M06, Lightford challenge to Smith nominating petitions [4th Sen]
I received an update on the numbers from James T. Smith who is challenging State Senator Kimberly Lightford in the Democratic Primary.
Smith submitted 1,898 signatures. He needs 1,000 valid sigs to qualify for the ballot.
Lightford's camp challenged 1,286; 612 were not challenged.
385 of the challenged signatures were by voters in suburban Cook County. After review, 226 of these signatures were found to be valid (159 of the challenges were upheld). This means 58.7% of Smith's suburban Cook sigs were good.
The next step is to evaluate the 901 challenged signatures from Chicago. Only 162 of these signatures need to be valid (18%), so Smith would seem to have earned a spot on the ballot.
See the earlier entry for comments.
Smith also informed me that Lightford's paperwork caused confusion among her people. In the cases they said they were objecting to voters living outside the district the objectors meant that the voters in questioned weren't registered. I had used this mistake to argue that Lightford's objection wasn't in good faith and that her attorneys should be disciplined. I still think this is true, but would focus on the almost 60% rate that Lightford's objections were flawed.
Smith submitted 1,898 signatures. He needs 1,000 valid sigs to qualify for the ballot.
Lightford's camp challenged 1,286; 612 were not challenged.
385 of the challenged signatures were by voters in suburban Cook County. After review, 226 of these signatures were found to be valid (159 of the challenges were upheld). This means 58.7% of Smith's suburban Cook sigs were good.
The next step is to evaluate the 901 challenged signatures from Chicago. Only 162 of these signatures need to be valid (18%), so Smith would seem to have earned a spot on the ballot.
See the earlier entry for comments.
Smith also informed me that Lightford's paperwork caused confusion among her people. In the cases they said they were objecting to voters living outside the district the objectors meant that the voters in questioned weren't registered. I had used this mistake to argue that Lightford's objection wasn't in good faith and that her attorneys should be disciplined. I still think this is true, but would focus on the almost 60% rate that Lightford's objections were flawed.
posted by Carl Nyberg at
6:33 PM
1 Comments:
Chris Welch filed a defamation lawsuit against me for writing stuff that's true. I'm not a fan of Welch.
Eugene Moore deserves recognition for helping me to get into politics. If he weren't such a horrid legislator I might have never learned the... joys of Proviso politics.
I try not to separate people into good and bad. It's hard sometimes. Even the good people aren't perfect and we should strive to understand their strengths and flaws.
Their flaws aren't to humiliate them but so that we understand how they can contribute to making the world and community a better place. You wouldn't send a great jockey to do the job of a middle linebacker, no?
But if someone is in the game for strictly self-serving reasons, it's not like their venality can be redeemed by some quality.
For example, Chris Welch could say all the right things on the campaign trail and it wouldn't matter. He can't be trusted and would devote his energy to accumulating power for himself if he was elected.
I suppose there's a purpose in acknowledging the guy makes a good first impression in forums where there's nothing adversarial happening. But watch how he deals with the minority on the school board.
I shouldn't rant about Welch. It feeds his ego.
Have I said anything that helps you?
If you have questions about any individuals, please ask.
And the journalists are almost all good people: Seth Stern, John Huston, Nicole Trottie and Megan Brody. I haven't really talked to David Pollard, Chris LaFortune or Terry Dean.
By
Carl Nyberg, at 11:54 PM, January 09, 2006
Post a Comment
<< Home