Already appeal filed. I think he'll win out, because he has the biggest $$ by far (i think he was ahead by at least 4x his closest opponent in the money race, Chico) and with overall public opinion polls he's near 40% with nearest competitor at 15%
Uhh. What? Great reasoning process there, I don't see anywhere in my comment the "exempt from law" statement or any reasoning that leads towards it. Maybe you can help me sherlock. I was simply stating my opinion, his financials, and his polls. How does that have anything to do with whether or not he should be held/not held accountable to the law? And yeah thats not the official twitter feed, this is: http://twitter.com/rahmemanuel
From what I've read, this ruling rests on the interpretation of the rule allowing for exception from the residency requirements if called upon service for the United States. The judges in this case believe that residency exception applies only to voters, and not candidates running for mayor. I think that's shaky ground to base a judgement upon. I need to see more concrete stuff to really have that decision stand; the Illinois state court can put a stay on this order, and let it bubble its way up to the supreme court, and that's the direction I think it'll go. Especially after the circuit court and election board approved it, I don't think they're gonna let it rest in the hands of the appellate courts to settle this decision (that wasn't even unanimous). It was a 2-1 ruling and here's a link to the dissenting opinion by Justice Lampkin: http://www.state.il.us/court/opinions/AppellateCourt/2011/1stDistrict/January/1110033.pdf And a more indepth link on the details from the Tribune: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...s-against-emanuel-on-01242011,0,4083659.story
I just shook his hand last Tuesday at the el station near my apartment. I thought he was another bum asking for money for a second.
I'm not always a fan of Rahm. In truth, I think he's a contentious prick. But this seems like a ticky-tack, bs interpretation of the law designed to punish those called to national service. Doesn't seem right. Not to mention, it's just going to drum-up support and sympathy for Rahm when it, inevitably, gets overturned. Bad move by his opposition.
Let's say you've been living in a house, registered to vote, been voting, have bank accounts, have family physicians in Houston for more than a year then your work sent you to a different state for a year. You temporarily lease your house for a year and keep majority of your personal stuff in the basement. You work for a year out of state renting an apartment/house while your wife and kids go back to Houston for physicians appointments and you never purchased a home, registered, voted, applied for driver's license or opened a bank account out of state. After a year you return to your house in Houston. Should you still be allowed to vote in Houston?
If you're stupid enough to have a basement in Houston, you shouldn't be allowed to vote. Side note: The thread title is offensive to little people everywhere.
