Skip to comments.How do you like those ballot restrictions now? [TEA Partyers unite against this RINO fascism!!]
Posted on 12/24/2011 10:37:52 AM PST by Jim Robinson
"A Gingrich campaign official prior to the move by the Republican Party of Virginia said the problem is how the rules are set up, arguing that the party is, for apparently the first time, cross-checking the addresses that signature-givers gave against the electronic voter database file for accuracies. A name without a proper address match was tossed, the official said."
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
I searched the Virginia Code of Law and found this (http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+24.2-545):
24.2-545. Presidential primary.
A. The duly constituted authorities of the state political party shall have the right to determine the method by which the state party will select its delegates to the national convention to choose the party’s nominees for President and Vice President of the United States including a presidential primary or another method determined by the party. The state chairman shall notify the State Board of the party’s determination at least 90 days before the primary date. If the party has determined that it will hold a presidential primary, each registered voter of the Commonwealth shall be given an opportunity to participate in the presidential primary of the political party, as defined in § 24.2-101, subject to requirements determined by the political party for participation in its presidential primary. The requirements may include, but shall not be limited to, the signing of a pledge by the voter of his intention to support the party’s candidate when offering to vote in the primary. The requirements applicable to a party’s primary shall be determined at least 90 days prior to the primary date and certified to, and approved by, the State Board.
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.
Translation: The state party can set whatever rules it wants to include names in a presidential primary. It *must* include names that have 10,000 signatures.
The law says nothing about grandfathering in previous candidates (for or against). It is up the party, it appears. It looks like any grandfathering of candidates from the previous election is to be determined solely by the rules of the party.
Never mind, BenKenobi responded.
Well, he finally did, and used more ridiculous flawed logic to try and analogize the Murkowski Alaska issue with Virginia. He’s in the dark up there in Alaska I guess. Too much vodka, not enough Vit D and brain waves.
You too! Thanks Ed. Have a great CHRISTmas! (And we will!)
Virginia would be nuts to stay with this decision. In case you haven’t noticed, Gingrich is THE leading Republican candidate nationwide for the office of the presidency. Virginians should rise up against this fascist B/S!! Hell, ALL Americans should!!
Many did. Many did not.
There were times when there would be 10 threads up, all saying how Cain was a serial adulterer, etc, all the politico articles etc.
I was there for it all. It was frankly shameful to see so many here participate in the high-tech lynching of a good man like Mr. Cain.
Now we have to live with the consequences, like the ones we are seeing now, where the candidates that pushed out Cain, get pushed out by Mitt.
Again, I warned people this would happen, as soon as they destroyed Cain. Now, here it is, and people are surprised when it comes out of the blue.
“They can’t do this to him!, He’s not on the fringe, no hoper”.
They told me, “There’s no way Romney can win”, and yet, here we are.
But isn’t that what we were warned about? Because I did not stand by X, when they came for me there was no one left to protect me.
I am very disappointed that Cain chose to drop out. I wish, more than anything that I could be looking forward to a primary season where he is a participant. And I miss him dearly.
So please forgive me here. I am not happy with Newt’s performance, when he needed to step up and get the job done. The last thing I want to see is a brokered convention behind Mitt.
No, I read it, there was nothing of logical meaning expressed there in. (LOL)
TOO FUNNY! ROFLMAO!
I can’t recall exactly when I would re-register, -— not atop my list -— but like you, I would have told the petitioner that I had moved since I last voted.
That is what needs verification. Not which candidate collected how many "validated" signatures.
And, it makes no difference weather you supported Cain, Gingrich or Perry.
LOL. I see that you’re taking off, so I want to wish you a most Blessed and Merry CHRISTmas, C. Edmund Wright!!!
Selective enforcement, only when it is politically convenient for them.
Seems there is some smokin’ goin’ on in the back room.
Found it. The 15,000 sigs is a rule of the Republican Party of Virgnia. It basically says that if a candidate submits more than 15,000 sigs (600 from each congressional district), the petition is presumed valid (’shall be deemed to have met the threshold for qualification and will be certified’) with no additional requirements. Addresses and names are *not* checked.
So all Newt and Perry had to do is get 15000/600 and they’d be in.
Actually I said that IF I WERE A VIRGINIAN, I would file the suit. I'm a Texas born Californian. I have no standing in Virginia.
Remember the Tom T. Hall song, “I like Beer!”
“Whiskey’s too rough, Champagne costs too much, AND VODKA PUTS MY MOUTH IN GEAR!”
OH, So true and prophetic!
What makes the longer list more valid other than the fact that it is, well, longer?
This one will not stand any scrutiny. Look for it to be withdrawn shortly.
You seem to have a lot of time and energy.
Why don’t you look around this site and come up with a strategy?
I specifically read where someone was actually filing on the grounds you mentioned. I would swear it was you.
Did my speed reading abilities fail me? (Say it ain’t so!) We really need this to happen and I was so certain it was.
Basically yeah. Romney and Ron Paul got over 15,000 so they're in without any scrutiny. Below is the last paragraph of the letter from the Chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia:
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.
Over 15K and you are golden, no checking.
I did, my man was Cain.
Now I’m out.
It’ll be up to the Newt supporters to pull him over the finish line.
here is what I dont get... if the sigs are not checked when they have turned in more than 15,000.... how do they know they there are more than 600 from each district?
That’s ridiculous. You fill petition forms with fake names and addresses (or you copy them out of the phone book), and as long as you fill enough lines on the forms, no one will question that all the names were signed by the same person.
Ben you make some good points, I too hated the Alaskan shenanigans, but here is what bothers me in this case:
First, if it is true that merely turning in 15,000 names is all that is needed, what prevents someone from fabrication, since no one is checking? Speaking of checking, who was checking the checkers?
Second, Is it not important whether the database is accurate or not? Shouldn't someone actually make an effort to examine discrepancies, and determine whether the form or the database is actually correct before tossing them?
Third, The law actually states that write ins have to be accepted for elections. Sure it makes an exception for primaries, but does not specifically prohibit primary write ins.
Fourth, when either party makes rules to restrict what the majority of the voters want so that insiders can limit the choices, shouldn't the voters at least work to have the rules reviewed? After all the people are sovereign not the party.
The letter says it is the Republican Party of Virgina doing the checking of names and addresses, not the state.
So presumably Newt would have to sue the Virgina GOP.
I’m pretty sure all candidates sign agreements with their respective parties to specifically prohibit intra-party litigation of that type. Presumably there is some sort of ‘Rules Committee’ in the GOP to handle this sort of thing.
CainConservative;Michele Bachmann; Rick Santorum
If the poll you offered has any validity at all, I would like to point out that Santorum and Bachmann together have 44 percent of the voter preference. This is sizably more than any other candidate, and a largely overlapping population. How many tea party or religious conservatives really want to vote for the serial polygamist or the person who believes he will one day be a god? Plainly speaking, not that many. The GOP needs to consider that it should not offer any candidate to the public at large which can not energize a quarter to a third of its base on a consistent basis. By what rationale do they assume that such a person will magically get 50 percent of the general populace (or a majority of the electoral votes.
I would appeal to the Bachmann and Santorum camps to do some soul searching and talking and merge behind one of these two.
Mhy personal opinion, which may be worth little, is to ask the hard thing of Bachmann’s camp, as she has more of the polls, and ask her to step behind Santorum. I know enough otherwise rational people who fear their perception of the Tea Party and view her as strident (you know how a strong man is viewed as strong, but a strong woman is strident) or completely fanatical - to the point that they mention emigration (I know, some might say good riddance...). Then there are whole camps of fundamentalists who will talk about what it means when the leader of the people is a woman... These are not editorial comments, but things that I think impact real voters in real ways.
To my way of thinking, recent articles about the Santorums’ dealing with the death of their baby aside, there is not the general feeling of alienation against him due to his perceived right wing-ness, and he would be the more electable candidate.
All that said, I would vote for either one of these over the rest of the pack, and have the highest regard for the one who sacrificed the attempt hereafter.
Meanwhile, we are doing in the primary what we say we are trying to prevent in the general election, splitting the conservative vote so that a not so conservative (at best) gets the win.
Just my two cents.
Now if it is true that none of the candidates qualified, but two who were grandfathered in, there is a real problem with the system, and I am not sure that equal application of the laws is being seen here - unless maybe McCain ends back on the ballot?
Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee say "You must vote for Mitt Rom-nee!"
Ok, Thanks for the clarification. Too bad. I am not a Virginian or a lawyer, but I would file suit, if I could too.
The rules of the game were in writing for anyone to read. Both Newt and Perry should have hired people who understood the consequences and had taken action to offset their signature gathering and verification procedures accordingly. If they needed 20,000 to be sure of qualifying, that is what they should have submitted.
Said failure is indicative of their lack of both management skills and organizational depth, the latter being indicative of the need to chase polling numbers in early primary states.
In a way, this is yet again an indictment of the MSM, for which there is no excuse on the part of the candidates.
Democracy looks very different from the bottom than the top. Like I said, most don’t have experience dealing with it. You name it, the shenanigans come out to prevent people from upsetting the apple cart.
The end result seems to do their best to deny the people their choice.
As for your questions. I’ve worked in quality control, for a bunch of different organizations. Random sampling is what is frequently used. If errors turn up in the random samples, then they can use these samples to calculate with some precision how many errors exist throughout the whole sample.
They can do this with petition signatures. They will not check all the numbers, but they will check a certain number of random samples, to see if there is any errors. A clean sample, you’ll expect to see around 10 percent fail validation, because there’s simply no way to check them other than validation.
As for the database, a rate of 20 percent failure isn’t going to be overturned by database errors. A percent or two at most. It might be enough to get Newt back on the ballot, but that’s assuming all the errors made are against him.
As for the party rules, well, that’s why you go to the long and boring meetings back in 2009 in the VA republican party where they vote on these rules beforehand. The party bosses are the ones who decide, and wrt nominations, they have pretty much carte blanche. That’s the way the system works. If you aren’t a party member, you don’t have a say as to how the party selects their members.
To change the rules, would mean that enough VA GOP members would have to speak up their dissatisfaction with the primary results. If you aren’t a VA GOP member, then there’s really not much you can do in this situation. But, there’s nothing stopping people from getting memberships and going to all the meetings, and most importantly, voting.
The economy is so bad under Obama, they couldn't afford to stay in their houses ... just sayin' .....
Seems to me that the conservatives need to do at least 2 things:
First, if they really want this changed this year swamp the party leadership, and/or a legal challenge.
Second, Get on the ballot as precinct chairmen in all the districts, win, and replace the GOP leadership with conservatives.
I can't help but think this is the establishment Pubs (DC is right across the street) making sure the candidates that are most likely to tear down the govt hegemony are handicapped in getting the nomination. I think they don't consider Paul a threat and Romney is a go along get along blue blood technocrat so he's "their guy". Gingrich although he's from the DC culture has been clear he would make big changes and Perry has been specific about changing DC as well.
These disqualifications give legitimatcy to the idea that the Republican party establishment is out of touch with its grass roots supporters.
Good luck with that GOP.
We're all watching.
Time for the SOLEMN MASS OF CHRISTMAS EVE from St Peter's Basilica on EWTN LIVE from Rome.
BLESSED AND MERRY CHRISTmas everyone!!!!
That’s the exact course of action.
I have to caution people, again, that it’s the VA folks that get to decide, because the state parties have this jurisdiction.
A state party requirement like this would generally favor the conservative candidate, provided the rules are applied equally. Especially the district requirement. This isn’t exactly a liberal rule.
And THAT will just guarantee 4 more years of 0bama.
When it's time, I'm ready!
Actually the district requirement, seems to be a firewall against NOVA, which seems to be why it’s there. By requiring a candidate to have support in all the districts they ensure that just canvassing NOVA and the area isn’t enough.
Just a coincidence that Perry and Newt were short 2000 sigs.
My experience has been that the electorate gets very little personal attention. They feel that they are taken for granted and that no one listens to them.
Doorknocking, alleviates that feeling.
| Something stinks to high heaven when petition-reviewers have to wait until 2am on a Saturday morning to announce their 1st-time-ever microscopic-scrutiny of voter signatures. It smells like the New Hampshire Secretary of State's office.
So, the good people of Virginia are going to be disenfranchised of their right to nominate their home-resident?
Gingrich owns only one modest HOME, and it is in Virginia. (Of all the GOP candidates, only Ron Paul's home in Texas is smaller)
The carpet-bagger Romney until recently, owned four MANSIONS, and none of them are/were in Virginia. He recently sold two, (apparently because that would look bad? ...or maybe because he spent $42 Million of his own cash in 2008 running for President?)
Are we to believe that the people of Virgina, (who have a lot of vested interest in keeping a strong military), they are to be given ONLY two GOP choices?
I think not. And either...:
- A judge will find the the voter's franchise must weigh higher than slight technical difficulties in petitions
- OR Newt will just have to win his home state's delegates by write-ins.
It worked for SENATOR Lisa Murkowski, who won by write-ins.
I could understand if the Gingrich campaign was BILLED the extra costs of verifying signatures without 'proper' addresses. (Those signatures would only need to be 'sampled' by a GOP panel to prove they were legitimate VA voters). I am confident those would be proven legitimate in great enough quantities, for Gingrich to be on the ballot.
( Gingrich-haters, please do not address or reply to me.)
Cain lynched himself by giving money to that woman without telling Gloria Cain.
Just the good ole’ GOP telling us who they’ll let us vote for. Now, shut up and sit down Tea Party, that’ll be enough of that!
Because the "party" wants Romney.
Under VA law each party applies its own rules to put candidates on its respective primary ballot. The Republican Party of Virgina could, if it wanted, pass a rule to allow you to get on the VA primary ballot if you can burp the letters from ‘A’ to ‘Z’ after drinking a gallon of Coke.
The VA law only says that if somebody manages gets at least 10,000/400 verified sigs, that person *must also* be included on the primary ballot.
Pat Murray of the Republican Party of Virgina has issued a letter stating that, in addition to Virgina’s 10000/400 requirement, that the VA GOP will also accept any candidate who gets at least 15000/600 sigs without checking names or addresses (’deemed to have been certified’).
The word ‘deemed’ has a specific legal meaning that stipulates the requirement is presumed already met.
Remember ‘Deem and Pass’ with ObamaCare? Same thing.
s/Pat Murray/Pat Mullins/
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.