Cabe

I am.

There you go again. Innuendo. You do realize we have 3 months. You don't have to get all your slamming out in the first week. I stick to my original comment. I don't think ANY candidate should come here.

Fine. If that's your choice and your reasoning, more power to you. But don't resort to nonsense name-calling. It doesn't become you. Or the Surepip way of "if I post it enough they will believe it".

You are creating a rukus on a weekend when no one can verify what you are saying. You haven't pointed to any code section that proves what you are saying is true, and you want me to call her on your behalf and get answers. I think not. Keep repeating the same thing over and over. Eventually we will forget about Will's donations.

Actually Paulding was 50/50. Only 4 votes between the two. Pathetic behavior coming from you.

You mean the same David Ralston who donated to the Stout campaign?

Talk about trying to justify! OMG Since you've obviously seen all of the disclosures, then you know that Paulette ran a very good, grassroots campaign against a virtual Stout machine. He raised more money for this race than he would make in 4 years in that part-time job. So, you want to talk limited resources?

I'm thinking a quick call in the AM to the Paulding election board would clear this all up. But, if you would prefer to turn it into something it's not to gain some ground for Will, have fun with it. But, when you search the State Ethics site, she is not even listed as a late filer. You make Will look desperate. Or maybe it's not Will at all, it's his supporters who are coming out so early in this portion of the race grasping at straws.

No. It's simply I can't think of one good single reason for any candidate to bring their race here.

You are taking this very personally. My guess is that you haven't seen the names on the disclosure you want to see and are therefore unable to prove the point that you keep trying to prove.

Maybe it's the AJC snubbing Paulding.

Thank you for the clarification. I guess Will isn't "like-minded" with republicans.

I posted that to point out to you that according to the State Ethics commission web site, she's not considered late. I went to her disclosures, I get that, no need to attempt to be insulting. I just took it a step further which you didn't seem willing to do.

You do realize that not all Tea Party participants are republican, correct? I don't think (I could be wrong) that the Paulding County republican party requires an "oath of allegiance".

Thank goodness at least somebody is trying to say no.

It worked, he returned most of his $150 to you in the form of a p.com membership.

I did a search under the late-filers tab and this is what I got: LATE & NON-FILERS INDIVIDUAL SEARCH RESULTS Search Returned No Filers with Outstanding Fees/Reports.

I've slung no mud and have no intention of doing so. I'm not sure about the status of the campaign disclosure, and I don't know the "rules".

I found his campaign disclosure quite telling. I appreciate Surepip pointing us in that direction.

No, you are right. I would be horrified if I had stooped to that behavior in the workplace. Considering what I work with on most days, I'm a little surprised it hasn't happened already though. I keep more of a "never let 'em see ya sweat" attitude. He apparently has earned a facebook fan page where folks are contributing money for his legal fees.

I, for one, thank you, Surepip. Paulette has been very open about providing all of her contact numbers. I'll give her a call and ask her about the financial disclosure. In the meantime, I appreciate your bringing this up. I would have probably not thought to look at Avery's and see where his dollars are coming from. Very interesting donor for such a "conservative" democrat.

Uh, yes. That'd be REPUBLICANS since they both ran on the republican ticket.

One other one locally and the rest who (on the surface) really shouldn't have anything to do with local Paulding County politics.