BVBL commenters attack Lucas volunteers

Not that they understand what they are doing.

In a thread at BVBL attacking Lucy Beauchamp, Batson D. Belfrey said:

McQuigg isn’t much better. Her lack of attention to detail contributed to the mess that is the 51st. Beauchamp and McQuigg….hmmm…who to chose?

Actually, McQuigg was on the Credentials committee, which had nothing to do with how the election was run, that was the Convention Chair Pat O'Leary (recommended by Julie Lucas), and the Elections committee, chaired by Ruth Griggs, again chosen by Julie Lucas.

If the convention ran poorly, Lucas people were in charge of it, having chased Tom Kopko out of the process.

Commenter Freedom responded:

Absolutely, Batson…but then again, thinking back on the 51st campaign and “I’m neutral but voting for Faisal Gill,” the decision becomes much, much easier.

Jonathan Mark showed his ignorance:

Does Beauchamp have a good shot at winning as more people become aware of the HOD-51 credentials fiasco? McQuigg could not control access to ballots and ballot boxes, resulting in overvotes in two precincts.

Again, McQuigg was CREDENTIALS, not ELECTIONS. But facts seem to mean little to BVBL's readers, and since I'm banned there's nobody to correct them.

She is silent on Kopko’s perversion of the rules and his current obfuscatory delaying tactics in sending Julie’s appeal to the 11th District.

There is no delay, nor does McQuigg have any say in the appeal. You might as well criticize every person in Prince William for "not complaining".

Anyway, here's my point. When bloggers started screaming that Tom Kopko couldn't be trusted, Julie went to people she could trust and asked them to protect her interests. Those people graciously accepted. One of those people was Michelle McQuigg.

And now that it is convenient, Lucas supporters want to punish people who volunteered their time and effort to try to make the convention work. Thus guaranteeing that NEXT time, it will be harder to find people to do this kind of work.