Virginia Primary Ballot

By Too Conservative

As someone who has stood out in front of Giants across Northern Virginia and Kroger’s across Virginia Beach to get folks on the ballot….the process is obviously in need of fixing.

The fact that Gingrich and Perry couldn’t get on the ballot doesn’t do anything except hurt the legitimacy of the primary and force Virginia GOP voters to vote for people they might be willing to do so.


Comments

  • NotJohnSMosby says:

    Just because the guy who’s partially paying for your rent isn’t bright enough to get 10,000 signatures in a state of over 8 million people doesn’t mean the process needs fixing. Romney and Paul didn’t have any issues, no candidates in the past had issues. Maybe if the majority of the Republicans running for the nomination actually knew what they were doing and how to run a Presidential campaign, not just on Fox News but on the ground, you wouldn’t be in the position you’re in.

    Your guy failed. Live with it.

  • Elder Berry says:

    My tree is finally decorated and family just left for home. Tired of last-minute stuff but sometimes it happens. Guess that was Newt’s problem, too. He and Perry just didn’t get an organized ground effort going in Virginia in time to collect enough signatures. There’s nothing wrong with the process in Virginia. Even Democrats manage to get candidates on a ballot and they are no wiz at organization. There’s no surprise about Perry cause he has no organization to speak of, his name seems to be Mr. Seat of the Pants. As for Newt, he just failed, then stepped in it and called attention to his failure, typically bragging on himself once too often on the wrong subject. More hot air than intelligence.

  • Prester John says:

    If the campaigns had been paying attention they would’ve noticed that they could’ve started gathering signatures on 1 July. Getting 10,000 signatures is not something you can do by snapping your fingers and expecting people to do it in the weeks between Thanksgiving and Christmas. Romney and Paul were able to get on the ballot because they had already done it back in 2008 and knew exactly what they had to do.

    Starting in September I was at county GOP committee meetings, GOP fundraisers, and community events to get signatures for Herman Cain. The only other people I saw collecting were for Romney (at the county committee meetings) and Gingrich (at a fundraiser in November after his numbers started going up)–no one else was to be seen.

    Also, there was a thing called Election Day which was the perfect place to get signatures–I got 100 signatures for Cain that day without even trying, and other people got even more than that. As a side note, I had numerous people ask me where the Gingrich, Bachman and Perry people were on election day. Others of course had no idea that there was a signature requirement in the first place and asked why a candidate wouldn’t be on the ballot.

    While only two candidates met the requirement for 2012, 6 managed to do it back in 2008–it’s not the process, it’s the ability of the campaigns being able to pay some attention to basic details. I saw one reference to the RPV tossing 2,000 Gingrich signatures because the signers didn’t put down their addresses — apparently the Gingrich folks didn’t bother reading the part of the instructions on the petition where it said addresses were needed.

    Unbelievable.

  • David C.F. Ray says:

    I think most people who know me would have guessed this, but I voted against having this abominable primary. If we had done it the old way, every candidate would be able to get delegates from Virginia. Not now.

    I suggest you ask EVERYONE running for Congressional District Chairman and for State Central whether he voted for this primary or not (or whether he would do so for 2016) before committing to ANY of them.

    David C.F. Ray

  • Loudoun Outsider says:

    The question of whether conventions or primaries are better mechanisms to nominate candidates is debatable. David has always argued conventions better solidfy the party, consume fewer resources and put the nominee in a better position for the general election.

    What is not debatable is any candidate who cannot fulfill the requirements of getting on the ballot is not ready for prime time or needs new staff folks.

  • Fred says:

    Romney had folks at LCRC meetings months ago gathering signatures to get on the ballot. Hat’s off to them for understanding the blocking and tackling of grassroots poltics. Gingrich and Perry have nobody to blame but themselves. I agree that only Romney and Paul on the ballot is not giving conservatives much choice, but everyone knew the rules far in advance to prepare adequately.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    What about Ron Paul isn’t “conservative” Fred??? That he correctly points out (inconvenient for the neocons) that we shouldn’t be wasting billions of dollars in Iraq?

  • Fred says:

    America does not turn its back on its friends. Ron Paul’s isolationism, particulary with respect to our ally Israel, is unacceptable.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    I’ll agree in principle on Israel, but he’s very much correct about some of the other messes we’ve gotten ourselves into. But then again I’ve always been a big Pat Buchanan fan as well.

  • BlackOut says:

    Pat Buchanan??

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    I’ve always been a big Pat Buchanan fan, and generally an isolationist when it comes to getting ourselves into occupying foreign countries.

  • Dan says:

    LI, being judicious about whether or not to go to war doesn’t make one an isolationist. It makes one sane.

    I’m not particularly a fan of Buchanan or Paul, but we do need voices speaking out against the disturbing tendency we seem to have developed to go to the military option first rather than exploring and exhausting other methods of advancing our interests before resorting to war.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    I agree Dan, although the neocons will call you all sorts of names and question your patriotism if you don’t buy into the world policeman stuff they’re selling.

  • Rtwng Extrmst says:

    Only the campaigns themselves can be blamed for not having enough organization to get on the ballot. If the RPV was working exclusively for Romney, that’s a different problem altogether.

    Personally I will write in the candidate of my choice, and if it comes down to a close race at the end and Romney needs VA to win, I might consider voting for Paul as an “anti-Romney” vote, but only if Paul is already mathematically eliminated.

  • AFF says:

    Get with the program RE. There ain’t no write ins on VA primary ballots. Period.
    This is one of the things that made Newt look so woefully unprepared ( after he didnt make the ballot he claimed he would mount a write in campaign)
    Fail

  • G.Stone says:

    What happens in Iraq over the next 2 years will lay the ground work for Americas involvement around the world for some time.
    It remains to be seen whether the Gov’t in Iraq can govern themselves in a way that justifies the great sacrifices made. It does not look good and the possibility that Iraq was a waste looms large. This will drive both the debate and policy for a very long time, especially if Iran exploites the situation.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    It’s about 10 years too late to view Iraq in terms of being a waste or not. Fighting or “policing” a country with no end in sight or staying there against the wishes of their government (a government we installed, by the way) is impractical — not isolationist.

    Paul is one of those kind of politicians that you listen to and go: “Yep, agree, agree there too, whoa — WTF?” You just have to decide if you can live with the “WTF” part of the mix.

    Israel… with allies like that…

  • NotJohnSMosby says:

    Of course Iraq will be a disaster, just as Afghanistan will be. Those areas have been disasters politically for centuries. But Republicans should be happy with the results. It got Bush reelected. It got Alito and Roberts on the Supreme Court. It got oil prices north of $100 a barrel and it seems permanently above $70 a barrel, so effectively oil is now twice as expensive as it used to be, which is great for the oilmen, like Bush and Cheney.

    Of course, it got liberals and minorities so pissed off that a black man was elected President, which has devastated the world view of white conservatives in this country permanently. But hey, at least Haliburton and Exxon made great coin out of it, and everyone got to know Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman and a whole host of neanderthal fuckups and retards who now operate under the Republican banner.

  • JTR says:

    NJSM- White conservatives could care less if Obama is a black man! In their eyes he is only a community organizer using the Olinsky tactics to destroy this county economically. His lack of executive experience is his major failing. He is slick, knows how to say nothing when campaigning, and has policy ideals that he did/will not discuss in any open forum.
    With regard to Iraq, Bush made a huge mistake when while being politically correct he failed to eliminate Muktador al Sadar when he was causing trouble and was indited for murder early in the war. This was IMO a major error in the name of PC that caused to war to go on and on.

Leave Comment