Oh boy can't wait for the Republicon candidate for Oregon Sec. of State, shitbag Linthicum, to spin this into some huge hoopla about "salem libereals suppressing conservatives!!! outrage!!!"
How hard would it have been to print:
This candidate declined to provide a summary for the Oregon Voter Pamphlet.
Because that's what a candidate not having a statement has always meant, and it's never been a problem before.
edit: Also if you look at the post by jordanlund the page that lists the candidates shows an asterisk by the people that didn't supply a statement.
The problem is you forgot to account for bad faith actors and their army of idiots.
Nope, they would just claim that the actual statement wasn't included.
It's true he's not in the pamphlet by his own design.
It's not true that there's a statement why.
Source: Am an Oregon voter.
Photos from my own:
This is the page where Trump appears:
The list and statement are on page 26, where they list all the candidates.
i.e. "The pages nobody reads". ;)
Ah the age old riddle "if a voters pamphlet has a statement on a page no one reads, is it really there?"
Associated Press - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Associated Press:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
Search topics on Ground.News
https://apnews.com/article/trump-oregon-ballot-election-false-claim-e8837c81ed64ead6f3686ac391e7145b
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News