That may be true in the GE, but in the primaries those votes count toward delegate apportionment.

If there are enough provisional ballots to affect the apportionment of even one delegate, they should be counted. In additon, there are actual delegates running for election and are other races that these ballots may affect.

Also, there is a court case regarding some of those ballots. If the judge's final ruling is that the ballots of supressed voters be accepted, then they will be counted. I can't imagine that any provisional ballots will be thrown away simply due to the lawsuit and the possibility of a ruling being appealed.

Those who vote by provisional ballot are informed if their ballot was accepted.

I agree with everything you posted

but those nuances (please forgive me for condensing to one word), in light of the sheer danger that the current product poses to everyone in my regional area, must be dealt with separately (on a parallel track perhaps) in order to concentrate on the immediate life-threatening problems of high level nuclear waste.

If it means giving free acess to public documents, I don't care whose site it is.

I'm sick and tired of all these barriers to accessing public documents, whether it's Clinton hiding them on an email server, Romney destroying them as he leaves the governor's office, states charging thousands of dollars for access to statewide voter databases and, especially, not being able to freely view our public court documents without physically being in the jurisdiction of interest.

At this point, it's original use is not a factor in what to do about it now.

The fact to take away from this is that, even if a specific pile of nuclear waste originally wasn't part of a process designed to initially take lives, it always ends up being part of a process that puts people in danger of their life.

FWIW, live north of there near Spokane.

The odds worked in our favor that they lived in the same era and came to

public prominence at the same time, when the world needed them both.

I'm an Atheist, but the sybolism of a Jew and the Pope, at the Vatican, working to focus the eyes of the world on economic solutions to the plight of the poor, sick and elderly of the world, and to the plight of our poor, sick old world does not escape me.

That was fun! Missed 1. No wonder the Vatican invited Bernie-they are on the same wavelength! n/t

Wyoming the "Equality State" welcomes Bernie.

What a perfect match!

Go Bernie!

A False Filing Date Listed For Hillary Clinton Allowed Her Petition To the DCBOE to Go Unchallenged.

Someone at the DCBOE may have deliberately falsified Hillary Clinton's nominating petition filing date. That is the real story in this sorry saga that needs to be exposed. (To make this situation more understandable, I have compiled the info from 2 previous threads of mine into this 1 thread.) The dates are important so they are highlighted...

----------------

In their 23 March 2016 online news release, the D.C. Board of Elections published a list of “Democratic Candidates in the June 14, 2016 Primary Election” that shows Hillary Clinton’s nominating petition filing date as 15 March 2016. In that same list, Sanders filing date was left blank!

How could that be? On March 30th, the D.C. Democratic Party stated in a news story that, while they received registration info from both those candidates before the D.C. Board of Elections Office closed at 4:45 pm on 16 Mar 2016 (the last day to file), they didn't submitted either of their nominating petitions to the DCBOE until 1:31 pm, on 17 March 2016.

So the DCBOE listed Clinton as not just filing before the deadline, but filing two days before the party actually late filed her petition. And the DCBOE should have at least entered a date for Sanders, (if not the 15th, like Clinton's, then why not the late date of 17 March?) D.C. voter and big Clinton supporter, Robert Brannum, who challenged Sanders' petition to the DCBOE noticed this lack of a filing date for Sanders and immediately filed a challenge to his ballot access petition the next day, on 24 March 2016, the day AFTER this list was posted.

This incorrect listing of Clinton's filing date as 15 March 2016 made it appear that she was within the legal filing deadline and therefore NOT SUBJECT TO A CHALLENGE! And in fact, neither Brannum, nor anyone else challenged her or made mention that her petition had also been filed late. The public did not even appear to know about this-what may have been a closely held fact-until news of Sander's challenge broke yesterday.

The DCBOE rules for Petition Challenges state that, on the 3rd day after the petition filing deadline, the Board shall post for 10 consecutive days all nominating petitions for: public inspection; and in order to provide the opportunity for challenge. Any challenge must occur within that 10 day period. Any candidate not challenged must appear on the ballot:

D.C. Board of Elections refuses to certify Sanders for June 14 primary. Clinton will be certified.

Very, very...very interesting (Sanders and Clinton D.C. ballot access)

In their 23 March 2016 online news release, the D.C. Board of Elections published a list of “Democratic Candidates in the June 14, 2016 Primary Election” that shows Hillary Clinton’s nominating petition filing date as 15 March 2016. There is NO Filing Date shown for Bernie Sanders, though.

How could that date be, because the D.C. Democratic Party stated that, while they received both candidates registration info before the D.C. Board of Elections Office closed at 4:45 pm on 16 Mar 2016, the last day to file, they didn't submitted either of their nominating petitions to the DCBOEE until 1:31 pm, 17 March 2016.

So the DCBOEE entered Clinton as not just filing before the deadline, but filing two days before the party actually late filed her petition. And the DCBOEE should have at least entered a date for Sanders, (if not the 15th, like Clinton's, then why not the late date of 17 March?), because the D.C. voter, and big Clinton supporter, who challenged Sanders' petition to the DCBOEE didn't do so until 24 March 2016, the day AFTER this list was posted.