Candidate challenges are bad enough in the non-partisan environment (believe me!). In a partisan situation, I think it’s an even worse. Seriously…The Decatur Township Republicans have to be jumping for joy over.  By sapping the time, energy, and money from the candidates we selected in our caucus, we are making it easier for the Republican’s to take the election.

 

So, as I understand from the paper, the charge is that agents of some of the candidates were electioneering. Well, I hate to split hairs, but I believe there was a very big deal made by the Chairman about not convening the caucus until after candidate speeches had been completed (*ahem* candidate speeches?…Isn’t that Electioneering?)

 

 

 

So ladies and gentlemen of the jury: I submit the electioneering charge is disproved prima fascia by virtue that all caucus participants (those Democrats who attended) and candidates (those Democrats seeking office) the caucus location agreed the candidates could speak before the formal meeting was called to order, and voting occurred. So, the location wasn’t really a “polling place” until the formal meeting was called to order.

 

What’s more -

If I’m following the objector’s argument, a logical extension of what they’re saying is polling places are “off limits” to all electioneering – even prior to the designated election time. Hmmm…This is problematic….So a candidate could never hold a fundraiser in a church banquet hall or in a community center that doubled as a polling place on election day? What’s even worse, if a locations’ “status” can’t change, doesn’t it stand to reason that some locations would be automatically disqualified from being polling places in the first place? Places like…Say, township party headquarters?

 

I'll post more in the comments