By Brandon Moseley
Alabama House of Representatives District 31 candidate, Jeshua Screws, whose petition for ballot access was disqualified by the Alabama Secretary of State office, went on Facebook and blamed corruption for the rejection of his Constitution Party candidacy for the HD 31 special election in Coosa and Elmore Counties.
Jeshua Screws said on Facebook, “Due to corruption in the Secretary of State’s office, I was rejected ballot access for HD 31. However, Yahweh is still in control. Thank you to everyone who supported me as I followed Yahweh in obedience.”
Constitution Party of Alabama Chairman Joshua Cassity said, “The state never even looked at the majority of signatures. They decided to do what is called sampling, where they pull a few random pages take the percentage and multiple it by how many you turned it. Unfortunately, the code states they have a choice of which method to use. This leave us little legal ground except to possibly challenge the formula they use. It is almost like they are inviting us to sue, with the possibility of depleting our financial resources. Jeshua was able to speak directly with Secretary of State Jim Bennett and advised him he did not believe we would sue but that he was praying for his salvation and the salvation of everyone in the office and their repentance. Mr. Bennett’s reply was “OK”.
Read the full article here.
No, but Jeshua did. And Yahweh, I guess. Or maybe the flying spaghetti monster.
Love his last name! So, did Alabama “screw” him from the ballot?
Paulie- me thinks he may be lacking in the common-sense department.
“Due to corruption in the Secretary of State’s office, I was rejected ballot access for HD 31. However, Yahweh is still in control. Thank you to everyone who supported me as I followed Yahweh in obedience.”
O… K… Obviously he’s one of those types; he probably would’ve gotten 10 or 12% of the vote in a two-way race with that kind of attitude.
I just like the last lines in the paragraph. I can just picture that conversation. “I’m praying for your salvation, you filthy sinners! REPENT!” “Um, Okay.” *click*
Attn Cody – as I predicted.
And statistical sampling is corrupt or invalid? How or why? I’ve checked stacks of signatures against validity databases (my own and others) and statistical sampling works. After you have done a sufficient sample the validity rate varies less and less and checking more signatures does not change it appreciably.
The law that requires us to collect this many signatures sucks, but that is up to the legislature, not the SOS office. The SOS office and Ed Packard have always been very reasonable to deal with and have cut alt party and independent candidates breaks any time they could, in my experience. Unless something changed there within the last year, it seems to me to be both foolish and counterproductive to blame bad validity on the people straddled with checking it. Especially since you may have to deal with them again.