Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so WHICH CANDIDATE sabotaged Symone's campaign? Come on DCUM, someone knows.

I don't get why Symone's campaign isn't saying.

Well, Priddy has already issued a “not it” statement, so we just have to wait for the rest of them. There’s a clear front runner in my mind just based on other actions.

Wait, why is it considered "sabotage" by calling out someone for unethical and/or illegal behavior? If Walker's running in the SB caucus indeed violated the Hatch Act, why isn't the focus on the fact that she HAD to drop out instead of WHO highlighted the apparent violation?

Allegedly another candidate actually contacted her agency. It’s not wrong per se, but they maybe could have gotten someone else to make the complaint.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so WHICH CANDIDATE sabotaged Symone's campaign? Come on DCUM, someone knows.

I don't get why Symone's campaign isn't saying.

Well, Priddy has already issued a “not it” statement, so we just have to wait for the rest of them. There’s a clear front runner in my mind just based on other actions.

Wait, why is it considered "sabotage" by calling out someone for unethical and/or illegal behavior? If Walker's running in the SB caucus indeed violated the Hatch Act, why isn't the focus on the fact that she HAD to drop out instead of WHO highlighted the apparent violation?

That's a good point. Her statement was rather whiny and she is certainly playing the victim.

Did her running actually violate the Hatch Act? Says who?

I guess I would like to know who it was and what they did. Depending on how the facts shake out, I might think what they did is a good thing or a bad thing. Can't tell anything now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so WHICH CANDIDATE sabotaged Symone's campaign? Come on DCUM, someone knows.

I don't get why Symone's campaign isn't saying.

Well, Priddy has already issued a “not it” statement, so we just have to wait for the rest of them. There’s a clear front runner in my mind just based on other actions.

It’s pretty juvenile to do this “ hint hint “ thing especially when she was so blatantly violating the Hatch Act anyhow,

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so WHICH CANDIDATE sabotaged Symone's campaign? Come on DCUM, someone knows.

I don't get why Symone's campaign isn't saying.

Well, Priddy has already issued a “not it” statement, so we just have to wait for the rest of them. There’s a clear front runner in my mind just based on other actions.

Wait, why is it considered "sabotage" by calling out someone for unethical and/or illegal behavior? If Walker's running in the SB caucus indeed violated the Hatch Act, why isn't the focus on the fact that she HAD to drop out instead of WHO highlighted the apparent violation?

Anonymous wrote:so WHICH CANDIDATE sabotaged Symone's campaign? Come on DCUM, someone knows.

I don't get why Symone's campaign isn't saying.

Well, Priddy has already issued a “not it” statement, so we just have to wait for the rest of them. There’s a clear front runner in my mind just based on other actions.

so WHICH CANDIDATE sabotaged Symone's campaign? Come on DCUM, someone knows.

I don't get why Symone's campaign isn't saying.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think she always knew she had to run as an Independent. She is just using this to play the victim and get PR. She was trying to skirt the law and got caught. Good!

But, but- harassment!

AEM is all up in arms about this and how ACDC is allowing someone to be bullied out of the caucus. It just sounds like the Hatch Act caught up with her. She's a fed employee. Fed employees are not allowed to run in partisan races, except in some cases as an independent. Running as an independent means you can't seek endorsement from a partisan political party. Am I missing something?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s not dropping out, but is running as an independent I think?

Same difference in a county that blindly votes blue no matter what.

I think you’re underestimating the support she has among Arlingtonians. Has anyone said which campaign went after her?

Hmm. Don’t people have to sign a pledge if they vote in the caucus, saying that they will only vote for the candidate(s) who win the caucus? Am I understanding that correctly (not being sarcastic, genuinely wondering)? If so, and if Symone is the only one running as an Independent, then those who want to vote for her will have to forego voting for the second open position.

Yes, you have to sign a pledge to vote in the caucus. However, I'm of the opinion that it's undemocratic and unenforceable so I wouldn't let that hold me back if I wanted to vote in the caucus and then vote for an independent. I ESPECIALLY don't care about following the pledge because the race is supposed to be non-partisan.

I have never voted in an Arlington caucus because of the pledge. Whether it’s undemocratic or unenforceable is irrelevant- I’m not pledging to do something I don’t intend to do.

Dp- well enjoy being disenfranchised

Not my doing. Enjoy being unethical.

I don’t think it’s unethical to break a pledge that is unethical and undemocratic, but you need to follow your own conscience.

This is the position that the ACDC puts us all in, and it’s not right.

This year I intend to vote in the caucus because that is the election for SB. I’m a Republican and come November, there isn’t a chance in hell I will vote for any Democrat, including those for SB. By the time they are endorsed they have won.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s not dropping out, but is running as an independent I think?

Same difference in a county that blindly votes blue no matter what.

I think you’re underestimating the support she has among Arlingtonians. Has anyone said which campaign went after her?

Hmm. Don’t people have to sign a pledge if they vote in the caucus, saying that they will only vote for the candidate(s) who win the caucus? Am I understanding that correctly (not being sarcastic, genuinely wondering)? If so, and if Symone is the only one running as an Independent, then those who want to vote for her will have to forego voting for the second open position.

Yes, you have to sign a pledge to vote in the caucus. However, I'm of the opinion that it's undemocratic and unenforceable so I wouldn't let that hold me back if I wanted to vote in the caucus and then vote for an independent. I ESPECIALLY don't care about following the pledge because the race is supposed to be non-partisan.

I have never voted in an Arlington caucus because of the pledge. Whether it’s undemocratic or unenforceable is irrelevant- I’m not pledging to do something I don’t intend to do.

Dp- well enjoy being disenfranchised

Not my doing. Enjoy being unethical.

I don’t think it’s unethical to break a pledge that is unethical and undemocratic, but you need to follow your own conscience.

This is the position that the ACDC puts us all in, and it’s not right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s not dropping out, but is running as an independent I think?

Same difference in a county that blindly votes blue no matter what.

I think you’re underestimating the support she has among Arlingtonians. Has anyone said which campaign went after her?

Hmm. Don’t people have to sign a pledge if they vote in the caucus, saying that they will only vote for the candidate(s) who win the caucus? Am I understanding that correctly (not being sarcastic, genuinely wondering)? If so, and if Symone is the only one running as an Independent, then those who want to vote for her will have to forego voting for the second open position.

Yes, you have to sign a pledge to vote in the caucus. However, I'm of the opinion that it's undemocratic and unenforceable so I wouldn't let that hold me back if I wanted to vote in the caucus and then vote for an independent. I ESPECIALLY don't care about following the pledge because the race is supposed to be non-partisan.

I have never voted in an Arlington caucus because of the pledge. Whether it’s undemocratic or unenforceable is irrelevant- I’m not pledging to do something I don’t intend to do.

Dp- well enjoy being disenfranchised

Not my doing. Enjoy being unethical.

I don’t think it’s unethical to break a pledge that is unethical and undemocratic, but you need to follow your own conscience.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s not dropping out, but is running as an independent I think?

Same difference in a county that blindly votes blue no matter what.

I think you’re underestimating the support she has among Arlingtonians. Has anyone said which campaign went after her?

Hmm. Don’t people have to sign a pledge if they vote in the caucus, saying that they will only vote for the candidate(s) who win the caucus? Am I understanding that correctly (not being sarcastic, genuinely wondering)? If so, and if Symone is the only one running as an Independent, then those who want to vote for her will have to forego voting for the second open position.

Yes, you have to sign a pledge to vote in the caucus. However, I'm of the opinion that it's undemocratic and unenforceable so I wouldn't let that hold me back if I wanted to vote in the caucus and then vote for an independent. I ESPECIALLY don't care about following the pledge because the race is supposed to be non-partisan.

I have never voted in an Arlington caucus because of the pledge. Whether it’s undemocratic or unenforceable is irrelevant- I’m not pledging to do something I don’t intend to do.

Dp- well enjoy being disenfranchised

Not my doing. Enjoy being unethical.

+ 1

I feel about this like I do about occasionally speeding. I am law abiding in general, but I have no qualms about going 72 in a 65 mph zone. I'll sign the stupid pledge and then vote how I want to in November.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s not dropping out, but is running as an independent I think?

Same difference in a county that blindly votes blue no matter what.

I think you’re underestimating the support she has among Arlingtonians. Has anyone said which campaign went after her?

Hmm. Don’t people have to sign a pledge if they vote in the caucus, saying that they will only vote for the candidate(s) who win the caucus? Am I understanding that correctly (not being sarcastic, genuinely wondering)? If so, and if Symone is the only one running as an Independent, then those who want to vote for her will have to forego voting for the second open position.

Yes, you have to sign a pledge to vote in the caucus. However, I'm of the opinion that it's undemocratic and unenforceable so I wouldn't let that hold me back if I wanted to vote in the caucus and then vote for an independent. I ESPECIALLY don't care about following the pledge because the race is supposed to be non-partisan.

I have never voted in an Arlington caucus because of the pledge. Whether it’s undemocratic or unenforceable is irrelevant- I’m not pledging to do something I don’t intend to do.

Dp- well enjoy being disenfranchised

Anonymous wrote:I think she always knew she had to run as an Independent. She is just using this to play the victim and get PR. She was trying to skirt the law and got caught. Good!

But, but- harassment!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Symone Walker is dropping out of the caucus per her Facebook page. Apparently another candidate was, in her opinion, harassing her re the Hatch Act.

The description didn’t make it sound like harassment. She just didn’t like it.

Also, cry me a river on the ACDC not being fair now that it’s not working in her favor. It’s been like that for years, and she hasn’t protested until now.

I think it's the Hatch Act itself that requires her to run as an independent. And there is an opinion from the Office of Special Counsel (who oversees the Hatch Act) that says if you run as an independent, but seek the endorsement of a partisan political party, that could make you a partisan candidate and not an independent one. Plenty of people on this thread have raised concerns about her possibly violating the Hatch Act, so I'm not buying the harassment angle. I bet someone just asked the legitimate question as to whether she was really complying with the law that applies to her as a federal government employee.

NP, but PP is right about the opinion. There is an opinion from the Office of Special Counsel from January 18, 2002. It says “if you solicited or advertised the endorsement of the Democratic Party or other partisan political party, or used the resources of XDC or other partisan political party to further your campaign, these actions could transform your independent candidacy into a partisan one.” And then it cites an actual case.

I found that opinion in less than 5 minutes of searching on OSC’s website. I’m alarmed that Symone, who claimed to always conduct diligence, and the lawyers at her agency didn’t find that same opinion which makes it pretty clear that she couldn’t run in the Dem caucus.