The excerpt above comes from a fundraising letter the Evergreen Freedom Foundation (EFF) recently sent out to Washington residents, decrying our state “as the place you can vote from the grave” or “if you are a resident of another state.” The EFF’s solution? Purge the voter rolls and make everybody re-register:
Each of us who wants to vote must be able to prove that we are a non-felon, American citizen, with a legal residence. And we must still have a pulse when we vote!
(Emphasis theirs.)
Hmmm. Um… before the EFF pontificates to state and local elections officials about how to clean up their lists, perhaps the EFF should try cleaning up their own. The fundraising letter was forwarded to me by a faithful reader, along with an angry cover letter addressed back to EFF President Bob Williams:
I find it incredibly ironic that your organization so concerned with cleaning up the election process in the state of Washington is sending mail to dead people.
I received a letter addressed to a Mr. Harald R. Lellelid, [address excised] on March 3, 2005. This person has been dead for nearly five years. Furthermore he has never lived at this address. He resided in Oregon, but as the executor of this estate I transferred all of his mail to my address in Seattle.
That’s right… the EFF’s targeted profile of outraged Washington voters includes deceased Oregonians.
In case you’re wondering, Harald did not receive a ballot this past November… which I suppose can be attributed to the fact that the EFF was not running the election.
Clearly, this error proves that the EFF’s research is “totally messed up.”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
lmfao!!
Maybe EFF got “harold’s” address from KC Elections Database.
I think it’s a good Idea myself, that would eliminate problems for future elections.
Wow another “bombshell”
Geez, Goldy, wrong addresses/people for a fundraising letter compared to the wrong addresses/people for the decision on who is the next Governor is a textbook apples v. oranges argument.
Jon @4,
Of course I am having fun at the EFF’s expense, but this is in fact relevant in that the EFF has been making all these allegations of irregularities, incompetence or outright fraud in this election, and I think we need to question the credibility of their own so-called evidence.
Time and again the EFF, the BIAW and other GOP surrogates have repeated charges, even after they have been refuted. For example, this fundraising letter continues to screach about military ballots being sent out late and illegally enhanced ballots… allegations that even the GOP attorneys have dropped from their lawsuit.
The EFF simply is not a credible organzation, and the example I show merely illustrates one example of their lack of credibility, in a humorous fashion.
This is smoke and mirrors, a wild goose chase and a snipe hunt all rolled into one. What does this letter have to do with the fact that significant numbers of ineligeble people cast a ballot in the 2004 WA general election? Legal voters are disenfanchised when ineligeble people are allowed to have a ballot counted. Plain and simple.
Goldy @ 5:
Yes, I did see the humor, but as you know, fundraising letters ALWAYS (no matter who writes them) run fast and loose with the facts to make the need urgent, and the “threat” worse than it is. The EFF (whom I certainly disagree with sometimes) is no better/worse than anyone else.
What is most “painful”, is, after making it perfectly clear, the accusers are not credible, the “mob” immediately refers to the allegations made by the not credible source, as facts.
Painfully funny, actually.
Goldy
You are digging like a fool, you are trying to compare apples and raisins, but all and all your raisins look more like deer turds.
Oh please.
Solicitation mailing lists are complied from various sources including any and all addresses for anyone who wrote them a letter whether it was an agreeing or disagreeing letter. God knows, the dumbest senator in US history sends me fundraising letters. Whoop de damn do.
Surely even you know the difference between mail lists and voter rolls.
Just another non-story story to hype the lib pets and pretend relevance.
Suckee @10
Obviously, if this had been a Democratic fund-raising letter, you would have been the first one to yell and scream about it.
You right-wing fanatics can only do right, right?
Yeah, far, far right.
Your bubble is bursting everywhere, from polling on the Schiavo case, to Bush’s Social Security disaster, to the multiplying DeLay scandals, to declining polling figures for Republicans all over the country (including, of course, that supposedly untouchable former movie star in California!).
And in this State, your entire focus is trying to resurrect a total loser. What a joke you characters are.
Election reform, what election reform, the dems are no where to be found on this issue. We have to show id to get into this country, we have to carry id to drive, we have to show ID to cash a check, we have to show id to buy cigarettes, we have to show id to buy booze. But the dems want to let everyone vote without any id whatsoever. They jerked it from the election reforms. CG wants ID shown, Sam Reed wants ID shown, people in this state believe you have to have ID to vote. Only dems (because it is the only way they can win it seems, are against verifying eligibility to vote. When you solve this with real election reforms you can lecture us! Until then no one is listening!
Dear Nelson, have another cup of KOOL-AID, refresh your parched throat, clear your addled ‘mind’ and tell me again which political party is irrelevant with no ideas except “NO, NO, NEVER, NEVER UH UH UH”.
You see Nelson, it takes COURAGE to stick to your ideals, ideas and convictions even when the “polls” are “against” you. But considering most of the lib pets here were weaned at the tit of the I-govern-by-the-polls Clinton presidency, it’s not surprising at all that this would be a foreign concept to you. I know a confident man scares you.
The children whine and care on about all their pals on the playground are saying about them (“Teacher, teacher, he called me a bad name…whaaaa”) while the adults cary on with the business at hand like adults.
http://reuters.myway.com/artic.....SH-DC.html
Apr 10, 4:47 PM (ET)
By Steve Holland
CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) – “Seated at the head of a conference table aboard Air Force One, talking at length with reporters, President Bush showed little sign of worry about a recent slide in public opinion polls.
“You can find them going up and you can find them going down,” Bush said of the surveys. “You can pretty much find out what you want in polls, is my point.”“
Nelson @ 11:
Please go read the Michael Barone column, and I’ll quote a good part for you to consider:
“But Republicans should pause before they panic. Polls on unfamiliar issues are notoriously volatile, and results can shift wildly when questions are worded slightly differently.
When pollster John Zogby asked, “If a disabled person is not terminally ill, not in a coma and not being kept alive on life support, and they have no written directive, should or should they not be denied food and water?” Seventy-nine percent said they should not be denied, and 9 percent said they should.
When Fox News pollster John Gorman asked, “Do you favor or oppose giving individuals the choice to invest a portion of their Social Security contributions in stocks or mutual funds?” Sixty percent said yes, and 28 percent said no. Both Zogby and Gorman, by the way, are Democrats. So the polls hyped by the mainstream media are not necessarily the final word on opinion.”
Oh Jon – let me pull out my crystal ball for you hun – they are going to say… “Barone is nothing but a political hack”
PET LIBS are too expensive to own @ 15:
Maybe, but my point (and Barone’s) is that polls are fickle at best, and I wonder if Nelson would support bans on gay marriage because, heck, the polls are in favor of that too!
Two wrongs don’t make a right.
I found this little piece here. I think it illuminates the mentality of some who troll here.
Whenever he looked in a mirror, he would see his mother’s eyes: china blue and frightened. Frightened of dirt, of her husband, of illness, and of God. Her son, too, was frightened. Frightened of priests and hunters, of cigarette smokers and skiers, of liberals, journalists, germs and dirt, of gypsies, judges, and Americans. He was frightened of being wrong, of being weak, of being effeminate. Frightened of poets and of Poles, of academics and Jehovah’s Witnesses. Frightened of moonlight and horses, of snow and water and the dark. Frightened of microbes and spirochetes, of feces, and of old men, and of the French.
The very blood in his veins was a danger to him. There were birth defects and feeblemindedness in his incestuous family. His uncle-father was a bastard, and Klara’s son worried all his life that unsavory gossip about his ancestry would become public. He was frightened of sexual intercourse and never had children, afraid his tainted blood would be revealed in them. He was terrified of cancer, which took his mother’s life, and horrified that he had suckled at diseased breasts.
How could anyone live with so much fear?
His solution was to simplify. He sought and seized one all-encompassing explanation for the existence of sin and disease, for all his failures and disappointments. There was no weakness in his parents, his blood, his mind. He was faultless; others were filth. He could not change his china blue eyes, but he could change the world they saw. He would identify the secret source of every evil, and root it out, annihilating at a stroke all that threatened him. He would free Europe of pollution and defilement–only health and confidence and purity and order would remain!
Are such grim and comic facts significant, or merely interesting? Here’s another: the doctor who could not cure Klara Hitler’s cancer was Jewish.
Goldy
This mailing list error does not hurt EFF’s credibility a bit. Any researcher that wastes his time doing himself what vendors do very cheaply, such as mailing lists, will not have much time left for real research.
Your closing statement (Clearly, this error proves that the EFF’s research is “totally messed up.”) does hurt your credibility. This error proves nothing of the sort.
av @ 6
What is “a significant number”? I’ve heard one pro-Rossi commenter here say that one felon vote was too many. I’m sorry but I don’t consider that significant. The WSRP came up with over 1100 felon voters in King County and that number has deflated like a popped balloon.
Show us the numbers AV otherwise you’re just blowing it out your rear end.
Lets see the gang banger party has attacked BIAW, Tim Eyman and now EFF.
Are the Democrats going to be successful at selling themselves under this routine search and destroy maneuvering? Is this the farewell legacy of the once great party? Ok the use of “great” was a teaser.
I agree. No ID, no vote!! [The Dems would lose 10% of their vote if mandatory IDs are required.]
You want to know what a significant number of errors (Felons, Dead votes, mishandled provisional ballots, etc.)?
Take the margin of victory write it on a piece of paper, there now you have a significant number. It is a dynamic number based upon the closeness of the race. Is one illegal felon vote significant? If the margin of victory is one vote it sure as the hell is. If the margin of victory is 10,000, one felon vote is insignificant. We have many times the margin of victory in errors in this election, so yes they are significant. Are they significant when looking at how Washington State voted for President? NO! Because the margin of victory in Washington State for Kerry was much greater then the total number of errors. I don’t live in a fantasy world where errors won’t happen but when they do the margin of victory better be much greater then the number of errors or we have a problem. You all should see it this way, it may be your candidate next time that is wrongly kept from office. You must hold the elections departments accountable. You have to have no tolerance for incompetence. They have a very important job to do and they must take it seriously.
PetLib & Jon —
Glad to see you’re both in panic over the rapidly declining poll numbers.
Anytime one tries to rationalize things like that, it means it really is hurting them badly.
Good to see it. You GOPers are headed right down the tubes. The American public has finally caught on to your wrongheaded philosophy and game plan.
…And if this dosent mean a damn thing then why do you all visit and post? Take a fucking joke would ya!
But of corse, reverse the roles…it’d be you all (RWW) spouting the same crap.
John @ 16
What if it was your vote that was cancelled out by a felon vote? How would you feel….
If this was such a model election, why is Simms appointing a “blue ribbon” panel (which by HIS doing the selection,is like a fox watching the hen house) but none the less, is he admitting that under his leadership, his hen house is on fire?
When an election is 98.8% accurate, should there be a need for such an panel?
In regard to the mailing list, at least he didnt get two letters (sic ballots), or phoned and asked how he voted so he could be escorted, and yes people like Harold voted too, so I would guess maybe EFF got the KC election absentee voter database of addresses. But obviously he wasnt a felon, cause those were mailed in bulk to Walla Walla…..(geezzz i bet KC saved tons in postage)
Wall Street Journal reported 900 felon voters (1100 down to 900 felons, ballon popping numbers drop)
“EFF credibility”? That’s a phrase that doesn’t coincide with reality.
Sorry Nelson, but grown ups don’t need external validation – we don’t care what people think of our ideas, our politics, our cars, our clothes or our pet libs.
Nice try.
Zip @19,
Of course it proves nothing of the sort. I was mocking similar statements by the EFF, Slade Gorton, the Rossi Campaign, (u)SP and others. Duh-uh.
Just once again exposing absurdity by example. That should be obvious by now. You guys need to lighten up.
John,
Wait till Christines trial and see my friend.
Ignore the flamers who are too dumb or too lacking in a sense of humor to get it, Goldy — nicely done.
I support Evergreen Freedom. I think our coniferous friends (and Madronas) should be freed from the shackles that hold them in bondage at tree farms. I’m pleased to learn of EFF and its fight to free the trees. I can only imagine how wonderful it will be when the mountains are full of free evergreens once again.
Nelson: “Glad to see you’re both in panic over the rapidly declining poll numbers.”
Huh?
Maybe I need to repeat myself:
Opinion polls are fickle, no matter what your position, and the only poll that matters is at the ballot box.
Thanks for not answering the question on banning gay marriage (or something else that you may not like) just because of some poll, or commenting on that, worded differently, ANY poll will give different results. Also, thanks for not reading the column I linked, becuase your ingnorance shows that you didn’t read it.
Did you think George HW Bush unbeatable in early 1991 because of his poll numbers?
You want to debate positions or policies, fine, but don’t use polls as a justification for anything.
Goldy
Ignore my comment 19 as I “totally messed up”.
Goldy:
I really did get the joke, but it’s kind of a “it’s so obvious that it’s not that funny” joke, and the EFF sometimes makes itself such an obvious target, that’s it’s too easy. Much like Mr. Eyman.
And liberals
Steven @32,
Um… with their opposition to land-use restrictions, I’m afraid the EFF’s goal is to free the mountains of trees.
Jon @33,
I still believe HW was unbeatable in 1991. Fortunately, the election wasn’t until 1992.
Which suggests a parallel with the GOP’s cynical call for a new gubernatorial election in 2005. They waged a very effective PR war in the wake of the November election, which would greatly benefit Rossi in an new election now. Yet they are not so confident of his chances in 2008.
Poor pathetic uninformed gs @ 12
The Democrats in the legislature are supporting a bill to require IDs at polling places.
I’ll bet this ruins your whole day.
JCH @ 22
The Republicans would lose 100% of their vote if brains are required.
Chris @ 23
Wrong, a significant number of illegal votes or errors is one that changes the outcome of an election. If the outcome would have been the same, the illegal votes and errors are irrelevant. Try reading the statute.
Chris @ 26
Hey Chris, your vote was cancelled out by my vote, how do you feel about that??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Pet @ 28
Yes, we know you’d rather be wrong than win elections.
Clearly, this error proves that the EFF’s research is “totally messed up.”
Yes and we need the feds to look into this pronto.
Don – I was going to say wtf?, I did not post @ 26. Then I looked and saw another Chris had posted.
We will have to wait and see how the trial goes. I think the errors cloud this race beyond compare. And I don’t make decisions on right and wrong strictly by the law. I agree with lots of laws and disagree with many others. So reading the statutue is great and have done so, but it really does not matter in forming my opinion of what is right in this case. I look at it first without the knowledge of the law and make a decision based upon what is right and makes sense to me. The statute matters as to what resolution is available and what purden of proof is placed upon Rossi but regardless of the wording of any law I know the difference between right and wrong. I am a realist Don and we live in a world of laws, for good reason, so even if I don’t agree with the outcome I will accept it as being legal and based upon the rules of society. I’ll use aborton as an example, I don’t think it’s right but it’s legal under the law.
Chris N, Chris @ whereever
One felon vote is too many for you? What highly principled fellows you are!
So let’s say on a first count, Rossi is ahead by one vote. He won right? Just like he was ahead by 249 back in November. He won didn’t he? Isn’t that what you guys were saying? Concede Christine! I know that’s what the Snark was saying…
You guys make me laugh.. Keep spinning your phony, disingenuous fantasies of election perfection.
av @ 30
Christines trial? Who’s that?
You mean the election contest lawsuit? You still haven’t shown us the numbers AV.
Until then happy blowing.
ArePETLIBSexpensivetoown @ 13 So what’s your point? The texas taco has never worried about anything his entire life. He has always had daddy and SA to bail him out. He has not worried about his addiction of bankrupting the USA, he has not worried to verify his own ilk’s intelligence reports, he has not worried how many inocents need to die for his ‘stupid’ decisions So why, when he is a lame duck, should the imbecil start to worry now?
duby??@ 40
You voted for Dino Rossi????? WOW, I would have never guessed.
John @ 44
You like being called “Ludicrious”? That woman used that word, and she lost any potential vote of mine in the future. I am not a perfectionist by any means, but I like Chris (the other one), use MY brain to form MY Opinions.
You didnt comment on my last post either “Wall Street Journal reported 900 felon voters (1100 down to 900 felons, ballon popping numbers drop)”. I think 900 is a bit more than one (1). Especially when the margin of Victory was 129.
Goldy @ 37: “They waged a very effective PR war in the wake of the November election, which would greatly benefit Rossi in an new election now. Yet they are not so confident of his chances in 2008.”
I agree! In fact, it’s peaked right now, so if there was a new election, I don’t think he’d win. The wild card there is the new state budget and whether it would change anybody’s mind.
ChrisN @ 47
900 more than 1? You figured that out by yourself?
Ok smart guy prove to me like Rossi’s attorney’s will have to do before Judge Bridges that the felon votes swayed the election towards Gregoire. Prove to me he actually won the election.
If Gregoire was misguided enough to concede the election after the second count, just like all you guys were screaming at her to do, tell me you would have been in favor of a revote.
You can’t can you?
Gregoire used the word “ludicrous”? Gee what a sensitive guy you are. I hope you never meet Erin Shannon at the BIAW.
John @49,
Yeah… Erin “Fuck You” Shannon’s vocabulary makes HA look like the official blog for Davy and Goliath.
(Obscure reference of the day.)
John @49
No John, 900 is more than 129, that is what I figured out….
You obviously didnt read my post to Duby, I voted for CG.
As far as proof goes, I am waiting for the Judge to determine/decide in his ruling, that is what we have Judges for.
And yes I am a sensitive Woman when it comes to leaders in powerful places. She showed her true colors to me when she used that word. She is suppose to be poised, and as a Woman, show strength, not childish name calling. It is called taking the higher road. If she had said “wait a minute” don’t swear me in, lets take a deeper look into this, she would have taken the higher road, and won by a landslide…… IMO
The 900 are not verified. King’s number is no more than 200 verified at this point.
The question on the Schiavo-similar case gets a different response because it’s not material to the Schiavo case. Schiavo WAS on life-support.
Chris, I saw you lay out that whole “margin of victory” gambit in another thread. Wow, that’s…unusual. The margin of victory is an independent variable. The elections team cannot modify the margin of victory, so measuring error ratio based on it is entirely foolish. But beyond that, it’s illogical. Under your theory, it would be OK (or at least far less bothersome from a performance standpoint) if one candidate secretly changed 100,000 ballots from his opponent to himself…as long as the margin of victory was sufficiently more than that. But two misfed provisionals when the margin is one–now THAT’S an election crisis.
Goldy–
You remind me of the little banty rooster who humps every little thing that comes near him.
HUMP-HUMP-HUMP!!
Your biggest problem Goldy is you HUMP away completely oblivious to the fact that you are IMPOTENT!!!
Good God Cynical, it’s UNIMPOTENT!
So I want to know why the democrats are fighting having to show ID when you vote. I cannot believe that for such a imprtant issue such as voting, that we should not feel the need to check ID. We do it for almost every other item in our lives when it comes to our daily grind. You would not go out without your ID, then why are we seeing so many democrats killing the ID issue. I believe I know the reason, but I will offer it out to you to comment on!
Char–
That sounds like what Don Ron Sims King would say.
“I is ostimistic that I is unimpotent”!
Once Dean “Weird Al Yankovic lookalike” is deposed, Goldy will look more like Woody WoodPecker after Woody spent a week trying to peck down the Columbia Tower Building.
All worn out…limber pecker!
ChrisN @ 51
Not only do you apparently demand perfection in elections, you place women in politics on a perilously high pedestal as well.
George Bush can butcher the English language – he’s a man. Christine Gregoire uses “ludicrous”, I don’t know in what context because I don’t know the quote – that throws you into a tailspin.
It appears women in politics can’t be human.
All I care about is her performance in office. If she screws it up and an acceptable R challenges her (Sam Reed comes to mind) I’ll consider giving that person a shot.
So far she’s doing ok. She’s trying out GMAP and ZBB and she’s put forth a modest budget for this biennium. If the D’s prevail in 2006 we may even see a sane tax reform.
John
Don’t hold your breath on tax reform. The Democrats aren’t even making any baby steps towards tax reform now when they have complete control. The problem is the special interest groups are getting their funding without reform, so there is no incentive for any of the Demos to stick their necks out.
The Democrats aren’t even making any baby steps towards tax reform now when they have complete control.
That’s because, to the dismay of the far left, the majority of democrats don’t want a state income tax either.
Cant reform taxes, until the republican overspending is paid off.
Erik, it is amazing and ironic that this budget is just as cobbled together or worse than the last one. It’s also ironic that the Sims plan was a good attempt and would have supported by many small business Republicans, and there has been not one mention of it in the press or even by Mr. Gates Sr. during the whole budget debate.
Tax reform is going to take some actual leaders in Olympia. And we may be waiting a long time for them to show up. Because Olympia is run by the teachers union and the public employee unions, and they have no interests beyond their own.
Zip @ 59
Nope. The “complete control” as you call it is very tenuous. Very slim majorities in both houses and the governorship under the cloud of this lawsuit.
There would be a better chance for tax reform if the D’s advance their majorities in 2006 but you do have a point though considering necks and all.
Gregoire probably wouldn’t take the lead on this until after a re-election and probably only under a bi-partisan umbrella. I suppose like Booth Gardner tried in the late eighties.
Uh dd, the tax reform comments are about WA here not WA DC. There hasn’t been a Republican in a position to overspend in Olympia for a long time. Spending reform in Olympia is a topic for another day.
sorry zip,
with gwdummy at the wheel cutting taxes for the rich, the federal spigot is drying up, and states are raising taxes to meet the loss.
Maybe this will make you feel better about gwdummy cutting taxes for the rich:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04.....yd6vEJyGUw
John, I doubt we’ll ever see Gregoire take the lead on this considering how dismissive she was of the Sims plan during the primary. She has not proven to be the type who will ever admit she was wrong.
It will take somebody new who understands that there is a lot of bi-partisan potential support for the right reform proposal.
zip @ 62
You make it sound as though teachers and public employees don’t have valid interests. Although top-scale teachers in the richest districts do fairly well (salaries in the high 60s), the average teacher in this state is not well off, and beginning teachers are abysmally paid. Meanwhile, state employees, who are paid far below the private sector, have not gotten a cost-of-living raise in four years; and with fuel and food prices rising rapidly on top of continously rising health insurance costs, it’s unfair to ask them to wait another two years. They would then have gone six years without a COLA which in reality is a large pay cut.
Don
Even if I assume that all of their interests are valid, I’m still looking at a governor and legislature that basically kow tows to them. If they don’t want to see the boat rocked by a debate over tax reform it will not happen. Since they are getting what they want this budget they would never stand for any Democrat proposing tax reform, they have too much at risk. And the Democrats will never cross them.
zip @ 66
And who, exactly, do you have in mind for taking the lead on tax reform; and how do you define tax reform? It is clear from the Gate Commission study that small business and low income households are overtaxed, and affluent households are getting off lightly. This points to shifting some of the tax burden away from small business and less affluent households to the individuals and families with the most money. An income tax — even a flat rate income tax — couple with repeal of the B & O tax and reducing the sales tax is one means to this end. It is important to remember the income tax is only a means, and not the end in itself. There may be other ways to accomplish the same thing, if politicians and the public won’t spring for an income tax. My discussion assumes tax reform will be revenue-neutral; but when I hear a Republican talk about “tax reform,” the first thing I want to know is whether he is coupling tax restructuring with revenue cuts. I do not support cutting state revenue further, as state spending has already been deeply cut, and we can’t make further cuts without sacrificing public education and other essential services. I will support revenue-neutral a tax restructuring that provides the state with more dependable and predictable revenue even without any reallocation of the tax burden, at least as an interim goal, but I will NOT support “tax reform” that is in reality slashing into state services or public education, nor will I support “tax reform” that consists of providing further tax relief to the most affluent segments of society at the expense of the least affluent. So if that’s what you mean by “tax reform,” forget it!
To answer my own question, I certainly do not see a Governor Rossi taking the lead on making our tax system fairer, or arguing for more revenue to bolster education and preserve state services. I believe Rossi would take us in the wrong direction on both counts — if he could get his way, public services would suffer and our tax system would become even more regressive.
Of course they don’t, after all they’re nothing more that glorified daycare providers. It’s WAY more important to have REAL representation. We wouldn’t what those freaky human interest groups mucking a perfectly good republican reform plan, now would we?
But insted, lets let big business runthe show. We all know their interests are for the greater good. They have no selfish interest whatsoever.
But to be fair, Sims did have a great plan…too bad it didnt stick, for whatever reason.
zip @ 68
Teachers and state employees are not getting what they want in this budget. They are getting something, but less than they asked for. I don’t think the governor or legislature, by funding modest teacher and public employee raises — the first they’ve had in four years and far less than the inflation over the six years these raises cover — is “kow towing” in any sense, any more than replacing the Alaska Way Viaduct is “kow towing” the contractor lobby. To a great extent, allocating this money is simply recognizing reality: At some point, if the politicians don’t pay teachers or public employees, these workers will leave for better jobs elsewhere and replacing them will cost more than the raises. So how do you justify calling that “kow towing?” Seems like a mindless partisan slam to me.
Don, believe it or not, I have no idea who is capable of leading the state to tax reform I would support.
The Sims plan sounded like Nirvana to me so that’s my idea of tax reform. If I recall correctly, this is one of the only topics you and I have (sort of) agreed on for ages so lets just leave it at that.
Tax reform is going to take some actual leaders in Olympia. And we may be waiting a long time for them to show up.
You’re a right winger and you want a state income tax?
I doubt it.
It sounds like you would just like to see the democrats attempt follow Sims with a state income tax so that the Ds lose at the polls. The opposition to the income tax is overwhelming. I don’t think it has a chance in the next 20 years regardless of who is in office.
John, I doubt we’ll ever see Gregoire take the lead on this considering how dismissive she was of the Sims plan during the primary.
Exactly. She won the primary by a landslide because she opposed a state income tax.
Goldy, in your Robert Mak segment the other day, you said that the Democrats have managed the PR post election very poorly. That just might have been the world’s biggest understatement.
One can’t make this stuff up. Sims appoints a “Blue Ribbon” panel that’s supposed to make everyone feel all warm and fuzzy.
Even if there were 100 of you frantically posting every day, you wouldn’t get 1 step forward before Sims, Logan, et. al. set you back another 100.
This is just priceless. Good luck.
zip @ 74
Okay, fair enough, and my apologies. I haven’t studied the Sims plan in detail, but my understanding is it’s in the ballpark of what the Gates Commission suggested. I think Gregoire is a dynamic and visionary enough politician to support tax reform that includes a state income tax, if you give her enough time to do it, but it’s not in the cards for a first term. A state income tax has long been the Third Rail of Washington politics, and seeing Sims get crushed in the primary as his reward for espousing it certainly didn’t give her either the confidence or enthusiasm to broach the subject with voters at an early date. I suspect the game plan, if there is one, is to get re-elected and then — if she still has a Democratic legislature behind her, and after vetting her plan with the legislators whose support she’ll need — approaching the public with the idea. And she would do this in a very cautious way, or not at all — what you’ll see is a flat-rate, revenue neutral tax coupled with a reduction in the sales tax and possibly property taxes, if she goes the income tax route at all. But I’m speculating. Gregoire doesn’t tell me what she’s thinking.
Don@77 says:
“I haven’t studied the Sims plan in detail, but my understanding is….”
Typical of you Left WingNuts Don.
Ready, Fire, Aim!!!!!!!
The devil is always in the detail.
Are you sure you were an attorney??
Oh, that’s right…you were a GUV’MINT attorney!
Cynical@54. In your eyes, everything is sexual. Thus, everything you post shows your sexually deprived or sexually depraved or both and comes across as sexually sick.
john@18. VERY GOOD POST!
Zip, Erik, Dubyasux:
I thought Sims lost in the primaries because of the “electability” factor rather than his tax plan. Sims vs. Slick Dino was a losing proposition.
The voters have asked the government for smaller class sizes and reasonable pay for teachers, access to reasonable health care and education among other things through the initiatives. The government isn’t delivering because it’s always in fiscal crisis.
The voters have also supported some of the Eyman initiatives because they’ve been the quickest way so far to get the tax system they want. They don’t want ridiculous car tabs, they don’t want ballooning property taxes, they don’t want any more sales tax. So what does that leave?
I think the voters can connect the dots. This state needs a new tax system so the government can finance what the people have asked for. Reduced property, b&o and sales taxes in exchange for a modest income tax where in the final analysis higher incomes pay a moderately higher percentage of their income than their poorer neighbors. Just like Bill Gates Sr has been pushing. That’s it plain and simple.
do you have the permission of harold to post his personal correspondance on the web?
Hey, those dead people voted in the election, they should have the right to be outraged about the outcome. Perhaps EFF got their list from the list of those who voted in the election.
To all you koolaid drinkers – get a clue:
http://www.nypress.com/18/14/n.....ssmith.cfm
TJ@53 –
You obviously lack the ability to understand the simplest of concepts. The point being using a percentage to determine the accuracy of an election is irrelevant if it not a percentage of the margin of victory. Of course errors matter but the degree they matter is in relation to the margin of victory.
As far as your fraud example of 100,000 –
You said; “Under your theory, it would be OK (or at least far less bothersome from a performance standpoint) if one candidate secretly changed 100,000 ballots from his opponent to himself…as long as the margin of victory was sufficiently more than that.”
Not at all what I said or the theory I put out. I will repost it after this post. Of course it would not be ok with me and thanks for brining fraud into this for me. I was giving the benefit of the doubt in my examples. Mine were just “Honest Mistakes” made by election officials, not fraud by a candidate as you suggest. My point being in one of my examples was that if “Honest Mistakes” did not near the margin of victory, while they should be fixed, they do not have the potential of changing the election result. Isn’t that the point, could it change the election result? In your example the other candidate “Secretly Changed 100,000 ballots from his opponent to himself”. Regardless of whether or not that was enough to change the result he should loose and go to jail because he committed election fraud, which if you did not know is a crime. But if the fraud was committed by someone other then the benefiting candidate and this candidate had no involvement in it or knowledge of it, then it should not change the result of the election unless the 100,000 votes was more then the MARGIN of VICTORY. If I committed fraud and voted 5 times for Dino Rossi and he won the election by 1500 votes why would you think he should not be certified the winner? He should be governor and I should be in jail. My fraud could not have an impact on the result so why throw it out? If person X committed fraud and voted 5 times for a candidate and Rossi won the election by 3 votes would you think he should be certified the winner? Again, like your example, if Rossi committed the fraud and voted 5 times for himself and won by any number then he should loose and go to jail.
My examples discussed by TorridJoe@53.
Example #1
1,000,000 total votes
30,000 vote errors as a % of ballots cast (3%) UNACCEPTABLE to you
375,000 votes for Candidate “A’
625,000 votes for Candidate “B”
250,000 vote margin of victory for “B’”
But the error rate is unacceptable? Do you throw out the election? You can’t allow an election to go with a 3 % error rate. Make the error rate in this example 4%, 5% , 6%.
The errors are only 12% of the margin of victory but you would have a problem with this result.
You see now why error rate as a % of ballots cast is meaningless? It only matters as a percentage of margins of victory. I would accept this result in the above example. Would I be happy with 30,000 vote error? NO but it would not be “Significant” to the election result. Remember Margin of victory was 250,000 votes. I would tell them to clean there shit up and they are lucky the race was not close or there could be some pissed off voters, understandably so.
Example #2
1,000,000 total votes
500 vote errors as a % of ballots cast(.05%) ACCEPTABLE to you
499,935 votes for Candidate “A’
500,065 votes for Candidate “B”
130 vote margin of victory for “B’
In this example you are fine with the result? But not in the first example. Again, it is all based upon Margins of Victory, not ballots cast. Even though we have 385% more errors then margin of victory you are fine with leaving well enough alone?
Comment by Chris— 4/11/05 @ 4:28 pm
Chris @ 85,86
Chris you’re projecting again. It’s TJ that understands the issues perfectly. He’s taken the time to interview Reed’s deputy and study the issues. All you’ve done is hurl insults and repeated the spew of the (u)SP crowd.
Example #2 is fine with me. Sure sucks for the loser but rules are rules. Now if I believed those 500 votes errors were the result of fraud or incompetence that can be proven to favor my opponent – I’d have a case to take to the courts. The law gives me that option.
If I lose in the courts, I’ve got no-one but myself to blame. I didn’t do enough to get voters to the polls.
This is the point you refuse to face Chris. The burden is on the D’s and R’s to get the support of the people for their respective agendas. Otherwise you get the law deciding the election instead of the voters.
Again, what did you do Chris to get Rossi elected? What did you do to get Rossi a comfortable 2000 vote lead that couldn’t be contested like Cantwell had over Gorton?