their court? Thats what he wants the losers to do in Texas...pay for the time and trouble it took the winners to litigate.

 

[JoeB131]

I thought right wingers were against frivilous lawsuits?

I don't see this as frivilous. The fraud on the part of the RPV is kind of obvious here.

Ahh I am reminded of Butterfly ballots and hanging chad, but the other side is whining now.

Well, there is still time to fix this, to start with. It's harder to fix a problem AFTER the voting has happened.

Should also point out that the person who designed the "Butterfly" ballot was a Democrat. Or she was until she was demonized.

I always found the Butterfly Ballot claims to be silly. Buchanan got more votes in that county in both 1992 and 1996 than he did in 2000. It's not unreasonable to assume he got that many votes who really meant it.

 

[Avatar4321]

Not surprising. He could have bypassed this by merely getting the signatures required.

 

[Inthemiddle]

It's noted that both Perry and Gingrich turned in the AMOUNT of signatures required--but still failed to qualify for Virginia's primary ballot requirements.

This is pathetic. You're spewing outright lies, and you know it. Neither candidate turned in the required number of valid signatures. You already know this. You just don't like the fact, so you're lying about it.

Basically Virginia disqualified 6 out of 8 GOP candidates-

Another lie that you know to be a lie. First of all, there aren't 8 candidates. There's about two dozen candidates. Of those, four made an attempt to get on the Virginia ballot. Of those four, two succeeded, and two FAILED. That's right, Perry and Gingrich FAILED all on their own.

and only two met their primary requirements.

BINGO!!! Only two met the requirements. Perry and Gingrich FAILED all on their own. Why do you not understand this?

 

[JoeB131]

Not surprising. He could have bypassed this by merely getting the signatures required.

Again, given the way the Establishment is trying to fix the game for Romney, I doubt it.

 

[paperview]

Imagine this if he were elected: A historical first!

First First Lady to ever be a known adulteress.*

*before election of fellow adulterer.

 

[Inthemiddle]

As far as I'm concerned

Oh boy, this is going to be good. Reading this is about to kill twice as many brain cells as a night of heavy drinking and drug use. So this is going to feel twice as good, right?

Party hacks invoke obscure rules

Obscure? The laws have been laid out for quite a long time. The state GOP chair set out the procedure he was going to follow months ago. How is that obscure? It seems to me that everyone was well informed well ahead of time.

to invalidate EVERYONE challenging the annointed candidate.

First of all, who is this "anointed candidate"? And what evidence do you have that he is so? And why in the Hell do people nowadays insist on using Messianic imagery to refer to political figures? First it's Obama who was the anointed one, now it's a GOP candidate. I guess next week it's going to be Rush Limbaugh and Rachel Maddow as an anointed tag-team.

Second of all, your suggestion is absurd, because two candidates were successful.

Third, nobody was INVALIDATED from the ballot. Perry and Gingrich failed to collect enough signatures. I explained in another thread yesterday that this failure is the fault of their own selves and their campaigns. I explained how I, all in my lonesome, could have successfully gained a given candidate 15,000 signatures with 85% validity in a time span of two months. It's not that difficult. They have nobody to blame but themselves.

and you don't smell a rat?

No, I don't smell you over the internet.

You know, I'm a funny guy.

An improbable result occurs that benefits the party hack.

There's nothing improbable about it. When you fail to put forth the effort, the PROBABLE result is failure. Gingrich and Perry failed to put forth the effort. Thus, they failed.

Don't need a bloody glove for this one....

You're right. What you most need is a thick, highly insulated hat, to help preserve what few brain cells you got left.

 

[JoeB131]

And we are back to the personal attacks...

How is his marital issues going to effect his presidency in any way, shape or form?

Incidently, I don't think he's going to be the nominee at this point. Perry might get another shot at being the NotRomney. But Romney will probably get the nomination, there will be a third party challenge from everyone who doesn't like Romney, and Obama will probably skate to a second term.