AND FILL IN THE BUBBLE
Primary election day in Iowa is June 5th. The local primary field will be discussed in general a bit more in coming days but this one needs some special treatment.
Readers are probably aware that the Ginny C⋅A⋅L⋅I⋅G⋅I⋅U⋅R⋅I name will not be on the ballot for the Republican primary because names on her nomination petition were challenged according to rules that did not stop other candidates on appeal. So be it. *You can read about the matter at her campaign website . The thing is she is the conservative, and has the background and has taken positions to establish that. She is an ardent Trump supporter.
Chris Peters by comparison is not/has not. Chris Peters (we did not realize this in 2016), caucused for Obama in 2008 (and his wife for Clinton). Then Peters ran for congress as a Libertarian. Seriously what kind of nincompoop Libertarian supports Obama or just about any Democrat over a Republican when they could caucus for a Libertarian or vote for a Libertarian? Now he is a Republican? Ah, but one who infamously said he would not vote for Trump in October of 2016.
He was too pure to vote for a guy who ten years previously engaged in boisterous talk but wants to be forgiven for voting for Obama, a policy reprobate on just about everything that should be near and dear to conservatives or Libertarians or Republicans. And his demurral on Trump was pathetically designed to help his pathetic showing in his race against Loebsack that year in a district that Trump won! Oh, and in effect help Hillary Clinton, another policy and personal reprobate. His political judgement not to mention his policy deficiencies compared to C⋅A⋅L⋅I⋅G⋅I⋅U⋅R⋅I are disqualifying in the primary.
If C⋅A⋅L⋅I⋅G⋅I⋅U⋅R⋅I succeeds as a write-in candidate, a formidable task, it will put her on the ballot in the fall on the Republican line and on the radar of politicos, we hope propelling her to victory over Dave Loebsack, a pale ,in skin tone only, Obamaite.
Articles of note:
http://daily-iowan.com/2016/04/07/chris-peters-is-not-your-average-republican/
Also:
https://americanbackbone.us/ginny/why-write-in/
Why Write-In?
To be on the primary ballot, as a candidate for U.S. Congress, candidates are required to get a certain number of signatures from at a certain number of counties in their District. Ginny had enough signatures from enough counties. However, this is what happened as I understand it:
There was a certain Republican County Chair Person (who happens to be for Ginny’s opponent) who signed her petition several times. This gave the impression that there were more signatures from that county than there really were (duplicate signatures don’t count). So when the signatures from that county were counted, the county was short. Ginny’s campaign was notified that this county was being challenged and looked short, but not to worry, they had gotten signatures from an extra county just in case.
However, it turned out that two pages of signatures from the extra county did not have the box checked at the top of the petition indicating Ginny was running as a Republican, and these pages were disqualified. This is pretty picky, since the panel who approves these had allowed petitions in the past when the top portion of the petition did not even have the candidates name written in! They in that case, they stated that the intent was there and gave the benefit of the doubt. As I understand it, Ginny’s campaign was not notified that this county was being challenged until it was too late to remedy the situation. We do not know if there was collusion to keep Ginny off the ballot or not. But we do know that she collected plenty of signatures.
But the panel does not have the last word – You Do! Ginny can still get on the ballot in the November General Election if she wins the June 5 Primary Election. All you have to do is fill in the bubble beside Write-In space, and then write in GINNY CALIGIURI in the blank (spell it correctly) See example below.
C⋅A⋅L⋅I⋅G⋅I⋅U⋅R⋅I campaign website:
http://ginnygetsiowa.com/homehttp://ginnygetsiowa.com/issues
*We note rumors that Republican politics may have played into the C⋅A⋅L⋅I⋅G⋅I⋅U⋅R⋅I denial. She may have been a sacrificial lamb in the appeal board process. Democrats on it would have maybe loved to allow Corbett to continue in the primary to oppose Reynolds but certain Republicans on it did not want that if it could be avoided , so they voted against both “for consistency” even though the situations were arguably different. Again the board as an institution has not been consistent in its treatment of petition signature validation according to reports.
