Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(AZCentral)   Green, Libertarian parties won't see ballot access in Arizona anymore... Wait, Arizona still has elections?   (azcentral.com ) divider line
    More: Fail, Libertarian Parties, ballot access, Republican, Jan Brewer  
•       •       •

1033 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Jun 2013 at 9:36 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



37 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-06-20 09:38:52 AM  
Enjoy yet even more lawsuits, Arizona.
 
2013-06-20 09:39:06 AM  
Gotta love Republican groups/bills who's names are the complete opposite of what they're advocating.
 
2013-06-20 09:39:48 AM  
Sadly, a lot of posters here are probably fine with this.

No, I didn't read the article, so if the headline is trolling, I retract my comment
 
2013-06-20 09:40:02 AM  
Subby, even the Soviet Union had elections. Stalin and his people regularly enjoyed 99% of the votes.
 
2013-06-20 09:41:51 AM  
But I thought Republicans in AZ were all about freedomz?
 
2013-06-20 09:42:01 AM  
Hey, gerrymandering will only get you so far.  It's like playing a game made up by your 6 year-old.  "Ok, now I get 3 more turns..."
 
2013-06-20 09:43:11 AM  

machoprogrammer: Sadly, a lot of posters here are probably fine with this.

No, I didn't read the article, so if the headline is trolling, I retract my comment


In the time it took to write this, you could have read the article.  It's not even a long article.  How lazy are you?
 
2013-06-20 09:43:52 AM  

GhostFish: machoprogrammer: Sadly, a lot of posters here are probably fine with this.

No, I didn't read the article, so if the headline is trolling, I retract my comment

Who the fark do you think would be fine with this? Name someone, please.


Anyone who supports republicans as a party, who focuses on the green side of things, or supported the R candidate mentioned in the article last election.

Also, apparently, a majority of state legislators.
 
2013-06-20 09:45:20 AM  
boosting their signature requirements to unattainable levels.

And those levels are...

*reads reads reads*

WTF?
 
2013-06-20 09:51:33 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: machoprogrammer: Sadly, a lot of posters here are probably fine with this.

No, I didn't read the article, so if the headline is trolling, I retract my comment

In the time it took to write this, you could have read the article.  It's not even a long article.  How lazy are you?


Im on my phone, so it's a pain to read certain sites. But very lazy.
 
2013-06-20 09:51:39 AM  

theknuckler_33: boosting their signature requirements to unattainable levels.

And those levels are...

*reads reads reads*

WTF?


After a quick google -

1/6 of 1% of voter rolls.

Of course, it was kind of ridiculous before - the article said it was based on a sliding scale. D/R needed ~600 signatures. The Libertarians needed 12. As in 2 more than 10.
 
2013-06-20 09:52:25 AM  

GhostFish: Deneb81: GhostFish: machoprogrammer: Sadly, a lot of posters here are probably fine with this.

No, I didn't read the article, so if the headline is trolling, I retract my comment

Who the fark do you think would be fine with this? Name someone, please.

Anyone who supports republicans as a party, who focuses on the green side of things, or supported the R candidate mentioned in the article last election.

Also, apparently, a majority of state legislators.

We get a lot of those people posting in the politics tab here at Fark.com?


The first two, yeah. Quite often.
 
2013-06-20 09:52:50 AM  

GhostFish: Deneb81: GhostFish: machoprogrammer: Sadly, a lot of posters here are probably fine with this.

No, I didn't read the article, so if the headline is trolling, I retract my comment

Who the fark do you think would be fine with this? Name someone, please.

Anyone who supports republicans as a party, who focuses on the green side of things, or supported the R candidate mentioned in the article last election.

Also, apparently, a majority of state legislators.

We get a lot of those people posting in the politics tab here at Fark.com?


There's a ton of partisan hacks who post here that claim voting third party to be a total joke and waste
 
2013-06-20 09:55:12 AM  
I live in OKlahoma, we only have D or R,

sometimes we get an I,

but I've never been able to vote for any other party in my entire life.
 
2013-06-20 09:55:23 AM  

Deneb81: theknuckler_33: boosting their signature requirements to unattainable levels.

And those levels are...

*reads reads reads*

WTF?

After a quick google -

1/6 of 1% of voter rolls.

Of course, it was kind of ridiculous before - the article said it was based on a sliding scale. D/R needed ~600 signatures. The Libertarians needed 12. As in 2 more than 10.


I was looking too, but it seem like the petitions need to be signed by 1/6 of  ALL voters on the voter rolls, not just in their party.

http://www.azleg.gov//FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/51leg/1r/bil ls /hb2305c.htm&Session_ID=110

http://tucsoncitizen.com/hispanic-politico/2013/06/19/omnibus-voter- bi ll-hb-2305-and-arizona-libertarian-candidates/

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I'm not sure I'm seeing the outrage here.
 
2013-06-20 09:56:09 AM  

machoprogrammer: Im on my phone, so it's a pain to read certain sites. But very lazy.


That's why you just READ comments when you're on your phone and post when you get to a desktop.
 
2013-06-20 09:58:48 AM  

GhostFish: machoprogrammer: Sadly, a lot of posters here are probably fine with this.

No, I didn't read the article, so if the headline is trolling, I retract my comment

Who the fark do you think would be fine with this? Name someone, please.


The Republican and Democrat party establishment.  Remember the need to kill off any possibility of a third party gaining traction is why the 2 parties came together and hijacked the debates away from the league of women voters.
 
2013-06-20 10:03:01 AM  

GhostFish: machoprogrammer: There's a ton of partisan hacks who post here that claim voting third party to be a total joke and waste

But would those same people think that making it practically impossible to vote third party is a good thing?

I agree that voting third party is a total joke and a waste in the current system, but I'll be damned if I don't think it should be a hell of a lot easier than it currently is.

The idea that voting third party is a waste is developed from the rules of the game in place. Making the rules even harsher towards third parties is not a natural extension of that.


I would imagine some would. Afterall, if you cant vote Green, then you'll vote Democrat. If you can't vote Libertarian, you'll vite Republican. At least, that is how some think
 
2013-06-20 10:03:07 AM  

GhostFish: I agree that voting third party is a total joke and a waste in the current system, but I'll be damned if I don't think it should be a hell of a lot easier than it currently is.

The idea that voting third party is a waste is developed from the rules of the game in place. Making the rules even harsher towards third parties is not a natural extension of that.



Yeah, if someone wants to throw their vote away, that should be their right.
 
2013-06-20 10:10:37 AM  
img.fark.net
 
2013-06-20 10:15:09 AM  

theknuckler_33: Deneb81: theknuckler_33: boosting their signature requirements to unattainable levels.

And those levels are...

*reads reads reads*

WTF?

After a quick google -

1/6 of 1% of voter rolls.

Of course, it was kind of ridiculous before - the article said it was based on a sliding scale. D/R needed ~600 signatures. The Libertarians needed 12. As in 2 more than 10.

I was looking too, but it seem like the petitions need to be signed by 1/6 of  ALL voters on the voter rolls, not just in their party.

http://www.azleg.gov//FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/51leg/1r/bil ls /hb2305c.htm&Session_ID=110

http://tucsoncitizen.com/hispanic-politico/2013/06/19/omnibus-voter- bi ll-hb-2305-and-arizona-libertarian-candidates/

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I'm not sure I'm seeing the outrage here.


1/6 of 1% for senator and 1/3 of 1% for most other high office as I read it.  1/3 of 1% of registered voters = about 11,000 I think.  Of course it also means the third parties will have to spend more money to get on the ballot and therefore have less $ to campaign on.
 
2013-06-20 10:38:14 AM  
Can't win the game? Rig the system!
 
2013-06-20 10:44:23 AM  
Green Party candidates would actually have to collect more signatures than they have party members


So 2 signatures?

I kid.  I hate that IL has similar bars toward 3rd party ballot access.  I have yet to see a problem arise from having toooooo many people on a balot necessitating these rules.  I can see if you have 20 names on a balot deciding to raise the bar but most everybody sees at most 3 names, 5 tops, around here.
 
2013-06-20 11:08:50 AM  
Green, Libertarian parties won't see ballot access in Arizona anymore...

Democrats are next
 
2013-06-20 11:30:04 AM  
Arizona, of course, still has elections. When you send every other governor to jail, you need to replenish the money tree of whoever profits from that.
 
2013-06-20 12:37:42 PM  
More proof that the Republican Party needs to be eradicated from existence.
 
2013-06-20 12:59:02 PM  

theknuckler_33: I was looking too, but it seem like the petitions need to be signed by 1/6 of ALL voters on the voter rolls, not just in their party.


That's 1/6 of 1% of all voters, according to the bill text. Which seems to be a significantly higher barrier than it was, and likely an obstacle for 3rd parties; however, the number of signatures (and effectively, percentage of the registered voters required) remains higher in Virginia.

Contrariwise, Virginia is pretty much the national benchmark for "obnoxiously tightass" on ballot access; and there was at least one Federal judge hinting (were the lawsuit filed BEFORE the signatures were due, rather than after the candidate fails to get on the ballot) that he might be inclined to consider a challenge to those laws. Nohow, he also considered it "not likely to prevail on" [...] " challenge to the 10,000 signature requirement".

pdee: 1/6 of 1% for senator and 1/3 of 1% for most other high office as I read it. 1/3 of 1% of registered voters = about 11,000 I think.


Looks to me like (1/6)% for statewide, (1/3)% of the particular district for non-statewide. I'm too lazy to go look up AZ's largest political sub-division, but I doubt it has half the population.

Still obnoxious, though.
 
2013-06-20 01:27:06 PM  
Well the Libertarian didn't give a shiat when the GOP started disenfranchising minorities, I bet you things magically will be different to them now when it's them.
 
2013-06-20 01:30:19 PM  

GhostFish: Time to break out the pitchforks and torches. I think Arizona still has those, right?


In Arizona's heat, our pitchforks transform into torches pretty quickly.
 
2013-06-20 01:36:13 PM  
I don't know what the going rate is in Arizona, but in Maryland, we paid signature gatherers about 1 to 2 dollars per signature. If they need 11k, they probably need to collect ~16k to be sure that any ineligible signatures are accounted for. So, this will cost them about $20k per election cycle.

That's pretty rough, but it's in line with what we paid in Maryland.
 
2013-06-20 03:19:06 PM  
Anyway they can white out Green and Libertarian and replace with republican and democrat, although it wouldn't take too long for the same financial masters to co-opt those parties as well if they haven't already.
 
2013-06-20 03:34:05 PM  

flynn80: Anyway they can white out Green and Libertarian and replace with republican and democrat, although it wouldn't take too long for the same financial masters to co-opt those parties as well if they haven't already.


I can see it happening with Libertarians, but I think it would be more difficult with the Green Party due to its platform.
 
2013-06-20 04:06:12 PM  
And we accuse other countries of not having free elections.

Hypocrites.
 
2013-06-20 10:34:53 PM  
Still think you can win by pandering to the GOP Libertarians?
 
2013-06-21 01:00:27 AM  
Nothing but Conservatives live in Sun City, so no need to list any other party in AZ, period.
 
2013-06-21 01:37:38 AM  
This is why I'm a militant libertarian.  The no aggression pact bullshiat is for candyasses.  Freedom requires the blood of evil to be shed regularly.  Be it foreign or domestic, only violence ensures that evil will not hold sway.  The rapeublican party has become evil.
 
2013-06-21 02:59:26 PM  

Corvus: Well the Libertarian didn't give a shiat when the GOP started disenfranchising minorities, I bet you things magically will be different to them now when it's them.


Is "the Libertarian" some kind of daily newspaper you read? Or is it some superhero?

/I know it's really just the strawman you use to pretend you have moral superiority over people you don't understand
 
Displayed 37 of 37 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report