Well, then, it looks like another failure then. Specifically, the term “properly”? Did the SoS follow the law, custom, and procedure for certifying those, and I mean ALL of those on the ballot? Unless you can demonstrate the SoS SPECIFICALLY violated the procedure, then it is all for naught, and will be tossed out, like the lower court did.
EVIDENCE, people. Not wishful thinking.
1. The state constitution requires the Secretary of State to verify a candidate’s eligibility.
2. The plaintiff has presented the state SOS mountains of evidences that obozo is not constitutionally eligible to be the pres, and asks the state SOS to verify obozo’s elig.
3. The state SOS ignored the evidences and did not do anything to verify obozo’s eligibility, thus violating the state constitution.
ISN’T THIS SPECIFIC ENOUGH??!
IT IS THE CONSTITUTION, STUPID. (I don’t mean you specifically, I mean all the idiots who ignore the constitution)
This is not a matter of ‘procedure’, but constitution!