Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BREAKING: Rick Perry Files Lawsuit To Get On Virginia Primary Ballot
businessinsider.com ^ | 12/27/2011 | Zeke Miller

Posted on 12/27/2011 3:48:28 PM PST by TBBT

Texas Gov. Rick Perry has filed suit in federal court against the Virginia Republican Party and the Virginia Board of Elections in order to gain a spot on the Commonwealth's primary ballot. Perry was excluded after the party found he had not submitted enough valid signatures by the deadline last Thursday. His campaign submitted 6,000 of the required 10,000, according to the suit. The lawsuit alleges that Perry's 1st and 14th Amendment rights were violated by the requirement that those circulating the petitions also be eligible or registered voters of Virginia. Failure to get on the ballot is a major embarrassment for the struggling Perry campaign — but he is not alone. Another one-time GOP frontrunner, Newt Gingrich, also failed to qualify. "Gov. Perry greatly respects the citizens and history of the Commonwealth of Virginia and believes Virginia Republicans should have greater access to vote for one of the several candidates for President of the United States," Perry communications director Ray Sullivan said in a statement. "Virginia ballot access rules are among the most onerous and are particularly problematic in a multi-candidate election. We believe that the Virginia provisions unconstitutionally restrict the rights of candidates and voters by severely restricting access to the ballot, and we hope to have those provisions overturned or modified to provide greater ballot access to Virginia voters and the candidates seeking to earn their support."

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: 2012gopprimary; amnesty; corruption; gop; illegals; lawsuit; lawsuitabuse; openborders; perry; perry2012; politicalelite; rino; rpv; va2012; wethepeople
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-250 next last
To: TBBT

Most are misapprehending what Perry’s legal argument is– It’s not that the petition signers must be registered voters; it’s that “THOSE CIRCULATING THE PETITION MUST BE REGISTERED VIRGINIA VOTERS. ”

Got it? Virginia law currently forbids a Perry campaign worker from Texas (for example) from collecting signatures from Virginia voters on his behalf.

As cited in Perry’s Complaint, the US Supreme Court has previously ruled that such a limitation was a violation of the 1st Amendment. (Colorado case).

Have to believe that this fiasco will be settled with all candidates out of Court.


51 posted on 12/27/2011 4:56:25 PM PST by VinL (It is better to suffer every wrong, than to consent to wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: normy

“Fox News is worse than CNN and equal to MSNBC”

Is that you, Frantzie?

(just kidding)


52 posted on 12/27/2011 4:58:49 PM PST by dynachrome ("Our forefathers didn't bury their guns. They buried those that tried to take them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Taking Congress back in 2010
Lawsuits.....the last refuge of a loser.

Thanks a lot - at least you're in Texas and will have a choice in your primary. In Virginia, we have the old Soviet Union, err, Virginia GOP, who chooses my candidates for me.

53 posted on 12/27/2011 4:59:29 PM PST by COBOL2Java (Virginia GOP: Romney's favorite butt boys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: TBBT
I'm very interested to see how this plays out in federal court.

Perry should start reminding people about the New Jersey rule that allowed Frank Lautenberg on the ballot, bypassing all existing laws.

The SCOTUS refused to hear the case, calling it a state issue.

-PJ

54 posted on 12/27/2011 4:59:29 PM PST by Political Junkie Too (If you can vote for President, then your children can run for President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBBT

From an article titled: “Search The Web, Monday, December26, 2011
Virginia GOP Changed Rules For Primary In November 2011?” by Suscan Duclos -
Share

The Code of Virginia states:

“Any candidate who submits at least 15,000 signatures of registered voters on valid petitions statewide and has at least 600 signatures of registered voters on valid petitions from each of the 11 Congressional Districts shall be deemed to have met the threshold for qualification and will be certified (provided, of course, that other requirements of State law have also been met)”

“If any candidate submits fewer than 15,000 signatures of registered voters on valid petitions statewide or fewer than 600 signatures of registered voters on valid petitions in one or more of the 11 Congressional Districts, the Republican Party of Virginia will individually verify signatures until the 10,000 signature statewide threshold and/or 400 per Congressional district is met.”

Because Perry and Gingrich only submitted 11,000 plus signatures they had to be individually verified, yet Paul and Romney’s signatures went through NO verification process whatsoever because they submitted over 15,000.”

According the article - The Gingrich and Perry Campaigns submitted fewer than the required 15,000 thus required verification.

So why does Perry get special consideration??? Seems pretty clear that they didn’t do due-diligence!


55 posted on 12/27/2011 4:59:50 PM PST by fremont_steve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBBT

Brief says the Supreme Court ruled in ‘Buckley’ that it’s unconstitutional to require petition-gatherers be state voters, or even residents.

I guess that provides an ‘out’ for the RPV.

(And Perry didn’t formally declare until Oct 31! Good grief!)


56 posted on 12/27/2011 5:00:24 PM PST by mrsmith (Start electing a 'Tea Party' House Speaker in 2012 now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

*


57 posted on 12/27/2011 5:02:34 PM PST by TornadoAlley3 (Obama is everything Oklahoma is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Thanks for the link to his filing!


58 posted on 12/27/2011 5:03:12 PM PST by mrsmith (Start electing a 'Tea Party' House Speaker in 2012 now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: sheikdetailfeather

Why is this great news? Rick Perry is an idiot and has no more business in this race than Mitt.


59 posted on 12/27/2011 5:03:12 PM PST by CWSNTEXAS (Am I'm the ONLY Conservative Jew in America? What's wrong with you other schmucks?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sheikdetailfeather

Why is this great news? Rick Perry is an idiot and has no more business in this race than Mitt.


60 posted on 12/27/2011 5:03:21 PM PST by CWSNTEXAS (Am I'm the ONLY Conservative Jew in America? What's wrong with you other schmucks?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sheikdetailfeather

Why is this great news? Rick Perry is an idiot and has no more business in this race than Mitt.


61 posted on 12/27/2011 5:03:21 PM PST by CWSNTEXAS (Am I'm the ONLY Conservative Jew in America? What's wrong with you other schmucks?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
He is just about totally dead to me now after years of respecting him.

People I formerly respected that I now have no use for...Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck. Honorable mention...Mark Steyn, and this one pains me the most.

62 posted on 12/27/2011 5:04:17 PM PST by ez (When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith

If this is true - he might have a case, but it smacks to much of Bush V Gore! Katherine Harris followed the law, and the state got sued. I don’t like it when Politicians work the courts when they don’t get their way due mostly to their own failings in not meeting the letter of the law.


63 posted on 12/27/2011 5:04:40 PM PST by fremont_steve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Repeat Offender
crying to courts

That depends on whether the rules truly are unconstitutional. If they are, then would you still want them?

64 posted on 12/27/2011 5:05:15 PM PST by xzins (Pray for Our Troops Remaining in Afghanistan, now that Iran Can Focus on Injuring Only Them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: nagdt

Perry is the only really sane and “normal” one in the bunch, debates notwithstanding! :)


65 posted on 12/27/2011 5:05:36 PM PST by LUV W (This tagline reserved for a hero.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: TBBT
So sorry for the multiple posts! I got a new iPad for Hanakuh and there is a learning curve for old people like me.
66 posted on 12/27/2011 5:05:43 PM PST by CWSNTEXAS (Am I'm the ONLY Conservative Jew in America? What's wrong with you other schmucks?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ez

Why Steyn??


67 posted on 12/27/2011 5:09:16 PM PST by normy (Don't take it personally, just take it seriously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: normy; proxy_user
Screw that. Get Rick And Newt back on the ballot and have a fair fight!

Let the people decide, not party hacks...put the others on the ballot!!

68 posted on 12/27/2011 5:11:49 PM PST by ez (When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: CWSNTEXAS
Perry is the most pro-Israel candidate and he has taken multiple trips to Israel for trade and cultural exchange.

Perry loves Israel and he has guided Texas to prosperity and a 1.6 billion dollar surplus DURING Obama's recession. He is also partly responsible for creating 45% of all jobs created in the USA during the Obama debacle. Hardly and idiot.

69 posted on 12/27/2011 5:12:32 PM PST by normy (Don't take it personally, just take it seriously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: TBBT

Good, I’d love to see newt and perry kick some gop ass.


70 posted on 12/27/2011 5:12:40 PM PST by muddler (Chaos is coming..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

Its not because the rules are “not fair”. It’s because they were changed at the last minute.


71 posted on 12/27/2011 5:14:03 PM PST by John Valentine (Deep in the Heart of Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Taking Congress back in 2010
Lawsuits.....the last refuge of a loser.

Like the losers fighting Obamacare? Slogans are for the weak-minded and don't belong on FRee Republic.

72 posted on 12/27/2011 5:16:15 PM PST by ez (When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: TBBT
Perry was excluded after the party found he had not submitted enough valid signatures by the deadline last Thursday.

And why does this need to go to a court? He needs to follow the guidelines, just like the other candidates.

73 posted on 12/27/2011 5:17:13 PM PST by Sarajevo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBBT

Perry’s only hope is to get an activist judge who will legislate from the bench rather than implement the Virginia law.

Perry is only conservative when it is convienent.


74 posted on 12/27/2011 5:18:10 PM PST by Taking Congress back in 2010
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith

You’re welcome, mrsmith! It was interesting to read it. I’m no lawyer, but it sure looks like Perry has a solid case.

Another thing I like about it is by filing the lawsuit, Perry is making it clear he intends to stay in the fight beyond Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. His supporters, myself included, can take heart in his perserverence.


75 posted on 12/27/2011 5:18:22 PM PST by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: fremont_steve

You are actually asserting that the CODE OF VIRGINIA establishes the primary rules for the Republican Party? That fails the laugh test.

I am quite certain that these are simply Republican Party rules with NO force of law, that can be enforced, changed, amended, or waived at will.


76 posted on 12/27/2011 5:19:15 PM PST by John Valentine (Deep in the Heart of Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine

There’s nothing in the brief about that.

he’s challenging the law.

IANAL but the case he cites, http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/97-930.ZS.html ,
does seem to be in his favor.


77 posted on 12/27/2011 5:20:51 PM PST by mrsmith (Start electing a 'Tea Party' House Speaker in 2012 now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Thank you for articulating that. I agree completely.


78 posted on 12/27/2011 5:21:13 PM PST by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Taking Congress back in 2010

Someone will need to prove to me that this is Virginia LAW, as contrasted with Virginia Republican Party Rules.

It would appear that if this is the case, that the Commonwealth of Virginia has enacted one set of rules for Republicans and another for Democrats. That alone sounds like an infringement of the equal protection clause.


79 posted on 12/27/2011 5:22:35 PM PST by John Valentine (Deep in the Heart of Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine

The rules are also unConstitutional due to equal protection before the law. It is fundamentally flawed to verify one candidates signatures while giving another a pass. It’s completely possible that Romney does not have 10k verifiable signaures either. The people of Virginia need too demand access to their chosen candidate. Let the people decide, not party hacks!!!


80 posted on 12/27/2011 5:23:30 PM PST by ez (When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: CWSNTEXAS
Rick Perry is an idiot... sorry for the multiple posts! I got a new iPad for Hanakuh and there is a learning curve for old people like me.

Oh, I thought you were just an idiot..Did you know that even Rick Perry can use an I-phone & I-Pad?

Plus, under that Idiot's Governorship, the logic chips for apple brought 1100 new jobs to TX, on top of the existing 2400 at that Samsung plant in Austin?

81 posted on 12/27/2011 5:25:35 PM PST by sockmonkey (He's not perfect, but Perry is no wussy boy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
You do realize this offense against my rights deserves really serious punishment ~ now whether or not the courts will hand that out Bolling probably ought to flee to his friends in Chicago now. Maybe they can protect him.

We'll see whether Mitt looks after his employees, or whether Bolling will be thrown under the bus.

82 posted on 12/27/2011 5:27:10 PM PST by COBOL2Java (Virginia GOP: Romney's favorite butt boys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing

Well. I was disappointed to see he didn’t fill out his declaration until Oct 31! Talk about waiting to the last minute!

But his case sure looks good. If the Supreme Court ruled against requiring only eligible state voters to circulate petitions on purely state matters then requiring that for a national election’s primary seems doubly damned.

Loved Rehnquist’s dissent though, miss him.


83 posted on 12/27/2011 5:27:17 PM PST by mrsmith (Start electing a 'Tea Party' House Speaker in 2012 now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: sockmonkey

Now that there is a great zing! lol


84 posted on 12/27/2011 5:27:48 PM PST by CajunConservative ( Leadership. It is defined by action, not position.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: normy

Steyn same reason as Beck and Coulter...dumping all over Newt with half-truths and demagoguery. Been with Newt a lot longer than Steyn. Perhaps his schtick is more powerful than his politics?


85 posted on 12/27/2011 5:27:51 PM PST by ez (When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith

Long time no see, Mr. Smith...

It seems that many people see this as a Commonwealth of Virginia law. May be, but if so, then it is a law that uniquely applies to the Republican Party and no other, and so unconstitutionally discriminates against Republican voters by establishing ballot criteria for their candidates which differ substantially from the criteria established for other parties. Perhaps they are not arguing this point, but I think it is a valid one.


86 posted on 12/27/2011 5:28:41 PM PST by John Valentine (Deep in the Heart of Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: VinL

Sounds like a boondoggle to me (whatever that is).

I’m glad Perry stepped up to the plate with this lawsuit.

But that’s Perry.

I guess Newt will chime in now.


87 posted on 12/27/2011 5:29:27 PM PST by altura (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: CWSNTEXAS

Well, he’s smart enough to file a lawsuit to challenge this mess.

And, hate to say, but people whose argument is phrased as;

“Rick Perry is an idiot” are idiots.


88 posted on 12/27/2011 5:31:10 PM PST by altura (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: sheikdetailfeather; AmericanInTokyo; aMorePerfectUnion; C. Edmund Wright; COBOL2Java; CWSNTEXAS; ...
what a putrid writer, this Zeke Miller. You can tell he is a liberal punk.

He calls Gingrich "another one-time GOP frontrunner" ... duh, how about "THE GOP frontrunner"

He implies Perry ONLY submitted 6,000 of the required 10,000, so ANYONE reading the story would have NO SYMPATHY for Perry and think him a kook for the lawsuit.

On Friday, per the WashPo, "Perry’s campaign told state election officials it had submitted 11,911 signatures" Does that mean OTHERS submitted the remaining 5,911 for him? Does it mean that 6,000 were disqualified for having an out-of-state gatherer?

How about pointing out relevant facts Mister Zeke Miller? like...

For STATE offices, Virginia law requires the petition gatherer to be "a qualified voter, or qualified to register to vote, for the office for which he is circulating the petition". THAT does not mean he has to be a Virginia resident, just someone qualified to vote for President. § 24.2-506 ... But more importantly... Presidential primaries have a SEPARATE controlling law: ( § 24.2-545 ) there is no such requirement at all for the petitioner. The petition gatherer could be from Abu Dabi and not even a citizen.


Virginia law also REQUIRES an address on petitions for state offices: § 24.2-506
...signed by the number of qualified voters specified below after January 1 of the year in which the election is held and listing the residence address of each such voter.

Virginia law does NOT require an address on petitions for Presidential Primaries: § 24.2-545

This law regulating primary signatures is clearly separate. § 24.2-545 specifically does NOT require addresses, nor the signatures to be taken after January 1st.
B. Any person seeking the nomination of the national political party for the office of President of the United States, or any group organized in this Commonwealth on behalf of, and with the consent of such person, may file with the State Board petitions signed by at least 10,000 qualified voters, including at least 400 qualified voters from each congressional district in the Commonwealth, who attest that they intend to participate in the primary of the same political party as the candidate for whom the petitions are filed. Such petitions shall be filed with the State Board by the primary filing deadline. The petitions shall be on a form prescribed by the State Board and shall be sealed in one or more containers to which is attached a written statement giving the name of the presidential candidate and the number of signatures on the petitions contained in the containers. Such person or group shall also attach a list of the names of persons who would be elected delegates and alternate delegates to the political party’s national convention if the person wins the primary and the party has determined that its delegates will be selected pursuant to the primary. The slate of delegates and alternates shall comply with the rules of the national and state party.
It is reasonable for some voters to understand that Virginia law has NEVER required the address on those primary petitions. It is optional, just like the SSN on the presidential petition form is also optional.



OR point out there was a recent Virginia court precedent where a petition gatherer was slightly in error on something, and the judge ruled that the voter should not be disenfranchised. The voter's intent to sign the petition outweighed the slight technical difficulty.



QUESTION: Shouldn't Newt be filing a similar lawsuit? Isn't it likely that Perry will get judicial relief but not others who do not complain? Wouldn't greater numbers of legal challenges help tip the scales?

Then, there is also the issue of the last-minute change.


http://www.rpv.org/sites/default/files/2012%20Petition%20Certification%20Process_1.pdf

This un-dated "Safe Harbor" letter is the smoking gun that could sink Romney-conspirators in the Virginia R.P. office, including Executive director: David Rexrode,


Chairman: Pat Mullins,


and maybe even Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling





Gideon7 correctly pointed out that the letter was CREATED in WORD on 12/21/2011.
Some freepers have suggested maybe that's just the date the letter was scanned, but no way... You can tell by zooming in close with a PDF editor that the characters and images are all perfect. This was not a scanned document.

It was, as the document indicates internally, CREATED on 12/21/2011 using Microsoft WORD.

Furthermore, the file also indicates the Author. Just open up this file with WordPad, and search for "2011", and on that line you will find the author...
<</Author(Dave Rexrode) ...... /CreationDate(D:20111221100053-05'00') /ModDate(D:20111221100053-05'00')
Why this is important is that ONE DAY EARLIER, Tuesday 12/20, Lt. Gov. Bolling had personally delivered 16,026 petitions for Romney. This letter guarantees that Romney's petitions would NOT be examined. They could NOT be challenged even if 90% said "Mickey Mouse" and showed no addresses. Meanwhile nearly every other candidate will fail the newly planned anal microscopic-signature checking [even though state law for Presidential Primaries § 24.2-545 does not require street addresses]. Without this letter, they feared Romney could be booted from the ballot too.

Mister Rexrode has even been so brash as to quote to the NY Times and others that Gingrich can do nothing about this... "Gingrich may appeal the party's decision to its State Central Committee, but Dave Rexrode, executive director of the Republican Party of Virginia, said there is not enough time to hold a meeting before the State Board of Elections meets Wednesday."


This is the undated letter.

The PDF file contains a hidden Microsoft Word creation date of 12/21/2011.

5 posted on Monday, December 26, 2011 12:39:11 PM by Gideon7

89 posted on 12/27/2011 5:31:52 PM PST by Future Useless Eater (Chicago politics = corrupted capitalism = takeover by COMMUNity-ISM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TBBT

Woohoo! Good news. Thanks for posting this.


90 posted on 12/27/2011 5:32:16 PM PST by Victoria Delsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBBT
Damn, that's hard to read. Here...

Texas Gov. Rick Perry has filed suit in federal court against the Virginia Republican Party and the Virginia Board of Elections in order to gain a spot on the Commonwealth's primary ballot.

Perry was excluded after the party found he had not submitted enough valid signatures by the deadline last Thursday. His campaign submitted 6,000 of the required 10,000, according to the suit.

The lawsuit alleges that Perry's 1st and 14th Amendment rights were violated by the requirement that those circulating the petitions also be eligible or registered voters of Virginia.

Failure to get on the ballot is a major embarrassment for the struggling Perry campaign — but he is not alone. Another one-time GOP frontrunner, Newt Gingrich, also failed to qualify.

"Gov. Perry greatly respects the citizens and history of the Commonwealth of Virginia and believes Virginia Republicans should have greater access to vote for one of the several candidates for President of the United States," Perry communications director Ray Sullivan said in a statement.

"Virginia ballot access rules are among the most onerous and are particularly problematic in a multi-candidate election. We believe that the Virginia provisions unconstitutionally restrict the rights of candidates and voters by severely restricting access to the ballot, and we hope to have those provisions overturned or modified to provide greater ballot access to Virginia voters and the candidates seeking to earn their support."    

Perry, whose campaign raised over $17 million in the third quarter of 2011, is also suing for attorneys' fees.  


91 posted on 12/27/2011 5:32:16 PM PST by glock rocks (Jesus take the wheel, Take it from my hands, cause I can't do this on my own...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Repeat Offender

The requirements are part of the establishments attempt to control the election, pure and simple. It is designed to help their chosen candidate, and if you keep defending this stupid scam, people might begin to think you are a Romneyite.


92 posted on 12/27/2011 5:32:43 PM PST by itsahoot (Throw them all out! Especially the Frugal Socialists who call themselves Republicans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: TBBT

Can Newt somehow get in on this ?


93 posted on 12/27/2011 5:35:42 PM PST by TexasFreeper2009 (Newt Gingrich 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ez
Exactly!

This is not about the individual candidates.

This is about disenfranchising the voters of Virgina.

94 posted on 12/27/2011 5:36:19 PM PST by 2111USMC (Not a hard man to track. Leaves dead men wherever he goes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Future Useless Eater

Frankly, this is making Virginia look as if it’s either run by crooks or incompetents.


95 posted on 12/27/2011 5:37:36 PM PST by altura (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Repeat Offender
..My response was tongue in cheek as none of the people I listed are elegible or registered voters of Virginia.

;)

96 posted on 12/27/2011 5:38:19 PM PST by Irish Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine

He’s just challenging the state law’s requirement that petition-gatherers be elegible state voters- which the SC ruled against before, and it’s requirements for the numbers of signatures.

I think this is an ‘out’ for the RPV and they’ll be glad to take it and let everyone who declared be on the ballot ( and it moots any disputes about the Party’s own procedures...)


97 posted on 12/27/2011 5:38:56 PM PST by mrsmith (Start electing a 'Tea Party' House Speaker in 2012 now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine

Good point. There are issues that need to be resolved, such as if the state GOP changed the rules unfairly, or administered the rules unfairly. This should be resolved by a court. If the state GOP acted fairly, they will be vindicated. If not, then Perry will.


98 posted on 12/27/2011 5:39:40 PM PST by Victoria Delsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: VinL; Repeat Offender; All
Most are misapprehending what Perry’s legal argument is– It’s not that the petition signers must be registered voters; it’s that “THOSE CIRCULATING THE PETITION MUST BE REGISTERED VIRGINIA VOTERS. ”
Got it? Virginia law currently forbids a Perry campaign worker from Texas (for example) from collecting signatures from Virginia voters on his behalf.
As cited in Perry’s Complaint, the US Supreme Court has previously ruled that such a limitation was a violation of the 1st Amendment. (Colorado case).
Have to believe that this fiasco will be settled with all candidates out of Court.

THANK YOU! Finally some truth is brought forward! It also needs to be known that the new rules required that a certain number of petitions had to be from EACH county in Virginia. Perry's campaign workers turned in over 11,000 petitions and only 6,000 qualify????

99 posted on 12/27/2011 5:41:12 PM PST by seekthetruth (I want a Commander In Chief who STANDS with Our Military! Rick Perry 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

What makes you think Bolling is any more responsible than McDonnell? McD has mucj more power and much more to gain.


100 posted on 12/27/2011 5:41:56 PM PST by wolfman23601
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-250 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson