Also, I bet some Democrats and those to the left of Democrats crossed over to vote for Jones in order to be able to say “Look how many votes Jones got! That proves Republicans are Nazis!”

What would be really funny, in a karmic sort of way, would be if the Republicans voted for a write-in candidate to clear their collective name while assuming the Democrat would win, and the Democrats voted for Jones in order to discredit the Republicans while assuming the Democrat would win, and Jones won the election!

What would be hilarious in the same sense would be if the House were split 217-217 after the election, and Jones gets to decide which party controls the House. Now THAT would be funny. In a karmic sort of way.

“If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve”. That was for the presidency, when it was assuredly not the most powerful position in the land.
And “bona fide” means establishment-approved. If loopholes are closed, a wall is built. To keep the loophole “finders” out or to keep them in?

Reminds me of an incapable alumna of my medical school. The school and its hospital felt they could not release her on the world as an intern; it would embarrass the good name of the school. So she was given her internship there, and by the same logic, her entire OB-GYN residency, in which she ended up as chief resident via the same craven logic. Her last operation as chief res was a vag. hyst in which she ligated both ureters! So the next day, now very fearful of what they had wrought, the faculty kept her on as asst. prof., And she taught us but was kept out of the O.R.! She was kept “inside the wall”.

If the NYTimes say some guy exists, not going to take that at face value. The moment you do, you just clicked on the virus and Trojan executable, congrats.

The Illinois Republican and Democrats are two child molestors and rapists fighting over who will get the better label in public. They’ve been allied since a long time ago.

I wouldn’t be surprised Republicans in Illinois get a kickback to the leadership from the Dem’s Planned Profit money laundering system.

That’s a good point.

Also, I bet some Democrats and those to the left of Democrats crossed over to vote for Jones in order to be able to say “Look how many votes Jones got! That proves Republicans are Nazis!”

If there had been bona fide opponents, they would have won instead.

I think you’re missing one very important point. The Republican strategy in this district was to cross over and vote for the conservative Democrat in that race, since this district is heavily Democratic, and the Republican has no chance of winning.

If there had been bona fide opponents in the Republican primary, they couldn’t have done that (or it wouldn’t have been enough). Then the progressive Democrat would have won his primary, and we’d have another progressive in the Congress instead of a conservative Democrat.

At least we’ll know how many Nazi/Holocaust deniers there are.

It is indeed a conundrum.

But they don’t actually have to run a campaign. They just have to get on the ballot. After that, they can decide whether it’s worth it to run a campaign.

I think this quote from justoneminute sums it up.
“The peril and promise of these ballot access rules is that ordinary registered voters are empowered – the party bosses cannot unilaterally dismiss reform minded, “rage against the machine” candidates like in the good old days. On the other hand, sometimes shit happens.

It would be nice if both parties would contest all elections but realistically, few people want to spend their time and money running a campaign that is guaranteed to lose.

“Allowed to run” as a representative of the Republican Party. Not just “allowed to run.” He had to file as a candidate for the Republican primary, as a Republican. I’m obviously not talking about running, per se. My very first sentence reads “allowed to run as a Republican.”

In the past, Jones was blocked from running as a Republican. Here’s how it was done, and how he managed to sneak by this time

Sanders (in 2005) had already basically received full approval of the Democratic Party. You can find the story at his Wiki entry:

Sanders entered the race for the U.S. Senate on April 21, 2005, after Senator Jim Jeffords announced that he would not seek a fourth term. Chuck Schumer, chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, endorsed Sanders, a critical move as it meant that no Democrat running against Sanders could expect to receive financial help from the party. Sanders was also endorsed by Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Democratic National Committee chairman and former Vermont governor Howard Dean. Dean said in May 2005 that he considered Sanders an ally who “votes with the Democrats 98 percent of the time.”Then-Senator Barack Obama also campaigned for Sanders in Vermont in March 2006. Sanders entered into an agreement with the Democratic Party, much as he had as a congressman, to be listed in their primary but to decline the nomination should he win, which he did.

The problem wasn’t just that Jones ran, but that he ran unopposed. If there had been bona fide opponents, they would have won instead. That’s why I said the party should always get someone on the ballot, even in heavily Democratic districts, or they risk this sort of hijacking, Personally, I don’t think 603 signatures (what was required of Jones) should be sufficient for getting on the ballot of a party.

In Illinois, these seem to be the rules:

Established political party candidates, new party candidates, and independent candidates must file nomination papers with the Illinois State Board of Elections in order to qualify for placement on the ballot. These nomination papers must be filed during the designated filing period.

If you read that link I gave previously, you’ll see that Jones filed on the very last day, and got enough bona fide signatures (the requirement is for 603). Here are the rules:

According to the Illinois State Board of Elections, it took 786 valid signatures to get on the March 20 Democratic primary ballot; 603 signatures for a Republican; and between 14,559 to 23,293 signatures to be on the ballot as an Independent, and 14,559 signatures to run from a new party.

What made Jones an “established political party candidate”? He certainly wasn’t the “established candidate” of the GOP. My guess is that the definition of “established political party candidate” is anyone who files as a candidate from a particular political party that’s already been established as a political party. So Jones was able to chose the GOP (an established party), filed at the last minute, made sure his hundreds of signatures could not be challenged, and filed in a district that had no other candidate. If he had filed as an Independent he couldn’t have gotten enough signatures, because far more were required.

It seems to me that that loophole should be tightened up, but in some way that still allows bona fide candidates and challengers to file. Or, if that’s not possible, parties should make sure there’s a bona fide nominee in every race. That would take time and effort, of course, and perhaps they ordinarily figure it’s not worth their time because ordinarily there are no Arthur Joneses. But I suspect there will be more of this sort of thing in the future.

How much vetting and searching for past indiscretions would be needed to get a Party’s blessing to run as one of many candidates in a local or state primary? Should a Ryan, former GOP candidate for gov. of Illinois, have to disclose to the IL GOP the contents of his court-sealed divorce litigation in order to run? The corrupt Dems illegally did that for him and ruined him as a candidate!

The Roy Moore charade comes to mind; social conduct today is not what it was 40 yrs ago, especially with femmes now shrieking “Abuse” and “Harassment”, about events real or alleged long ago, when they willingly disrobed and got onto casting couches. Happens today!! Read the newly-published “Cheap Sex”.

The country revels in phony feminist righteousness.

Marriage remains legal for girls at age 14 in AL with parental consent, and marrying an older, productive man who will provide security for the lass AND her family is historically the desired norm.

I think Neo should reconsider her desire to close that “loophole”.