Its surprising how much you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit
Once again, the proxies seemed to carry the day. Below you will see a chart of the attendance of those in person and by proxy. You will see that in several districts that Graham and/or McCain meddled in during the Aug 30 elections of PCs and in their Organizational meeting carried a lot of proxies. Those are indicated in the chart below. Remember the Chairman's race had a margin of only 32 votes. We believe the fix was in based on the facts we currently have.
The same thing happened in the Maricopa County Republican Committee elections on January 14 - the proxies determined the outcome of the elections. Candidates were elected by people who did not show up to vote. 118 people showed up with 188 proxies. How much clearer can it get?
PLEASE DOWNLOAD the proxy form at the link at the end of this paragraph and sign it to be added to those needed to address this issue with the state legislature. There is a good probably that a bill will be run this coming session and it's important to show our legislators that the people want an honestly run AZGOP. [LINK]
|AZGOP Statutory Meeting January 28, 2017 Stats|
|County/ Legislative District||Number of SCs Attending in person or by Proxy||Number of SCs Attending In Person||% of Total SCs Attending in Person||Number of SCs Attending By Proxy||% of Attendees by Proxy||Avg no of proxies carried by person|
**Graham is reported by PCs in that district to have interfered with their election
^There is no such thing as At Large State Committeemen
Lets see just how would McCain would be riled ... if he voted by proxies rather than in person? Would anyone complain from LD13, LD19, LD 24, LD28 ? One Man ... ONE vote in person. These are all fraudsters against the "responsibility" of an office to vote in person. Just who signed those proxies? Who are those people that we should call out in public, for they voted from behind the Curtain of Oz ... or more importantly behind the curtain of Graham, Lines, and McCain !!!
John, perhaps you witnessed what Archie Dicksion posted below? We have now spoken to several SCs in different districts who revealed information similar to what he posted. One Credentials Chairman for his district told us that he closed his credentials when he was told to, submitted a count for his district but when the count was announced, it was higher than what he counted! We wonder how many credentials chairmen paid attention to what was announced for their districts to know whether numbers were the same.
So when that is the case what recourse do those credentials chairman have? My common sense would tell me that the credentials numbers are the ONLY ones that would be counted not the ... GOP chairman's gift .. that keeps on giving a purposeful deception. This must be controlled or we no longer have limited government, but a free-for-all at any political price.
Don't legislatures run on actual personally cast votes, so why would a party's convention be any different? Uniformity removes corruption.
Ah, John, that is the question, isn't it. It looks to us like the Golden Rule is in place: he who has the gold and the keys to the castle, rules. We will be surprised if the records for the secretary or treasurer are actually turned over to the new people, making them essentially figure head elected board members. Remember, Gabby Mercer said in her comments that in the year or two she has been on that board, she has never been called to a single meeting! Someone is hiding something which is why the McCain guy won whether he got the most real votes or not!
LD22 had only three proxies. The first column of #s is the total in person & Proxy. The second column is in person and the third column is proxies. Those in BOLD had 50% or more by proxy.
Sorry for error in reading, however still believe since Dewit, Lovas, Franks and Morgan set to support Lines outcome from LD 22 pretty much went as they lead it to.
Just a minute. Many people in the remoter areas have to pay several hundred dollars to attend these meetings. Many do not have the money and the local precincts do not have the money to pay for expenses. In many cases that is why proxies are carried.
With all due respect, the farthest away district highlighted "in bold" is LD 13 in Yuma, others are Goodyear & Tolleston, and locally the Phoenix areas. There is no excuse for those LD's that had over 50% of committeemen voted with proxies that were within an hours drive time. Get involved personally or you have no "dog in the fight" for our federalism. Use the "car pool lanes" to put yourself & others in attendance.
It takes us over 4 hours to get to meetings in Phoenix. We are in Mohave County. I could not go this time as I was ill and under doctor's care. Some did not have the money to stay overnight. You are very narrow minded it appears to me. Most of our driving is on rural roads and there are no "car pool lanes".
That amount of time is a mystery to me. I drive to Vegas, much further than Mohave County, in under 3 hours going 5 or 6 miles over the speed limit. But I would think you could find some nice, like minded persons in the Phoenix area who would put you up for a night. I know SCs who did that.
I'm sorry that you are ill and of course, no one expects those to attend. It is those who proxies were meant for but we all know that ghost proxies from those who never had any intention of going ruled.
Nan, dear. Please do take a good look at the chart. You will see that only 1 remote county sent more than 50% of their votes by proxy. All others made it a point to be at the meeting. Other than Jonathan Lines district in Yuma that sent just under 50% of their votes by proxy and as we know, most of those were his own family, the remote districts did a superior job of getting to the meeting. You know, being a SC is a willful and voluntary decision. Those who sign up know what is required. I would like to add one more thing that has not been said. I am told by friends who live in Safford that Graham County didn't have enough people sign up to be SCs so Graham just appointed proxy votes to fill out the number. I have scoured our state statutes for a ruling on that but it seems there is no language other than "elected" so wouldn't it seem that if you have a maximum but no minimum of seats to fill and they are required by statute to be elected that you send as many as get elected. Otherwise, I believe in Pres. Trump's parlance that would be "a rigged system."