[jazusamo]

You know not of what you speak.

The vote was Burns 85 to Russell's 46.

Here's a post of yours from yesterday morning.

Because this Russert LOST BEFORE and never Lived in the district and ran a crummy campaign.
Russert needs to grow up and move on.

15 posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 5:14:40 AM by ncalburt (e)

Who are you talking about, Tim Russert? He's dead, Jim.

[mnehring]

The vote was Burns 85 to Russell's 46.

I'm surprised this should be such a controversy. It seems that party rules should be clear as to when to call a special election. For example, in New Mexico, you have to get above 20% of a vote like this to be on a ballot, if only one person gets above 20%, a special election is not needed unless the other party can get a certain amount of signatures. If the rules are similar it seems Russell has a very strong case here.

[ncalburt]

thanks for proving my point .

the local gop followed the PA state laws for
special elections ?

no district in the country finances special election primaries .
too expensive.

[ncalburt]

Well Russell and Rusert both peddled half truths in the media .