Predictable consequences for an appallingly bad idea. I immediately burn my "democracy" vouchers upon receipt.

Why was Lorena Gonzalez not also charged for abusing the democracy voucher system?

This poor poor woman.
What will they throw at her next?
Our Thoughts and Prayers are with Sheley.
Always.

Desperation is a stinky cologne.

is Erica ever going to live that wine thing down? I see a dozen wine stories for every byline at least...

@7

Not getting?

Let us help you out...

"— (She) was accused by a white male of doing something (she) did not do. <Let that sink in for a moment> "

We'll wait while it sinks in.....

.

Now.
Let's continue...

A White. Male.

Do you get it now?

@9 are you under the impression that *actual* truth is a function of a sex and race?

I thought Mario Brown and B&B Strategies were her campaign manager?

@1 Concurring with Raindrop for a change, but for different reasons I expect.

Turns out my and my family members' chosen candidates to give our "voucher money" had already maxed out the amount of money they were allowed to get. So, we didn't get to participate in the "democracy" we paid for with our tax money. Just the name "Democracy Voucher" pretty much tells you its going to be some weak-assed bs, so I wasn't surprised to find that we were getting just as much of this democracy as those in power thought was good for us.

If the allegations are true, Secrest is clearly not too bright, but it is important to also note that her supporters didn't get as much democracy from the very beginning because they weren't in a position to pony up and buy access to the higher tier of democracy that comes with a candidate legally empowered to accept Democracy Vouchers. In contrast, the supporters of candidates with more supporters able to add dollars to their signatures levered themselves into the higher tier of democracy. Isn't that a contradiction with the underlying rationale for the stupid Democracy Vouchers in the first place? I admit I don't understand the ins and outs of this weird fast food chain style buzzword game card system, but why not just have the voucher threshold be signatures alone?

I don't see how this even hints at being a substitute for campaign finance limits. Personally, I just ended up finding the whole voucher thing insulting from beginning to end.

As to the massive block of "victim complex whites" who post here and elsewhere, I think if you engage in some rigorous self-examination, you will find that your thoughts and ideas that led to you putting Cadet Bone-Spurs in the Whitehouse should result in your withholding expressions of individual or collective superiority over other people about anything until you have gotten through an extended period of time, perhaps many years, without acting out similar monumentally stupid thoughts. You just can't trust yourselves.

White people weren’t the only race who voted for Trump.

Anyways, what does this have to do with Secrests alleged actions?

@12: The voucher system is not a "substitute for campaign finance limits," the law also includes strict limits that lowered the size of the maximum allowed donation significantly.

Secrest didn't have to cheat because of some flaw in the system. She had to cheat because she simply didn't have enough real supporters to qualify. For example, Nikkita Oliver would have qualified easily from simply the crowd at her kickoff event had the mayor's race been eligible for vouchers.

@14 LOL

Sometimes people use a few extra words so other people can read those extra words and understand what they are saying and not saying - if they care to read them.

@16. I think "cheat" is too weak a word. "Commit fraud" is more precise. I agree wholeheartedly, any flaw in this system would not justify or be expected to lead to someone doing what is alleged here, which shows near "Dumb and Dumber" levels of intelligence and belief in what one can get away with.

But I do not take back my ruminations about buying ones way into a higher tier of democracy, as the many forms these phenomena take are itself what Democracy Vouchers are intended to combat.

> "I was accused by a white male of doing something I did not do. historically, that has never played out well for black folk like me."

why are you mental midgets complaining about anyone pointing out how patently ridiculous this?

Yes, its criminal its fraud, and really ignorant. Then she stiff's the guy who knows of the crime, ugh! Her legal training was weaker than her arrogance.

Yes, its criminal its fraud, and really ignorant. Then she stiff's the guy who knows of the crime, ugh! Her legal training was weaker than her arrogance.

Hopefully they take away her law license for good this time.

To those saying this proves the voucher system is bad... no. It proves it worked: it caught the first person who tried to defraud the system.

The vouchers you don't use cost you nothing. You're not paying for the vouchers that aren't spent. This is all explained on the democracy voucher website.

@22 Yeah, right. I don't pay extra taxes if I'm not able to give my voucher to my chosen candidate. You see that as an argument to rebut my experience of being blocked from participating in the voucher system?

As to "It proves it worked: it caught the first person who tried to defraud the system," I'm not a fricking idiot who determines whether a system or program works by whether it catches people trying to misuse the system. I'm interested in whether the system actually works. In this case, it is very likely that the cost of prosecuting Secrest will cost the government more than she obtained in benefits from the system. I'm not saying she shouldn't be prosecuted, I guess, but there is certainly no way this situation is evidence in favor of Democracy Vouchers, unless one's primary purpose in all public policy is to catch out the unfortunate, the stupid, or the disenfranchised.

Holmes is a White Devil working to oppress the Black Man. Shameful.

“Independent journalist Erica Barnett,” AKA former Stranger writer back when there was a News department in the traditional sense, and who had the good sense to give Dan and Tim the finger. Fuck you all.

@1 Do you literally burn them? That does kind of sound like a satisfying way of getting the stupid out of the house - burn the stupid before you find yourself screaming, "Ahh, no, the stupid! It burns! Make it stop! It burns!"

@23 How are you "blocked" from using the voucher system just because some perfect imaginary candidate you invented in your head isn't qualified to receive them? Secrest will likely face a penalty in which she'll have to pay back costs prosecuting her... but as even you said, the cost of catching criminals isn't a reason to not bother.

Calling me an idiot because I see how the system worked as designed doesn't exactly make your statements suddenly make sense.

I hope they change the law so that the voucher program is paid for by people who whine about it on the internet.