Posted on 12/24/2011 8:20:24 AM PST by shield
Either the Signatures are viable or they are not. If they don't meet the requirements then they aren't viable.
Now your position is that they shouldn't enact the rules as written because it disqualifies the Candidate you wish to win. In other words it is you who wish to use lawyer tactics to try and subvert the rules in play.
Lets put this one to rest right now.
Which scenario is Better for Newt. Getting well over the number of Valid Signatures to Qualify or not doing so and trying to fight it out in the courts like the liberals do?
Cheers hahahahahah
"Voters deserve the right to vote for any top contender, especially leading candidates," Gingrich campaign director Michael Krull said in a statement. "We will work with the Republican Party of Virginia to pursue an aggressive write-in campaign to make sure that all the voters of Virginia are able to vote for the candidate of their choice."
However, state law says this about primary write-in campaigns: "No write-in shall be permitted on ballots in primary elections."
"Virginia code prohibits write-ins in primaries. He can't do it," said Carl Tobias, a law professor at University of Richmond.
If we surrender to every arbitrary rule then we surrender our liberty in all matters. There comes a time when people must rise and challenge the rules. This is clearly one of those times.
Grab your pitchforks and torches. It is time to march on the establishment. This shall not stand!
If I were Romney or Paul, neither of whom I support, I would use this against Newt and Perry saying that they were unable to demonstrate they could run a national campaign. I think it would be foolish politically for Newt and Perry to fight this, at least publicly.
Arbitrary Rule? Either you misstated your premise or you do not understand the definition of the word.
AN Arbitrary rule would be one that is created by an individual at his discretion.
Being the rules are written in advance by committee such cannot be the case.
Newt was frantically trying to get signatures right until the deadline and fell short. He was furiously collecting signatures at his December 21 rally in Arlington, VA as the price of admission. Obviously, he was trying to comply with the law right up until the deadline. To challenge it now makes him look like a sore loser or worse, incompetent. He has known about the legal requirements since March 6th. Nine months to get 10,000 valid signatures should not be a problem for a major top tier candidate, especially one who lives in VA.
Newt isn't on the ballot in Missouri (but it is a non-binding primary) and he had to scramble in Ohio. Newt had better get his ground game going or he will not be competitve when the actually voting starts. He also needs money to run a media campaign, which has hurt him in Iowa.
I just do not see how having over 15K signatures waives a requirement for confirming the sigs are legitimate. Add in the open primary and we are talking nightmare. The opposing party literally can choose our candidate. Not that they are not already.
This may prove interesting. If this happened here in Wisconsin, I guess I would not be able to vote in the primary. Yeah, not allowing write-ins, not a good thing.
I am with others. If Mitt is the nominee, I will not be voting for him.
It is beyond a rule. It is Virginia LAW and part of the state legal code. It has been in effect essentially unchanged since 1999.
WRONG.
What law school did you flunk out of?
An Arbitrary rule is one that serves no legitimate legislative purpose or which is not rationally related to carry out such legitimate legislative purpose.
A rule which rewards election fraud and punishes honest candidates is clearly not rational.
That’s what I thought, no write-ins.
That’s ok, I’ll save the half gallon of gas it would have taken to drive to the polls on 3/6/12!
There are no winners in this. None. Not even Romney/Paul. Their VA primary victory will have little to no meaning re support/momentum. At best, one gets the whole 49 VA delegates to the national convention. Alas, the eventual nominee will be determined in some other state. A burden and responsibility off our VA shoulders.
You have your rules in WI, we have ours in VA. Isn’t the 10th amendment great!! Romney and Paul didn’t write our election laws. They just complied with them.
Now the rules have been in effect for awhile now (as mentioned upthread) and the rules were written by committee, so explain how the rule is arbitrary.
I already did a dozen times on this thread alone. Obviously you are blinded by your secret allegiance to Mitt Romney.
I do have a serious problem with open primaries.
Then 0bamao it is.
The Stupid Party lost the tax deal though they had the issue and now they kill themselves with an un-democratic procedure which should allow all Pub candidates to be on an open choice ballot. What is wrong with this group? The DC Estab. seems unable to function as conservs who actually want to defeat the worse Prez in our history. It is very depressing.
It is the LAW, not a rule. It will require legislation to change it. You can call it “arbitrary,” but that doesn’t make your opinion so.
Your premise is the rule is arbitrary and for such to be true you must define the word arbitrary like I have done previously and they make your case. FOR THE RULE TO BE ARBITRARY ACCORDING TO THE DEFINITION OF THE WORD IT MUST HAVE BEEN CREATED AND SUBJECT TO INDIVIDUAL WILL WITHOUT RESTRICITON; CONTINGENT SOLELY UPON ONE'S DISCRETION.
Now present your evidence that the rule was created thusly.
In VA, the state sets up the election laws on primaries. In post #81 I provided the law that governs the conduct of Virginia’s Presidential primaries.
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.