• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Judge halts Alaska Senate Certification

applecorped

Banned
applecorped
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
20,145
http://articles.ktuu.com/2010-11-19/murkowski-campaign_24842367

"The ballots in the U.S. Senate race are counted, but the legal battle is far from over. On Friday afternoon, a federal judge temporarily stopped the certification of the race’s results, provided Republican candidate Joe Miller files a state lawsuit by Monday. U.S. District Judge Ralph Beistline says the results of the election should not be certified for now, giving Miller the option of taking the issue to state court where Beistline says it belongs.


“This isn't even about winning or losing the election -- it’s about making sure the process is fair and according to law in the future,” Miller said. “I think all Alaskans would agree that pretty much what we've seen over the last week and a half or so has not been what what we expect, or what we like in future elections."






Delaying the inevitable.
 
applecorped said:
“I think all Alaskans would agree that pretty much what we've seen over the last week and a half or so has not been what what we expect, or what we like in future elections."
Click to expand...

It certainly wasn't what he expected. He expected them to vote for him. They didn't.
 
Meadmaker said:
It certainly wasn't what he expected. He expected them to vote for him. They didn't.
Click to expand...

To be fair he did say, “This isn't even about winning or losing the election -- it’s about making sure the process is fair and according to law in the future,” Miller said. Whether you think he was being sincere is another matter.
 
applecorped said:
To be fair he did say, “This isn't even about winning or losing the election -- it’s about making sure the process is fair and according to law in the future,” Miller said. Whether you think he was being sincere is another matter.
Click to expand...
Of course he's sincere. Just as sincere as every athlete who holds out on his contract who claims "It isn't about the money."
 
Yea, he was sincere about States having more control over State business rather than the Fed having control....... Until he decided to pursue this in Federal court becasue the State said he lost.
 
And isn't Miller one of those anti-government Tea Party people who think that wasteful government spending is worse than anything? Yet here he is pursuing legal processes that do nothing to contribute to the fairness of an election but only serve to waste time and resources.
 
Region Rat said:
Are you saying that no Democrat has ever sued anyone?

Really?
Click to expand...

While I don't agree that suing when you've lost is the 'Republican way' either, it does no good to attack such a silly straw man as 'no Democrats have ever sued anyone'.

The Painter said:
Do you need to go back to 2000 when the Democrats sued over election results? I don't know how old you are, maybe you don't remember that.
Click to expand...

The difference being that it appeared as if Gore might have actually won. Even if you don't think it was possible that Gore won, it's still a world different from what's happening here.
 
tyr_13 said:
While I don't agree that suing when you've lost is the 'Republican way' either, it does no good to attack such a silly straw man as 'no Democrats have ever sued anyone'.
Click to expand...

I know, but the R vs D bickering, like backers of one party cannot have anything at all in common with backers of the other party gets to me sometimes.

No, that's not true. It always gets to me.
 
tyr_13 said:
While I don't agree that suing when you've lost is the 'Republican way' either, it does no good to attack such a silly straw man as 'no Democrats have ever sued anyone'.



The difference being that it appeared as if Gore might have actually won. Even if you don't think it was possible that Gore won, it's still a world different from what's happening here.
Click to expand...

NO it is not a world of difference! It is the same. As I've said over and over, "It all depends on whose ox is beign gored". You think it's different because it was your ox.

PS Both parties arguing about the results in Alaska are Republicans. Exactly where do the Democrats fit in here?? As agitators?
 
The Painter said:
PS Both parties arguing about the results in Alaska are Republicans. Exactly where do the Democrats fit in here?? As agitators?
Click to expand...

Is it possible that some Democrats voted for Miller or Murkowski? This is the general election, not the primary.
 
The Painter said:
NO it is not a world of difference! It is the same. As I've said over and over, "It all depends on whose ox is beign gored". You think it's different because it was your ox.

PS Both parties arguing about the results in Alaska are Republicans. Exactly where do the Democrats fit in here?? As agitators?
Click to expand...

I already stated why it was different. At the time, it very much appeared as though Gore might have won. In nooooooo way does it appear may have won. It wasn't because Gore was 'my ox' no matter how many times 'over and over' you say it. There were actual voter irregularities and valid concerns, which is completely unlike this case.

But keep acting like the only reason people might disagree is party lines, it's a really soft and well stuffed strawman.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom