Recall: Postponement could mean more (or less) candidates in election

[Democat]

State lawyers face questions on whether a postponement would mean reopening the ballot to allow candidates to remove their names or new candidates to join the race. State law generally requires that the ballot be set within 59 days of the election.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/recall/la-na-recall16sep16.story

This is an interesting side effect of the court decision today. The way the state law works, candidates can qualify for the ballot up to 59 days before the election. If the election is moved to March, new candidates could have until around Christmas to enter the race.

Also, some candidates (Simon, Ueberroth) could possibly drop their names off of the ballot, which would help the leading Republican.

The lawyers are going to be earning their money if today's decision stands.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

1. I was wondering what would become of that

Either way, I'd rather have a more decsive election regardless of the outcome.

[Democat]

2. The more this becomes national and partisan, the more it exposes the right

I don't think anyone knows how the 59 day rule would be applied if the election gets moved to March. One thing is sure, though, the Republicans dirty tricks are being put in the national spotlight.

For Issa's $2 million (and a lot more right winger wasted taxpayer money), Democrats are getting a chance to expose right wing corruption before the 2004 election.

I wonder what Bush thinks of the mess Issa got them into.

[Melsky]

3. I was so surprised this happened

I just got my election booklet in the mail. Insane amount of money being wasted. I hope the postponement works out well.

This whole thing amazes me.