Renner survives Gerrard’s challenge

By:  Diane Benjamin

Tari Renner still had enough signatures approved to stay on the ballot, but my sources say 204 were thrown out.  That’s an invalid rate of almost 27%.  Evidently gathering legitimate signatures wasn’t a high priority.

My sources also say more many people were not registered to vote at the addresses them wrote on the petitions, but the reviewers searched for other addresses where they were registered and allowed them to stay on the petition.

More later!




15 thoughts on “Renner survives Gerrard’s challenge

  1. I must say, it was very comical watching this absolutely inept gang of hayseeds storm into town with their cell phone cameras on, reciting the OMA in their heads, and get completely shut down day after day. Delaying their own hearings because of technicalities, having to withdraw and refile multiple petitions because of their own callowness to seemingly any and all legal procedure? That blows any scripted comedy out of the water! I sincerely thank Diane, Kevin, and all others who provided updates on this clownish nonsense. I hope you continue the fight for your ultimate goal, to get all of the Non-Good Ol’ Boys thrown off the ballot. But if I know you guys, I know you’ll end up shooting yourself in the foot (because you don’t know the law), and then cry foul on the unfairness “corrupt system.”

    You are not “concerned citizens,” you are “concerning citizens.”

    Keep Making America Great Again, one mistake at a time.


    1. Amanda, I don’t know where you get your information because it is inaccurate. The OMA violation was a separate issue and was upheld resulting in the need to reschedule the hearing. Mr Gerrard’s challenge to the validity of Renner’s petition was unrelated. The petition challenge did proceed according to the law governing the election process. It is every citizens’ right to challenge the integrity of a candidate’s petition. Yes, Amanda, voter fraud does exist.


    2. I always welcome dissenting opinions. However, since your post was rather long on insults and rather short on facts or coherent arguments, I have some questions to try and clarify what you are saying. First of all, please explain how shutting down several illegal meetings and getting a quarter of signatures thrown out demonstrates an ignorance of the law. Yes, Dianne Hauman’s challenge was thrown out on a technicality, but it took a professional lawyer (of which Kevin has never claimed to be) to find the technicality to throw that out. Second, you seem to be against holding elected officials accountable for following the OMA and election laws. What laws exactly should they be held accountable for following? What is the criteria to determine which laws to ignore and which to follow?


      1. Ah thanks for catching that. My apologies. There is so much going on that it’s difficult for me to keep it all straight. Thanks to Kevin and Bruce for the hours they put into this.

        By the way, how many valid signatures did Renner end up with and how close was it to the required number?


  2. Amanda, when 27 percent of signatures were deemed unacceptable don’t you think this improper procedure deserves to be investigated or do you think its OK to not perform properly and expect the taxpayers to accept everything at face value.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s