Compounding Musgrove's problems on this, Y'all says, is the fact that Barbour has a record of "stomping" Musgrove at the polls and in court and that the judge who ruled in Musgrove's favor at the lower court level "has been overturned more times than a pancake at IHOP."Pender wrongly asserts that Musgrove is wasting his time and energy fighting this issue. Again he quotes his source Y'all Politics.
I just read an entry on the Y'all Politics blog that sums up my consternation: "Why would Ronnie Musgrove seem poised to die on this particular hill of 'ballot placement'? Who really cares about this? For a candidate that wanted to talk about earmarks and the price of gasoline, his campaign has now irrevocably shifted the news cycle for at least the next 14 days over legal wranglings over ballot placement."Pender makes light of the idea that being placed at the bottom of the ballot will effect turnout. Why then is the appeal to the Supreme Court being made if it is baseless worry. There will be a major influx of new voters, many of who are coming primarily to vote for Obama. By moving this race to the bottom, the fact is that a percentage of those voters will not find the Musgrove Wicker race. Whatever that percentage is might be enough to keep Ronnie Musgrove at bay.
Musgrove has his knickers in a bunch that the race between him and Wicker will appear - as special elections typically do - near the end of a long ballot in November. He fears "ballot drop-off," that people will get tired of voting before they get to the end or something.According to Pender special elections have always been place at the bottom of the ballot. The Governor has even made the erroneous claim that Musgrove approved a 2002 ballot that had the special elections at the bottom of the ballot. While it is true there were special elections at the bottom of the 2002 ballot, they were district races which state law orders to be placed at the bottom of the ballot. Also on the ballot in 2002 was the special election for the Court of Appeals, which believe it or not, was placed near the top, in the same section as the other elections for the Court of Appeals.
Jim Hood has both state law and precedence on his side. Will that be enough to sway the Chamber of Commerce Supreme Court? I am not holding my breath.
No comments:
Post a Comment