Edwards falls short for Rhode Island's primary

[Freddie Stubbs]

RALEIGH -- Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards likely won't appear on Rhode Island's primary ballot because he failed to submit enough valid signatures, election officials said.

A candidate must have submitted 1,000 valid signatures from registered voters by Dec. 19 to qualify for the Rhode Island ballot. The secretary of state then has until Dec. 26 to assess the validity of the signatures.

Secretary of State Matthew Brown said that Edwards had only 918 valid signatures, with 321 questionable. Brown, a Democrat, ruled Edwards ineligible Dec. 26.

The Edwards campaign appealed, and the Rhode Island Board of Elections met Wednesday to review the decision.

more: http://www.news-record.com/news/government/edwards_010204.htm

[JNelson6563]

1. wow, only 1000?

That's gotta sting.

[anti-bush]

23. Yeah but.

When you turn in 1300 signatures, you probably assume that you don't need to go out and continue to get signatures. Obviously something is fishy with somebody deciding that over 300 of his signatures were bad.

[Hep]

27. That's not true at all.

PEople know that if you need 1000 signatures, you GET 3000.

[topdog08]

31. Which explains why NO ONE BUT DEAN EXCEEDED 1300!!!!!!!!!!!!

You could at least read the story before you shoot off at the mouth.

http://www.news-record.com/news/government/edwards_010204.htm

Seven other Democratic candidates will appear on the ballot: Lyndon LaRouche, who had the most signatures with 1,756; Howard Dean (1,649), Wesley Clark, U.S. Rep. Richard Gephardt, U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, and U.S. Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, who all had between 1,195 and 1,292 signatures.

[Hep]

35. Take a look at the post I responded to

and you'll be more clear on what I'm talking about.

[Kayla]

2. I note at the end of the article

that he is in good company.

Also, I don't think he does need RI to win.

[Freddie Stubbs]

3. Good compnay?

Those two aren't running serious campaigns. This is not a sign of a very organized campaign.

[arewethereyet]

11. he comitted hard to Iowa, RI is expendable

and it sounds like he did do it, had well over 1000. either loser local help or the fix is in (not too shocking for that area).

[Freddie Stubbs]

17. Is Dean the only candidate trying to win delegates in all 50 states?

It seems like everyone is skipping at least one state. I wonder if anyone has compiled a list of this.

[Hep]

30. I think you're right

but I can't verify it. But we know we can eliminate at least two candidates- Clark and Edwards.

[Freddie Stubbs]

33. And Lieberman

He is not participating in the Iowa Caucuses.

[Hep]

29. No way.

No way 1300 signatures is enough for a petition drive to get 1000. Anyone who stops at 1300 is an idiot. Sorry, it's true.

In NC if you don't take matching funds you have to get 10,000 signatures. The Dean campaign has been working hard to get those signatures. But our goal is 30,000 because you just never know.

As of last count, we've hit the 4,000 mark, but we've submitted over 6,000 signatures.

[helleborient]

4. Is he going to win somewhere?

I suppose he does need to win somewhere to win.

[DemDogs]

25. Edwards will win SC

The tone of your note is one of the reasons people don't want anything to do with that campaign.

[eileen from OH]

5. This bums me out.

I like Edwards more and more - definitely my second choice. It's not the missing being on the ballot thing, per se, it's the lack of campaign organization that's troubling.

eileen from OH

[AP]

6. I'll bet 20 bucks he wins the appeal.

[arewethereyet]

15. thats the least likely answer

its a small and tight political community there and I do not rule out "home field advantage" against the cocky southern boy. They had plenty of signatures, just pulling his chain.

[KaraokeKarlton]

19. I strongly suspect that Edwards will be part of the Dean administration

Either as VP or Attorney General, where I'd personally LOVE to see him. He's be a phenomenal AG, and Lord knows we need a good one after the piece of shit we have now. Even though Edwards is struggling, he's eventually going to have his time as president. I just don't think now is his time. But he's definitely going to be getting primed for a future run. Try not to let this get you down. :D

[Renew Deal]

7. I am not sure if Edwards, Gep, Lieberman,

are going to get on the NY ballot. Edwards might. The other two might not.

[askew]

8. What's the requirement for the NY ballot?

And do you know who has met the requirement so far?

[PATRICK]

26. Edwards is on already in NY

and is boasting I think about being the first. NY is a monster for candidates' procedures.

Edwards is definitely not feckless or easily hurt in legal matters. That early attack on his campaign finances seems to have been handled well.

[Renew Deal]

34. He won't be boasting

when he sees how many petition signatures Clark and Dean got.

[jpgpenn]

9. sorry to hear that

Is his campaign that unorganized? BTW, isn't it Edwards that is always in trouble with late filing of his taxes?

[DemDogs]

24. Sorry? Really?

He had late taxes on a house he was renovating, where he didn't live yet. I figure you are bringing that up because he you are not "sorry" but happy.

[jpgpenn]

36. you figured wrong

I for one wouldn't hesitate to vote for Edwards if he was nominated. What i'm saying is, for a man that is in the political limelight and very bright, how does he let himself get into such attention grabbing situation? Surely there are at least 1000 people to get him on the ballot.

[genius]

10. That's obnoxious.

I'm for Dennis but if I had known Edwards needed more signatures, I'd have had some of my friends in R.I. sign for him. We need to keep all the good candidates on the ballot until we see how the prirmaries are going. That's more than the average of invalid signatures. I wonder if some of Dean's supporters pulled some dirty tricks to keep Edwards off the ballot.

[LittleDannySlowhorse]

18. Give me a fucking break.

Seriously. Not everything bad that happens to another candidate is Dean's fault, or the result of "dirty tricks" from his supporters.

[jfiling]

12. That's a real shame

John Edwards is the Democratic candidate that has finally won me over. I don't like Bush, but until Edwards' performance yesterday in the debate, I really couldn't warm up to any of the Dems ( although I'd flirted with supporting Lieberman ).

[spooky3]

16. Welcome, jfiling!

[sleipnir]

13. Edwards' been falling short this whole primary...nothing new here.

Sorry, but he's been in the tank the whole race. He hasn't moved anywhere, but stagnated in a doldrum. Nothing personal, but I've been mystified about how he hasn't gotten any traction...

I'm not sure why, other than voting for IWR, PATRIOT ACT, PATRIOT ACT II, I can't see why anyone wouldn't like to support him.

Seriously here, he did have some bad votes, but he's got a relatively good message, I can't figure out why he didn't catch fire. Damn shame, but I've felt his campaign was over in early November. Oh well, that's life, you win some you lose some...

[AP]

20. I'm not suprised. Media has him on their pay-no-mind list.

I'm pretty confident he'll rise above the adversity. He is the best candidate by a mile.

[Hep]

28. It's too bad his supporters can't pick up the slack for him.

n/t

[jfiling]

21. Believe it or not...

"I'm not sure why, other than voting for IWR, PATRIOT ACT, PATRIOT ACT II, I can't see why anyone wouldn't like to support him."

Some of us in the anti-Bush camp support IWR, and the PATRIOT acts. Just becasue Bush pushed for something doesn't necessarily make it wrong. By the same token, just because Bush supported it doesn't make it right, either.

EDIT - I'm nnot for every provision of the PATRIOT acts. However, they did pass Congress, so the President can't be solely blamed for them. The judiciary will clean out the unconstitutional deadwood, and what's left seems to be pretty good in fighting terrorism. Unless someone can prove to me that it's not?

[AP]

22. Those criteria describe Kucinich and, in theory, Dean -- two candidates

who get between 25% and 33% of the voters in most polls. So 2/3rds to 3/4ths of voters don't seem to agree with you.

Furthermore, there was a poll cited here which said that only 20-something percent of voters want a candidate who was against the IWR.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

14. We might be able to go to NH to canvass for Edwards

If I can do it on the weekend and be back in NYC in time for work Monday we're going to - we're still trying to work out the details.

Go Edwards! He was so great at the debates, and his trade policies were so much better than I realized, that he's now a very, very close second to Kucinich for me. I can't wait to go to NH and sign up Edwards voters!

[lastliberalintexas]

32. That's a real shame

Edwards has moved up considerably for me in the last month or so- he might even be my second choice now. I'm not too upset for Edwards though, since I think any Dem president would be foolish to ignore his potential as Atty General (or even VP!). After 8 years in either office, I think the voters would see him as more experienced and presidential. Even if 2004 isn't Edwards' year, I think we'll see much more of him in the future.