[TheBigB]

"Voters have an "over-arching" right to have competitive elections..."

YOU CANNOT INVENT RIGHTS OUT OF THIN AIR, G*DDA*IT!! THERE IS NO MORE "RIGHT A COMPETITIVE ELECTION" THAN THERE IS A RIGHT TO A DECENT PAIR OF SHOES. THE VOTERS OF NJ CAN VOTE FOR FORRESTER, TORRICELLI, THE GREEN, THE LIBERTARIAN, THE BUTCHER, THE BAKER, OR THE FRIGGIN' CANDLESTICK MAKER!! THEY CAN WRITE IN LOUSENBERG IF THEY WANT!! JUST BECAUSE LOUSENBERG'S NAME IS NOT ON THE BALLOT, THAT DOES NOT MEAN THE ELCTION IS NOT COMPETITIVE!! HOW THE #$%^& CAN THEY NOT SEE THAT??

Sorry. Sorry. I'm too PO'd to be polite about these damn RATS right now.

[1Old Pro]

The RAT says let them send in two ballots and we'll accept the one that is for the Dem, uh, er, I mean the second ballot.

[Galtoid]

Just a slight disagreement with you. I believe that I heard someone yesterday say that the only way this thing gets to SCOTUS is on a Voters' Rights basis. In other words, voting rights is a federal issue, which could be violated in the case of the absentee voters' already receiving ballots which will have been invalid.

[mwl1]

I think your post was entirely reasonable. Well said.

[RooRoobird14]

"Voters have an "over-arching" right to have competitive elections..."

Someone needs to point out that the Dumb@ssocrats chose to run their primary with one and only one candidate who they knew was a crook. It's their fault and their fault alone that the general election will be "uncompetitive." That's what happens when a corrupt party chooses to support a corrupt candidate and doesn't look for alternatives.