Comments on: Bachmann GOP Challenger Looks Forward to “Referendum” http://themoderatevoice.com/23645/bachmann-gop-challenger-look-forward-to-referendum/ An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right Wed, 15 Feb 2012 18:37:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: christoofar http://themoderatevoice.com/23645/bachmann-gop-challenger-look-forward-to-referendum/comment-page-1/#comment-160051 christoofar Tue, 21 Oct 2008 18:35:00 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/at-tmv/newsweek-blogitics/23645/bachmann-gop-challenger-look-forward-to-referendum/#comment-160051 I donated $$ to Bachman's Democratic opponent.<br><br>Brill marketing strategy, Michelle!! I donated $$ to Bachman's Democratic opponent.

Brill marketing strategy, Michelle!!

]]> By: Michael Merritt http://themoderatevoice.com/23645/bachmann-gop-challenger-look-forward-to-referendum/comment-page-1/#comment-159962 Michael Merritt Tue, 21 Oct 2008 06:36:05 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/at-tmv/newsweek-blogitics/23645/bachmann-gop-challenger-look-forward-to-referendum/#comment-159962 "Didn't Lieberman have to designate himself as an Independent?"<br><br>Sort of. The Secretary of State told him it'd be easier to get on the ballot as a party, so he formed "Connecticut for Lieberman" and ran on that ticket. “Didn't Lieberman have to designate himself as an Independent?”

Sort of. The Secretary of State told him it'd be easier to get on the ballot as a party, so he formed “Connecticut for Lieberman” and ran on that ticket.

]]> By: Marlowecan http://themoderatevoice.com/23645/bachmann-gop-challenger-look-forward-to-referendum/comment-page-1/#comment-159898 Marlowecan Tue, 21 Oct 2008 01:43:06 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/at-tmv/newsweek-blogitics/23645/bachmann-gop-challenger-look-forward-to-referendum/#comment-159898 I know Immelman cited this and that statute in his petition to the Elections Office, but I rather doubt he will be allowed to be a "Repubican" challenger to Bachmann, or the "write-in Republican candidate" as the media suggest.<br><br>As Bachmann won the primary, is it even legal for him to refer to himself as a Republican candidate? Didn't Lieberman have to designate himself as an Independent?<br><br>I thought initially it was good on him . . . if he gets elected, he might effect change. Big tents are always good.<br><br>But the quote cited by Dennis represents him as just a spoiler. What he is saying is: If the Democrats keep their own votes, I can siphon off enough votes to ensure a Democratic victory. <br><br>Clearly, if he does not ask for any Democratic votes, it is extremely doubtful he can win with a fragment of the Republican vote. Why would he not want to win, and effect change?<br><br>A "referendum" . . . or just sour grapes revenge on the party that wouldn't vote for him. I know Immelman cited this and that statute in his petition to the Elections Office, but I rather doubt he will be allowed to be a “Repubican” challenger to Bachmann, or the “write-in Republican candidate” as the media suggest.

As Bachmann won the primary, is it even legal for him to refer to himself as a Republican candidate? Didn't Lieberman have to designate himself as an Independent?

I thought initially it was good on him . . . if he gets elected, he might effect change. Big tents are always good.

But the quote cited by Dennis represents him as just a spoiler. What he is saying is: If the Democrats keep their own votes, I can siphon off enough votes to ensure a Democratic victory.

Clearly, if he does not ask for any Democratic votes, it is extremely doubtful he can win with a fragment of the Republican vote. Why would he not want to win, and effect change?

A “referendum” . . . or just sour grapes revenge on the party that wouldn't vote for him.

]]>