Bush getting on ballot hinges on statehouse deal (Illinois)

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.suntimes.com/output/elect/cst-nws-bush26.html

President Bush moved one step closer Wednesday to securing a place on Illinois' presidential ballot this fall, but partisan politics at the Democratic-led Statehouse could still cause a springtime deal to come unglued.

Senate Minority Leader Frank Watson (R-Greenville) pushed legislation through a Senate panel that would allow Bush on the ballot in November despite his inability to meet a candidate certification deadline in late August.

Bush won't be nominated until early September.

A fix to Bush's dilemma originally was contained in legislation last fall that Watson's Senate Republicans rejected because it also included provisions to forgive steep election fines against mostly Democratic officeholders.

On Wednesday, Senate President Emil Jones (D-Chicago) said he would grant relief to the Bush campaign but will bundle other unspecified election issues with the proposal, perhaps threatening another partisan showdown on Bush's fate.

Anyone know the status of a couple of other states where the Repug's holding their convention late to annoint * as near to 9/11 caused ballot problems?

[kysrsoze]

1. What does it matter anyway? Bush won't take IL

they should stop wasting their time.

[alcuno]

4. I doubt if we'll even see a campaign ad in Illinois.

That recent Trib poll showed a 24% gap between *'s support from men and women.

[Qanisqineq]

10. Good, then I won't have to look at him on my TV

n/t

[MASSAFRA]

2. Bush wants to use

9-11 as a photo op leading into th election. Fine, if his nomination comes to late to get on a ballot, then so be it.

[rock]

3. Let them write him in

I understand that both of the illinois-bush-voters are literate.

[lazarus]

5. Same issue in California

I'm sure we'll come to some agreement with them, though. Sigh.

[Zero Gravitas]

6. Keep him off the ballot!

The only reason he would miss the normal deadline is because Rove wants to use 9/11 as a disgusting political propr. If they want to sink that low, they should be prepared to suffer all the consequences of doing so, including not getting on the ballot in IL.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

7. How about we put Bush on the ballot in return that we get to.....

redraw the congressional districts to allow the Democrats
two more seats!

I could live with that!

[mobuto]

8. Put him on the ballot!

Unless the Democratic candidate is losing by a landslide, Illinois will vote for him in November, regardless of whether Bush is on the ballot or not. The real question is Illinois' Senate seat, vacated by Peter Fitzgerald. If Bush isn't on the ballot, then turnout for all races will be depressed (why vote if a Dem victory is assured?) and low voter turnouts typically help Republicans.

Its somewhat convoluted logic, but why not?

On Wednesday, Senate President Emil Jones (D-Chicago) said he would grant relief to the Bush campaign but will bundle other unspecified election issues with the proposal, perhaps threatening another partisan showdown on Bush's fate.

That sounds about right. Make the bastards work for it.

[kysrsoze]

9. Sheesh, I'd hate to see Jack Ryan win Fitzgerald's seat

What an asshole.

[bushisanidiot]

17. Excellent Point. Dems May Not Come Out to vote if they don't have anyone

to vote against. AWOL needs to be on the ballot to inspire the dems to come out to the polls..

the conspiracy theorist in me is thinking this is a ploy by rove to keep dem turnout low so they can excuse "tight" races in states that should have gone dem.. that's when the diebold machines decide the winner.

[davsand]

11. Ka-CHING!!! That price keeps going up!

Back in November the price was gonna go up a little more for every month they waited to give in to the Dem demands for stuff. Last time it was forgivness for Jesse White's campaign fines and a bailout for Daley in Chicago in return for shrub on the ballot.

If the GOP didn't take that deal back then, I have a hard time even figuring out what it is gonna cost them NOW... All I can say is it is gonna cost them dearly.

Gawd--don't you just LOVE Illinois politics?

Laura

[SoCalDem]

12. Screw HIM.. These are the people of "personal responsibility"

They know the deadlines.. Remeber "rule of law"?? The LAW says x, then x it shall be.. If the shoe was on the other foot, what would they be saying?? "neener,neener,neener"..

He just wants to prance around NYC pretending to be the saviour of the people..

[Norquist Nemesis]

13. Make him pay for it

He's got a war chest and this would be a drop in the bucket! $10 or $20 million sounds fair to me. Much better than spending it on media ads.

I'm going to have to put the remote on a short leash for channel switching pretty soon...either or get one of those toy rubber-dart guns and shoot target practice. LOL

(note to FBI - It's a joke!)

[CreekDog]

14. If W isn't on the Illinois Ballot, it will hurt him even if he can't win..

Though Bush lost Illinois by over 500,000 votes, he still garnered 2,000,000 votes there.

Though Bush lost California by around 1.3 million votes, he still got over 4.5 million votes.

I can't see the Republicans accepting any scenario where they lose between 2 and 6.5 million votes. Although they can do exactly that and win the electoral college, the margin of the popular vote would probably cause major problems for them.

Assuming vote totals are same as in 2000, if certain states didn't have Bush on the ballot, this would cause major problems for him, even if he won the electoral college. Winning while losing the popular vote by millions and losing the majority to another candidate will cause him problems with the press beyond anything we are seeing now.

these numbers are approximations

D R TOT (% D/R)
2000 51 50.5 104.4 (49/48)
w/o IL 51 48.5 101.4 (50/48)
w/o IL and CA 51 44 97.9 (52/45)

[dusty64]

15. I can't believe all these

states have twisted the laws to get our regime on the ballot even though they've willing broken them in order to exploit the 9/11 dead for their political benefit. If there were ever a perfect example of Democratic lack of fight, this is it. Does anyone actually think rethugs would allow Democrats to do this?

[ithacan]

16. the GOP KNEW about these deadlines

and chose to have a late convention anyway.

Why don't they just take personal responsibility for their shameless politicization of 9/11 rather than trying to bend the rules for themselves.

What f***ing hypocrites!

[soup]

18. Have the other states changed their election laws?

Vaguely recall a couple of the states immediately amending their statutes to accommodate '*jr.'s New York moment', but haven't heard anything else on it.

From an old article, here's a list of the states:
Alabama, Alaska, the District of Columbia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa Louisanna, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Texas, Utah, and Virginia.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/Conventions_020510.html