Wisconsin Democrats are challenging the ballot position of Cornel West, on the basis that some campaign documents were not notarized properly. No one disputes that he has enough valid signatures. The administrative challenge will be heard on Wednesday, August 27, at 11 a.m.
Wow, even those losers can’t dispute that Dr. West has enough valid signatures. How embarrassing for them.
Funny how they were literally trying to bribe Dr. West to endorse Kopmala … why would he endorse a corrupt party who’s trying to kick him off every ballot? That is part of the reason that Kennedy, a champion of democracy, united with Trump against the anti-democratic Democrat party
You are babbling nonsense. If documents are not notarized properly, the loser’s petition is invalid. Everyone knows that. It’s embarrassing when they can’t even properly notarize.
The Liberal Party USA POTUS Nomination! https://x.com/liberalparty_/status/1827669768616222880?s=46
Lindsay, there are many complex issues relating to notarization. Suppose the notarization was done in another state? Suppose the notary’s commission had expired? Does that really matter for the purposes of election administration? Notarization of petitions is not even necessary, and only a handful of states require petitions to be notarized. The notarization requirement for petitions was declared unconstitutional in federal court in Pennsylvania in a Green Party case.
Democrats haven’t learned their lesson yet, huh? Trying to remove every candidate from the ballot will just unify everyone against you…
I agree with Thecommander Jeff here. They trying to eventually become the only legal political party in this country.
I knew Ebke was a communist!
@Lindsay
If I were to walk into the town clerk’s office and hand them a paper that was supposed to be notarized, but wasn’t, they wouldn’t take it. They’d hand it right back to me.
If the executive branch of government failed to carry out a law, the court needs to grant West a chance to remedy the situation.
Notarize this ballot and shove it.
A ballot cast by a qualified voter is all the petition needed to make a candidate “qualified” to receive votes.
QUALIFIED TO TAKE OFFICE – A QUITE SEPARATE MATTER
“Lindsay, there are many complex issues relating to notarization. Suppose the notarization was done in another state? Suppose the notary’s commission had expired? Does that really matter for the purposes of election administration? ”
Does it matter for the purposes of other kinds of legal documents?
“Notarization of petitions is not even necessary,”
Of course it’s necessary. Some one legally swearing witnessing the signing of a legal document…
“and only a handful of states require petitions to be notarized.”
Is that a recent development? I seem to recall it was many states back when I travelled with petitions.
“The notarization requirement for petitions was declared unconstitutional in federal court in Pennsylvania in a Green Party case.”
Obviously not universally since other states have it. Courts sometimes err, like your federal court in a PA vomit party case.
“They trying to eventually become the only legal political party in this country.”
Not really. That’s the Republiklan. Democrats are trying to keep that from accidentally happening through the clownish antics of spoiler parties siphoning votes that are badly needed to keep the commie fascist RepugnantKlan from winning.
“If I were to walk into the town clerk’s office and hand them a paper that was supposed to be notarized, but wasn’t, they wouldn’t take it. They’d hand it right back to me.
If the executive branch of government failed to carry out a law, the court needs to grant West a chance to remedy the situation.”
That would depend on whether there is a deadline, much as with petitions.
Try walking into a town clerks office with a paper that was supposed to be notarized by a deadline with no time to remedy the lack of required notarisation before the deadline passes. This is in no way unique to elections or political matters.