New York

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts) Thu May 5, 2016, 03:26 PM May 2016

Board of Elections will suspend second clerk as Brooklyn primary debacle continues to unravel

JENNIFER FERMINO

A second Brooklyn Board of Elections official is expected to be suspended Thursday over New York’s primary day snafu that led many voters to be turned away at the polls.

Betty Ann Canizio-Aqil, a BOE chief clerk in Brooklyn, is expected to be suspended after a vote at 3:30 pm by the board’s commissioners, sources told the Daily News.

Canizio-Aqil is the Democratic counterpart to Diane Haslett-Rudiano, the Republican BOE chief clerk.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/board-elections-suspend-clerk-primary-debacle-article-1.2626423?cid=bitly

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Board of Elections will suspend second clerk as Brooklyn primary debacle continues to unravel (Original Post) hrmjustin May 2016 OP

so a bi-partisan screw up, eh??? elleng May 2016 #1

All actions are supposed to be approved by the 2 BOE members assigned hrmjustin May 2016 #2

Good! In_The_Wind May 2016 #3

I sure hope they got their money up front Android3.14 May 2016 #4

Personally I think this was about the mayors election next year. hrmjustin May 2016 #5

You've ignored the issues, logic, party favoritism and suppression of the vote this whole season. Android3.14 May 2016 #6

Well the problem with thinking it was about the presidential primary is that there was hrmjustin May 2016 #7

How is this "party favoritism" when a republican and a Democrat were suspended? George II May 2016 #8

elleng

(136,833 posts)

1. so a bi-partisan screw up, eh???

Reply to hrmjustin (Original post)

Thu May 5, 2016, 03:39 PM

May 2016

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)

2. All actions are supposed to be approved by the 2 BOE members assigned

Reply to elleng (Reply #1)

Thu May 5, 2016, 03:42 PM

May 2016

for each county. And they are always from seperate parties.

In_The_Wind

(72,300 posts)

3. Good!

Reply to hrmjustin (Original post)

Thu May 5, 2016, 03:45 PM

May 2016

Android3.14

(5,402 posts)

4. I sure hope they got their money up front

Reply to hrmjustin (Original post)

Thu May 5, 2016, 05:03 PM

May 2016

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)

5. Personally I think this was about the mayors election next year.

Reply to Android3.14 (Reply #4)

Thu May 5, 2016, 05:08 PM

May 2016

Android3.14

(5,402 posts)

6. You've ignored the issues, logic, party favoritism and suppression of the vote this whole season.

Reply to hrmjustin (Reply #5)

Thu May 5, 2016, 05:15 PM

May 2016

Of course you would think suppressing the vote in Democratic contests has nothing to do with the primary.

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)

7. Well the problem with thinking it was about the presidential primary is that there was

Reply to Android3.14 (Reply #6)

Thu May 5, 2016, 05:19 PM

May 2016

no evidence it was targeted at one candidate.

If you look the neighborhoods that were more effected you will see they were not targeted only towards one candidate.

You mistake me. I think it was dond on purpose but I think this was about local politics.

George II

(67,782 posts)

8. How is this "party favoritism" when a republican and a Democrat were suspended?

Reply to Android3.14 (Reply #6)

Thu May 5, 2016, 06:14 PM

May 2016

Reply to this discussion