Gregoire certified governor-elect… right-wing bloggers certifiable

Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed today officially certified Democrat Christine Gregoire as governor-elect, declaring her the winner of the closest gubernatorial election in state history. While historical records are incomplete, it is likely the closest gubernatorial race percentage wise, in the nation’s history.

While Republican Dino Rossi continues to call for a new election, claiming the results of a hand recount cannot be trusted, Reed — a two-term Republican — continued to defend the integrity of the electoral process.

“I do not feel like this has been a botched election,” Reed told a news conference. But he said that because it was so close, any error discovered took on great significance.

“I saw serious mistakes being made. I saw them being corrected,” Reed said. “That’s part of the process. The system itself has worked well.”

“Nothing that I have been informed about rises to the level of fraud,” Reed said. “There have been human errors. There have been mistakes. At this time there is nothing that appears fraudulent.”

While Reed defends the integrity of the election, Rossi’s proxies on the right-wing blogs continue to slog innuendo on top of conjecture on top of downright lies, in a concerted effort to undermine public confidence. The accusation du jour is that a “very prominent” King County Democrat is fraudulently registered at an illegal address. I can only assume that the villain’s identity is being withheld as an attempt at political extortion.

I don’t need to provide a link to the blackmailers… you know who I’m talking about.

Comments

  1. 1

    Bob spews:

    They are so funny …… god, don’t hire their attorneys. Correctable errors are…correctable eros. Not fraud, not fraud networks, not fraudlent voters/votes….they are getting so winged and wiged out over there….

    Another good one, is impeach Gregoire, that fits their fits….BUT, and this is so over the edge, impeach Sam Reed…..have to laugh

  2. 2

    Peter spews:

    Best in the New Year to All.

    On the other blog just noticed the use of “Tsuamni of voter fraud” and I have to say that is this most CRASS thing I have encountered in my life. Shame. You are sickening.

  3. 3

    chuck spews:

    On the other blog just noticed the use of “Tsuamni of voter fraud” and I have to say that is this most CRASS thing I have encountered in my life. Shame. You are sickening.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    I wouldnt personally have used that phrase…but still, Peter your skin is to thin…seriously

  4. 5

    D Huygens spews:

    The law was followed. The closest election in state history was decided after following proper procedures. Mr. Rossi has the option to contest the election and prove fraud if he is able.

    There is no need to change the law.

  5. 7

    Danny spews:

    Any speculation what this all means to the leadership of a Gregorie administration? She obviously owes her election to liberal Seattle, yet the margin also demands some respect to the other side. I’d like to say to the winner goes the spoils and she push a strong enviro/education/social justice and public works program, but I wonder if that is wise. I also heard Sam Reed defending on a KOMO Radio interview and he said each recount progressively got better as more valid votes get counted. Imagine the pressure the GOP has put on him. I think he’s a hero and intend to send him a personal thank you note. I also agree–respect for the dead demands judicious use of the term tsamni right now. Danny

  6. 10

    David spews:

    bmvaughn: “This is someone I think a lot of Democrats would feel bad about losing if they end up being sacrificed in this tsunami of illegitimate voting.” The implication is that there isn’t a GOPer that the Dems would feel bad about losing.

    FWIW, I’m in upstate New York and enjoying this all immensely… we never have this much fun with our elections. :-) I’m more inclined toward Stefan’s view of things but I read and enjoy this blog as well as his.

  7. 11

    bmvaughn spews:

    david: “The implication is that there isn’t a GOPer that the Dems would feel bad about losing”
    Agreed, though this still doesn’t imply that the person Shark has found is a Democrat. In fact, (s)he could be in a non-partisan office. OF all things, wouldn’t it be amusing if it were Ruth Bennett or Ron Sims? I am sure Ruth didn’t… she’s a sweet woman, but perhaps our buddy Ron is registered at a PMB somewhere.

  8. 12

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    Once again everyone is so impatient to know what Stefan has. This isn’t like some bogus reality TV show. Stefan, like Rossi, has until 1/20 (3 weeks) to put up or shut up. Don’t you all think that with 39 counties and 3 million votes AND considering the stuff already revealed that the R’s will find 129 verifiable examples of “wrongful acts(lesser standard of proof than fraud), errors and neglect???
    Goldy seems to now recognize the need for patience….although I know he has to “spin” a little bit to keep the conversation lively.

  9. 13

    bby spews:

    Chuck – go fuck yourself….that comment about Gregoire’s daughters is beyond the pale. You claim to be a father- boy, oh boy, oh boy.

    Lacking any evidence of fraud, now — it is just insults of the most vile sort.

    Gregoire made Rossi look like cloudy amateur night….she did an excellent, great job…….Vance ahd Dumbossi need to hire a good media professional and follow that advice.

    Chuck, you leave me shaking in anger. How could you be a dad and say something like that about her great looking kids….or…..perhaps all women are sluts to you? Sexist pig.

  10. 14

    bby spews:

    Mr C — stilllllllllll waitingggggggg – day after day after day—-week after week after week after week

  11. 15

    David spews:

    bmvaughn – I know “someone… Democrats would feel bad about losing” doesn’t automatically mean the someone is a Democrat. But I think it was enough for Goldy to assume that it’s a Democrat; you’re right that Stefan never actually said as much.

  12. 17

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    bby-
    At long last, you have convinced that there was absolutely no fraud in this election. Gregoire is the rightful Governor. I’m sure Chris will always try to do the right thing just as she did while AG. We definitely need to cut her some slack and just forget about the $18million she cost taxpayers by missing that filing deadline AND the additional $800,000 she cost taxpayers by trying to blame someone else. We should also forget about all those times she withheld public records…especially on that Boeing “giveaway”. I mean all this is mere chump change.
    And Chuck,,,be sure to refrain from anymore snide comments about Gregoire!!!! …When her first act is to bring in that “single-wide” and park it on the front yard of the Governor’s mansion, I expect you to ignore it!!!!!

  13. 18

    chuck spews:

    I would have told my kids the same thing if they had shown up for a public appearance dressed like that.

  14. 19

    David spews:

    chuck – thanks for giving this conservative a chance to agree with bby on something.

    bby – not sure if you’re right about why chuck said what he did, though. maybe his comment was due to sexual frustration? Seeing good-looking women can trigger that in some people.

  15. 20

    DustinJames spews:

    Never mind the couple of BILLION she brought in as AG there Mr. Cynical. In business, when you make 20, and you lose 3, you still make 17.

  16. 21

    HowCanYouBeProudtobeAnASS spews:

    The way the daughters were dressed is a direct reflection of the respect they show Washingtonians – they can’t be bothered to look their best and they can’t be bothered to respect us.

  17. 22

    Rick spews:

    Do you lefties really think Christine would win if King Co didn’ didn’t allow all extra Chicago-style votes?

  18. 23

    bby spews:

    Going to the gala – I expect it will be the event of the decade, with national celebs there….Will set up and blog from the event…how about that Goldy? Expect pickets and Impeach Sam petitions from the undertheSoundNether World creepers.

    I don’t type well.

  19. 25

    Rick spews:

    I’m sure the gala will be full of X-tine constituents; dead people, PO Boxes, illegal immigrants, vacant lots, etc. Her theft of this election has pissed-off so many people in this state that her “victory” will be the last Dem governor for a long time.

  20. 26

    bby spews:

    Bet you ten to one they will be in satin and taffetta – prom regalia at mom’s big night……will call and loan them my grandmother’s pearls and very antique Chinese jade ear rings…..

    Back to the election — It appears that there were hudreds of rejects, ballots, in Spokane county…..caller on TV….and Rossi opposed the Dems call to count all ballots….in retro….he really did get outsmarted, if he did not know exacly what was going on in the the Rossi counties after three weeks post election. ….oh I know, the phone impairment thing…genetic? to R’s……

  21. 27

    bby spews:

    C – quit changing the topic, I thought you were a big wig in the big fraud investigation. Stilllll waitingggg..

  22. 28

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    bby–
    Keeeeppp waitinggggggggg! We have until January 20th. You will probably be ready for the looney-bin by then….although most of us would probably agree you were born ready!
    And bby—as many times as you keep referring to “Fraud”, I will remind you that the Code says we need 129 hard examples and “Errors, neglect & WRONGFUL ACTS”. Much lower standard of proof…unfortunately for you.
    Maybe Gregoire should have accepted Rossi’s olive branch?
    January 20th…put up or shut up drop dead date.

  23. 29

    Goldy spews:

    I’d be happy to go to the gala… if somebody offers me a free ticket. (And, child care permitting.)

    And Cynical… the burden proof doesn’t just require errors or wrongful acts… it requires proving that these errors and wrongful acts changed the outcome of the election. Oh… and by the way, a wrongfully rejected ballot (signature mismatch on a clearly elegible voter) is not going to qualify as a wrongful act.

  24. 30

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    Goldy–
    You mean that these errors, wrongful acts and neglect COULD HAVE changed the outcome of the election. You know darn well that specific votes are now co-mingled. It is impossible to know how any specific person voted.

    Regarding wrongfully rejected ballots—I guess we will see if that qualifies as an error, neglect or wrongful act. I think it will be evaluated on a case by case basis. I just heard about a situation where someone voted provisionally in one County…that county contacted another County which said erroneously that that person was not registered there so the provisional ballot wasn’t forwarded. Turns out the person was registered and apparently had voted in the primary. So let’s not make any blanket statements Goldy. Case-by-case. If there are 129 hard examples accepted by the Court…the Election is set aside. If not, your gal wins, the band strikes up “Dueling Banjo’s” and that single-wide is on the front lawn of the Governor’s Mansion for 4 long years.

  25. 31

    Goldy spews:

    No Cynical… you are wrong. 129 is not a magic number… it could require more or less. If for example they could cite 50 examples of ballots that should have been counted for Rossi, but ended up being counted for Gregoire because of misconduct or negligence during the ballot enhancement process, then the court might rule that there very well might be more of these, and thus set aside the election. But 129 or 150 or even 200 wrongly rejected ballots does not imply that they would have changed the outcome. Hell… if you took every rejected ballot in the state and counted them, it would likely increase Gregoire’s margin.

    Of course there are errors… there are always errors. But they tend to be randomly distributed. For the GOP to set aside this election based on errors, they’re going to have to prove that they are massive, or that they disproportionately favored Gregoire.

    The court will not set aside this election simply because we can’t determine with certainty that Gregoire won. With an election this close, we can never determine the outcome with certainty.

  26. 32

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    Goldy–
    I disagree…at this point you cannot prove how anyone specifically voted. And I can hardly believe my eyes…you said,
    “with an election this close, we can never determine the outcome with certainty”. Did you really mean that? How much “uncertainty” are you willing to tolerate?

  27. 33

    Goldy spews:

    Cynical… yes… I really mean it. I said as much a month ago, and I still stand by it.

    But to toss out this election because it is too damn close, means we have to toss out all close elections, and I don’t think anybody here is seriously ready to argue that we have automatic revotes when the results are within 0.1%. According to statute, Gregoire won. You can argue that that isn’t fair, but that’s the law.

  28. 34

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    I thought “the law” says Rossi can challenge this election???
    I’ll give you that for now she has won. Reed certified that part. But it ain’t over ’til it’s over. And if Rossi doesn’t put up or shut up by January 20th, then it is over. If he puts up…then it is up to the Court to sift through each and every allegation in Rossi’s challenge. If he can’t get to 129 that the Court agrees with, we all pull out our cans of Skol, put a pinch between our cheeks and gums and yell “SSSSHHHHHHHIIIIIIIIIITTTTTTTTTT!!! And then pass the SKOL can and a couple of warm beers out of the back of our pick-up truck over to the Gregoire girls as kind of a Blue Collar olive branch and try to get our State moving in a better direction than Locke did.

  29. 35

    Josef spews:

    Like SoundPolitics.com…

    Goldy, now as a Rossifarian: I think they need to help our Commander-in-Chief by coming forward with this name IMMEDIATELY since they couldn’t keep their lips sealed…

    Oh and now Tim “LIE-man” Eyman has joined us. DAMN that bastard. I hate him, still do. Let me be clear before the inevitable leak here: I am no fan of Eyman, never have and never will be. But I support Dino Rossi the friend of the soldier, the friend of the REAL Skagit Valley College and the friend of the Ukrainian people (catch my drift?).

    My .02. I have to go back to work…

  30. 36

    jcricket spews:

    Careful about those Ukrainian references Josef. Now that the facts have changed, Rossi risks seeming more like Yanukovych, who’s calling for a “do-over” much like your beloved Rossi.

    Would hate to see the courts throw out Rossi’s complaints like they just threw out Yanukovych’s, leaving the impression with people that he’s a sore-loser.

  31. 37

    jcricket spews:

    Cynical – Rossi can challenge the election all he wants, but he’ll have to come up with some real evidence first. Given he’s failed to do so every previous chance he’s had, I wouldn’t hold out your hopes. I know, you keep peddling some BS about how the Repubs are “holding back”, but that’s just wishful thinking.

    Unlike the right-wing blogs and talk radio who are eager to peddle any lies, distortions, half-truths or rumors Rossi or Vance wants spread, the courts have standards of evidence. And so far, Rossi’s been unable to even come close to meeting those standards.

  32. 38

    jcricket spews:

    BTW, My Cynical the “stuff already revealed” hasn’t been shown to be fraud or even incompetence. As Sam Reed put it, it’s the system working. So don’t look now, but your foundation’s made out of sand.

  33. 39

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    jcricket–
    You say Rossi has “failed to provide evidence every chance he’s had”.
    Let me remind you for the umpteenth time—
    UP UNTIL NOW, ROSSI HAS BEEN AHEAD. WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD ROSSI BRING FORTH SPECIFIC EVIDENCE THAT WOULD RESULT IN THE COURTS SETTING ASIDE AN ELECTION THAT HE WAS WINNING????
    You seem to have a number of blindspots jcricket…if you can’t understand this simple concept and you are the best Dem “spinner” they can find, the R’s have a beautiful future ahead.
    The burden of proof is now on Rossi…NO DOUBT ABOUT IT!
    However, the R’s have until January 20th to present that case. In the meantime, folks like you are encouraged to keep your mouths running that there are no problems and this election was free of 129 hard examples of “errors, neglect and wrongful acts”. You continue to demand that the R’s show FRAUD. That is not what the CODE requires.
    Sam Reed saying “the system is working” doesn’t mean that the system worked. If his protege, Dean Logan, still hasn’t reconciled the Voter Registration List Totals to the Total Ballots Counted precindt by precindt 8 weeks after the election and after 3 certifications….and if Sam Reed believes it’s ok to take another month to do so, I have below zero confidence in this election. The thing is, other County’s have also failed to reconcile before certification. That is out & out neglect.
    As I’ve said previously, liberal Jefferson County did it before every certification.

  34. 40

    Peter spews:

    Eyman and Rossi alliance – tell me more. I said that would happen a week ago. They are made for each other. With Vance, that is the Lying Gang of Three.

    And Rossi is not the top…metaphoricaly speaking..

  35. 41

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    You don’t contest an election and try to have it set aside while you are ahead. DUH!
    Now when you are behind…of course you contest.
    You just don’t do it on jcricket or bbj’s timetable.
    They are certainly wound up pretty tight on this one, aren’t they!
    3 more weeks to go.

  36. 42

    Josef spews:

    jcricket: Are you a synonym for somebody I know… like Jenny or maybe, just maybe Kristen Brost?!?

    Wouldn’t suprise me if Gregovich’s Minister of Defense was posting here…

  37. 43

    Brent spews:

    Mr. Cynical says, “Now when you are behind…of course you contest.” Rossi filed a lawsuit to stop the counting of votes in King county, where he was behind. In the Supreme Court’s ruling, they pointed out that his lawyers had insinuated fraud and corruption in King county, but they had provided no evidence to support their claims. Now he keeps claiming corruption and fraud in King county, yet he still has not provided any evidence to support his claim. You’re right that when a candidate is behind, they will contest the race and try to prevent votes from being counted in areas where he/she does not do well, and the best way to have them thrown out is to present to the Supreme Court evidence of fraud or corruption. Since Rossi’s lawyers insinuated fraud and corruption in King county but did not present a single iota of evidence to support their claims when they had the perfect opportunity to do so before the Supreme Court when he was behind in King county and it looked as though the recount in King county would put Gregoire over the top, it is clear that he has no evidence to support his wild allegations. Do you think his plan was to withhold all evidence of fraud and corruption until after the election is certified and then use it to contest the results? If so, you obviously haven’t thought this through at all. If during the second Supreme Court hearing he had presented any evidence to support his claims of fraud and corruption, the Supreme Court may have decided not to allow the 732 ballots to be counted until they could be examined with a fine-toothed comb. Instead, the Supreme Court has pointed out that he has not even a single iota of evidence to support his claims of fraud and corruption, and he is left to contest the election in court. Rossi may have been behind when the Supreme Court hearing took place, but Berendt had already announced that his figures showed Gregoire taking the lead by 8 votes without the 732, so it was perceived by everyone that King county would PROBABLY put Gregoire over the top even without the 732 ballots. Rossi had the perfect opportunity to present evidence of fraud or corruption to the Supreme court while being perceived as being behind in the recount, but instead his lawyers decided to insinuate fraud and corruption and did not present any evidence to support their claims. Again, was this a strategical move to withhold evidence of fraud and corruption in King county while he was behind and could still have stopped the ballots from being counted because he wants to horde all the evidence for an election contest? That assertion makes absolutely no sense and is directly antithetical to your assertion that a candidate would contest when they are behind.

  38. 44

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    brent–
    You are taking what I said out of it’s proper context–
    1) The Supreme Court ruled on 732 ballots. That is only 1 issue! I have no idea how many, if any, of those 732 are illegitimate. For sake of argument, let’s say they are all legitimate.
    2) Where we are today is about the other 3 million ballots. And all the procedures and actions used in collecting, enhancing and processing these ballots.

    In other words, the Supreme Court hearing was still not the appropriate time to discuss these other 3 million ballots. Again, at the time, only the original count and the 1st recount had been certified. If Rossi was somehow ahead after this 2nd recount, he would have foolishly jeopardized his win by providing evidence for the Dem’s to use to get the election set-aside. Remember, the person contesting the election DOES NOT have to show how the ballots that were hard examples of “Error, Neglect or Wrongful Acts” actually voted. For some reason, Lefty’s have a real blindspot understanding this. Although I did read that a recent study showed that pot-smoking combined with Prozac leads to early Alzheimer’s. Perhaps these “Potzac” cocktails are taking their toll on you folks all at the same time.

  39. 45

    jcricket spews:

    Oh please, Cynical – you’re totally pretending not to know what Brent was talking about, as usual. Your strategy is to move from lie to lie, wherever you can get the biggest rise out of people, never stopping to notice how much credibility you lose each time.

    The Republicans openly and publicly accused the Democrats of handling the 732 (and other) ballots in an insecure fashion. They made very specific allegations of this in front of the media, on talk radio, in right-wing blogs and in front of the Supreme Court during the second hearing. The Supreme Court pointed out that the Republicans offered no evidence to support their allegations, which was part of the reason they denied the Republicans claims.

    At that point, the Republicans were behind. Gregoire had won the count by 10 votes. They had a chance to prevent the 732 ballots from being counted, with the added bonus of providing solid grounds to call all of KCs ballots into question. And the Republicans failed to provide any evidence.

    So your entire theory is completely BS and unsupported by the facts, just like the Republican accusations of fraud, and your complete misunderstanding of the relevant election contest law, as everyone with a brain here has tried to point out to you.

    But feel free to keep on trying. Maybe you’ll eventually come up with a new lie that will convince someone gullible enough.

  40. 46

    Brent spews:

    All of those 732 ballots were from King county, which at the time was the only county which had not yet re-certified for a second and final time, and in which he was way behind. I pointed this out to refute your point about him not contesting when he was ahead. He DID contest ballots in a county where he was WAY behind. During the Supreme Court hearing, he insinuated corruption and fraud in King county and had the perfect opportunity to present this evidence to prevent Gregoire-leaning ballots from being counted, but he did not present a single iota of evidence, as was pointed out by the Supreme Court. If he had presented such evidence, he could have argued against counting Gregoire-leaning ballots, and that evidence would be much more credible during an election contest than it would be now after he’s had the opportunity to present the evidence and has not. Election officials in many Rossi-leaning counties have candidly admitted that they did not even bother to cross-check the signatures on absentee ballots, even though it is their legal obligation to do so. These acts were illegal and resulted in many illegitimate Rossi votes. If Rossi presents evidence of corruption or fraud in King county, Gregoire will present evidence of fraud and corruption in Rossi-leaning counties. Since Rossi has to prove that fraud and corruption resulted in changing the outcome of the election, that means that he will have to find 129 more fraudulent Gregoire votes than Gregoire finds which are fraudulent Rossi votes. Both sides have equal protection, equally long lists of disenfranchised voters and almost bottomless legal funds, so their efforts will cancel out each other. We run clean and secure elections in King county, and we bother to do our jobs by following state law. Unfortunately for Rossi, the same cannot be said for the hick counties which voted primarily for him. Keep your hopes up if you want. It will only result in a longer, harder fall when Rossi finally has to put up or shut up.

  41. 47

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    brent–
    You still don’t get it. You don’t have to prove who the illegitimate voter voted for to contest…because you can’t. Watch.

    jcricket-
    Weak effort as usual. My point was clearly that Rossi was not behind in a certified count until AFTER the manual recount was certified.
    You allege I have a complete misunderstanding of the election contest laws. Really??? Show me where I’m wrong? We have discussed this on this blog previously with all relevant references. Richard Pope and Jim King both did a good job of nailing it. As usual, you choose to ignore because it doesn’t fit your “spin”.
    So jcricket…you are challenging me. Prove your point!!!
    I’ll bet you won’t for 1 simple reason…you can’t!!!!!!
    So bring on your legal argument jphonycricket!

  42. 48

    HowCanYouBeProudtobeAnASS spews:

    So jcricket…you are challenging me. Prove your point!!!
    I’ll bet you won’t for 1 simple reason…you can’t!!!!!!
    So bring on your legal argument jphonycricket! -Comment by Mr. Cynical— 12/30/04 @ 9:41 pm

    And I’ve been waiting so patiently… NO cricket… imagine that!

  43. 49

    jcricket spews:

    Sometimes people have lives beyond this blog ASS. Goldy pointed out quite clearly, in his response to Cynical, that the Republicans have to provide hard evidence that would actually change the result of the election. The standard of proof is high. It’s not enough to show “errors”.

    Rossi was behind, and Cynical knows it. The Republicans have no evidence, and his hopes that they are just “holding back” as some wacky PR ploy are just wishin’ and hopin’.

    To take a play from your book: Read Chapter 29A.68 RCW (CONTESTING AN ELECTION) and you’ll see. All the relevant statutes make it clear that the evidence presented has to prove the election would have changed as a result of the evidence you’re presenting. Properly rejected ballots do not equal errors and wrongful acts. Random Republican accusations are no basis for contesting this election.

    There’s also an interesting part of the section on absentee ballots

    RCW 29A.40.070 (Date ballots available, mailed)

    (6) Failure to have absentee ballots available and mailed as prescribed in subsection (1) of this section does not by itself provide a basis for an election contest or other legal challenge to the results of a primary, general election, or special election.

  44. 50

    jcricket spews:

    In case you’re interested: http://www.leg.wa.gov/RCW/inde.....ter=29A.68

    The “errors, neglect or wrongful acts” Cynical keeps referring to don’t include anything that’s been corrected during the recounts. That’s not evidence of anything wrong. And the other statutes clearly state that the misconduct or illegal votes has to be material to the result. Despite Cynical’s denial, 129 votes isn’t some magic number, you do have to prove that the problems in question would have changed the results of the election.

    Also, remember that “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.”

    So, my “legal argument” is thatcontrary to what Cynical is trying to imply, the burden of proof is quite high for anything the Republicans would try to prove regarding contesting an election. The statutes are clearly designed to prevent sore-losers like Rossi from wasting the state’s time and money with his frivolous claims.

  45. 51

    John spews:

    Thank you Providence. I’m so happy I found this blog!

    I’ve been spending too much time on the blog that shall not be named.

  46. 52

    Larry spews:

    “Rossi’s proxies on the right-wing blogs”?

    So it’s okay, Goldy, if we refer to you as “Gregoire’s Proxy”?

  47. 53

    Goldy spews:

    So it’s okay, Goldy, if we refer to you as “Gregoire’s Proxy”?

    Call me anything you like… just don’t call me late for dinner.

  48. 55

    J.ANDERSON spews:

    I CAN UNDERSTAND ROSSI AND THE REPUBLICAN DILEMA, THEY AREN’T USED TO HAVING ALL THE VOTES COUNTED. COME ON CHRISTINE GIVE HIM AN INVITE TO ONE OF THE INAUGURATION PARTIES, DRY HIS EYES HE’LL GET OVER IT…