Dead guy wins in Missouri

AndrewR

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,157
0
0
Now the plan is to appoint his wife. Why? When Senator Coverdell died IN OFFICE (there's the key difference), the governor didn't appoint his wife. He appointed a Democrat who has now won the seat in the election. Carnahan never held the office WHILE LIVING so the governor shouldn't be able to appoint someone. Are we decreeing elections now?

That's the biggest crock I have ever seen. I'm sorry that Carnahan died, but HE DID NOT WIN THE ELECTION -- HE'S DEAD. A dead person is not a citizen, as much as the Democrats would like to think otherwise. Therefore, the election goes to the Republican who probably would have won without the sympathy vote for Carnahan.

I hope that some group has enough balls to challenge this in court. It's criminal.
 

mosdef

Banned
May 14, 2000
2,253
0
0
Yeah it's definately interesting. They said they polled the voters and the wife would have lost by a few points if she ran as herself. Do you know if the Democrats in MO selected the wife, or was this based on something else?

-mosdef
 

Raspewtin

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 1999
3,634
0
0
I heard about the wife thing also, since most of my family lives in Missouri. Every Democratic seat gained is cool, whether they're dead or alive. Who cares who actually sits in the seat; they don't make the decisions in a vacuum anyway. Bush wouldn't be making his decisions either, so it wouldn't even matter if he was dead or alive.
 

fdiskboy

Golden Member
Sep 21, 2000
1,328
0
0
Actually state law requires that to run/ be elected the candidate must be a resident of the state. Dead people cannot be residents. Mark my words. There will be a court challenge in MO on this one and probably the St Louis polling fiasco.
 

AndrewR

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,157
0
0
It's only common sense that there should be a challenge.

fdiskboy: What happened in St. Louis?
 

fdiskboy

Golden Member
Sep 21, 2000
1,328
0
0
In St Louis, the Democrats filed a motion with a state court to keep the polls ONLY in St. Louis open until 10pm. (That area is strongly Democratic) The judge (a staunch Democrat) granted the motion which was then reversed when the Republicans appealed to a higher court. That court (about an hour/hour and a half later) ordered the polls closed. However(!) there were reports hours later that people were still voting in St Louis. So, some strange stuff going on there.

Also, it was noted that after the first judge ruled, there were calls at one Democratic candidates rally for volunteers to "Get out the Vote"--and that at 8pm or so (Central). I can understand the need to hold the polls open for voters that are there or on the way. But trying to turn out more people as the polls are about to close, that's stretching it a bit.

Unbelieveable, but we'll see what happens.
 

Hey, send the corpse over to NY. It will probably be more animated and less wooden than Hillary! :)
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
Well, the issue is that they couldn't change the ballots for some reason. The wife could have had her name on the ballot, and win the sympathy vote anyways if the state let her. You don't suggest that republicans get the seat by default, just because the state doesn't want to reprint the ballots? Besides, MO voters were aware that by voting for the dead guy they were actually voting for his widow. So I don't see any foul play here.
 

Bling Bling

Banned
Dec 16, 1999
1,279
0
0
personally i think that voting for a dead guy is completely retarded. i mean what the hell....he's dead. he can't serve you in anyway. sure his wife will replace him and what not, but that's whom the vote was for! she could have differing views, etc. on politics than her husband. the people who voted for the dead guy knowing he was dead pretty much voted for someone they didn't know. talk about a worthless vote!
 

fdiskboy

Golden Member
Sep 21, 2000
1,328
0
0
I think you put Jean Carnahan (or an actual qualified candidate) on a special election ballot in a month and let her take on Ashcroft fair and square.

This was a pure emotion vote. A sympathy vote, if you will. I am pretty confident that in a month the result would be markedly different.

 

ecrespol

Senior member
Jun 28, 2000
572
0
0
I don't know, but it seems to me that no one was voting for Coverdell who was unaware of his condition (death) so it's like what's the point in fighting the descision. Who says that sympathy votes are not allowed (McCarthy from Long Island was elected because her husband was killed by a gunman)
 

Tominator

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,559
1
0
Less than 48hours after Gov Carnahan's plane crashed it was announced his wife would fill the seat, so they really did not vote for a 'dead guy.'

The appointment is against the US Constitution but not against the Missouri State Constitution.

The Republicans have vowed not to challenge it in court.
 

Dameon

Banned
Oct 11, 1999
2,117
1
0
Bah,this is the biggest bunch of crap. Arg. Campaigning on her husbands dead body, I hope the senate refuses to seat her b1tchass..

ever see the Simpsons episode with "Bart's People"?? That's what this reminds me of. Shameless pandering to emotions. Yuck. :disgust: