Uh-oh. As the Chelan County courthouse prepares for the circus to come to town, yet another “scandal” is brewing in King County regarding military ballots. According to an article in today’s Seattle Times, two Republican observers said they saw election workers improperly duplicate “federal write-in” ballots.
These federal ballots must be duplicated because the orginals cannot be read by the optical scanners. When a voter fails to name individual candidates, but merely indicates the party, the ballots should be counted as straight party-line votes.
But Republican observer Kirk Brandenburg said he sat at a table where election workers ignored party choices on at least 30 ballots. He said that when he asked a supervisor about it, he was told, “The names were not to be counted unless they were listed.”
Shit. The claim was corroborated by Carol “Sacrificial Lamb” Cassady, a Republican observer who also supposedly challenged U.S. Rep Jim McDermott this November. Damn it! A congressional candidate would never lie, so this really looks bad for Gregoire.
Or does it?
Cassady and Brandenburg said most of the overseas voters whose ballots they saw favored Democratic candidates, including newly elected Gov. Christine Gregoire.
If election workers had consistently counted party-choice ballots, Brandenburg acknowledged, Gregoire would have extended her 129-vote lead over Republican Dino Rossi.
Oh.
I guess that’s why we haven’t seen this “smoking gun” over on (un)SoundPolitics.
It could very well be that the “military and overseas” category in King County favored Gregoire overall, even if by a smaller percentage than the county as a whole.
With military voters, we get two types. First, those folks who resided in Washington when they joined the military. If they don’t change their official residence for military purposes (“home of record”), then they can always keep voting in the county and precinct where they resided right before they entered active duty.
The other category is people who change their “home of record” while serving on active duty. If someone originally from Mississippi or Oklahoma gets stationed in Washington, then they can change their “home of record” to the address they are residing in Washington. If they are later stationed somewhere else, they can keep this Washington “home of record” if they so choose. They would then be registered and voting in the county and precinct of their adopted Washington “home of record”.
Washington keeps most of the military members that fall in the first category. Very few military members who sign up from Washington change their “home of record” to another state.
Washington also gains a lot of military members in the second category. Many military members from other states change their “home of record” to Washington when they are stationed here, and keep it for the remainder of their military career.
This phenomenon has something to do with the fact that active duty military members have their payroll deductions calculated based upon their “home of record” …
Since King County has no military bases, almost all of the military voters from King County are natives of this county, and will reflect the county’s normal voting patterns to some degree — and be less Republican leaning, and maybe even Democrat leaning.
By contrast, Pierce, Kitsap, Island, Snohomish and Spokane Counties have military bases, and will get a lot of military voters in the second category. These voters will reflect the voting patterns from their original native states to some degree, and be more Republican leaning.
Last, but certainly not least, there are the overseas voters — a distinct and very different group of people than military voters. If you are a U.S. citizen residing outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. (i.e. not in any state or territory), you have the right to vote in the state, county and precinct of your last U.S. residence.
Somehow, I would think that King County voters who have moved to places such as France or Canada would tend to be at least as liberal and Democrat leaning as King County is as a whole.
So it would not be surprising if Gregoire gained a net advantage from the “military and overseas” category in King County.
Hey Goldy, assuming this comes up in the Chelan challenge, how will the courts know if these Republican observers are even telling the truth? Aren’t they supposed to object to these types of “irregularities” at the time that they see them? How will the court know which ballots were supposed to have been improperly duplicated? Would they be able to subpoena those ballots even now to verify claims by the observers? I personally wouldn’t trust the word of these people, even under oath. Anyway, I don’t know a lot about how all this works so please forgive the ignorant questions. Thanks!
I personally wouldn’t trust the word of these people, even under oath.
Comment by Dave— 1/20/05 @ 1:35 am
The legacy of Bill Clinton finally affects the outcome of our governor’s race. Dave, if they testify under oath in court, go ahead and give them the benefit of the doubt. And if you ever get called for jury duty, decline.
Here’s an article streesing the competency of the judge who will hear the case. Let him sort out the truthfulness and relevancy of the testimony.
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBJQPHR64E.html
I think the main issue here is that this works to undermine GOP/BIAW efforts to have the court go beyond the statute. The statute is very clear that there must be an appearance that Gregoire won due to errors and illegal votes (despite GOP arguments to the contrary.) The GOP seems to want to prove that the various distributed irregularities throughout the state — and in King County in particular — so cloud the results of the election, that the whole thing must be tossed regardless of whether they can prove any bias.
But the more evidence that comes out showing errors or fraud that favored Rossi, the harder it is to make the argument that the election should be thrown out on errors alone, for if that were the standard, then 129 errors in Rossi’s favor would be enough to set aside a Gregoire victory.
As to whether you believe these Republican observers or not, I sincerely doubt that any of these people are willing to lie under oath, and if it helps the Democratic case, I wouldn’t be surprised if these two observers are subpoenaed and deposed. If you read some of the other GOP depositions regarding claims of irregularities, what you find is testimony couched in first person observation… this is what they thought they saw happen. For example, in the case of claims about ballot enhancement, the observers made the point of stating that they weren’t allowed close enough to clearly observe all of what went wrong. It’s nearly impossible to perjure oneself under those conditions.
But the more evidence that comes out showing errors or fraud that favored Rossi, the harder it is to make the argument that the election should be thrown out on errors alone, for if that were the standard, then 129 errors in Rossi’s favor would be enough to set aside a Gregoire victory.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Goldy, all we want is one final vote to make a “fool” out of Rossi once and for all and verify Gregoirs victory in the history books, it is fair to Dino and fair to Chrissy…
Well Chuck, I’d like to go back to 2000 and actually re-vote in Florida to correct the poorly designed ballot that “stole” 10,000 votes from Gore, eliminate the “felon” purge list that wrongly disenfranchsed more than 2,000 African American voters, ensure the courts used an equal standard for accepting overseas absentee ballots in all counties (instead of a lax one in Republican dominated counties and a harsh one in Democrats) and many other things. Far from just helping WA state, we’d like have never gone to war in Iraq and more than 1,400 Americans would still be alive.
It’s only fair.
But no Republicans supported a re-vote during Florida of 2000. And Republicans have done their best to quash even an investigation into irregularities in Ohio during the most recent presidential election.
Election politics isn’t about “fair”. If it was, people wouldn’t be able to tar Vietnam Veterans who are missing three limbs with being “soft” on terror. If it was, Nethercutt wouldn’t have tried to win with the “Osama comparison” ads.
I think this court case is a fine example of how the Republicans should proceed given their feelings about the election. If they’ve got enough evidence to overturn the election, good for them. But scheduling a special election is a short-circuiting of the process that will not allow the evidence to come to light and proper fixes to occur.
And we have another “final” vote already scheduled. Rossi can run in 2008 and have his chance in the sun again.
Richard Pope–when my husband served in the military we didn’t change our home of record from Wyoming to other states we were stationed in because Wyoming does not have state income tax–therefore, I would suggest that the fact that Washington does not have state income tax is the reason for some soldiers changing their home of record to Washington. If, as I suspect, military members change their home of record strictly on monetary factors, they probably don’t vote in state elections, because they have no interest in, nor know about, the local issues and candidates. However, they could just write in the political party designation for every office and have their vote counted–see below.
I looked up info on the Federal Write-in Absentee Ballot http://www.fvap.gov/pubs/onlinefwab.html , and a sample of the actual ballot and instructions http://www.fvap.gov/pubs/ofwab.pdf It says in the “instructions to the voter,”: “Voting Procedure: For each office for which you vote, write in either a candidate’s name or political party designation.” From this it would seem that the “supervisor” was wrong in their answer!
“But Republican observer Kirk Brandenburg said he sat at a table where election workers ignored party choices on at least 30 ballots. He said that when he asked a supervisor about it, he was told, ‘The names were not to be counted unless they were listed.'”
Far from just helping WA state, we’d like have never gone to war in Iraq and more than 1,400 Americans would still be alive.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Based on what? Almost every democratic leader said at the time that Saddam was one of the greatest threats to the world. Including your star child Clinton….
But no Republicans supported a re-vote during Florida of 2000. And Republicans have done their best to quash even an investigation into irregularities in Ohio during the most recent presidential election.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even after the election the Florida ballots were counted 3 more times even using the most liberal standard and the outcome was the same.
Richard Pope–when my husband served in the military we didn’t change our home of record from Wyoming to other states we were stationed in because Wyoming does not have state income tax–therefore, I would suggest that the fact that Washington does not have state income tax is the reason for some soldiers changing their home of record to Washington. If, as I suspect, military members change their home of record strictly on monetary factors, they probably don’t vote in state elections, because they have no interest in, nor know about, the local issues and candidates. However, they could just write in the political party designation for every office and have their vote counted–see below.
I looked up info on the Federal Write-in Absentee Ballot http://www.fvap.gov/pubs/onlinefwab.html , and a sample of the actual ballot and instructions http://www.fvap.gov/pubs/ofwab.pdf It says in the “instructions to the voter,”: “Voting Procedure: For each office for which you vote, write in either a candidate’s name or political party designation.” From this it would seem that the “supervisor” was wrong in their answer!
“But Republican observer Kirk Brandenburg said he sat at a table where election workers ignored party choices on at least 30 ballots. He said that when he asked a supervisor about it, he was told, ‘The names were not to be counted unless they were listed.'”
Richard Pope–when my husband served in the military we didn’t change our home of record from Wyoming to other states we were stationed in because Wyoming does not have state income tax–therefore, I would suggest that the fact that Washington does not have state income tax is the reason for some soldiers changing their home of record to Washington. If, as I suspect, military members change their home of record strictly on monetary factors, they probably don’t vote in state elections, because they have no interest in, nor know about, the local issues and candidates. However, they could just write in the political party designation for every office and have their vote counted–see below.
I looked up info on the Federal Write-in Absentee Ballot http://www.fvap.gov/pubs/onlinefwab.html , and a sample of the actual ballot and instructions http://www.fvap.gov/pubs/ofwab.pdf It says in the “instructions to the voter,”: “Voting Procedure: For each office for which you vote, write in either a candidate’s name or political party designation.” From this it would seem that the “supervisor” was wrong in their answer!
“But Republican observer Kirk Brandenburg said he sat at a table where election workers ignored party choices on at least 30 ballots. He said that when he asked a supervisor about it, he was told, ‘The names were not to be counted unless they were listed.'”
Hey Chuck,
Believing Saddam to be a threat is quite different from invading Iraq. The war is wrong and the US is losing it, big time. It should never have happened and it wouldn’t have happened if Gore had won Florida in 2000.
Hi Jill –
9/11 wouldn’t have happened either if Gore had won Florida, but it’s no use talking sense to these people. They don’t care much for peace and prosperity.
Hey Chuck,
Believing Saddam to be a threat is quite different from invading Iraq. The war is wrong and the US is losing it, big time. It should never have happened and it wouldn’t have happened if Gore had won Florida in 2000.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So if you see a mudreous threat, as a leader you stand around with your prverbial thumb up your ass and do nothing?
9/11 wouldn’t have happened either if Gore had won Florida, but it’s no use talking sense to these people. They don’t care much for peace and prosperity.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Jill, you forget the same group tried to take the same buildings down on clintons watch, the bomb wasnt big enough. Why would Gore have been different?
You know, I’d like to go back to 1876 and “re-vote” the Tilden-Hayes election. I’m still not confident in the outcome.
Saddam was contained, and not a significant threat to US interests. (Next you’ll say how we had to make the middle east safe for “democracy”.) What Iraq has become, a breeding ground, is far more of a threat than what Iraq was. Bush wanted to be a “war president”, and now he is. He should have just focused on the job in Afghanistan, but that wouldn’t have served his long standing oil based agenda.
Hi Chuck-
—-So if you see a mudreous threat, as a leader you stand around with your prverbial thumb up your ass and do nothing?
Nothing proverbial about not reading PDBs about hijackings and instead reading My Pet Goat while the World Trade Centers collapse.
Well said, Goldy.
Saddam was contained,>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes, contained in a country full of people that lived in fear of his murderous rampages….
Is that your way of saying “make safe for democracy”? Do you think those same people now are less fearful?
No doubt that Saddam was more than just an average asshole, but now we’re the assholes. Like I said, Bush should have focused his attention to getting the job done in Afghanistan (which contrary to media reports, is still a pretty messed up place).
Chuck – My point is that there were plenty of other election problems in Florida that far exceeded Bush’s margin of victory (see below) but Republicans were already yelling “sore loser” to the Dems when the Dems even suggested a recount. If Democrats had demanded Republicans agree that the election outcome was “uncertain” and a re-vote was the only way to “assure an accurate outcome” Republicans would have laughed and laughed. So we’re only giving you a (tiny) taste of your own medicine. Democrats have no reason to “roll over” and accept your reasoning behind calling for a new election. There’s no way Republicans would do the same and Republicans constantly resist any post-election questioning whenever their candidate has already won. I see no reason not to make Republicans go the distance on their own. Fight your battle in court, we’re not acceding to your demands.
Chuck wrote: Even after the election the Florida ballots were counted 3 more times even using the most liberal standard and the outcome was the same.
BTW, you’re wrong on this point. Under the most liberal standards, Gore wins, under the “accepted” standards in the state at the time (which have all sorts of inconsistencies, just like the complaints Republicans have about KC) Bush wins. But that’s just counting the votes already placed, not correcting the election errors that caused the outcome to be in doubt (like you’re asking for in a re-vote). See http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....Nov11.html
So, it’s still arguable who really won in Florida if we’re talking about just a re-count. It would have depended on the standard used. Remember that Florida didn’t have a statewide recount provision during that election. How “fair” is that?
Moreover – 2,000 Felons were improperly disenfranchised in Florida (by outdated felon “purge” lists), far greater than the margin of error. Florida election officials were told, years in advance, of problems with those lists. They chose to ignore them.
10,000 voters were likely disenfranchised because of the illegally designed butterfly ballot (illegal under Florida law). Why should those voters pay for the mistakes of the election worker who designed the ballot?
Lawyers for Republicans fought to exclude overseas ballots in Democratic counties based using standards they argued should be ignored in Republican counties (so more Republican overseas ballots would get counted) – this resulted in an estimated net vote increase for Bush of 290, close to half of his margin of victory. Why should overseas votes in Democratic counties be subject to more stringent rules than those in Republican counties?
Republicans scoffed at Sen. Bob Kerrey’s call for a “re-vote” in Florida of 2000, and we Democrats are only returning the favor, in what I see as far less troubling circumstances.
Nothing proverbial about not reading PDBs about hijackings and instead reading My Pet Goat while the World Trade Centers collapse>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Under the conditions it was the best thing to do, while the experts that he hired to handle such things got the answers they needed to handle the situation, just as when a pilot is flying a plane and someone gets sick, he continues to pilot the plane while his representative (airline attenant) determines the extent of the problem and possible solutions (such as landing early, or giving alka seltser)
So if you see a mudreous threat, as a leader you stand around with your prverbial thumb up your ass and do nothing?
That’s a real slippery slope Chuck. If you’re a good leader, you first absolutely very that he’s a murderous threat. And, you make sure you have a good strategy for “winning the peace”, so you don’t end up trading one murderous dictator for 1000s of new mini-dictators.
Oops – turns out Saddam had no WMDs, no chemical stockpiles, no biological weapons programs and no programs to create WMDs. The inspectors were right. The sanctions did their job. Sure, Saddam had “intentions”, but I’m sure that lots of two-bit dictators around the world want to create WMDs. Are we going to invade them all? (Maybe if you believe Ann Coulter, we should)
Are we just going to attack anyone who might be a threat? How do we know our new “intelligence” on them isn’t suspect? Let’s just start policing the world (something Republicans always complain about until they find a war they support). Where is all the money for this going to come from? Where are we going to find fresh troops? The army & reserves are far under their recruiting targets because no one wants to enlist under these conditions. What’s next, the draft that Republicans keep denying is coming? How do we fight unlimited length wars in North Korea, Iran, Iraq and keep our homeland safe without a draft and some pot of gold?
I’m not a pacifist. I supported the first Gulf War. I support the war in Afghanistan. I would probably support tougher action (not sure what) against North Korea, and to a lesser extent, Iran. I just don’t think the war in Iraq was properly planned or executed, and it’s made us less safe overall. Iraq is a breeding ground for terrorists and our unfortunate treatment of POWs in Iraq and Gitmo have made great recruiting tools for anti-American Islamists to rally around.
Can anyone imagine the calls for impeachment the Republicans would be making if it turned out Clinton went to war on bad intelligence? or forged documents (the Niger/Yellowcake) Bush and the neo-cons pushed and pushed, saying they had iron-clad information that Saddam was an imminent threat. Sure, other countries believed Saddam was a threat too, but we’re the only one who pushed the world into war.
Is that your way of saying “make safe for democracy”? Do you think those same people now are less fearful?>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes I do think so, I see them on the television every day SPEAKING THEIR MINDS. That alone was unheard of onder Saddam.
Oops – turns out Saddam had no WMDs, no chemical stockpiles, no biological weapons programs and no programs to create WMDs>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is not what John Kerry or Bill Clinton originally said after the facts were in…
The legacy of Bill Clinton finally affects the outcome of our governor’s race. Dave, if they testify under oath in court, go ahead and give them the benefit of the doubt. And if you ever get called for jury duty, decline.
Not the legacy of Bill Clinton, the legacy of Dino Rossi and Chris Vance.
It’s nearly impossible to perjure oneself under those conditions.
That’s exactly what I’m afraid of. Nobody would ever know even if they were lying. I hope the court doesn’t base its decision on their word without at least some corroboration, or physical evidence in the form of the actual questioned ballots themselves. I just sincerely don’t have faith in anyone associated with Rossi’s campaign actually telling the truth. They’ve been engaging in lies and distortions about King County from day one.
Dave – that’s precisely why the statutes were written the way they were. Based on what I’ve read I doubt the judge will accept uncorroborated partisan testimony. Which is why the Republicans are (rightly) focusing on digging up as much actual evidence as they can, because they don’t have enough.
Their claims and breathless accusations just aren’t going to get them anywhere now that they’re in court.
Sayonara, pig fuckers?
A couple points. In King County the republicans are all upset about “extra ballots.” However they are not mentioning that some of the worst offending precincts have been on the Eastside (Bellevue-rich-Republican.) The times web page had a screen where you could look up voters. John F. Conners (Ex VP Boeing and a Republican Pioneer) claimed he voted for Bush – but his name does not show on list.
The other point you should realize is this is a war over industies. Building v. Boeing. Builders just got the unemployment premiums lowered because worker are paid based on yearly average now. Builders were rebuffed on their demand to remove ratings for unemployment and Industrial insurance. Boeing (and other stable businesses) have lower rating and would pay more if they had to pay for the more dangerous and seasonal building.
In King County hurting Boeing is not a good idea.
Oh yes, I almost forgot my main point. BIAW (a group of bad builders – as compared to Master Builders Association – who united because they were being sued so often for poor construction and workers injuries) keeps 20% of its members workman comp refunds. They did not object to raising premiums according to ratings; but they don’t want to spread the claims by ratings. Let members be billed high, pass off the claims, and keep the money for BIAW!!! Their motto: Measure once and cut crookedly.
Washington:
Cascadia Scorecard
Evergreen Politics (D)
This is a test of the
systemI still have not mastered this blog command.