2 votes

Challenges explanation

I would like to avoid **another** thread bashing the campaign. I feel they did pretty good for the cards they were dealt.

That being said, I have a few questions that I have been unable to find answers for.

1) With the Romney folks challenging pretty clear cut wins of the Paul campaign (eg Maine), why did the Paul campaign not challenge the states that went the other way by questionable means (eg ND or AK)?

2) What exact "procedural" irregularities are being challenged in Maine?

3) How does the delegate count stand in states like MA, LA, etc. After the compromise?




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I recall they didnt have a strong enough case in some states or

Merely the fact that they don't have the resources time and evidence to back this up against a monolithic private Company like the Republi-cants

Oath of Freedom
for the True north, strong & free!

1,2,3

1 - Last night Doug Wead said he asked the same question, and at least in the case of ND, it was determined that while what they did was pretty shady, the campaign didn't feel like any rules were broken.

2 - the filings are out there somewhere, but they claim that during the voting for delegates, there were guests on the floor; a second part of their complaint has to do with something they claim was done (balloting/credentialing) when the delegates broke into their separate CDs, that they claim should have been done during general assembly.

3 - Louisiana we have 17/46, Mass. we have somewhere between 10-12 out of 38.

Thank you! Did he happen to

Thank you!

Did he happen to mention why AZ wasn't challenged?