Daily Kos

Plus, I'm making a few calls to verify that the Sore Loser Law does apply to races that the candidate did NOT participate in during the primary.  Gray area, but worth investigating.

"sore loser law", huh?  Too bad Connecticut doesn't have this one.  How'd you like to listen in on the Red team trying to handle this one?  heh heh.

If so, wow.

The Ohio GOP will argue that the Sore Loser Law does not apply here, because Padgett did not run specifically for the seat of Representative in the 18th CD.

It also seems to me, that since Republicans tend to get what they want from the courts (Tom DeLay's recent shenanigans notwithstanding), that a judge will allow Padgett on the ballot.

But...hey, we'll see.

As good news as this seems to be, I feel certain that ol' Kenneth will just make an exception or something and voila! Padgett on the ballot. Besides, it will look really odd if she wins a Diebold election when she wasn't even on the ballot. Might make Ohio voting practices look suspect.

the Sec of State in Ohio, a man of sterling integrity could allow a variance....... if the money is right.
Keep on this, it may be the straw.

Sounds interesting to me. I've never heard of a "sore loser law". But it seems that it's time for some Ohio lawyers to belly-up and do what Texas lawyers just got done -- keep an dirty R candidate on the ballot. Any idea whether there's anything afoot in legal circles to keep Joy out, or to keep Ney in?

just cant seem to decide who they want to run anymore. Maybe they should run as a group of 5 or 6 so that when corruption charges get too bad then the next one on the list could step in and take over. It would avoid all this messy court stuff. They could form a PAC (Crooks R Us) to collect money for the campaign and use some of it to run and some for legal fees.

Could we please not take election law advice from someone who has been repeatedly warned and fined by the Federal Election Commission for his failure to file necessary reports?   Hell, it's now almost two years after the race, and Jeff Seemann still hasn't filed a report that was due in November 2004.

I do not believe that this Ohio statute can supersede the minimal federal requirements for qualifications for Congress, which would make the "sore loser" statute inapplicable here.

But I'd love to see her try.  Cardiac arrest in forty-five seconds, tops.

In seriousness, great diary.

he's hardly being a sore loser if he's running as the party's candidate for the office he originally wanted.

Padgett of the ballot?    Or is this wishful thinking?

Tom Delay notwithstanding, this is definitely an infringement on Padgett's Constitutional guarantees.  Even though I don't like that Lieberman can run again, I believe he has every right to get trounced in the general.

Although not a card-carrying member of the ACLU, I think they should get involved.

Padgett sounds absolutely awful.  It's typical for Republicans to misuse an image of a hostage confronting his captors to make him seem like a member of Hezbollah.  Of course, it's also typical of Democrats to not respond to this, follow Lieberman's advice, and just expect everyone else to figure this out.  

Hey, could Bob Taft run for the office?

I'm a big fan of anybody who has run for Congress and can write the word "clusterfuck" in a diary.  

The Washington Wire (WSJ online) says this will probably have to be hashed out in court.  link

First off I would like to poiint out that the Liberal media would be reorting this every 15 minutes if it were a Democrat. How many Republican scandal does this make? I can count about 30 in my head!

If anyone knows anything about this moron you know how bad he really is.

The Dots Connect Between Abramoff, Ohio 2004 Election Smokescreen and Ney's Former Staffer Revealed to be on Diebold's Payroll While Working for White House Law Firm

http://www.bradblog.com/...

For some real in-depth repoting and videos visit

http://www.velvetrevolution.us/

But what is a nominating petition.  Unless I'm reading the law wrong it only prevents past losers from trying to gain election via write-in (obviously wouldn't apply here) or nominating petition.  Nominating petition sounds to me a lot like what Lieberman would have to do to run as a "Connecticut for Lieberman" if he loses the primary tomorrow.  It doesn't sound at all like "Candidate X who won the primary is now unavailable (I realize here its by choice), so we're appointing Candidate Y to replace him."

This might start to get problematic for the GOP if someone within their ranks starts to make a big stink about not getting the replacement nod, but outside that it doesn't look to me like a winner.  Of course, my experiences with Ohio election law is nil.

I live in Ney's district, and I regularly post in a local forum that gets quite political. Today, I've decided that, from here forward, every time I write Joy Padgett's name, I'm calling her Joy "Fat Pig Who Feeds At Abramoff's Trough" Padgett. It should go over well with the folks who post there. Besides, she IS a fat pig. Ugh.

a political candidate use the word 'fuck' in any way, ever. But hey, I'm ex-navy, and I loved the diary. Kick ass!

I believe that the Ohio law prohibits candidates who lose a primary from appearing on the general election ballot for that same office. There are countless reasons to oppose Padgett, but this isn't one of them.

And, boy, is it fun when she does. :)

I hate to get in the middle of a pissing match, but this is the wrong section of the code.  Had Padgett decided to run as Lieberman plans to in case he loses, the law cited by the diarist would be correct.  However, this section seems to be the right one.

Section (B) of the above code

If a person nominated in a primary election as a party candidate for election at the next general election, whose candidacy is to be submitted to the electors of a district comprised of more than one county but less than all of the counties of the state, withdraws as that candidate or is disqualified as that candidate under section 3513.052 [3513.05.2] of the Revised Code,

The above is the section that would apply to Congress and, I think, state legislature seats that span more than one county.

the vacancy in the party nomination so created may be filled by a district committee of the major political party that made the nomination at the primary election, if the committee's chairperson and secretary certify the name of the person selected to fill the vacancy by the time specified in this division, at a meeting called for that purpose. The district committee shall consist of the chairperson and secretary of the county central committee of such political party in each county in the district. The district committee shall be called by the chairperson of the county central committee of such political party of the most populous county in the district, who shall give each member of the district committee at least two days' notice of the time, place, and purpose of the meeting. If a majority of the members of the district committee are present at the district committee meeting, a majority of those present may select a person to fill the vacancy. The chairperson and secretary of the meeting shall certify in writing and under oath to the board of elections of the most populous county in the district, not later than four p.m. of the seventy-sixth day before the day of the general election, the name of the person selected to fill the vacancy. The certification must be accompanied by the written acceptance of the nomination by the person whose name is certified.

This says that basically, it is up to the party leaders in the county (read: corrupt OH Repubs) to decide.

for selection of a replacement:

Section 3513.04 of the Ohio Revised Code combines a “sore loser” rule and fusion ban, prohibiting nomination after the primary whether or not the candidate has won the primary. It provides:

No person who seeks party nomination for an office or position at a primary election by declaration of candidacy shall be permitted to become a candidate at the following general election for any office by nominating petition or write-in.

See also 37 Ohio Jurisprudence Section 269, which states: “...The Election Code provides that no person shall be a candidate for nomination or election at a party primary if he voted as a member of a different political party at any primary within the next preceding 4 [now 2] calendar years.” See also State ex rel. Young v. Glasser, 21 OS2d 253, 50 O Ops2d 484, 257 N.W.2d 389 (1970), which appears to carve out two exceptions to the affiliation rule as follows:

Where a vacancy occurs in a party nomination (RC 3513.31), the appropriate committee of the political party which made the nomination may fill the vacancy by selecting a person without regard to his voting record or participation in previous party primary elections. (emphasis added)

...

While this analysis is targeted primarily at the issue of fusion, it provides the pertinent language on filling a vacancy after a primary as well.

(My apologies if this is taken up already in the preceding 100+ comments.)

Padgett said she is preparing to run in a primary election to replace Ney. Ohio law requires a primary if a candidate withdraws or dies more than 80 days before a general election. If Ney were to wait to file his official notice of withdrawal until after the 80-day cutoff for the election - which would be Aug. 21 - there is a four-day window in which he could give notice and county party officials in the district could appoint a replacement, said James Lee, spokesman for Secretary of State Ken Blackwell. The county where Ney would file his official notice, Tuscarawas, had not received Ney's filing Monday.

Looks like a special election

May not be able to run

since there is no sound conclusion that Pagett Can't Run.

It's misleading to say the least.

Does it just apply to the office that the candidate ran for or for any office?

In 1996 I sued Then-Governor Zell Miller and others to strike a part of a state election law as it applied to races for Federal Office. I won in Federal District Court and then in the Federal Court of Appeals. It had to do with the qualifications clause.

...Ohio 18 may have a Tom DeLay Part II because of a law that prevents them from having a Joe Lieberman part II.  Funny.

I resented Lieberman before Lamont challenged him and have only had that feeling compounded in the time since.  What do we do on Wednesday?  I'm sure a lot of the Lieberman supporters probably feel that about Lamont.  But can the distain we feel for Republicans, exceed the contempt I have for Lieberman?

I honestly don't know.  In the Republicans, I know who my enemy is and where the attacks are going to come from.  But from Lieberman, I have come to expect to be attacked out of Left Field, by someone I consider to be a Vichy Democrat, a Quisling, a Traitor!

God forbid, Lieberman should win tomorrow--I'm not sure of how I'm going to proceed.  Today, I got another fundraising call from the DSCC and without thinking I tore into the caller with a short diatribe about "the leadership's support for Lieberman and how it's pissed me off and that there's no way in Hell..." I'd give.

Come Wednesday, are we so divided that we are easy pickin's for the Repugs?  The only thing I can think of to support a Lieberman campaign is control of a Congressional Body--which would give us Subpoena power.  But I can see us getting 51 votes in the senate, just to have Lieberman swing over to the other side or get on his high horse about "partianship" and again, stab us in the back.

with a lot of other stories to it's credit.

I'd like to ask people not to edit it out of the tags when people (like me) place it in appropriate stories.

for Katherine Harris to make a lateral move.

1.)  Put together a collection of plaintiffs from the 18th district, including at least one who voted in the Republican primary, so that you don't run into problems with standing ("standing" is a term of art meaning "eligible to seek relief").

2.) File for injunctive relief before a friendly judge somewhere in the District. (The 18th is gerrymandered to beat the band, but there's got to be a friendly judge somewhere.)

3.)  Do it right away, so that there's no question that your judge gets and keeps jurisdiction over the case, and any subsequent cases that might be filed and consolidated with the original filing.

4.)  Only the courts offer any chance of relief; if you're looking for compliance with the law from the SOS, you're not only barking up the wrong tree, you're in the wrong forest.