Why have election laws?

[JBA]

A reminder, When the Dems candidate in New Jersey was losing in the polls just 30 days before the election they pulled him out and put in poll tested Toraselli sp? to replace him, Toraseli won. The Dem appointed SJC ruled it Okay. Aganist the election laws of New Jersey and the State constituion. When GORE didn't like the results of Florida, well we know what happened there.

So once again here in Massachusetts the Dems don't like the law. If Kerry wins the Presidential (god help us) then the Governor a Rep. has the Law both State and Federal Constitutionality to appoint a interim Senate, Now the Dems in the State Legislature with Kennedy pushing hard are trying to pass a law to overturn an 80 year old law to stop this appointment, incidentally this is how KERRY got his senate set, Dukakis appointed



http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/02/19/democrats_eye_plan_to_protect_kerry_senate_seat?mode=PF

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Governor
Michael S. Dukakis appointed Kerry to the seat to give him a leg up in ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Massachusetts Democrats are devising a plan to keep John F. Kerry's US Senate seat in their party's hands by blocking Governor Mitt Romney from naming an interim replacement if Kerry wins the White House.


Under Article 17 of the US Constitution, governors derive the power of filling a Senate vacancy from their legislatures.


Under state law, Romney would appoint an interim senator

Under the Straus proposal, the Senate seat would remain vacant until the state holds a special election to fill it, 60 to 180 days after the vacancy.
Straus said such a system would also avoid having two Senate contests taking place in the same year. Senator Edward M. Kennedy will face reelection in 2006. With a gubernatorial election taking place that year, Straus argued, voters would face a lot of confusion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
O I guess I'm to stupid to understand two names on the ballet. F off Straus

[Pongo]

you evidently have no idea what happend in florida.

[AKIron]

Originally posted by Pongo
you evidently have no idea what happend in florida.

Why don't you give us your condensed version of what happened in Florida then? Be prepared to be refuted with facts.

[JBA]

Pongo,
please explain? your version.
once again the dems don't like laws that don't help them gain or hold onto their power and they will change the election laws during an election to suit their personel agendas

[SOB]

Man oh man, them evil dems is out to get us!!!  They all break the law and eat babies, while the upstanding republican crusaders do their best to live by a strict code of ethics and strive to never do anything underhanded.  And I woke up with a headache this morning, damned democrats sneaking into my apartment at night and giving me a headache, they're sneaky and coniving and out to get us I tell you!  When will this madness end?!  It's plain to see that we need to get the camps up and running and wipe the liberal scum out of existence!

[JBA]

SoB adding nothing to the conversation once again, Thanks:aok   Do you get ignored when out with friends?

[Stringer]

Pongo,
I'm still waiting for you to reply to Kieren over at checksix regarding your statement on Harris breaking Florida laws, mainly by you showing which ones were actually broken.

[Dead Man Flying]

On the contrary... SOB added about the most intelligent comment yet in this thread.

What exactly is the point of starting threads like this anyway?  To point out the evils of Democrats?  To whom?

-- Todd/Leviathn

[AKS\/\/ulfe]

Monkeys throwing feces, thats the point of this thread.
-SW

[JBA]

why brake the law, o thats right can't win at the voteing both.

[B17Skull12]

lets vote Hitech for president.

[Dead Man Flying]

Originally posted by JBA
why brake the law, o thats right can't win at the voteing both.

First of all, if you change the law you aren't breaking it.  Second, you never did address the questions I asked.  What is the point of this thread?  To whom are you writing it?  You obviously don't plan on convincing anyone of anything.  It's more akin to ideological masturbation than anything else.  

Lastly, how does blocking an unelected appointment equate to an inability to "win" at the "voteing both [sic]?"  Do you even understand how these things work?

-- Todd/Leviathn

[Dead Man Flying]

Incidentally, there is no "Article 17" of the U.S. Constitution.  The author of the article refers to the 17th Amendment.  Shouldn't this fact alone raise some alarm bells with you, JBA?  Or should we not let facts get in the way of a good partisan rant?

-- Todd/Leviathn

[capt. apathy]

Originally posted by JBA
A reminder, When the Dems candidate in New Jersey was losing in the polls just 30 days before the election they pulled him out and put in poll tested Toraselli sp? to replace him, Toraseli won. The Dem appointed SJC ruled it Okay. Aganist the election laws of New Jersey and the State constituion. When GORE didn't like the results of Florida, well we know what happened there.

So once again here in Massachusetts the Dems don't like the law. If Kerry wins the Presidential (god help us) then the Governor a Rep. has the Law both State and Federal Constitutionality to appoint a interim Senate, Now the Dems in the State Legislature with Kennedy pushing hard are trying to pass a law to overturn an 80 year old law to stop this appointment, incidentally this is how KERRY got his senate set, Dukakis appointed



http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/02/19/democrats_eye_plan_to_protect_kerry_senate_seat?mode=PF

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Governor
Michael S. Dukakis appointed Kerry to the seat to give him a leg up in ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Massachusetts Democrats are devising a plan to keep John F. Kerry's US Senate seat in their party's hands by blocking Governor Mitt Romney from naming an interim replacement if Kerry wins the White House.


Under Article 17 of the US Constitution, governors derive the power of filling a Senate vacancy from their legislatures.


Under state law, Romney would appoint an interim senator

Under the Straus proposal, the Senate seat would remain vacant until the state holds a special election to fill it, 60 to 180 days after the vacancy.
Straus said such a system would also avoid having two Senate contests taking place in the same year. Senator Edward M. Kennedy will face reelection in 2006. With a gubernatorial election taking place that year, Straus argued, voters would face a lot of confusion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
O I guess I'm to stupid to understand two names on the ballet. F off Straus

ya, or like when Bush & Chaney found that law that forbids the pres and VP from being from the same state inconvenient.  so Chaney changed his address to Wyoming immediately before taking the nomination

[JBA]

Originally posted by capt. apathy
ya, or like when Bush & Chaney found that law that forbids the pres and VP from being from the same state inconvenient.  so Chaney changed his address to Wyoming immediately before taking the nomination

or when Hillary moved to NY?