Is Dana Walsh disputing her loss to John Dennis?

[RonPaulCult]

I just saw this statement from Dana's blog:

It is too early to know the final outcome of Tuesday's primary election. There is a large number of absentee ballots yet to be counted that could affect the small margin of votes that currently separate John Dennis and me. Following a final count of the remaining absentee votes, we will make a further announcement.

Feel free to visit her blog and leave a comment on what you think of her contesting the 12 point lead John currently holds

danawalshforcongress.com/blog/statement_regarding_the_results_of_the_primary_ele ction

[dannno]

I don't think she will approve our comments, but go ahead and try ;)

[RonPaulCult]

No - you're right - she won't. I can't believe the nerve of this woman. John has a 12% lead!

[0zzy]

No - you're right - she won't. I can't believe the nerve of this woman. John has a 12% lead!

BUT! BUT....Absentee ballots! Surely that will narrow it to a, a, 1% lead for her! SURELY IT WILL!

[RonPaulCult]

BUT! BUT....Absentee ballots! Surely that will narrow it to a, a, 1% lead for her! SURELY IT WILL!

Maybe she feels the election was fixed. You know how the elite love liberty candidates and will stop at NOTHING to put them into positions of power.

LMAO.

[sailingaway]

She got 7% in the last election against Pelosi. Third parties got more. SF doesn't WANT her, and likes libertarians better. The RNC backed HER however, I know because I hung up on a couple of their robocalls. She got a LOT of money and now has lost to the person people should have been backing to begin with because he polls better against pelosi than ANY challenger previously has.

Do they want to beat Pelosi, or not?

[0zzy]

Maybe she feels the election was fixed. You know how the elite love liberty candidates and will stop at NOTHING to put them into positions of power.

LMAO.

Kinda like how Lyndon "Landslide" Johnson won his first Senate election.

His opponent won and 5 days later they "found" 202 ballots in a precinct, 200 went to Lyndon Johnson. Funny thing is, all the "found" ballots had voters voting in alphabetical order and using the same ink. Then after Lyndon died, the judge who ruled in favor of him admitted he helped steal it.

so, ya know, it's happened before.

[Brian4Liberty]

Nothing wrong with counting all the votes. A lot of people don't realize that they usually stop counting as soon as someone concedes. So many people use absentee/mail-in ballots, and a lot don't get counted.

[RonPaulCult]

Nothing wrong with counting all the votes. A lot of people don't realize that they usually stop counting as soon as someone concedes. So many people use absentee/mail-in ballots, and a lot don't get counted.

I believe almost all of the votes have been counted. She will never be able to catch up in a million years. She is being a brat. She might even take this to court even though she has NO case. Ugh.

[Brian4Liberty]

She is being a brat. She might even take this to court even though she has NO case. Ugh.

Don't doubt that at all!

[libertybrewcity]

Maybe she feels the election was fixed. You know how the elite love liberty candidates and will stop at NOTHING to put them into positions of power.

LMAO.

if anything, she fixed the election and failed to win it.

I can't see the absentee ballots adding up to much. Although i voted for Dennis absentee so add one for him!

[sailingaway]

I believe almost all of the votes have been counted. She will never be able to catch up in a million years. She is being a brat. She might even take this to court even though she has NO case. Ugh.

Because she thinks she will have funding because she has the RNC support. I hope she won't have support in THAT. The RNC is saying people should vote for GOP even when their candidates lose the primaries, they will have NO credibility if they don't back those who WIN the primaries. She just knows it will be a high profile race because it is against pelosi and even though John has a MUCH better chance of winning, per polls, she wants to stay in. There is no more to it than that.