Last deadline is Sept 25th which would take a court filing by Akin.
I was going to say the same thing.
It's not over yet. Akin can still read the tea leaves and decide to drop out, but now it will take a court filing.
We can't let people forget this, that there are still options.
So, we have to start talking up the courts, just in case. We cannot allow a liberal judge to force Akin to remain on the ballot if Akin chooses later to withdraw. That would be judicial activism of a nature way beyond the Torricelli/Lautenberg ruling.
With Torricelli, Democrats argued that the voters of New Jersey deserved a competitive election, and therefore the courts must allow Torricelli to be replaced with another candidate. Ironically, they argued this simultaneously with arguing in Hawaii that the recently deceased Patsy Mink should remain on the ballot in the name of fairness, and any votes for her should count for her replacement.
Sympathetic courts sided with the Democrats in both cases, voting to toss the Torch and keep the late Mink.
And let's not even talk about the Mel Carnahan disaster here in Missouri. The reason the courts didn't intervene is that John Ashcroft was too much of a gentleman to contest the legitimacy of running against a dead candidate who had the governor's promise to name his wife in his place if he won. Properly, votes for Carnahan should not have counted at all, but Rules For Democrats trump the rules for the rest of us, it seems.
So, what would they do in Missouri if Akin decides to drop out later? Will they force him to remain despite other courts allowing the deceased to remain in Hawaii and Missouri, and the loser to be replaced in New Jersey?
-PJ