Votes for Harris could be tossed out

The SHT (that's "Sarasota Herald-Tribune"!) ^ | 9/7/2002 | Gary Fineout

[MissAmericanPie]

"As for how well she'll do in Congress, well, judging from many of the creatures that currently inhabit that particular place, it wouldn't be very hard to do much better than most."

Point well taken.

[JulieRNR21]

As for the loser always being angry, well, it's us who will be the losers if Hill wins the primary because of his backstabbing lawsuit.

Exactly right! What really galls me is that Hill could be beaten by the Clinton clone, Jan Schneider! This nobody Hill is on an ego trip and the RATs are loving it!

The judge is stalling in his decision....pure torture...GRRRRRRR!!

[Joe Brower]

The judge is stalling in his decision....pure torture...

The part I love the most is how the leftmedia is already crowing about how any votes for Harris will be thrown out if the judge rules against her. Talk about VOTER DISENFRANCHISEMENT!

Of course, it doesn't matter in this instance because they're REPUBLICAN voters.

[Theyknow]

OK any of those folks could have beat him. If a frog had wings it wouldn't bump it's b--- so much. We still don't know how the court will hold, but if it's Hill it's Hill. He still helps us keep our numbers up.

[Theyknow]

Harris IS being sued by a Republican -- her opponent, John Hill. Butterworth is not a party to the lawsuit."

Butterworth has nothing to do with the Harris suit. Except that if Hill wins a Republican will almost certainly bring a suit against Butterworth before the general election. No action can be brought by a Republican against Butterworth now because Republicans can't vote in the Rat primary, therefore they have no standing.

Just as no Rat could have sued Harris until after the primary because they are not "electors" or voters in the Republican primary and only voters have standing according to the statute.

[MEGoody]

"As Secretary of State she should have known what was required. Its her own fault."

Maybe. The law had previously been that a resignation did not have to be tendered until the individual was elected. As I understand it, the law had just changed and she wasn't sure that it had gone into effect yet. Yeah, she messed up, but it's not like she'd been operating under this new law during her entire tenure.

[Theyknow]

", well, it's us who will be the losers if Hill wins the primary because of his backstabbing lawsuit."

ONLY Hill could have brought this lawsuit at this point. If it were brought by a Rat before the general but after the primary Harris's name could have been removed and there would be NO Republican to vote for, that is my point. Now, do you really think the Rats would have dropped it if they had that kind of potential power?