South Carolina Ping List
Click Here if you want to be added to or removed from this list.
Posted on 11/15/2004 7:59:27 PM PST by SC Swamp Fox
SUBJECT: Katherine JENERETTE to Challenge Senate Vote Count - for S.C. SENATE District 28
Date: Wednesday, November 3, 2004
To: All Media
Jenerette to Challenge Senate Vote Count
Katherine Jenerette, the Republican Candidate for S.C. Senate District 28 seat is demanding a recount and filing an official protest of the race results in Tuesdays election to County and State election officials in her bid to unseat the incumbent Senator Dick Elliot(D).
Jenerette, defeated Elliott in Horry County, which makes up nearly 70% of the Senate district, according to the unofficial election results, but lost the overall election by a slim 1,316 votes out of nearly 30,000 votes cast.
Elliot, the longest serving member of the Horry County delegation, did not even win in his home county with Jenerette winning the totals votes in Horry.
In addition to the recount demand, Jenerette's official protest will include a request of an investigation into the publication two days before the election by the Sun News of a Voter Guide which wrongly identified her as a Democrat and Elliott as a Republican incumbent in the predominately Republican Senate district. Out of all the names listed in the guide, only Jenerette's and Elliott's party affiliation was incorrectly listed. While the newspaper published a small correction box the next day the newspaper encouraged voters to study the incorrect Voter Guide sheet before going to the polls.
In her challenge, Jenerette said that she will include information alleging possible voter fraud in specific precincts and counties. Also, Jenerette charges numerous instances of unethical and illegal misconduct during the course of the Senate campaign.
This may be good news for fellow SC FReeper, Katherine Jenerette. If anyone hears anything, post it here.
Click Here if you want to be added to or removed from this list.
What a sore loser. That margin is too huge to overcome with a recount. And what's with calling in the brown shirts to investigate the newspaper? This is a free country. We all have the first amendment right to publish what we want, even if it's not factually correct. Sometimes republicans that lose end up being the worst hypocrites.
Sorry y'all.
yeah seriously, i get get mad at all people who try to cheat to win like this. It doesn't seem like she has a legitimate case to challenge the election. she should show specific examples of fraud or cheating against her, rather than this crap
she should show specific examples of fraud or cheating against her, rather than this crap
If you read to the bottom of her press release you would know that is exactly what she did.
I know I'd be pissed if someone printed that I was the Lib candidate a couple of days before the election. Are you aware how many people voted based upon the party lines this year? Not only that but that particular county ... nah, nevermind. I happen to agree with her - she has a legit gripe IMHO.
Jenerette, a FReeper candidate featured on the freerepublic.com home page, is responding to some potential dirty tricks played against her. Even if she cannot hope to overturn the results, it is worth it if she can clean up some of the abuses for the next time. Given some of the strange count modifications due to programming errors, etc., asking for a recount (assuming she can afford it) might not be a bad strategy. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt.
But how does attacking the newspaper do that?
In my state, like many, you can vote strait GOP or DEM with the push of one button or chat. How stupid would you have to be to screw that up, if based on your claim, the vote this year was very party line? We're not talking Palm Beach here.
You are incorrect about that. If it is done with actual malice toward the person, who as a result suffers material loss, then it can be criminally or civilly libelous.
A few years ago in the county neighboring my own the Republican candidate for Sheriff purchased an advertisement for his campaign in the local newspaper. After he gave them the ad some snotty little leftist sh*tkicker on the newspaper staff altered the "paid for by Joe Smith for sheriff" campaign disclaimer on the ad to "paid for by the Liberty County Knights of the Ku Klux Klan" or thereabouts. He was planning to file a libel suit and the newspaper printed a tiny retraction on the back pages...but rather than owning up to the harm they caused him the paper actually defended the claim and published an allegation by some union thug democrat who _claimed_ without any proof at all that he heard the republican use the n-word once! It was a complete smear job by a newspaper that was serving as a partisan agent for the Democrats and they pretty much got away with it.
Sometimes newspapers do that sort of thing and sometimes they do it with actual malice. If that turns out to be the case here - which could be hard though not impossible to prove - then IMHO she should sue the pants off of them.
Thank you.
Might be a hard case to justify a new election though.
What are the points of the fraud issues?
And what in the story (which my comments were based on) leads you to believe 1) there was actual malice and 2) she's even considered suing the newspaper? She's a public figure, and it's virtually impossible for her to win a lawsuit against a newspaper. I stand by my statement. Put the Law School for Dummies book away.
Well, for starters she evidently suspects it. That's why she's apparently called for an investigation, which is her right to do. If it turns up evidence, great! Then sue the pants off of it and file for criminal charges. If not, then let it drop. Either way, your position is premature.
2) she's even considered suing the newspaper
I suppose that's what she'd do if an investigation turned up evidence of malice. But that requires the investigation itself.
She's a public figure, and it's virtually impossible for her to win a lawsuit against a newspaper.
It may be virtually impossible, but that alone does not _necessarily_ mean she shouldn't try if cause exists. Nor does it mean that it isn't her right to try. All I'm saying is that newspapers can and do commit malicious acts against Republican candidates (witness the case of the KKK ad I just described to you) and if there's enough reason to pursue an investigation of one, that is exactly what they should do.
Agree...Dirty tricks are clearly evident here.
Is here a mechanism in place in S.C. to have a special election in these circumstances?
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.