Skip to main content

View Diary: Daily Kos Elections Live Digest: 11/18 (289 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  From the article itself: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    madmojo, LordMike, wadingo
    But the bar for success is extremely high. The law states that a candidate must detail “objections to the conduct or results of the election accompanied by specific allegations which, if proven true, would have a probable impact on the outcome of the election.”

    “That’s a heavy burden,” said former Virginia Attorney General Anthony F. Troy. “A contest, you have to demonstrate not that a vote was cast that shouldn’t have been cast, but the results — the outcome — would have been different.”

    "You are not machines! You are not cattle! You are men! You have the love of humanity in your hearts. You don't hate! Only the unloved hate — the unloved and the unnatural!" -Charlie Chaplin

    by KingofSpades on Mon Nov 18, 2013 at 11:45:55 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Again (5+ / 0-)

      The bar for proof is wherever the GOP majority in the legislature sets it. It's not like Herring has any avenue of appeal here. The guy quoted in Serwer's piece has a much better read on the situation:

      “If they can find a hook to demonstrate some sort of irregularity, then there’s nothing to prevent them from saying our guy wins,” says Joshua Douglas, an election law expert and professor at the University of Kentucky College of Law.  “There’s no rules here, besides outside political forces and public scrutiny.”
      There's absolutely no "legal" bar here. The only obstacles are public pressure and fear of backlash.

      Get the Daily Kos Elections Digest in your inbox every weekday. Sign up here.

      by David Nir on Mon Nov 18, 2013 at 12:33:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Is there perhaps a constitutional argument (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LordMike, KingofSpades

        against this sort of crap? I would think due process or what have you would outlaw this.

        23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

        by wwmiv on Mon Nov 18, 2013 at 01:43:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The guarantee clause is felt to be (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          James Allen

          nonjusticiable. You also don't have the right to an elected attorney general. The Bush v. Gore question would be whether the General Assembly were county some votes differently than others, in violation of the Equal Protection clause.

          I wonder whether (but doubt) you could get an injunction under §2 of the VRA. If I were the judge, I would grant it--at least as a preliminary matter.  

          Ok, so I read the polls.

          by andgarden on Mon Nov 18, 2013 at 06:11:52 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site