SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: KLP who wrote (51264)10/12/2002 11:25:56 AM
From: JohnM  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
If the entire situation happened, and it was a Republican who wanted the changes to current 51 day law.....what would your position be....?

Wildly oppposed, of course. ;-)

Seriously, I'm torn on this one. My first reaction, typed on this board, before the court ruled, was that this opened stuff up to a great deal of mischief. The obvious: losing in a race, just drop the candidate, substitute another, and start again. I still worry about that.

But two things moderate that view.

1. The view I typed in the previous posts, that the point of the statute was to leave enough time for ballot preparation. And the choice of candidates was a party issue.

2. The mischief I worried about strikes me as not as serious as it first did. Losing candidates are unlikely to resign as Torricelli did. Hope springs eternal sort of thing.

But I go back and forth on this one.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News