KRC Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 I haven't been following that race as much as the Lieberman/Lamont one, but I looked back at my relevant posts here (three in total it looks like; for the most part more giddy at Sanitarium's sh!tty numbers than Casey as a candidate) My take: If you can't beat the pants off a nut like Santorum, then you don't deserve to win. He still leads in the polls, but you are right, he's sinking fast. Have they started the debates yet in that race? Maybe Casey is saving his money for an ad blitz closer to the elections...I would guess that these new poll numbers would light a spark under his campaign's a$$ to get moving. You'll have to tell us what's going on with ad time in PA. Is Santorum burning up the airwaves to make up ground, while Casey waits to fire up the campaign post-Labor Day? It could be a resource thing...let Rick bust his nuts to make up ground, then really start the campaign closer to the election. You don't want to run out of cash in September. I don't know. 746080[/snapback] The PA Dems are tossing a crap-load of money on preventing the Green Party candidates from getting on the ballot (Governor, Senator, etc). They are more concerned with preventing free and open elections than they are about their candidate. They are continuing their efforts to disenfranchise voters (from the Presidential elections) and are now moving to prevent people from having a choice on the ballot. It is true that Santorum has been spending money of late. He spent no money early, while Casey was spending the money. It has now shifted in the other direction. This gives him momentum going into the debates (they have not started yet). Casey (and the Dems) needs to stop worrying about preventing voter choice and start focusing on pushing Casey. The problem is that he is a bad candidate. Santorum is exposing that and will continue to beat Casey down going into and after the debates. Casey is in trouble and the PA Dems are not helping. They are more concerned with taking away voters rights than they are with getting their candidate elected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 The PA Dems are tossing a crap-load of money on preventing the Green Party candidates from getting on the ballot (Governor, Senator, etc). They are more concerned with preventing free and open elections than they are about their candidate. They are continuing their efforts to disenfranchise voters (from the Presidential elections) and are now moving to prevent people from having a choice on the ballot. It is true that Santorum has been spending money of late. He spent no money early, while Casey was spending the money. It has now shifted in the other direction. This gives him momentum going into the debates (they have not started yet). Casey (and the Dems) needs to stop worrying about preventing voter choice and start focusing on pushing Casey. The problem is that he is a bad candidate. Santorum is exposing that and will continue to beat Casey down going into and after the debates. Casey is in trouble and the PA Dems are not helping. They are more concerned with taking away voters rights than they are with getting their candidate elected. 746099[/snapback] That's truly unfortunate. It would be a shame if the Dems are setting up roadblocks to the Democratic process and if, regardless of what happens, Rick "Man on Dog" Santorum gets back into the Senate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 That's truly unfortunate. It would be a shame if the Dems are setting up roadblocks to the Democratic process and if, regardless of what happens, Rick "Man on Dog" Santorum gets back into the Senate. 746112[/snapback] It is unfortunate that the Dems would spend so much time and effort in both 2004 and now to prevent free and open elections. It is more about gaining/retaining power than it is about the citizens of the commonwealth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 The PA Dems are tossing a crap-load of money on preventing the Green Party candidates from getting on the ballot (Governor, Senator, etc). They are more concerned with preventing free and open elections than they are about their candidate. They are continuing their efforts to disenfranchise voters (from the Presidential elections) and are now moving to prevent people from having a choice on the ballot. Damn those Democrats who during the presidential elections wanted background checks on voters in Wisconsin, challenged validity of voters in Ohio, challenged voters in areas which they were unfavored, restricting access to provisional ballots, and others. Oh wait, those were all Republicans that did that during the previous presidential elections. Playing the laws to make sure their party wins and other threats are eliminated. Sorry, but even if a 3rd party were elected, they'd more then likely do it too. Ugly fact, but one that comes with elections and power. Something that I doubt very highly a 3rd party would change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 Damn those Democrats who during the presidential elections wanted background checks on voters in Wisconsin, challenged validity of voters in Ohio, challenged voters in areas which they were unfavored, restricting access to provisional ballots, and others. Oh wait, those were all Republicans that did that during the previous presidential elections. Playing the laws to make sure their party wins and other threats are eliminated. Sorry, but even if a 3rd party were elected, they'd more then likely do it too. Ugly fact, but one that comes with elections and power. Something that I doubt very highly a 3rd party would change. 746333[/snapback] It makes it tough for a third party candidate to make it on the ballot, when the Big Two use unconstitutional means to prevent ballot access. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 It makes it tough for a third party candidate to make it on the ballot, when the Big Two use unconstitutional means to prevent ballot access. 746341[/snapback] Indeed it does. For clarification, I wasn't saying I supported it, just that it isn't only the Democrats who participate in this type of crap, and I doubt a 3rd party (if they could get elected in a pipedream) would stop as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 It is unfortunate that the Dems would spend so much time and effort in both 2004 and now to prevent free and open elections. It is more about gaining/retaining power than it is about the citizens of the commonwealth. 746124[/snapback] It is unfortunate that the PA GOP, so desperately trying to keep a deranged man in the Senate, have resorted to spending so much time, money and manpower to get a third party candidate on the ballot...not because they're so big on free and open elections, but because that candidate takes votes away from another candidate. Free and open, indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 It is unfortunate that the PA GOP, so desperately trying to keep a deranged man in the Senate, have resorted to spending so much time, money and manpower to get a third party candidate on the ballot...not because they're so big on free and open elections, but because that candidate takes votes away from another candidate. Yeah. It is horrible that the citizens of the Commonwealth of PA are allowed to have a choice on the ballot. Who do they think they are? Taxpaying citizens protected by not only the Constitution of the United States, but also the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania? It is already been ruled in several courts on several levels that the Pennsylvania Election Code is unconsitutional. Preventing this candidate from getting on the ballot is unconstitutional. Yup. We wouldn't want to have those people allowed to vote for the candidate of their choice. Funny, the Dems get their panties in a bunch when it looks like Bush/Republicans violate the constitution, but it is perfectly acceptable for the Democrats to violate the Constitution. Hmmmm...what is that smell...oh...it is the smell of hypocrisy. Free and open, indeed. 746373[/snapback] It is a step in the right direction. That is more than I can say for the Democrats in PA. All they are concerned with is regaining power in the Senate and they are willing to violate the Constitutional rights of the voters in PA to do it. Again, pretty hypocritical from the bunch who are "outraged" by Bush and his Constitutional issues. What is that saying? Do as I say, not as I do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 Yeah. It is horrible that the citizens of the Commonwealth of PA are allowed to have a choice on the ballot. Who do they think they are? Taxpaying citizens protected by not only the Constitution of the United States, but also the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania? It is already been ruled in several courts on several levels that the Pennsylvania Election Code is unconsitutional. Preventing this candidate from getting on the ballot is unconstitutional. Yup. We wouldn't want to have those people allowed to vote for the candidate of their choice. Funny, the Dems get their panties in a bunch when it looks like Bush/Republicans violate the constitution, but it is perfectly acceptable for the Democrats to violate the Constitution. Hmmmm...what is that smell...oh...it is the smell of hypocrisy. It is a step in the right direction. That is more than I can say for the Democrats in PA. All they are concerned with is regaining power in the Senate and they are willing to violate the Constitutional rights of the voters in PA to do it. Again, pretty hypocritical from the bunch who are "outraged" by Bush and his Constitutional issues. What is that saying? Do as I say, not as I do? 746397[/snapback] Rolling around in the filth with the GOPigs is a fabulous way to get your budding “independent” third party growing. They’re just oozing credibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 Rolling around in the filth with the GOPigs is a fabulous way to get your budding “independent” third party growing. They’re just oozing credibility. 746442[/snapback] It is much better to ignore the constitutional rights of the voters of PA. I'll remember that the next time you rail on Bush and the GOP about violating the constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 It is much better to ignore the constitutional rights of the voters of PA. I'll remember that the next time you rail on Bush and the GOP about violating the constitution. 746445[/snapback] So if there is a question as to the validity of the signitures on the ballot the Dems should just shrug their shoulders and let the chips fall as they may? Look the other way for the good of democracy and the process, right? The majority of Romanelli's (sp?) campaign money came from GOP contributers, he used GOP people on the ground to help get the signitures, and it looks like some of the signitures on the ballot/petition may be Santorum staffers. If the good people of PA wanted a third party would Romanelli need to take cash and resources from another party? Seems less than above-the-board, if you ask me, and certainly doesn't sound like a third party candidacy. But it's your state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 It is much better to ignore the constitutional rights of the voters of PA. I'll remember that the next time you rail on Bush and the GOP about violating the constitution. 746445[/snapback] Yeah, because Republicans don't do it in Pennsylvania sh-- man, both sides do it all over the US, and its dispicable that either one does. They'll do whatever it takes for them to win, but thats the way it will be until the idiots in government get their heads out of their asses. Won't be until it gets enough bad press to cause an issue though. I'm sure the people running in the elections aren't exactly itching to make their suppression efforts known acrossed the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 The majority of Romanelli's (sp?) campaign money came from GOP contributers, he used GOP people on the ground to help get the signitures, and it looks like some of the signitures on the ballot/petition may be Santorum staffers. MY GOD NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!! You mean that people have the ability to contribute to whoever they want? What the hell kind of state is this where people have freedom of choice? I am going to have to move. As far as the signatures, you have GOT to be kidding me. Signing a petition does not mean you are voting for that person. I will let you in on a little secret. People signing petitions know this when they sign. Even in your party, people do this (I know it is a shock, but it happens). Again, you seem to have an issue with free and fair elections. Is that because a free and fair election would get in the way of your guy getting elected? Nice to know that trampling over the constitution is acceptable if it means a Democratic win. Again, I will remember that when you rail on Bush/GOP for trampling over the Constitution. It is only acceptable when Democrats do it. Got it. If the good people of PA wanted a third party would Romanelli need to take cash and resources from another party? Seems less than above-the-board, if you ask me, and certainly doesn't sound like a third party candidacy. 746464[/snapback] It is the only way they can compete, since you have the Dems doing everything in their power to trample over the consitution and prevent free and open elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 Rolling around in the filth with the GOPigs is a fabulous way to get your budding “independent” third party growing. They’re just oozing credibility. 746442[/snapback] Gopigs? Guess we can add that to the list all time lame retorts. A list which includes classics such as: Libtards, Dummycrats, and Repukelicans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts