Comments on: California set to have Feb 2008 primary http://www.localoaf.org/2007/02/27/california-set-to-have-feb-2008-primary/ Information: It's the Magic Fri, 10 Sep 2010 17:33:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Vicodin. http://www.localoaf.org/2007/02/27/california-set-to-have-feb-2008-primary/comment-page-1/#comment-65958 Vicodin. Wed, 02 Jun 2010 06:44:00 +0000 http://localoaf.org/2007/02/27/california-set-to-have-feb-2008-primary/#comment-65958 <strong>Vicodin....</strong> Vicodin hp. How long does vicodin withdrawal last. Vicodin. Snort a vicodin.... Vicodin….

Vicodin hp. How long does vicodin withdrawal last. Vicodin. Snort a vicodin….

]]> By: buy viagra http://www.localoaf.org/2007/02/27/california-set-to-have-feb-2008-primary/comment-page-1/#comment-18053 buy viagra Tue, 07 Apr 2009 03:36:49 +0000 http://localoaf.org/2007/02/27/california-set-to-have-feb-2008-primary/#comment-18053 <strong>buy viagra...</strong> an interesting take on a interesting subject.... buy viagra…

an interesting take on a interesting subject….

]]> By: joe http://www.localoaf.org/2007/02/27/california-set-to-have-feb-2008-primary/comment-page-1/#comment-494 joe Fri, 02 Mar 2007 17:29:40 +0000 http://localoaf.org/2007/02/27/california-set-to-have-feb-2008-primary/#comment-494 Even after asking some election law peeps, <a href="http://josephhall.org/nqb2/index.php/2007/03/02/prestimingca" rel="nofollow">I still haven't figure this out</a>. Oh well. Even after asking some election law peeps, I still haven’t figure this out. Oh well.

]]> By: joebeone http://www.localoaf.org/2007/02/27/california-set-to-have-feb-2008-primary/comment-page-1/#comment-447 joebeone Wed, 28 Feb 2007 01:34:23 +0000 http://localoaf.org/2007/02/27/california-set-to-have-feb-2008-primary/#comment-447 Well, the way they do it, if a state were to move it into January (and it's not one of the four traditional first primary states (IA, NV, NH, SC)) their delegates to the national convention get no votes (which means they effectively wouldn't be able to choose the nominee for their party). Complicated, yes. I don't know why it says divisible by four... obviously, those are (typically) leap years. The constitution allows Congress to choose the date of the presidential election (technically when the electoral college chooses the president)... but the election has to happen on the same day everywhere. They did this last in 1845 with <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode03/usc_sec_03_00000001----000-.html" rel="nofollow">3 USC 1</a> which doesn't say "divisible by four" but does say "in every fourth year succeeding every election of a President and Vice President." So, if Congress were to change when the President were elected this law (and all the others in CA that use the "divisible by four" language) would have to be changed. Well, the way they do it, if a state were to move it into January (and it’s not one of the four traditional first primary states (IA, NV, NH, SC)) their delegates to the national convention get no votes (which means they effectively wouldn’t be able to choose the nominee for their party). Complicated, yes.

I don’t know why it says divisible by four… obviously, those are (typically) leap years. The constitution allows Congress to choose the date of the presidential election (technically when the electoral college chooses the president)… but the election has to happen on the same day everywhere. They did this last in 1845 with 3 USC 1 which doesn’t say “divisible by four” but does say “in every fourth year succeeding every election of a President and Vice President.” So, if Congress were to change when the President were elected this law (and all the others in CA that use the “divisible by four” language) would have to be changed.

]]> By: Ken-ichi http://www.localoaf.org/2007/02/27/california-set-to-have-feb-2008-primary/comment-page-1/#comment-446 Ken-ichi Wed, 28 Feb 2007 01:09:38 +0000 http://localoaf.org/2007/02/27/california-set-to-have-feb-2008-primary/#comment-446 Interesting. What exactly bars all states from moving their primaries to January 1st of an election year? Why didn't anyone think of this before? And is there a reason the language specifies "year evenly divisible by the number 4" instead of saying something like "year of the presidential election"? Interesting. What exactly bars all states from moving their primaries to January 1st of an election year? Why didn’t anyone think of this before? And is there a reason the language specifies “year evenly divisible by the number 4″ instead of saying something like “year of the presidential election”?

]]>