Fight, Dino, fight!

The other day I sent an email to Dino Rossi advising him to concede, and got a very polite email back from his campaign manager. Well today, I’d like to publicly retract my advice. Dino… stick with this as far as you can go… take it to the county auditors. Take it to the Legislature. Take it to the courts.

My change of heart comes after reading Matt Rosenberg’s piece on (un)Sound Politics, which surprisingly echoed my sentiments. At first I was impressed by Matt’s relatively tempered tone, and reasonable arguments. But then I read the comments from (u)SP’s loyal readers, and realized damn… they’re living in cloud cuckoo land. So why not let the Republicans self-destruct by wallowing in their anger and paranoia?

The fact is, unless Rossi’s got real, legal-type evidence of electoral fraud and corruption — enough to change the outcome of this election — he doesn’t stand a chance of winning an election contest in court. And as Danny Westneat suggests in his column today in The Seattle Times:

Paradoxically, a contest could be our best hope to move on. It would force critics to put up or shut up on this notion that the recount was rigged. They’d have to prove vote-counting manipulation in a courtroom, instead of just shouting it over the airwaves.

Public discourse has been so poisoned by unsupported insinuations of widespread malfeasance, that an election contest may be the only way to fully clear the air. So I say, bring it on. If King County is so corrupt, prove it in a court of law.

Plus, the longer Rossi draws out this election, the less he’s going to appear a victim, and the more he’s going to look like a whiny, arrogant, hypocrite. If Rossi wants to brand himself the biggest loser in state history, that’s fine by me.

So my advice to you is fight, Dino, fight! I’m sure Maria Cantwell is looking forward to a punch-drunk opponent in 2006.


  1. 1

    Josef spews:

    2 Things:

    1) Thanks for your support of the war effort. I appreciate it.

    2) As I just posted here, and I want you to hold me to this: I will support the re-election of Maria Cantwell to the United State Senate. I may have personal feelings towards some of Rossi’s staff, but other than that – my advocacy of him is simply because he is the better choice for Governor.

  2. 3

    Jim King spews:

    Goldy- be careful of what you wish for…

    A contest doesn’t have to prove widespread or coordinated corruption or fraud, it only has to prove 131 errors- even unintentional and understandable. Only 131 illegal votes cast. Such a small hurdle, if the scattered facts exist among the almost 3 million votes cast.

    And unlike a scouring for votes, it doesn’t become a race to find more votes than the other side does.

    Any registered voter can launch the challenge. Let the onus be upon the BIAW, or such. The left keeps baiting, the right may decide they have nothing to lose…

    Again, be careful of what you wish for… Or incite…

  3. 4

    Brent spews:

    If the Republicans have proof of 131 errors, why didn’t they present even one of them to the Supreme Court? Their legal presentation looked like it was prepared by a fourth grader, even though the White House has sent its lawyers to back Rossi. But then, this level of incompetence is what we’ve come to expect from the Bush administration. The Supreme Court even pointed out in their ruling that the Republicans claimed fraud but had presented no evidence to support it. We want Rossi to do whatever it takes to win because he has no chance of winning. At this point he has two choices, live to fight another day or put a permanent end to his political career. Goldy, I and I’m sure many others sincerely hope he chooses the latter option.

  4. 5

    Jim King spews:

    Oh, and by the way- contrary to information circulating in the Matrices, Reed’s action next week (the “amending of the abstract”)does not start the ten-day contest window. The certificate of election is provided by the Legislature- the election is cerified on January 10th. The window for launching a formal election contest, under state law, will be from January 11th to January 20th…

    That’s not to say that other legal actions might not be commenced before that date…

  5. 6

    WesternFlyer spews:

    Right, wrong, right, wrong:

    First, Goldy has it exactly right. Democrats should lob email after email to Rossi encouraging a protracted fight. Or, suggesting he is a pansy if he caves. Read Danny Westneat’s column.

    Second, wrong, Goldy said that Westneat’s column was in the P-I.
    (He is a Seattle Times guy.)

    Third, Josef is right to support the re-election of Maria Cantwell.

    Fourth, wrong, it is not true that “A contest doesn’t have to prove widespread or coordinated corruption or fraud, it only has to prove 131 errors- even unintentional and understandable.” That is a serious misunderstanding of a contest. A contest has to show that there is fraud and illegatlity. 131 honest mistakes aren’t going to cut it. Even if you have mistakes by the canvassing boards, the first Washington Supreme Court decision this month says that you cannot force them to consider them prior to the second recertification.

    Finality. RCW 29A.62.070 says there is nothing for the canvassing board to do after the second recertification. They can recertify their votes up to two more time after the certification at the initial count, canvass, and certification (that ended 11/17). They recertified once after the machine recount on 11/30. The recertified again after the hand count that ended 12/23. There cannot be another recertification.

  6. 7

    WesternFlyer spews:

    They don’t sound like they are conceding (from the Seattle Times):

    “”It’s a total sham,” Rossi spokeswoman Mary Lane said. “If Chris Gregoire thinks democracy was well served by this, she’s out of her mind. It hasn’t been fair. It hasn’t been consistent. It hasn’t been democratic.””

  7. 8

    Bob from Boeing spews:

    Some Historical Review-Remember Judge Lum – what did the R’s say in that first legal maneuver? Then they lost round 2 in Federal Court to stop ballots, and in the end they lost again bigtime, 3rd time, to stop more ballot counting-and they are now are screwed. Ho,ho,ho… JUST HORRIBLE THINKING….First they need some brains. Hardest task of all. They LOST, by their own incompetence in nothing more than the closest election in US history. Oh, well…..why should I care about stopping them from self destruction when I think there are better options anyway…

    Remember all the braying and mocking when the Dems went on the hustle to get more ballots into the stream after the Judge Lum decision. R’s sat on their asses mostly with a much smaller, no smarts, effort and just kept pot shoting stupid propaganda. Taunting the very real and honest grunt political work of getting your base’s ballots into the tally.

    Some R’s even wanted the Democrats to get their workers to collect their R’ idiot voter correction paperwork. Wonder Land fantasy stuff, Vanceisms.

    PosturingBellowingNotThinkingSnideBlabbermouthVance has shown himself to be the R’s biggest problem.

    What should they do NEXT, concede. And for every wailing hard core right winger playing crybaby… I know six Dems ready to start the field work for the next set of elections…..Democrats have learned hustle, hustle, get your based educated, properly registered and updated. AND recreate sample ballots, how to FILLOUT correctly reviews.

    And, OH, Skamania County canvass board will be in play next week, says Vance today…. I have always understand the hard times saga of that area. But really, Mr. Vance, this is like the troops from the Cameroons in the Bush war machine — honey, Skamania County, capitol city Pe El, has less punch than Bothell, how terribly pathetic. The Twilight zones Vance refers to are in the collective headspace of the far right wingers……..brain surgery? Is that the real solution?

    Again, Dino Rossi, Gov. not elected, concede. Period. In the universe of elections, you just lost.

  8. 9

    Goldy spews:

    First… oops on confusing the Times and the P-I… I fixed it. I guess that’s what I get for posting at 1:30am. (Though even wide awake I sometimes confuse the two papers.)

    Second… y’all do realize, I was being somewhat sarcastic? I’d much pefer this all be over (with Gregoire as the winner) even if it means cutting my traffic in half.

  9. 10

    bj spews:

    As jcricket said, late in another thread far down below, the repubs are saying “I voted against the re-canvass before I voted for it”.

    The dems should be using this…

  10. 11

    Chuck spews:

    Hey BJ, this is all together different, we were against the counting the 700 votes. It was ruled that they could be counted, (hence changing our opinion of the rules of the game). So if those votes can count ALL votes should count…you guys are the ones that appear to have changed your stand, even after the court backed you…

  11. 12

    jcricket spews:

    We haven’t changed our stand. We lost in court (remember that) and followed the ruling of the Supremes (otherwise known as the law). The Supremes argued in our favor the KC 735, and against our argument that a full re-canvass should be conducted. We didn’t change our argument, we’re just following the law.

    Besides, we won even without the KC 735.

  12. 13

    jcricket spews:

    And Chuck, the courts were clear that the SOS was right all along, they clarified in their second ruling that this was categorically not changing the rules. So unless the Republicans are able to muster up some legal argument (which they already tried) to change the mind of the Supremes, the rules stand (as they always have).

  13. 14

    Josef spews:

    There is no doubt in my mind that we can contest the election legally. Don’t you dare count us out or down. Count Rossi IN. As in, we’ve learned to say NO to kleptocracy. Democrats, Republicans and Independents are all saying: Draw the line, Marummy. Dino, don’t concede. Vaninator, thanks for being a stand-up guy.

  14. 15

    Josef spews:

    And look, your best best right now is to not be arrogant but be ready for another smackdown fight. Turnabout is fair play.

  15. 16

    Josef spews:

    Comment by WesternFlyer— 12/24/04 @ 6:07 am

    Thoughts from my State Secretary of Defense… thanks!

  16. 17

    David spews:

    Josef saith: “we’ve learned to say NO to kleptocracy.

    Kleptocracy, as in grasping at straws in a bid to become Governor? How is Rossi not a shining example of this made-up term? …Silliness.

  17. 18

    Bob from Boeing spews:

    Josef – Keep the faith – SKAMANIA county will not save your butts…….

    Concede, it is over.

  18. 19

    Bob from Boeing spews:

    Chuck – yu are sounding as willy as Jesef ——YOUR BIGGEST MISTAKE all along was opposing counting ballots…..that was your only chance…..remember, it is an election.

    You oppoed counting ballots in three lawsuits, actually four.

    Concede, take this horrible burden off our necks. Can’t stand Vance in my living room one more time. And that blond bimbo nobody from the R’s is sounding just like him….insulting everybody……

  19. 20

    jcricket spews:

    Despite all the Republican accusations of fraud, remember they have offered no proof, given countless opportunities to do so. The Repubs had their chance in front of the Supremes where they could have presented up evidence of fraud and not only gotten the KC 735 thrown out, but probably called the whole election into question. But when they had to “put up or shut up” – they failed.

    I have no doubt the Repubs will continue to attempt to spread rumors and fear-monger, but that’s all they have – innuendo and speculation without evidence.

    Goldy’s right. I wish this were over, but the Republicans are only going to hurt themselves now.

  20. 21

    Bob from Boeing spews:

    Here is an indicator of the R’s bluster about what they “have”- Thruston looked the ten ballots they are waving around. Three had been counted ALREADY. Stupid number one. Others had been thrown out because of signature problems, like thouands more across the state, stupid two.

    One ballot might be eligible for review, not ten—-ballet-hooeyhooey to the max. See article in the Olympian, link next to this blog.

  21. 22

    Josef spews:

    Comment by Bob from Boeing— 12/24/04 @ 10:05 am

    Marummy’s not blonde – you mean the deputy spokesperson for Gregoire?!?


  22. 24

    jcricket spews:

    Josef – I’m really not sure you want to associate Mary Lane with Rumsfeld – now known as the “Grinch” for not actually signing the “sorry your son/daughter was killed in Iraq” letters and arguing with soldiers they don’t need armored vehicles because they’re going to get “blown up anyway”

  23. 25

    WesternFlyer spews:

    YOUR BIGGEST MISTAKE all along was opposing counting ballots…..that was your only chance…..remember, it is an election

    Interesting comment. Post-election analyses by the SCLM of Florida 2000 suggest Al Gore would have done better had George Bush’s legal position (recount all votes statewide) prevailed. Instead, Gore hunkereed down seeking a more selective recount. Gore would have done better had he not opposed what Bush’s legal team was pushing for.

    Ditto here. The Rs may have come out on top had they just joined hands with the Ds in seeking the writ of mandamus that the Washington Supreme Court denied 8-0. Now, they wish to force that count of all the votes, but it cannot be done. In light of the first Washington Supreme court decision this month, you cannot revisit earlier canvassing decisions. Under the second decision, the County Canvassing Board had limited discreition to fix mistake to the extent provided in the .210 safety valve. But RCW 29A.60.070 forced going back to re-recertify the count. I think Sam Reed is very right on this. After the vote has been recertified for its count for the second time (in light of the hand recount), then that is as far as it goes:

    RCW 29A.64.070

    After the original count, canvass, and certification of results, the votes cast in any single precinct may not be recounted and the results recertified more than twice.

    [2003 c 111 § 1607. Prior: 2001 c 225 § 9; 1991 c 90 § 3. Formerly RCW 29.64.051.]

  24. 26

    Bob from Boeing spews:

    W F- Thanks – I was relying on the Gore mistake. I had posted earlier tht Al made some mistakes that Dems learned from. In the final hand count, Washington, there was never a question of cherry picking, just raising enough money. And the R’s doubted that the Dems could…..another mistake….waiting to see rather than working the field.

    There were more disputed ballots in King, but I suggest that many of them were flawed- remember King had 700 plus and actually only approved 500 plus for counting.

    Had Rossi reached a stipulation in the first Lum case, then hustled to get 500 ballots from Rossi folk repaired, then went hell bent to scour the state for more ballots….well it has been a close vote in every phase…..who knows, because we nave no set value for rejected ballots.

    I think the R’s became obessed with media spotlight and perky, silly verbage and lost sight of the goal…….and maybe they could have had a squeeze tight win…..ten votes….

  25. 27

    chuck spews:

    By posting the second certification of Thurston county, Sam in effect accpted that senario as official, it is now a moot poin whether he goes back and accepts the first count only to prove a point. A track record has already been established and accepted as fact by him

  26. 28

    Bob from Boeing spews:

    Chuck on the Sec of State site it says that these are not official results. It is only one vote, not too big of a deal one way or the other.

    If allowed, I can live with it . I do believe in counting every vote.

    I have chaired several voter registrtion drives, all volunteer, that put 10,000 new people on the rolls. Possible in Seattle, every year thousands of new people, addresss changes, etc. I like doing that- then I want them to be perfect voters, perfectly counted. Happy Seasons.

  27. 29

    David spews:

    In their top-of-the-hour news clips, KUOW is airing Mary Lane hyping claims that “the rules were changed for the Democrats” and “Democrats want to disenfranchise military voters” (apologies for inexact quotations). The Rossi campaign is clearly playing for the public’s perception — and the media isn’t bothering to quote anyone refuting them (after all, controversy drives news consumption, so they have an interest in keeping it going). Same thing in this morning’s NYTimes: Vance is quoted and not challenged. Just feeding the partisans. If it’s a battle of who can scream the loudest, the Republicans are winning. Haven’t the Dems learned anything about PR?

  28. 30

    Bob from Boeing spews:

    Dems could only put Paul B. on TV once crying – Vance and Mary scalding blather does not top that gem….all over ballots. God, some freedom foundation should give him a medal.

    Chris Vance would out poll Mary Kay Letourneau and Monica’s backstabbing friend, remember, as one of the worst ….. folks have really grown tired of him.

    Hope the GOP give him another term

  29. 31

    Josef spews:

    I think you all should see today’s Horsey toon…

    Folks – I think the Vaninator is a stand-up crusader… for crusades. I’d buy him a long-neck root beer – and Baghdad Bob Berendt one with ice scream, too. He’s just as bad.

  30. 32

    Josef spews:

    Comment by jcricket— 12/24/04 @ 10:46 am

    Well, this started when she started talking tough. Then, just as Rumsfeld starting going to crap, I stopped. Next day, David Ammons spreads the “Marummy” around the world so I got back on. Mary Lane loves it… as do I.

    And Rumsfeld the man – I think he makes honest mistakes and his deputies screw up royally, then he corrects them. He’s a first-class man for a lot of reasons. Not the least of which going to Mosul and Baghdad yesterday and today…

    Oh and on 11 September: He ran out to the attack site at the Pentagon and rallied to the assistance of the grunts. Helped carry IVs and did what he could. Real manly man, unlike Dubya. I’d follow him into hell and back. Same with Marummy.

  31. 33

    Josef spews:

    Oh, and 1 other thing: He knew he could have been killed either by a follow-on attack or by snipers. But he doesn’t care. Last of the real men in the Bush Administration today.

  32. 34

    Karen spews:

    “I think you all should see today’s Horsey toon…

    Folks – I think the Vaninator is a stand-up crusader… for crusades. I’d buy him a long-neck root beer – and Baghdad Bob Berendt one with ice scream, too. He’s just as bad.”

    What the hell does a cartoon have to do with who won or lost? And WHO is “Vaninator”? Do you make up nicknames for everyone in your life? Kinda immature!

    Face it – Dino lost and it is over. So Move on with you life and if you can’t handle Gregoire as your ‘governor’ – then move to IRAQ! They need able bodies to kill more innocent civilians over there.

  33. 35

    Erik spews:

    The Rs plan is nothing more than a publicity stunt at this point.

    They are requesting ballots to be considered to 3 counties next week where:

    1) The absentee ballot envelope was not signed; and

    2) The voter didn’t post mark the ballot by election day;

    The RCW specifically forbids opening up the certification. I don’t believe any of the Rs think they can win, only try to undermine Gregoire at this point.

    However, the effort appears to be backfiring as the media and commentators, even those who votes for Rossi like Schram, are calling for Dino to concede. Dino’s chance to run against Cantwell are diminishing daily.

  34. 36

    bj spews:

    I read somewhere that the KC canvassing board actually decided that 2 of the 22 ballots found in the machine bases were valid, and thus counted them. It’s a minor footnote, but can anyone tell me why they were added (and the other 20 not added)?

  35. 37

    Robin spews:

    I don’t really believe that the more mature moderate minds of the Republican party (Slade, Dan Evans, J. Vander Stoep) have any desire to keep riding this pony much longer. They will try to get this runaway stopped about the time the first county canvassing board, next week, tells them they will not reopen certification. They are just trying to put on a show to keep the base motivated. They can’t be stupid enough to dirty Rossi’s future up on this loser much longer.

  36. 38

    WesternFlyer spews:

    Dori Monson on KIRO (710) is calling for him to throw in the towel for the same reason you are asking him to fight, fight, fight: the longer this goes the further into the sewer Rossi goes. I cannot believe the Ds’ luck that Dino has already let this run another full 24 hours. The Ds need not say a thing since Vance’s credibility is shot. Mary Lane had that ludicrous quote that he would agree to the hand recount . . . “if he won.” Her credibility is tubed.

    Practically, Dino as until the start of Christmas Eve services before he becomes the “sore loser” topic of Christmas Eve and Christmas dinners around the state.

    Let’s see if Dino has the “stones” that CG had to weather this kingd of pressure to quit.

  37. 39

    Josef spews:

    Comment by Karen— 12/24/04 @ 1:23 pm

    Oh, so you’re the one on my blog posting anonymously and getting nasty…

    I made up the nickname “Vaninator” as a joke for Chris Vance because he sounded like Governor Arnold S. of California.

  38. 40

    Josef spews:

    Comment by WesternFlyer— 12/24/04 @ 2:42 pm


  39. 41

    Robin spews:

    Was looking at previous tread re new puppy. Congratualations, very popular dogs with the horsey set, but like my breed (Dobie) they own YOU, not the other way around. Check out the Mud Bay Grainery up on the westside, great place to take them into so they can help pick out own toys and treats.

  40. 42

    Bob from Boeing spews:

    Joey- she has turned real mean in the last three days…..she is taking her ideas from meanieSound. Dwight Pestz was on camera saying thtat the King Co. canvassing board had tried its best, had very few disputes, and he was glad it was over. Very neutral level stuff -tame for Dwight who can bark if pushed….. Asked to respond, she snapped, ” What a joke”.

    There were big time Victory Bonuses for Rossi staff- in the works. Apparenly Christine cost her a tidy sum. She was another bad choice, use names for spokespersons, not the blonde bimbo image….bad choice.

  41. 43

    Bob from Boeing spews:

    bj – as you know, the R’s would say–“they wernt’t needed”

    D Logan had a good explanation on TV, rational, can’t remember for the moment.

  42. 44

    bj spews:

    And then there’s blond bimbo no. 2 — Diane Tebelius. I thoroughly enjoyed the news coverage yesterday when she was trying to create a photo op when giving the 91 signed statements to Dean Logan. He said something proper and professional, she put her own spin on it and asked him to agree, and he responded with something like “that’s not at all what I just said, and you were standing right here.” Another embarrassing moment for the repubs in the public media.

  43. 45

    Robin spews:

    Who is this Mary Lane? I’ve seen her on tube as Rossi spokeswoman, don’t know anymore.

  44. 46

    Chuck spews:

    I dont see how we can go farther before my sons vote is counted, he cast his ballot on time in person at the polling place, produced his ID and everything….

  45. 47

    Goldy spews:

    Chuck… so what reason did they give for rejecting your son’s provisional ballot? Was it a signature mismatch? Had he received notice that his ballot had been rejected?

    Oddly enough, counties are not required to notify provisional voters and ask for a new signature card. That’s something that needs to be changed.

  46. 48

    Chuck spews:

    No notice was recieved, I called the elections department in Pierce County and found this out (I called to check my vote and was asked by my kids to see if they would give info on thier votes as well)

  47. 50

    Chuck spews:

    If a new signature card was what they needed (the guy at the elections dept could find no reason) then they could have asked for one there, as they needed 2 pieces of ID to vote in Roy this year…

  48. 51

    jim p spews:

    Merry Christmas to all from Amazing Thailand. And I do hope that everyone put a beautiful, big, brilliant Blue Star on top of their Christmas Tree

  49. 52

    John Slyfield spews:

    I heard Sam Reed may lock the certification of the votes, which means that (1) Gregoire will win by 129 votes, and (2) Counties cannot send new results to the SoS office (THurston County’s second certification will be rejected, giving Gregoire a net gain of 171 votes, or a win by 129 votes).

  50. 53

    Goldy spews:

    John, my guess is, that is correct. Sam Reed will likely not accept the revised Thurston County certification. So Gregoire’s margin will be knocked down to 129.

  51. 54

    Brent spews:

    John Slyfield, where did you hear that? It’s exactly consistent with Reed’s position all along that Thurston county did not have the legal authority to certify their results a fourth time. I’d still like confirmation, though.

  52. 55

    Josef spews:

    Okay, you all:

    #1. Mary Lane is the Rossi spokesperson and is not blonde and NO bimbo! She is my (and your) State Secretary of Defense. Wanna get Rossifarians fired up – put her on tv and watch them hoot and holler!

    #2. Bob – That bonus was only $5K for her – a paltry sum. She’s fighting for bigger things like God, country, state and her fellow Rossifarians!

    #3. I salute Diane Tebelius for leading an attack for liberty. If the rules can be changed for Gregoire, then Rossi can play under them. Period. This is not the end of the battle…

    #4. Come after my Marummy some more, I come after you…

  53. 56

    jcricket spews:

    Josef – the rules didn’t change. The Supremes made that clear. Your interpretation is clearly different than the Republican SOS, all the judges on the Supreme Court, and the auditors of the county canvassing boards. So, how is it you’re going to convince people the rules have changed? And tell me who you’re going to convince.

  54. 57

    Josef spews:

    Comment by jcricket— 12/24/04 @ 9:21 pm

    a) Previously rejected ballots – rejected because of auditors’ mistakes – were permitted into the universe of (valid) ballots… In other words, the State Supremes said county canvassing boards have the authority to correct discrepancies and inconsistencies at their end.

    b) We Rossifarians are going to convince people that the rules have changed by just telling the truth. Or at the very least, I’ll do it – with passion!

    c) I can’t speak for the Defend Rossi Victory Campaign, but y.t. will be quite public and supportive of any and all efforts.

  55. 58

    Goldy spews:

    Josef, I don’t know how many times I have to repeat it, but the ballots in question were NOT rejected, they were misfiled. In the words of Supreme Court:

    Here, certain ballots were coded as having “no signature on file” without having been fully examined to properly place them in that category. In that sense they were never fully canvassed, and the seeming error in placing them in any category has become evident to the King County Canvassing Board. Under Doyle this is just the sort of apparent discrepancy or inconsistency that the board can correct through recanvassing.

    The key here is that these ballots were “never fully canvassed.” They were part of the original universe of ballots, but were not counted because their canvassing was never completed.

    Rest assured that the GOP lawyers understand this, and they have explained it Vance and your sweetheart, Lane. The fact that the GOP continues to say that the Court changed the rules is simply a PR maneuver. They know full well that the Court upheld its prior decision refusing the Democrats request to recanvass rejected ballots. The 735 were allowed because they had not been previously rejected.

    Now personally, I wouldn’t mind recanvassing all the rejected ballots… I believe Gregoire would expand her lead. But it’s not going to happen, period. I’m not saying this to be mean, or to gloat, or to try to spin you. The hand recount is over, and my guess is Reed won’t count the extra Thurston vote, and Gregoire will be certified with a 129 vote win.

    Rossi is free to contest the election, but since the Supreme Court has already ruled on these particular issues, and there has been no evidence of misconduct or irregularity by KC canvassing board members (who operated under great public scrutiny) the only real avenue for Rossi is to find airtight evidence of 129 fraudulent votes for Gregoire. And if they had the kind of evidence you can be sure Stefan would be breaking over on (u)SP.

    My guess is, if they go through with this, they’ll skip the contest provision and go straight to federal court. It’s their only chance, and not much of one.

  56. 59

    jcricket spews:

    Another type of ballots that could have been included was if one county canvassing worker mistakenly thought you needed some kind of 10-point signature match, where all the others only used a 3-point match. But there’s been no evidence of that.

    Besides Chuck (who has said his son followed all the rules), the Rossi camp has only offered evidence of voters who actually haven’t followed the rules (ballot in late, no signature on the outside envelope, etc.). And when given the opportunity, they failed to show any evidence of malfeasance on KC (or the Dems) part.

    I think Goldy’s right – their only chance is to go the feds and (likely) lose but sow the seeds of “stolen election” so they can use it as a campaign issue.

    Again, if you are somehow able to change the rules (over-ruling the Supreme court who said that previously rejected ballots weren’t subject to a forced re-canvassing, and the SOS’s comments about certification date rules), the Dems have more than enough rejected ballots they could re-canvass that would equal an even bigger Gregoire lead. The Republicans know this, so they’re being disengenous in their sudden conversion to the “count every vote” side. It’s all a ploy, and Josef, I hope you can see that someday.

  57. 60

    WesternFlyer spews:

    Another type of ballots that could have been included was if one county canvassing worker mistakenly thought you needed some kind of 10-point signature match, where all the others only used a 3-point match.

    I think in a contest you have to show fraud or illegal votes. The fact that there might be a ballot out there “that could have been included” (but was excluded by the canvassing board) does not show fraud. It is also not an illegal vote because it was not included among the votes counted.

  58. 62

    jcricket spews:

    WesternFlyer – I wasn’t saying that those votes I described were illegal. I was just saying that similar to the 735, if the other county canvassing boards had discovered a discrepancy in the way votes were rejected, they too could have corrected it.

    But what the Republicans are now trying to do is claim that votes that were considered and rejected for signature mismatches, lack of signatures, late postmarks, etc. are in the same class as the KC 735. We all know that not to be true.

    Plus I agree with you that the Republicans have to show fraud or illegal votes – which they haven’t been able to show. The best they’ve gotten is military personnel who were uninentionally disenfranchised because they’re ballots arrived late (despite being mailed out on time). A terrible thing, to be sure, but not a valid reason for an election to be contested or to change the vote counting rules.

  59. 63

    Josef spews:

    jcricket – “A terrible thing, to be sure, but not a valid reason for an election to be contested or to change the vote counting rules.”

    Okay, I hate to impugn your patriotism but maybe you should read the Seattle P-I’s obits of the local troopers killed in Mosul. I wonder how they would feel about such statements…

    It’s a valid reason in my book – even though I know they trend GOP and I’m not a big fan of most GOP candidates… unless they’re trying to Save Our State!

    Also, I guess this is the Gregocrat response: Play dirty until they win and then try to slip on white lace gloves as if nothing happened…

  60. 64

    jcricket spews:

    Wow, Josef, I’m sorry to hear you say that. You’ve stooped to invoking the obituaries of dead soldiers to try win some points in an argument on a blog about an election. That’s just terrible.

  61. 65

    Josef spews:

    Comment by jcricket— 12/25/04 @ 9:28 am

    And much more terrible to say, “military personnel who were uninentionally disenfranchised because they’re ballots arrived late (despite being mailed out on time). A terrible thing, to be sure, but not a valid reason for an election to be contested or to change the vote counting rules.”

    That sickens me. So the votes of the troops don’t count if the bureaucrats (Disclaimer: I’m one in a county gov’t) screw up! Now you get my angst!

  62. 66

    Josef spews:

    Oh and read this obit:

    Capt. William W. Jacobsen Jr.: Captain had a strong belief in democracy

    “He felt that we are blessed in this country with the freedoms that we have,” said his father, retired Lt. Col. William Jacobsen. “This was something he believed in, that we all believe. He felt like he had a responsibility to help people gain freedom and democracy.”

  63. 67

    Bob from Boeing spews:

    Prediction = Rossi concedes on Wed.

    Remember it is all R bluff. Read the report from Thruston- 13 froggy ballots waved around by the R’s. On investigtion, 3 were COUNTED, (don’t bother us with the facts) an 9 were already rejected for problems. One might be considered.

    Chuck’s son was voting by provisional ballot it seems. Need moe information, but it seems there was an admin. mistake. Perhaps some discussion there.

    Militairy ballots are a whole new topic. I think we need more information and real facts- not Rossi PR. Making changes for those ballots is needed if they are being mesesed with. Vote online or fax?

    But until the rules change, they are out for this election.

  64. 68

    jcricket spews:

    Bob – just FYI – there was a small test of online voting for the military this year. Unfortunately, after it was shown the appoach had major security flaws, the test was shut down.

    Banks occasionally get de-frauded (from both the inside and outside), depsite billions of dollars being spent on fixing that problem. The spam problem only seems to get worse. And I don’t think voting will be any easier to fix than those two problems.

    As I pointed out a while ago, the CEO of VoteHere pointed out that you can’t build a fraud-proof, perfect system. Republicans (or anyone) who claim otherwise are fooling you with empty rhetoric. The best you can do is build a system with end-to-end transparency and voter- and third-party-verifiable audit trails. That way you can spot fraud or errors if they occur and do your best to correct them.

    Nevertheless, I agree that we need to figure out a way to fix the patchwork of voting/vote counting methods. More uniform standards and fewer ways to vote (all vote by mail, uniformity of signature match regulations) would be a start. Moving up the primary would also help.

  65. 69

    Josef spews:

    Comment by Bob from Boeing— 12/25/04 @ 10:40 am

    Go to another planet. NO CONCESSION! WE KNOW HOW TO SAY NO! As Sir Winstoh Churchill said, “Alexander the Great remarked that the peoples of Asia were slaves, because they had not learned how to pronounce the word ‘no’. Let that not be the epitaph of the English-speaking peoples or of Parliamentary democracy…”

    NO, NO AND NO!

  66. 70

    Josef spews:

    Comment by Bob from Boeing— 12/25/04 @ 10:40 am

    Go to another planet. NO CONCESSION! WE KNOW HOW TO SAY NO! As Sir Winston Churchill said, “Alexander the Great remarked that the peoples of Asia were slaves, because they had not learned how to pronounce the word ‘no’. Let that not be the epitaph of the English-speaking peoples or of Parliamentary democracy…”

    So: NO, NO AND NO!

  67. 71

    David spews:

    Josef is regressing: “NO CONCESSION! WE KNOW HOW TO SAY NO!” “NO, NO AND NO!”

    Dude, you sound like a two year old having a temper tantrum. Get a grip. Argumentum ad conniption fit is unbecoming and ineffective.

  68. 73

    Josefie spews:

    David, Karen;

    NO CONCESSION! WE KNOW HOW TO SAY NO! As Sir Winston Churchill said, “Alexander the Great remarked that the peoples of Asia were slaves, because they had not learned how to pronounce the word ‘no’. Let that not be the epitaph of the English-speaking peoples or of Parliamentary democracy…”

    Is that a temper tantrum?


  69. 76

    Josefie spews:

    Comment by David— 12/25/04 @ 1:49 pm



  70. 77

    jcricket spews:

    bj – you asked about the 2 ballots that were counted… Here’s some info from the Times:

    King County also counted two provisional ballots yesterday that had been left in locked compartments of voting equipment after the election, and a third provisional ballot that had been rejected in a case of mistaken identity.

    But the three-member canvassing board rejected 20 absentee ballots found in voting equipment weeks after the election because there was no proof the votes were placed there before polls closed.


  71. 78

    Jim King spews:

    Western Flyer (and others)- you need to go read the law on contesting an election before making more uninformed comments. Josef was so kind as to give you a link at the top of this thread, and I posted some comments that get at the gist. So why so many of you keep talking about not reopening certification, etc., is beyond me- other than you haven’t moved the two steps forward.

    An election contest involves challenging the results based on any of a number of factors, all of which in this case boil down to improper vote counting- “illegal” votes are not necessarily the result of fraud or evil intent. Honest mistakes can create illegal votes.

    And the material regarding these would not have been put into play in any of the court cases to date because they were not relevent to the facts in those particular cases- or were not yet “ripe” for action.

    Several times in the two Supreme Court cases it was pointed out that the respective losing sides were trying to advance a contest which should be brought under the contest law in a proper manner at the proper time. And much of what many of you are laughing about is proper preparatory work for a contest.

    There is almost four weeks before a contest must be filed, if one is to be filed. That is time for continuing to gather the cold hard facts, properly vet them, and make hard cold decisions. Rossi comes out a sore loser ONLY if he pursues a contest, and loses. Just as Gregoire took a calculated risk on requesting the legal manual recount, as was her right, Rossi would take a calculated risk if he pursues a contest- which is his right.

    Rossi has more to lose than did Gregoire, because he has a future ahead of him after this race, where Gregoire was looking at the end of her career. But he will make a choice after listening to friends and allies, and will pay no more attention than did Gregoire to the chorus demanding concession.

  72. 80

    Bob from Boeing spews:

    The chorus is being joined by the Big Newspapers- Seattle, Tacoma- who will be needed in future campaigns. If he does not concede he has no future, one trick pony. And this contest idea he is clinging to is a greater problem than geting beat totally in the second Suprem Court case.

    Of course, there could be files in the Right Wingers Offices — documenting how they themselves committed some fraud, heaven forbid, and they are going to throw their own fix-it-felons into the case…

    .Jim, give it up. It is over.

  73. 81

    WesternFlyer spews:

    Jim, thank you for the suggestion to read the law. Doing so, confirms that I was right that grounds on which to contest an election are exceedingly narrow:

    RCW 29A.68.020
    Commencement by registered voter — Causes for.

    Any registered voter may contest the right of any person declared elected to an office to be issued a certificate of election for any of the following causes:

    (1) For misconduct on the part of any member of any precinct election board involved therein;

    (2) Because the person whose right is being contested was not at the time the person was declared elected eligible to that office;

    (3) Because the person whose right is being contested was previous to the election convicted of a felony by a court of competent jurisdiction, the conviction not having been reversed nor the person’s civil rights restored after the conviction;

    (4) Because the person whose right is being contested gave a bribe or reward to a voter or to an inspector or judge of election for the purpose of procuring the election, or offered to do so;

    (5) On account of illegal votes.

    (a) Illegal votes include but are not limited to the following:

    (i) More than one vote cast by a single voter;

    (ii) A vote cast by a person disqualified under Article VI, section 3 of the state Constitution.

    (b) Illegal votes do not include votes cast by improperly registered voters who were not properly challenged under RCW 29A.08.810 and 29A.08.820.

    All election contests must proceed under RCW 29A.68.010.

    This boils down to misconduct at the precinct level, inelligibility for the office, unrehabilitated felony conviction etc., bribery by the candidate, and illegal votes. Moreover, a vote is not illegal if they are cast by improperly registered voters who were not properly challenged under RCW 29A.08.810 and 29A.08.820. .810 provides for challenging the voters’ right to vote by the day before the primary or election.

    In the last category, illegal votes, the fact that someone else’s vote might have been counted does not make the votes illegal. In a contest, you look to the votes cast and not the “shoulda, coulda, woulda” maybe votes. Votes not counted are not the focus of the election contest unless it was a result of misconduct by the precinct officer, bribery by the candidate. There is no evidence of that at all. And there is no basis in the statute to second-guess the decision to not count ballots unless it is on account of bribery by the candidate.

    So, I think the Rs will have a very tough time, if they proceed under this statute, trying to knock out as illegal 131 votes among those votes cast or otherwise contest the election. The fact that a different outcome could have been reached had different ballots been counted is not a ground on which to contest the election, absent bribery by the candidate.

  74. 83

    Jim King spews:

    WesternFlyer needs to now go read case law, court jurisdiuction under the equity provisions of the state constitution… You still haven’t gotten it right… Try Foulkes v. Hayes for starters…

    And you are way off on the open-ended definition of illegal votes, as previously adjudicated…