Only two clear-cut winners in yesterday's municipal election race
Last night's election results are in... sort of, and the celebratory mayoral candidate winner is... Boss Godfrey... maybe. With a total of almost 1300 absentee and provisional ballots remaining to be counted, the final victor in this race remains anybody's guess.
We'll be brief this morning and reel off links to this morning's main three Standard-Examiner post-election articles.
Ogden Drama- Godfrey 6,450 -- Van Hooser 6269 (Mayoral Race)
Aardema takes Ogden Council post (Council Races)
Voters’ residency challenged during election (Godfreyite Voter Challenge)
The gist of these stories is that there seem to remain at least two Emerald City Municipal Election races too close to declare winners. For instance, the Aardema/Johnson Council At-large "C" race is separated by an 18-vote spread, a circumstance that will demand an early recount, at the very least. And we think Boss Godfrey's slim 181 vote margin ain't enough to yet justify dancing a victory flamenco, with nearly 1300 ballots still remaining uncounted in the Weber County Election Department hopper.
Only council candidates Gochnour and Wicks appear to have bullet-proof margins.
We'll dispense however with the analysis and commentary this morning. Frankly, your blogmeister needs a short breather. That shouldn't prevent our gentle readers from chiming in, however. So please accept our invitation to comment, pontificate, vent and otherwise carry on the post election discussion on this thread.
We'll also extend our thanks to gentle reader CJ, who provided that most entertaining jib-jab animation, included in our second link above.
Take it away, gentle readers.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
97 comments:
A long time ago, I decided that the best possible outcome (for me) in a democratic process was to lose in a very, very close election.
That way, I could say I was just as popular, and just as many people trusted me, as my opponent.
But -- and this is the critical point -- then you don't have to do the job!
I was proud of Ms. Van Hooser for running what I felt was an open, transparent, and above-board campaign. I think we can all see that this is in sharp contrast to her recent opponent.
I don't personally believe that the means justifies the ends.
For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? -- Mark 8:36 KJV
In that regard, at least one of yesterday's posts, which used my name, did not come from me.
I don't appreciate that tactic. I'm not asking for it to be removed, but I would note that I tend to write in complete, English sentences with proper punctuation -- in case anyone is confused.
If you can't do the same, then please don't pretend to be me.
CJ,
Thanks for the jib-jab link. It gave me a good chuckle! A little ray of sunshine on this dreary morning!
On the upside - we get four more years to make fun of the little man!!! I'm thinking about a new career as a political cartoonist!
What can I say - he's an easy target - especially when he does it to himself!
I believe in justice.
Justice will cause Godfrey to face up to his misdeeds.
By the chance that Godfrey did get reelected then he will have to face up to the disaster at the Junction that was his dream.
There is still the chance of a recall if Kent Jorgenson pursues a suit.
The voter challenge may backfire on the Godfrey campaign also.
too close-
What do you mean backfire? The votes were just simply not counted and will be in the end. All it has accomplished is to get his hopes up that he won, when indeed it will be closer. I still think that in the end he wins because the absentee ballots will be just as split and the general tally.
I have a hypothesis regarding the voter challenge.
(As a neuroscientist, I'm not allowed to point out inconsistencies of fact, but I think I'm still allowed hypotheses.)
I think that the person making the challenge crossed the Democratic voter roll with the record of people who moved in the last year.
There may have been a name or two slapped on there just for intimidation.
I believe that the party affiliation list and the voters who have moved are public information. It would be interesting for some enterprising soul to obtain both lists, cross them by computer, and see if the same set of names pop up.
While I hold out hope that votes yet to be counted will push SVH over the top, if that doesn’t occur, I won’t give the simpletons the satisfaction of seeing me rage.
I was on Blake Geiger’s list of challenges. I still cast my vote, and it will be counted. The whole sordid affair, hell, the last eight years, have led me to wonder, “What kind of people are these, Henry?”
Did they not have fathers and grandfathers who taught them what it means to be a man? Lessons of honesty, integrity, and credibility were lost. Does Matt Godfrey or Bob Geiger look in the mirror in the morning and take pride in who they are? Or do they simply stare through hollow eyes mourning the further retreat of their hairlines?
The tyrant had the audacity to state to Trentelman that he had no idea that a challenge list was submitted. It’s nice to know he remains constant, committed to deceit and corruption for as long as he draws breath. I hope your father’s proud of you, Matt.
Fellas, you have no class, no integrity, no intelligence, no mustard. You are what you’ve allowed yourselves to become–charlatans without redemption. Karma’s a bitch as they say. One day you’ll find your names on a list.
The one saving grace, as pointed out by a good friend, is now Matty will stand accountable when he’s surrounded by his crumbling house of cards. Unfortunately, we’ll be left to clean up the mess.
Also, I feel truly sorry for the employees of Ogden City, some of whom I call friends, who must continue to work in a hostile environment, ever fearful of retribution, unable to bring to light the illegal conduct they’re surrounded by each day. The payoffs will continue, more buildings will burn.
I’m truly hopeful that Aardema will remain on top. I’ve known her my entire life and not a more sincere, caring person will you ever find. And congratulations to Caitlin and Amy, who I consider to be the most important victory, not only for the honest, competent, and trustworthy Councilwoman she is, but also for how utterly disastrous it would be to see Eccles in any city capacity save at the end of a dogpound shovel.
Godspeed beloved O-Town. Remain vigilant.
Dave F. (from "Yes, Gentle Readers; the Polls Are Open")
So, If I own property in 2 cities, I can't decide for myself which city I vote in? I have to leave it up to the current regime to determine my right? I can understand not being able to vote in both. Sounds like you are just pissed off....period. The law suit may be stupid to you, but making sure our elected officials follow the laws is not stupid to most people. Your old-school ego wasn't bruised by a female standing up to an arrogant male regime in the land od Zion was it? How dare Dorothy not walk 10 steps behind the men. Seems she has more balls than a man of your like can handle. Be pissed...be very pissed. I thinkn the show is just about to begin for the little mayor. Seig Heil!!
Nero:
There will be no recall. Utah law does not provide for recalls of municipal officials.
If the vote stands as it now is, and I expect it will in the end, Godfrey won the election because the voters decided, at the polls, that that would be the outcome. Narrowly, true, by a razor thin margin, but they did decide it. This is electoral politics we're discussing, not horseshoes. Coming close still goes into the record books as an L. The judgment of the voters has to be respected, even if we think they have exercised that judgment unwisely. Absent substantial evidence of serious criminal conduct... and none has been proffered so far... we ought not I think to be casting around for judicial ways to reverse the wishes of the voters expressed at the polls.
Anyone who takes part in an election, who casts a vote, agrees by doing that to be bound by the results of that vote, even if it does not go as they wanted it to.
If Godfrey is found guilty of some of his misdemeanors he will and can be by law removed from office.
Jeez, I moved and didn't register that change on my voter registration.
How dare they question me!
What D. Littrel has two addresses in Weber County and even uses the N.Ogden address on her correspondence and then is surprised that someone might question her residency?
http://wcforum.blogspot.com/2005/10/open-letter-to-ogden-city-council.html
Even though she try to hide the fact that is it is North Ogden, by just saying Ogden. County records verify that it is North Ogden.
How dare someone question that...perhaps she can file another vengeful law suit.
I'm not saying she didn't have the right to vote, I'm just say ing it seems quite reasonable to have her verify where she lives.
Does she live here:
Dorothy E. Littrell
4265 Edgehill Drive
Ogden, Utah 84414
801-782-5906
OR here:
Dorothy Littrell
228 West 3275 North
Ogden, Utah 84414
801-782-5906
OR here:
2165 REEVES AVE , OGDEN 84401 per county records
Or per the SLTRIB : "Dorothy Littrell, of North Ogden, says she ..."
Sounds like to me questioning her validity to vote was the prudent thing to do.
Nero:
Yes, a serving elected official can be removed upon conviction of a sufficiently serious crime. But that's not a recall. A recall is the voters petitioning to get a recall referendum, and thus getting to vote to remove an elected official from office mid-term. What happened to Gov. Grey Davis in California, for example, was a recall followed by the mid-term election of the Guvenator.
And, again, no one has yet proffered substantial evidence of serious criminal conduct on the Mayor's part. What some, even many, think he did, suspect he did, are really really really sure he did... or even [though I hope not] hope he did... does not constitute credible evidence of criminal conduct.
Anybody has the goods on the guy, have it him. Call in the law dogs. But it makes me a little uneasy for people to be looking to the courts to reverse the decision of the voters. Always has. No matter who the target is. It was wrong when the Republican house went after President via impeachment, attempting to reverse the decision of the voters... and that's exactly what they were doing. It would be no more right in this instance to look to the law to do the same, reverse the judgment of the voters.
And unless and until someone comes forward with credible evidence of significant lawbreaking --- and no one has --- it's all idle speculation in any case.
The Horror:
Two points: first, people with multiple address --- even people the Mayor does not like --- get to choose which one they want to use as their legal, voting address. It's their choice, so long as they do not attempt to vote in two different precincts.
Second: the problem with what happened to Ms. Littrel is not that here name was on the challenge list. It is that once she returned with proper identification for her Ogden address, she was still denied a provisional ballot. The purpose of the provisional ballot is to make sure that someone who's right to vote is challenged, gets to vote provisionally so that if it turns out he or she is a legal voter, her vote will not have been lost.
The legal problem here is that Ms. Littrel, once she returned was proper ID, was still denied the provisional ballot she was entitled to. I should not have taken five hours to get her a provisional ballot. In my polling place, Polk Elementary, people on the challenged list who provided ID like a driver's license were immediately issued provisional ballots, as they should have been. That's the problem. Not that she was challenged, but that the poll workers refused to issue her a provisional ballot when she returned with identification.
"The Horror"
Exactly, thats the statistics I would like to see how many of the challenged votes should have been challenged regardless of any political affiliation. It sounds to me that people are angry because they were caught cheating and if they weren't cheating all they had to do was bring get this...(wait for it)....2 FORMS OF current ID, "the horror."
Well it given all the time she spends on all her fruitless endeavors, I would have thought she's enjoy getting the run around.
Gives her one more plank on her soap box.
Godfrey probably re-timed all of the stop lights for her drive home to make it as painful as possible. I hear he also called the oil companies asking them to jack up the price of gas so that she would have to pay more on her three trips to the polling place. And finally I hear he made sure the pens for the provisional ballots had invisible ink in them.
I don't question the legality of the challenge. I question the prudence of a law that allows it in its current practice.
I just find it pathetically sad that Matty had to resort to combing through the list of registered voters looking for any irregularity that might cause anyone difficulty in exercising his or her right to vote. Do you really think anyone on the list submitted by Blake Geiger really intended to vote for Matt Godfrey?
I suppose SVH could have used the same tactic. I'm sure some votes cast for Matty were questionable. But, she didn't do that. Why? She has a quality unknown to the Godfrey camp–class.
And for Godfrey to continue to maintain he had no knowledge of the list being submitted is patently ridiculous. But the man can't move his lips without lying.
Oh, and I plan to introduce myself to my new neighbor shortly. And I'll be sure to reregister once I'm moved in–I wouldn't want him putting me on another list.
So when Litrell files a complaint and Van Hooser says she knows nothing about it that is legit...even though emails about it were flying around to Jeske and the like? But when someone files a complaint and Godfrey claims no knowledge he's evil, lying etc.
Recognize your hypocrisy.
Truth is she was just as sneaky as you accuse him of being.
When she cherry picks crime numbers she "truthful" when he cherry picks them he "lying." Both were full of crap or at a minimum telling half-truths.
Dear Antilib Short-deck Geiger:
You have every right to submit a challenge list to the Weber County Clerk's office; it's also the right of certain folks on that list to place you and your little sign-fixing pal Blake Fowers on another roster, and it ain't the varsity starting squad. And your terrific arguments do not require ALL CAPS for emphasis; they are fantastic in and of themselves.
THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE
Anti:
Do try to get your facts straight. What the Godfrey campaign did was list the names of people whose right to vote they challenged. Not all of those people voted. I know of one person on the challenge list who has not lived in Ogden, and has not voted here, for 14 years, and did not vote here yesterday. Is that a valid challenge? If it is, I could next election "challenge" the Ogden voting rights of 146 residents of Salt Lake City, and by your standards, all of those would be valid challenges and evidence of foul play by those SLC residents.
And you wrote of those who were challenged and are angry about it: It sounds to me that people are angry because they were caught cheating... Really? So far, no one has been caught cheating that we know of. Generally, here in the US of A, we try not to presume guilt before any evidence at all is in. If you know of evidence someone voted illegally, you should bring it to the notice of the proper authorities. Under the law as it now is, I could have filed a challenge to your right to vote with the County Clerk last week, and if I had, you would have been forced to file a provisional ballot. And you would have, I suspect, been angry about having to do that. Would you then have been "caught cheating?" You seem to think so by what you wrote above.
A fair question for you to ask would be: how many people on the challenge list who voted turned out to be not legal residents of Ogden or of the precinct in which they voted? I'd be curious to know that too. If there are any, that is.
I expect some of the votes of those challenged to be tossed for technical reasons... voting provisionally requires the filling out of more paper work, and that absolutely guarantees that a certain number of errors in filling them out --- by the voter and/or the poll worker, since both have forms to fill out --- will occur.
Be interesting to know how many... if any... of those who were challenged and who filed provisional votes turn out to have been not qualified to vote in Ogden. But your implication above that a person's having had his right to vote challenged constitutes evidence that he got caught cheating is flatly false. Again, do try to get your facts straight before making accusations. Or is taking the time to get facts straight before drawing conclusions one of those things you think only liberals do?
I think antilib hit it on on the head. The Godfrey supporters that challenged the 146 voters on the list did so to prevent "cheating". I've never been accused of cheating in my life and to be accused of such publicly at the polls along with my wife in the company of my daughter and in front of neighbors is exactly what angered me. Of course I returned again with two forms of ID and voted provisionally. I suppose two hours at the poll is a small price to pay. The majority of voters registered and not challenged, showed no ID to vote.
I have no doubt many of the names on the list did not vote in Ogden and have moved out of the city. To automatically assume that citizens have no integrity undermines our entire democratic process. Out of the 146 voters on the list how many of those were attempting premeditated "cheating". I have two friends, both Godfrey supporters, that are registered in Ogden at addresses at which they no longer live. They were not on the challenged list. I would never think that they were attempting to "cheat".
I'm a registered Republican as are others on the list. I am certain the list was handpicked. I did have a Susan Van Hooser sign in my yard briefly and my name appears on Smart Growth's site, although I have never once been involved in any meetings with anyone in the organization.
Politics aside, what benefit is there to making it difficult for individuals to vote. How many votes did the challengers hope to block that were cast for Van Hooser - 20? 30? I'm sure that two individuals I called and warned to take extra ID most likely voted for Godfrey.
I respect the results of the election and have optimism that Mayor Godfrey can work towards building some sort of consensus, but I can not respect the tactic of challenging voters for perceived political gain.
Face It:
You wrote: So when Litrell files a complaint and Van Hooser says she knows nothing about it that is legit...even though emails about it were flying around to Jeske and the like? But when someone files a complaint and Godfrey claims no knowledge he's evil, lying etc.
Recognize your hypocrisy.
OK, try to pay attention now.
(1) The voter challenges were filed by people who identified themselves as working for the Godfrey campaign. That is why it is difficult to credit that the Mayor knew nothing about it.
(2) Ms. Littrel was not part of the Van Hooser campaign. As I recall, in the first primary, I think she was supporting Rep. Hansen. But she was not part of the VH campaign, and so Ms. VH's claim that she had no part in Ms. Littrel's suit, and did not know it had been filed until she read the story in the paper is on its face more credible than Godfrey's claim that he had no idea that his campaign was filing the challenges. Especially since Ms. VH, the very first day the law suit hit the papers, went on record asking DL to withdraw it, which DL did not. Had she in fact been working for the VH campaign, it would have promptly been withdrawn. It wasn't. And I remind you that the clerk at the County building told those inquiring that the challenges had been filed "by the campaign."
True, no candidate can know everything every campaign worker does. But that Godfrey was wholly unaware of a challenge by his campaign of 146 names filed a month before the election with the Weber County Clerk's office does not seem credible to me. Nor, I think, would it seem credible to most disinterested observers.
These Godfrey supporters are a real piece of work...
always looking for hypocrisy on this blog. You may find it...SFW(So F&*%in' What)??
I have a question of substance for you, how about analyzing your own hypocrisy when it comes to this gondola nonsense. There ARE NO EXPERTS who can validate it's feasibility or utility. Why do you continue to press this issue and that the so-called naysayers want to derail the city's progress. If the gondola is nonsense(which it is) then we have derailed NOTHING. In fact it is your kind who have derailed community nicety by pushing a worthless issue and drawing lines in the sand over it. We could meet eye to eye on almost all issues yet you all choose to remain divisive over something as stupid as an urban gondola. Please give us all some evidence that an urban gondola is appropriate and I will listen. Until then, you are the thorn in the side of all who love Ogden. No one I know wants stagnated growth for Ogden. Appropriate growth is the key. An urban gondola is a waste of money and WILL NOT bring people here. It is nonsense. Might as well build a Tower of Babel as a gondola by your logic.
Zac:
Good post.
I suspect part of the problem is that the County Clerk has not kept the voting rolls records as up to date as they should be, creating the appearance of voting irregularity where none actually exists. I talked to one of the people challenged who has lived in the same precinct in the same house and voted at the same polling place for the past four years, but was told when he complained about being challenged that the poll officials had no record of his having voted from his new address, and only had him on their rolls as voting from an address now five years old.
I don't know what provision Weber County has for periodically purging the voter lists to make sure they are up to date. It would seem whatever provisions the county does have are insufficient or are not being rigorously followed. One or the other.
The most telling part of your post, for me, was this: I have two friends, both Godfrey supporters, that are registered in Ogden at addresses at which they no longer live. They were not on the challenged list.
Exactly.
Again, good post.
CURM Practice what you preach:
"Generally, here in the US of A, we try not to presume guilt before any evidence at all is in.
Again, do try to get your facts straight before making accusations. Or is taking the time to get facts straight before drawing conclusions one of those things you think only liberals do?"
You pay attention....because it doesn't seem credible to you doesn't meet the burden of proof you require from others.
I find it laughable that you would reprimand someone in such a manner when I see all of the accusations thrown about on this blog without any proof.
Pay attention: You are a hypocrite.
It would be very interesting to know what resources went into compiling the voter challenge list, and how Mr. Fowers and Ms. Terry obtained those resources. Did they do all the work themselves, or did they have help? I hope Mr. Trentelman is asking them these questions right now, and will share what he learns in tomorrow's paper.
As far as "cheating" goes, Trentelman's article says that it's perfectly legal in Utah to be registered in one location and yet to reside and vote at another location. This provision is obviously intended to prevent the disenfranchisement of people who move shortly before an election. Is it "cheating" to take advantage of this law? Hardly. Would it be "cheating" to try, shortly after you move, to go back and vote in your former precinct? Perhaps this is illegal but I suspect that it's rarely done for nefarious purposes. "Cheating", I think, would be to falsify an address on one's voter registration, or to continue to vote at an obsolete address because you care more about the races in that location. I suppose it's possible that one or two people on the list are guilty of cheating in this sense. Is it worth accusing 140 others of cheating in order to catch the 1 or 2 real cheaters? No, it's not.
I have worked for all levels of government over the past 15 years and I have never come across an elected official so unethical and smug as Ogden's Mayor (why so many fail to see or care about this is beyond me). It is too bad for Ogden that they may have to deal with him for at least 4 more years. It is truly a testament to the fact that Ogden is fed up w/ this turd that if he does make it through it will only be by a few votes, considering he had almost 4x the money, is the incumbent, was recommended by the local rag, lied consistently throughout his campaign, his Pals screwed with the voting process, and Susie moved forward w/ honesty and integrity. She could have played dirty and maybe won a few extra votes, but she did things the rightway--the way local politics should be done. Will Godfrey learn anything by all of this? Likely not, I'm sure it will be more of the same. As JW says, more gondola, gondola, gondola...
face it said:
When she cherry picks crime numbers she "truthful" when he cherry picks them he "lying." Both were full of crap or at a minimum telling half-truths.
This is a misrepresentation of the facts, something which I'm becoming increasingly used to.
There are many, many points to be made here, but I will address those that are raised directly by your post.
1. In 2004, Greiner published a report that gave a number for 1999 crime figures. The mayor, in his campaign, retroactively went back and changed that number, using a 1990 census figure he knew was outdated, simply to make his "drop" in crime look better.
2. There was not, and still is not, any basis whatsoever for the 2005 and 2006 crime figures stated by the Mayor or posted on the city website. The Mayor knows that these numbers are faulty, but still persists in uttering falsehoods.
3. Similarly, the Mayor knows that crime data are not properly handled by taking a made-up, unfavorable 1999 number and dividing it by a made-up, favorable 2006 number. He chooses to ignore this.
4. I asked for, and was denied, the city's source data for 2005 and 2006 crime figures. They appeared only several hours after my Op-Ed piece appeared in the S-E. If you look at them yourself, you'll see they don't make sense. For example, every year since 1992, Ogden Police have reported over 100 armed robberies. In 2005 and 2006, there were half that or less. This discrepancy begs explanation, particularly since it's not in agreement with the Utah BCI or FBI figures for those same years. No other city in Utah has this type of discrepancy. I will be happy to share the proof of this with you, or you can investigate it yourself.
Well, Senator Hatch will be holding a Senate investigation into the mess yesterday perpetrated on the citizens of Ogden by the Godfrey machine.
Having the Geigers and the Godfrey brother(s) intimidating voters and sitting at the judges' table...and one supporter having GODFREY materials on her lap in plain view constitutes interference in one's constitutional right to vote without harrassment and is electioneering on the other hand.
Godfrey is incapable of being honest in any of his dealings. When one sees how his brother challenged Aardema's kids at the polls, then we have to question putting their funeral flowers on Dorothy's doorstep as a "Christian act of love" as the lying miscreant piously stated.
It was an act of threat and retribution. AND ON THE AFTERNOON OF THE FATHER'S FUNERAL!
Why weren't they comforting their mother?
There is no shame in these Godfrey' nor in the Geigers', Fowers, Terry and the other hangers' on.
What do they gain from this little dictator? Is this protection money like the hapless baker would pay to the Don's henchmen? So that Guido wouldn't break their knee caps... or burn down their candy shop? Hmmmm? (did I say candy shop bldg?)
These sycophants must be getting something from buzzing around this stinkweed.
Well, it's all going to hit the fan very soon. We'll see how long the despot stays on the throne....assuming he still has one more vote than Susan at the end of the day. Godfrey has teh big boys breathing down his scrawny neck now,.
It will be interesting to see how long the rats stay with his sinking and stinking ship as it goes under.
I wonder how many of the new absente landlords that Godfrey's gondola promises have brought to town were able to register (using one of the addresses that they rent out) and vote (un-challenged) in our local election?
I could be wrong, but it appears to me that yesterday's election issues might have some credence if it weren't for past unwarranted and ill-advised lawsuits by the Anti-Godfrey folks against Godfrey thus destroying any shred of credibility they may have had. The crap Godfrey and his pals pulled yesterday is outrageous and is an attack on our democratic sensibilities, but I'm sure that it will all be dismissed and largely chalked up as trumped up charges by the usually cast of Anti-Godfrey characters.
Jim, it's they way the Police Department files their report.
If someone calls, and reports a burglary, when Police arrive the perpetrator is not apprehended or no longer on the property, they report it as a trespass.
That's how Greiner and Godfrey fudge the numbers reported.
Face it:
Sorry, but I did offer evidence to distinguish the two cases we're talking about, and evidence which I found compelling, though you did not. [E.g. challenge list filed by workers for the Godfrey campaign; Ms. Littrel not being SVH campaign staff and being asked by SVH to withdraw suit as soon as it hit the papers, and refusing.] You may not find that evidence compelling. Certainly your right. You may reject the evidence that the earth circles the sun. Some do. But what you're accusing me of is leaping to a conclusion and providing no evidence to support it. That I didn't do. And what I concluded from the evidence I offered was that the Mayor's claim of ignorance was not credible. Absent more and compelling evidence to the contrary, I think my conclusion is reasonable. You, however, have offered no evidence Ms. VH was involved in the Littrel suit other than you think she was. That's the difference, Face It.
Tired as Poo:
You wrote: I could be wrong, but it appears to me that yesterday's election issues might have some credence if it weren't for past unwarranted and ill-advised lawsuits by the Anti-Godfrey folks against Godfrey thus destroying any shred of credibility they may have had.
You're not wrong. You're exactly right. Of course, every legal case stands alone on its own merits, but in terms of public perception, you're right on the money. It's the "crying wolf" effect. The reaction to the news that "Littrel planning lawsuit against Godfrey campaign" is bound to be "Oh God, again?"
Law suits can be powerful weapons for public use against miscreant public officials. But you have to pick your fights, which means using the tactic only when you are pretty sure of prevailing in court [I'd say 60% probability of success, at a minimum], and that you pick issues that the public will recognize as substantive and significant... which Ms. Littrel's last suit did not.
I don't know what she's thinking about this time. But she may well have an issue worth pursuing with respect to denying her a provisional ballot once she returned to the polls with proper ID. Though the fact that she eventually got one, five hours and three tries later may moot that point. The other issue... I gather she's alleging campaigning at the polls, possibly by poll workers, may have some merit as well, but the remedy there will probably be, if she prevails, a fine and perhaps for a court to mandate upon the City new procedures and safeguards to make sure it does not happen again... unless she can prove [not allege, prove] collusion on the part of election officials [poll workers and their trainers and/or supervisors in I guess the County Clerk's office] to inhibit voting by one political group, or to permit campaigning at the polls on behalf of one candidate or set of candidates. Without smoking gun evidence, that's tough.
But you're right, I think, that much of her public credibility at this point has been undermined by the ill-advised lawsuit trying to have MG thrown off the ballot. Any tool, overused and unwisely used, becomes dull.
If the numbers hold, then we're in for four more years of the co-mayorship of THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE and Short-deck Geiger. Which is fantastic. Because Mayors Geiger promise to bring a lot of circus rides to town that will make us all rich and which carry a terrific ancillary benefit, that being the elevation of Weber State University to global fame due to it being serviced by said circus ride.
THE SKI IS DARK AND GREY
From the Midday Update on the S-E web site:
Election official says final Ogden results in mayoral race will be known Tuesday
OGDEN -- Final voting results in Ogden's tight mayoral race won't be decided until Tuesday following a tally of absentee and provisional ballots, Weber County Election Administrator Gloria Berrett said today.
Counting of the absentee votes will be the final step in determining whether Mayor Matthew Godfrey, who as of today held a 181 vote margin over challenger City Councilwoman Susan Van Hooser, will win re-election to a third term.
In addition, about 700 provisional ballots have yet to be verified and counted in connection with the mayor's race, Berrett said.
Let's be clear about one thing: the creation of voter challenge lists - like the one put together by Fowers - (while perfectly legal)is not about trying to prevent cheaters from voting in areas where they are not registered. If it were, these lists would include persons of both parties or in Ogden's case Smart Growth VH supporters and Lift Ogden Godfrey supporters. The purpose of these voter-challenge lists is to attempt to diminish the vote for the other side by hoping that when the people on the list are told that they can't have a ballot that they will simply leave and not come back. These challenge-lists tend to work much better in accomplishing this goal when those targeted are unable or unlikely to spend the time to return to their polling location a second or third time with the proper paper work. Seems like the challenge-list put together by Mr Fowers did not work in suppressing the VH vote. At least, I haven't heard of any accounts of people being turned away and not being able to return to exercise their right to vote.
cato,
There's still the question of how many of the provisional ballots will actually be counted. This morning a colleague of mine related a story of how he once had to use a provisional ballot (when he moved to Ogden Valley a few years ago) and the ballot was NOT counted, due to an error by the poll worker who did not fill out their part of it properly.
This is a scandal....The only proper thing to do is have a re election at the affected polling sites...OR, the radio, papers (SL TOO) and all tv stations should announce for next three days that those who were turned away at their polling place should go to the County Recorder's office and cast their vote!
Dorothy Littrell was interviewed today by KSL radio, the program will air between 4 and 7 pm today...on 102.7 FM.
It oughta be good.
It shouldn't matter if Dorothy has been fighting for clarity and info from Godfrey, what he and his Geiger buds and brothers pulled yesterday is criminal.
Is Ogden in America or nyet?
Dorothy can also be heard on 1160 AM KSL, according to an email I reac'd.
One of the good things about Dorothy is, she tells the truth..like it really is!
Dorothy can also be heard on 1160 AM KSL, according to an email I reac'd.
One of the good things about Dorothy is, she tells the truth..like it really is!
Dan,
you are correct. Obviously the provisional ballots do need to be counted, which if they are not then the purpose of the challenge-list will have been met.
sharon said...
This is a scandal....The only proper thing to do is have a re election at the affected polling sites...OR, the radio, papers (SL TOO) and all tv stations should announce for next three days that those who were turned away at their polling place should go to the County Recorder's office and cast their vote!
---
That's just nuts. The polling I voted at (Polk Elementary) had signs outside clearly indicating that voters should be prepared to show ID. In fact, I was disappointed that I was not asked to produce ID, even though the poll workers did not know me from adam.
I hope the day comes when EVERYONE will be required to show proof of residency to vote.
Just to clarify my understanding. I have not heard any evidence that the mayor's brother challenged anyone at the polling location about anything. He was there as an official observer from the mayor's campaign and I believe acted in accordance as such. It could be argued that placing a relative as a poll observer probably was not the wisest, due to the appearance of influence.
I also believe that the mayor didn't have knowledge that the challenges were being filed. I think it was a group of supporters that picked up the idea from some book o' political dirty tricks and thought they would give it a try. The same could be said of the recent suit to remove the mayor from the ballot. In any event, I think that we have to proceed from this assumption since it would be difficult to prove otherwise.
I would hope the mayor would condemn the challenges at some point as I hate to think of this becoming a regular occurrence in Ogden politics. This along with a litany of other outrageous occurrences during this election show the dangers of extremism. Respect and rationalism would do much more for the community.
Mayors Geiger disagree with you, Zac. Mayors Geiger want nothing but community discord and gondolas, and maybe some onions. Mayors Geiger will now, with the help of their Lilliputian-alien-massive-foreheaded puppet and his addled father-in-law, begin stringing gondolas from block to block and from road to road. Our OTown will be defined by its remarkable preponderance of gondolas and its stench of onions rather than dog food. We will remain under the despotic rule of Mayors Geiger for four additional unless a miracle in provisional and absentee lunacy saves us from this horrific tyranny of Mayors Geiger. We will all soon be forced by Mayors Geiger to plaster our vehicles with decals and eat untold gobs of onions. This is the future under the Mayors Geiger administration.
THE SKI IS GLOOMILY BLACK
Zac:
I saw the Mayor on TV last night, defending the challenge list as simply an attempt to make sure only qualified voters voted. As you noted earlier, that might be accepted as true if the challenge lists were not targeted largely at those presumed to be supporters of the Mayor's opponent. I find it hard to reconcile the Mayor's statement on TV last night with the claim that he knew nothing whatever about the challenge list that Godfrey campaign workers had filed at the Clerk's office a month previously. We agree on much, Zac, but not on that.
Sharon:
The polls are not going to be reopened. If it is shown that all who had acceptable ID and were challenged were given provisional ballots, as the law directs, there will be no legal basis for reopening a poll.
My guess would be that a significant number of provisional ballots will be disallowed because poll workers and/or voters make some mistake in filling out the paper work. This will not provide a valid justification for reopening a poll.
Zac is correct. It was an unethical political maneuver designed to suppress the vote of a group believed to oppose the mayor's re-election. But it was not so far as I can tell by what's been revealed so far, illegal. I doubt any court, any judge, would declare a "do over" in this matter.
Now, if it could be shown that significant numbers of voters who were challenged and who provided or returned with valid ID were then denied provisional ballots... enough of them to affect the outcome of the election... then perhaps a court might intervene. But that seems not to have happened. Even Dorothy L. got one... after three trips and five hours of her time, but she did get one. I wouldn't invest much hope in a do-over, Sharon.
My understanding was the list was submitted late last week. I certainly agree that if the list was given to the clerk a month ago the idea that the mayor was not informed doesn't hold much weight.
In any event, campaign workers should certainly always be assumed to be working under the authority and direction of the candidate they support. As such the burden of proof is upon the mayor to accept responsibility or otherwise hold his supporters accountable. How that plays out will soon be seen and we may draw our own conclusions.
The issue here is that Godfrey poll watchers who were not official election workers were present by the election workers' table.
In my polling place the woman watcher working for the Godfrey campaign had a big box of bar coded sheets which it now turns out were the names of the voters. She was seated right by the door behind the first official person who took down names.
The watcher could hear as each person stated their name to the poll worker. That watcher challenged my voting before I had even said my name.
This procedure kept track of who had showed up to vote so that the voters who had not shown by 4:00 p.m. could be called and/or picked up to bring to vote.
Pretty slick scheme but completely illegal.
At my polling location, Bob Geiger was standing behind the row of election volunteers holding a clipboard, furiously working his cell phone, and sucking his thumb. I assumed he was one of the volunteers, but learned later he was serving as a Godfrey or Eccles observer.
He also had his cute little yellow truck parked outside the entrance with Royal Eccles signs sticking out of the windows. I imagine he wasn't regulated for any of this given that his stepmommy (who happens to work for the Mayor) was running the provisional ballots desk.
first hand:
Poll watchers for various campaigns often are given access to voter information, or at least totals, at several time during election day. It is neither unusual, nor I think is it illegal, at least not in many states. In some states, during partisan elections, each party has a poll watcher present at every polling place to monitor events. Very often they can challenge a voter. I've seen cases where at a polling place, the Republican poll watcher began challenging, say, every voter seeming to be under a certain age. The Democratic poll watcher then began challenging automatically one voter presumed, by demographic indicators, to be from a group leaning Republican. Finally, poll workers got both to agree to stop the challenges because it was slowing up the vote a great deal. The poll watcher system is designed to limit corruption on the presumption that if each party has poll watchers present, the other party will not be able to pull off any shenanigans un-noticed, and if it tries, legal teams and election officials can and will be summoned swiftly.
So, poll watchers in partisan races are not at all out of the ordinary. They are not so common in non-partisan races, however. The fact that so far as we know so far, only the Godfrey-campaign [or associated council campaigns] had poll watchers there with lists of names to challenge again makes it difficult to accept that all this was being done without the knowledge and approval of the Mayor.
Isn't it delicious that Gloria Berrett is the election official in charge of this counting that is going on to determine Godfrey's fate?
The story is that he fired her for not dummying up some records. Now she is in control of the count and he has got to be hoping that she still isn't into faking public records! He fired her for not being corrupt and now her not being corrupt could very well save his ass.
You just got to love Ogden politics.
Zac:
Ok, thanks for the correction. Agreed, only a week's lead increases [some what] the possibility that the challenges were filed without the Mayor's knowledge. However, the fact that apparently only the Godfrey campaign or its allies [from council candidates he supported] had poll watchers present with lists of names to challenge I think increases the likelihood of the Mayor's involvement/approval significantly.
None partisan mayoral races should be this complex and complicated. Ah, Utah....
Oz:
I expect Ms. Berrett will do a count that is as scrupulously correct as she can make it, even if it certifies in the end that the Mayor won the election by a single vote. It's called doing your public job with character and integrity. Sadly, Hizzonah would have to look both words up, I'm afraid.
Curmudgeon:
Excellent point about poll watchers having the list of challenged voters and attempting to enforce the challenge. Very suspect.
I think there may be some confusion here between the list submitted by Fowers and Terry on one hand, and the poll watchers on the other. The poll watchers were clearly working for the mayor's campaign. What's not so clear to me is the extent to which they were challenging voters' eligibility. The Fowers/Terry list may well have been compiled and submitted without the mayor's specific knowledge, but from his comments on TV last night (yes, even I watched TV!) it was clear that he knew that voters were being challenged--and he defended the practice.
zac,
Now I'm confused. Did the poll watchers come in with their own copies of the Fowers/Terry list, or did they merely arrive at the polls, discover that the election judges had the list, and then step in to make the judges enforce the challenges?
I've just heard a rumor that Godfrey's lawyer will be challenging all, or virtually all, of the provisional ballots. The qualification/disqualification process is apparently scheduled to begin tomorrow at noon.
Presumably someone will let us know if we need to be present somewhere to offer moral support during the counting of ballots.
Hopefully the officials will not give undue consideration to attempts to strong arm them, including by silly lawyers.
Remember, lawyers have no power at all. The people you have to pay attention to are called "judges." But lawyers are nothing, other than sometime liars and would-be bullies.
A spy that attended lying little matty's campain bash last night at the Ben Lomand Hotel reports over hearing a conversation that went something like this: Abe Shreeve was instructed to take down kent petersons billboard and convert it to a sign that reads, home of the future Walmart. A forsale sign was also discovered behind the 4th green at the golf course, on Ogden City property. Our informant say's their plan is to locate the Walmart where Mt. Ogden Park now sits. The forsale sign is up for meeting the requirements of the newly adopted public property sale notification, it'll be up for 30 days. Then the whole property will be sold to a new entity formed by gadi lesham and chris perterson,(hijack llc). In a token attempt at conforming with part of lying little matty's bogus declaration of restrictive covenants, the mini putt at the jackass center will be moved to the home and garden area of the Walmart along with 4 public ping pong tables.
Congratulations to the Van Hooser campaign. They did the best they could with what they had against a well financed and evil empire. They wrestled the beast to very nearly a tie and the jury is still out. In fact I'm calling it for Van Hooser by 8 votes when all the dust settles and the final count is in. Long live the new mayor Van Hooser!
OB
And to think the Godfreyites and Geigersters believe that nay sayers cannot dream! Your call of a Van Hooser win seems the impossible dream to me!! I sure hope it comes true.
david,
Hey, watch what you say. Some of my best friends are lawyers!
also david,
Any judge that would have any jurisdiction in this matter, was first and still is a lawyer.
I too hope that SVH wins, but I would have to dissagree with you on your point that SVH did her best to beat the boy king. I think she failed to point out all of the faults he has. His lying, bullying, ticket quota, following of police spouses, costing the city 5 mill on the old mall site, the federal BDO investigation just to name a few. She needed to make a clear distinction between her ethics and integrity and his lack of them. She failed to do so and the result was that he will likley win an election that was hers to lose.
Dan, when I voted Bobby G was there and he had a list of voters in some type of Bar code format, they were also in the form of labels. When ever anyone entered to vote when their name was announced to the polling judge, Bobby franticaly looked over his papers, I would presume to see if he could disqualify anyone.
David,
Don't diss lawyers on this blog. Democrats and the Democrat Party loves lawyers. So, you will offend people here.
And not only that, but I find lawyers rather reasonable to deal with. Lawyers are experts at logic and precise language. So, if you possess these traits, you too will find lawyers easy and reasonable to deal with.
Shit dude, it ain't like mediating a dispute in Karbala. I'd much rather negotiate with a garrulous, would-be bully (lawyer), than a Hummer full of rednecks with Colts or a Toyota full of Mehdis with AKs. You wanna talk about bullies.
Dan S.-
I have no first hand knowledge of poll watchers challenging voters. I merely was agreeing that if poll watchers entered with the list of challenged voters than the entire campaign knew exactly what was going on.
I would guess that poll watchers probably picked up on the list after noticing it on the poll table. It was prominantly located at my polling location and could easily be read by anyone voting. I noticed my name on the list before the poll worker did.
You miss the point.
Some use lawyers as bullies.
We need to take care our officials do not feel bullied by silly lawyers.
Obviously, I do not refer derisively to ALL lawyers, some of whom are nice people, like my cousin, my friends, etc.
Dan:
You wrote "I've just heard a rumor that Godfrey's lawyer will be challenging all, or virtually all, of the provisional ballots."
Not necessarily surprising. He or she will be trying to insist that before a provisional vote be counted, the residence of whoever cast it be first established beyond question. I don't know in this state if the poll worker's accepting ID in order to hand out the provisional ballot is considered by vote judges sufficient to prove residence, or if, when a ballot is specifically challenged, they have to, or usually choose to, verify residence independently.
In re: lawyers....
The general rule of thumb seems to be that lawyers representing the other guy are heartless blood sucking leeches who would sue Mother Theresa for a big enough fee, while lawyers representing you are talented courageous defenders of the aggrieved against the unjust assaults of heartless and hostile predators.
Perspective is all....
I don't think these challenges are about the Mayor's race, folks. I think they are about the Council races. If all or nearly all of the absentee ballots are accepted and they break the Godfrey way, while all or nearly all of the provisional ballots are disallowed and they break generally SVH's way, the process could materially affect the outcome of two of the Council races. At least.
Remember, the Mayor is a Republican and as such is well aware of how elections can be won by having votes for opponents disallowed on technicalities. As the great philosopher Yogi Berra is reputed to have said, "It's deja vu all over again."
I agree with Robert, the point is lawyers working for you are legitimate, lawyers working for those you oppose are "silly."
"We need to take care our officials do not feel bullied by silly lawyers."
So David S. were the lawyers working for Ms. Littrell in her dismissed and judicially described "frivolous lawsuit" against Mayor Godfrey the silly kind or the legitimate kind. And if so, why weren't you voicing your concern for that official?
From the KSL site:
Godfrey says it was a long road to get to this point. "This is my third election, of course, and it has been by far the most bizarre and nasty, and it's just been really unbelievable," he explained.
And said with a straight face!
He said it with a straight face because he is the one who is bizarre and nasty, RDA debt is not City debt, Susie caused it she voted for it, bla blah blah.
It just makes me sick to think of four more years of poor little me.
Are you kidding? The only "poor me" I'm hearing is from people on this forum. Just like your candidate VH, your not really for anything, I haven't heard any solutions from you or your candidate, beyond pie in the sky election rhetoric.
If your not part of the solution you are part of the problem. Stand for something other than your hatred for one man, oh and his minion, i forgot about them.
David,
My lawyer says she agrees with you about lawyers.
Curm:
How strong a break for Godfrey and his council slate do you expect in the absentee ballots? I certainly agree that the Aardema-Johnson race is up in the air, but the Gochnour-Petersen race, with a margin of 270 votes, is decided (in my opinion).
antilib,
Did you bother to look at the First 100 Days' Plan on Susie's website? Yeah, I figured you didn't.
antilib,
Just because we're promoting ideas that are proven to create economic growth and great communities instead of tacky carnival responses to community planning doesn't mean that we aren't offering solutions!
VH and many on this blog are all for a Streetcar: the number one recommendation from the Wasatch Front's Regional Council's Transportation Study. Streetcars have been proven in many demographically similar cities to create viable economic development!
VH and many on this blog are also for creating and preserving our open space, and providing a great trail system linked by walkable communities, and viable urban transit! A key element in an outdoor recreation oriented city – don’t you think?
We would all like to see a city that promotes business by openly working with all members of the business community in a cooperative fashion rather than unfairly bullying some while giving huge subsidies to others. We are also for good public schools, and a safe, clean, and maintained city that people can be proud to call home!
It’s not our fault that you lack the attention span to follow a platform that’s not flying through the sky or plastered with blinking rainbow colored lights! Guess what antilib we are the solution – you are the problem!
There are many more solutions than that too! Pick a topic, I'm sure many people on this blog would be happy to provide you with some really great solutions!
As for me - I'm going to bed! I have a long day ahead of me tomorrow, doing my own part to continue to move this community forward!
bill:
You slay me. Brilliant.
Care to "engage" ... in a match of pong?
Dan:
You're right. I'm wrong. I was working from memory and didn't check and "recalled" a difference much closer than it was. Always a mistake, working from memory alone, especially when running on empty, as I am today. Thanks for the correction.
Oh, Antilib, you're not really going to try to beat that old "naysayer" horse to its feat for yet another trot around the track, are you? Man, you guys need to get some new lines. Not even whatever's left of Lift Ogden is flogging that one anymore.
Oh, by the way, the Mayor is now a naysayer too... he's against selling off the parklands for real estate development now, and in fact, he now says the plan was not practical from the git go. And he no longer supports a city built downtown gondola. Didn't you get the memo?
Thats more information in the last five posts then I was able to glean from pages and pages of past entries on this forum. I have to admit I just discovered this bastion of free political thinking yesterday, so what you might have posted months ago I regrettably missed out on.
However, there are still no specific plans, "We are also for good public schools, and a safe, clean, and maintained city that people can be proud to call home!" Well zippity doo dah, aren't we all, while we're at it why don't we cure cancer and aids, end world hunger and make love not war. Elect me!!!! Talk about blue sky.
And yes I went to her web page and saw nothing more than "Restoring Ogden's S.O.U.L" which was just a bunch of bullet points much like the posts here of pie in the sky rhetoric....
"Making public safety our top priority" - duh
"Investing taxpayer dollars with care and prudence"
(again no specifics of what she means but who can argue against care and prudence)
"Listening to everyone"
"Respecting all points of View"
Welcoming questions"
Where is she running Sesame Street?
Unified means....
I couldn't stop laughing to address VH as a unifier or anyone here for that matter.
At any rate even her slogan restoring Ogden's soul, is merely a jab at the current administration and all points are in opposition to their plans. I didn't realize our town had no soul?
And as i've stated before there are at least three major roads and a railroad leaving Ogden, if you don't like it leave.
At any rate thank you for the election entertainment, I will leave you with your conspiracy theories and hateful diatribes.
I personally think Ogden is a better place because of Mayor Godfrey and I'm grateful he cares enough about the area to put up with the incredible amounts of crap that have been shoveled.
As for evidence and fact, the only disagreements that have been brought before an unbiased and impartial tribunal (the 2nd district court) have been found in favor of the mayor.
If everything you post here is "truth" why don't you put your money where your mouth is, hire one of those good albeit "silly" lawyers and actually prove some of the stuff your saying about him. If he is the criminal and liar you claim, it should be relatively simple to establish your case.
Antilib:
Oh, lord, and now "love it or leave it?" Surely you can do better than that. That one's had mold growing on it since the 50s.... Oh, and by the way, no one's been able to leave Ogden by rail for a couple of decades now, I think.... You need to get out more.
Thats it...curmudgeon I think you got my point.
antilib,
So the rhetoric continues. I was hoping all of this would be put to an end after Tuesday's vote. I personally voted for SVH because of her platform of improving Ogden's public safety and public infrastructure/ facilities, furthering transportation options, promoting the City's valued resources, working cooperatively with the City Council, and because of her focus on Ogden's neighborhoods. I've seen what Godfrey has done in those areas over the recent years and his record is rather abysmal. There is more to running a city than putting a bunch of flashy new buildings downtown at the tune of millions of public dollars, especially when it comes at the expense of other critical community needs. Having a vibrant downtown is vital, yes, but the larger picture has been ignored. That is why Ogden is so divided. Many people, like myself, feel like their needs have been ignored by the Mayor (we, citizens, have been pushing for better public safety over the past few years and the only time the Mayor addresses it is weeks before his election--what is wrong with this picture?). I'm not trying to be snippy, but once again, the Mayor has not acted in the best interests of all the community- that is why this community is so divided, and that has been proved even more so by Tuesday's happenings.
Look Antilib,
We all care a great deal about Ogden. We all think it is a fantastic place to work, live, and play! We do have a different opinion about what needs to be done to make Ogden better. In a functioning municipal government people with differences of opinion sit down and talk it through, gather input from the general public, and at the end of the day reach some kind of compromise that everyone (or mostly everyone is happy with).
What has been happening in Ogden for the last four (some say eight) years is that not only has the Mayor not invited those with opposing views to sit down at the discussion table, he has locked them out of the building, and publicly ridiculed them! He has his mind made up and he doesn’t care what anyone else thinks – he doesn’t care what the voting public has to say (except for the last three months that he’s been trying to get re-elected) – he doesn’t care what the experts have to say. You’re right, there is an awful lot of complaining on this blog. My point is that because most of us have literally been shut out of the community planning process, this is now our only place where we can go to have our voices heard!
The key difference between the MG and the VH camps is that VH wants to re-open the lines of communication in this city, so that through the process of civil discourse we can all work together to reach the best solution(s) possible!
Urbanite:
Nicely put. The trouble with "love it or leave it" shouters is that they always, but always, insist that "loving it" [whatever it is, city, state or nation] be defined only as they want it defined. As with Antilib: "if you complain about Ogden or its Mayor, you don't love it, so leave it." But the other side can play the same game: "If you're content with an unprincipled mayor and a runaway city debt, you don't love Ogden, so leave it."
Bromide chants like "love it or leave it" are lazy substitutes for thought. Always.
Urbanite
It is too bad that the Van Hooser campaign was not able to articulate, and resonate with the voters, the concepts that you wrote above.
As they found out, it is impossible to have a civil discourse with an un-scrupled sociopathic personality like Godfrey.
I am among those who believe that Ogden politics is not as gentle as perhaps VH would have liked it to be, and the only way to beat a guy like Godfrey is a very in his face, calling his bull shit, kind of campaign. He sure as hell didn't play "fair", and nobody in their right mind expected him to. This poses the question that perhaps VH played it just a little too genteel? Or as the old saying goes: "You shouldn't be taking a knife to a gun fight".
I do admire Van Hooser and her circle for taking on the beast and giving the little bounder a good fight. And of course I am still holding out hope that she will win the final count!
Curm....Amtrak stopped in the mid-90's and judging from your lack of awareness some of the newer things in the world, you might want to get out more.
and Ozboy,
Van Hooser had three civil discussion events and still couldn't communicate effectively. That had nothing to do with Godfrey. And she was far more vengeful and angery at those events than Godfrey every was.
Curm....Acdeptable ID, picture ID, voter registration card were presented by Littrell 3 times! and it was only when she had the Clerk's office involved, was she able to vote after 3 tries and 5 hrs and 10 minutes!
Not everyone who showed up with ID could vote. It IS a scandal, and those who don't have the guts to fight for their rights need to go to the County Clerk's office with their ID and vote! And, you, Curm, cuold let your friends know and those you tell us you eavesdrop on while having your morning coffee around downtown.
Daps:
Well, since I moved here 5 and a half years ago, not surprising I wasn't around to see Amtrak in Ogden in "the 90s." But, not to put too fine a point on it, it still isn't available for folks to take the train getting out of Ogden, as Antilib suggested they could. Six months from now, maybe.
Interesting that it came through here and then stopped. Where was it routed from, going to? Was it replaced by the SL/Dever via Soldier Summit and Price route, or was it a separate Amtrak route that was axed? Like to know, if you know or anyone else does. Thanks for the info.
Sharon:
As I noted earlier, the fact that Ms. Littrel was denied even a provisional ballot after returning with proper ID seems to me, so far, the grossest violation that's been posted, though the fact that she finally got one, however long it took her, may make the matter legally moot. Though as part of a larger pattern of misconduct, it still might resonate. We'll have to see.
"And she was far more vengeful and angery at those events than Godfrey every was."
Boy, I would hate to be angery; my wife might make me take out the trash.
You assclown. Go back to school, you silly-ass Geiger. Geiger, Geiger, Geiger, Geiger...
LOL Jason, WRONG AGAIN! I've never even met a Geiger.
Too bad your wife can't make you thinnk.
Post a Comment