Who Was "Incurably Uncertain"?
The TNDP has released some documents associated with the State Democratic Primary Board meeting which decided (or rather failed to decide) the outcome of the Senate District 22 primary involving Rosalind Kurita and Tim Barnes.
The list of Executive Committee Members who were voted is available here.
As it pertains to Nashville:
Inez Crutchfield (F-19) - No
Jerry Maynard (M-19) - No
Angela Cannon (F-20) - Yes
Chip Forrester (M-20) - Yes
Will Cheek (M-21) - No
Doris Medlin (F-21) - Yes
A yes vote adopted the motion to accept the subcommittee's recommendation to rule the election "incurably uncertain" and throw it back to a county convention, to be held this Wednesday.
Also provided was the voter analysis requested by the Barnes team which showed the number of Republican and Democratic primaries the voters had previously voted in (right-click to zoom in):
Clearly, there were some pretty strong Republicans who voted in the Democratic primary (103 had voted in 4 or more GOP primaries previously and not in Democratic primaries). The question of course is did the Barnes' team prove that they were voting for Kurita in a coordinated way? Or were these disaffected Republicans who have come to see the light? I suppose that is a value judgment each of the Primary Board members had to decide upon.
5 comments:
Or were these Republicans voting in a Democratic Primary because nothing was going on in the Republican Primary?
Just because people vote in a particular primary does not mean they think of themselves as party members. If you ask people on the street, I'd bet they'd tell you, "Oh, I just vote for the person."
I mean, we only have one or two stark choices, unless we write in or go for a fringe candidate, both of which I've done. I usually vote in Republican primaries, but in the general election awhile back, I voted for Harold Ford. Do you want me take that back?
Great work Sean.
Hello again, Sean. Long time no chat.
People think the politburo Democrats are stealing an election from voters. I tend to agree. I'm doing something about it. You are one of the first to know.
What's your take on it?
Go to www.cooljim.com
Good talking to you again.
Jim Boyd
Sean,
If any group takes public money to host an election among its membership and that election is corrupt… it IS illegal. Remember the RICO statutes that the Feds used to bring down a corrupt AFL/CIO election in the 80’s?
Basically, if you have a membership of any kind and want to host a corrupt election, don’t let the public pay for your balloting process.
The Tennessee State Democrats held their election at the public’s expense.
Your friend,
Jim Boyd
Post a Comment