Rossi asks Gregoire for revote… Goldy snickers

At a press conference broadcast live during the local evening news, Dino Rossi read from a letter asking Governor-elect Christine Gregoire to agree to a new election.

What does that tell me? He ain’t got squat.

I have been saying for weeks that the margin of victory in this election is just too far within the margin of error of the voting technologies to confidently determine who really got the most votes. And I find it ironic that Rossi agrees with me… now that he is behind.

Oh, he and his GOP handlers would like you to think that suspicious “voting irregularities” are to blame for the uncertainty, but the truth is… this is simply a damn close election. Fortunately, state statute — a statute Rossi voted for — provides a means of determining the outcome of these damn close elections: the winner of the hand recount wins.

To say now, that we need a new election because the first one was too close, calls into question all close elections. It would be untenable, bad policy.

It is also ironic that Rossi claims his sole purpose of asking for a revote is to restore confidence in the system. How exactly is he restoring confidence in the system, when he’s telling voters the system is so flawed we need to go outside of the system, throw out the results, and hold a new election? And how does repeating the unscientific claim that hand recounts are inaccurate, possibly restore confidence in a system that clearly relies on hand recounts as the most accurate count?

I have never understood Rossi’s reputation as a straight shooter, but if you had any doubts as to whether he is anything more than your typical politician, this performance should put them to rest. Let’s be honest… does anybody really believe that Gregoire is going to join Rossi’s call for a new election? And does anybody actually believe that Rossi thought there was a snowball’s chance she would?

So which is it? Is Rossi stupid? Or was this whole press conference just a transparent PR ploy?

Rossi ain’t got squat, and he knows it.

And I can’t help but think that we’ve just witnessed him filming the first TV commercial of his 2008 gubernatorial campaign.

UPDATE:
The Seattle Times has just posted one of those stupid, lame-ass, online polls, asking whether we should have a new election. You must know how much I loathe these worthless things by the way I mock them on my website. But please click on over and vote “No” as many times as you can.

And if you know an easy way of casting multiple votes, please share it with the rest of us. As long as Republicans are going to accuse us of stealing elections, we might as well start with this bogus load of crap.

Comments

  1. 2

    Don and Sherry spews:

    We called both campaigns. The Democrats were very polite, and said they were keeping a tally of calls. The Republicans were rude, and didn’t indicate that they were keeping track. In both calls, we stated politely that there should be no recount.

    Rossi isn’t going to pursue an election challenge. It would be too uncertain and too disruptive. The reasons he is playing this card are: 1. he wants to see if he can gain public support and pressure Gregoire into a revote and 2. he wants to keep his base riled (Republicans LOVE anger) so that they can continue to pity themselves and whine on talk radio, and try to undermine the legitimacy of the governorship.

    It has to do with being disruptive and destructive, nothing else. He knows he wouldn’t agree to a revote in his postion (when he was ahead he requested consession) and that Gregoire would be a fool to do the same. It is disingenuous and cowardly. I hope the public sees it as such.

  2. 3

    WesternFlyer spews:

    Silly online poll. Until you attach the $$ amount of the cost of new election, I bet more people support a revote generally. But once the $$ cost to the taxpayers is factored in, everyone can find better uses for taxpayers’ money.

  3. 4

    Richard Pope spews:

    If King County Elections can’t find another (very close to, at least) 3,539 people who legitimately voted in the November election, the results will, at the very minimum, have to be nullified and the election rerun. A 129 vote margin of victory cannot stand if there are even 130 more ballots counted than people who actually voted, much less 3,539 extra ballots.

    If Gregoire triumphally claims victory tomorrow, in spite of the Sword of Damoclese hanging over the King County results, then she is going to be perceived in a very negative manner when she is either booted out of office, or not seated in the first place, and a revote has to be held.

    Under such circumstances, I will predict that Rossi will win a 39 county blowout, beat Gregoire by at least 15 points statewide, and not only carry King County by a noticeable margin, but come real close in the city of Seattle.

    On the other hand, if Gregoire agrees to a recount now (or perhaps next week, if she doesn’t triumphally claim victory tomorrow), she will actually stand a very good chance in a revote. People had a very negative perception of her on election day, when the race was extremely close, and that perception has gotten worse since election day.

    However, if Gregoire agrees to a revote, her perception will improve. If the average voter’s perception of Gregoire is raised to neutral, or at worst just slightly negative, then she stands a decent chance of beating Rossi by a couple of percent in a new election.

  4. 6

    Edgar is Good spews:

    This confuses me – is there even the power for a revote? Clearly, Gregoire can’t do it herself, the legislature has to be involved. And under existing law, wouldn’t a court have to set aside an election first? I mean, there are codes and such, and it may not even be under legislative power to get a new vote without a ruling that from a court that this one was flawed.

  5. 7

    bby spews:

    KING 5 – reports that Gregoire spokesperson said she will not agree, of course.

    Dino STILL needs to concede……then learn to read better…..let reporters ask their questions, and tell the wife to smile, honey, we are on camera. Why wife and kids as props anyway? Press experts?

    Really bad….pathetic effort…..

  6. 8

    Chuck spews:

    Nope, Rossi should by no means concede, you can see the smug smile on her face, lets see if it stays when she finds that she actually has to convince the voters again after putting the state thru this crooked mess.

  7. 9

    jcricket spews:

    Richard – Here’s what’s actually going to happen: Gregoire will claim victory tomorrow in a less-than “I won a mandate” fashion, befitting the close results and the length of time the three counts have taken. Republicans will continue to bleat and present psuedo-evidence on blogs and talk radio for the next 3 weeks. Then she’ll be sworn in. Rossi will run again, probably, for another office or Governor again in ’08, using this as a campaign issue.

    If you stop seeing everything through your “Rossi-colored” glasses for a minute, you’ll realize that only people on the far right view her as negatively as you do. Everyone else will just move on.

    Goldy’s exactly right – If the Republicans had something that would actually be useful in a contest, they would have used tonight’s press conference to present that. Instead they’re still fishing, wishing and hoping for some shred of evidence to support their accusations.

    BTW, I have little doubt that your latest evidence (about differences between votes cast and votes counted) will evaporate similar to all the previous “evidence” that’s been floated by the Republicans over the last 5-6 weeks.

  8. 10

    bby spews:

    Richard you are posting into a tin bucket to hear the echo.

    Gregoire won. Rossi wil have to go to court with a good case to contest this election….all the bullshit and blather from you and unrulyandbadassSound does not change the process….

    King County does not jump via your command. You will get your data….AND, in the meantime, tell me what happed to Skamania, Ferry, Thruston, Grays Harbor and Lewis. Huh, Richard…….

    Fantasys are nice in life….I’m a real dreamer…don’t work in court cases…espeically with better attorneys on the other side….and Mr Babblefish was not a good choice.

    Gregoire has no buden at all to anybody. She is governor. Rule on Christine.

    Dino Concede, then move to another state if you are afraid of ChrisVancetheBombast. and his minons.

  9. 11

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    jcricket-
    You still seem to think Rossi is somehow obligated to publicly present his case in your kangaroo court. That ain’t gonna happen.
    Rossi knew exactly what reaction he would get from the Left. Goldy, you folks seriously underestimate Dino Rossi. The reason he did what he did tonight is so obvious IF you set aside your personal feelings (if possible) and challenge yourself to really think rather than do the typical Lefty emotional response.
    Richard Pope is a very, very wise man. He knows the Lefty’s on this blog will minimize his comments.
    C’mon Goldy, give Rossi some credit (even if it’s just for a couple of minutes) and think about this. Also, assume he will not present any of his case until he absolutely has to (January 22nd)!
    jcricket has been literally frothing at the mouth for weeks wanting to know what Rossi has. And bby with his chronic call for Rossi to concede and running his mouth without having a clue what has happened in King County is, well, PRICELESS!!
    While you knuckleheads have been blogging yourselves almost to climax, some of us have been working on sifting through the evidence helping to build the winning case. JANUARY 22nd! Hell, if you all keep blogging each other for 3 more weeks at this pace, you will likely be blind, or worse!

  10. 12

    jcricket spews:

    Always good for a laugh Cynical. We’ll be waiting for your evidence, but please pardon us if we don’t hold our breath. I’d hate to be someone who believes in you – I’d always have to keep excusing your failures, lies and half-truths.

    The Republicans have failed, at every turn in this election, to prove their case when it required providing evidence. I have no doubt that will continue.

  11. 13

    Jim King spews:

    jcricket- you and Goldy should know I have no respect for unSound Politics or the Snark- but even fools occasionally stumble into something other than shit… Sometimes…

    But consider, just for a moment- IF the discrepancy between voters who voted and ballots that were counted IS true… What DOES it mean?

    I’d be interested in the thought patterns of some of the good minds here, for a moment…

  12. 14

    Goldy spews:

    Goldy, you folks seriously underestimate Dino Rossi.

    Cynical… it is you, who underestimates me.

    Let’s see now… I am an admittedly liberal blogger, admitting to a liberal spin. But then, doesn’t admitting I am spinning, while drawing attention to my bias, undermine my spinning? So riddle me this, Cynical… what exactly am I trying to spin by spinning my spinning?

    As to the tediously transparent Mr. Rossi… I do believe he understands that he has more to lose in this than you and your BIAW buddies. Perhaps it is you who are underestimating him?

  13. 15

    Richard Pope spews:

    Comment by Mr. Cynical— 12/29/04 @ 7:38 pm

    Actually, the deadline for an election challenge lawsuit would be January 20, 2005, assuming that the Legislature does a perfunctory certification of the election results on the first day of its new seesion on January 10, 2005. RCW 29A.68.011 sets the deadline at 10 days after issuance of a certificate of election. Under Article III, Section 4 of the state constitution, this certificate of election is issued by the Legislature.

    Of course, if Gregoire was contesting an election, she would probably file the contest lawsuit two days late, on January 22, 2005, given her track record in filing timely appeals.

    Actually, Article III, Section 4 also says: “Contested elections for such officers (i.e. statewide officers) shall be decided by the legislature in such manner as shall be determined by law.”

    When read in conjunction with Chapter 29A.68 RCW, this could very well mean that an election contest must be decided by the Legislature before issuing the certificate of election, and any registered voter may appeal this decision by filing suit in court withing 10 days after the Legislature issues the certification of election.

  14. 16

    Richard Pope spews:

    Comment by Jim King— 12/29/04 @ 7:55 pm

    I don’t think you are going to get a straight answer to that question on here. However, if the shoes were on the other foot, and Rossi won by 42 votes, and there were 1,000 extra ballots in (let’s say) Benton County, than people who actually voted, that would mean that the Republicans stole the election.

    I am sure the 3,539 vote discrepancy (at the present time) is true, since that disk of actual voters has been released to a lot of people today. I am sure the Dems have their own copy as well. If Shark were wrong in saying that disk only contained 895,660 names, I am sure someone would have called him on it by now.

  15. 18

    Goldy spews:

    Well clearly Jim, if the discrepancy between voters and ballots counted is true, then it likely raises some serious questions. But right now, I consider this analogous to the 10,000 ballot descrepancy between the number of ballots estimated left to count, and the number ballots actually left during the first count.

    If there is still an unexplained discrepancy after King County is finished, then I’ll start to worry.

  16. 19

    bby spews:

    Jim – it is not true. The R’s were in a hurry and got the data from King entered to a certain point. They know that…. Crass, crude, silly blog propaganda stuff.

  17. 20

    bby spews:

    Let us all — and I command all — take a deep and refreshingly oxygen rich deep breathe……ahhh

    NOW – eaah of us post the BEST scene Dinno could have created tonight. State and national media at his beck and call. Political media dream. Biggest political story in the history of your state. You are acclaimed by many as THE up and coming star. “messiah like” to some……What would you have done?

  18. 21

    Chuck spews:

    OK Goldy, riddle me this, if Gregoire is sworn in without any further contest, then you have to admit that almost 50% of the people will not back her or be behind her. You also have to admit that possibly over 50% will not back or get behind her. She will not be legitament by 50% of the people. So why would a believer of democracy such as yourself be against a final little challenge? (I know actually it is in your liberal blood, you think you won so you are going to take your bat and go home)

  19. 22

    Amelia spews:

    Commenters seem to be assuming that an election contest would be brought in court, and that a court could order a new election. But Article III, Section 4, of the state constitution says, with respect to all statewide elected officials:

    “Contested elections for such officers shall be decided by the legislature in such manner as has been determined by law.”

    A statute cannot overide the constitution, so regardless of how our general election statutes are written (providing that anyone can contest an election in court, it would seem that the legislature must decide a contest of a governor’s election. That there is no law further detailing procedures would not seem to alter the undelegable responsibity of the legislature to resolve a contest for governor.

    Has anyone looked at this issue more closely? If Rossi brought a contest in court, I would think opponents would argue that the court has no jurisdiction to decide the case.

  20. 23

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    bby
    “what would I have done?”
    Thank you for asking!
    I believe I would have taken the opportunity to inform our entire nation what a true dumbass you are!.

  21. 24

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    Goldy–
    “what are you trying to spin by spinning your spinning”?
    Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!
    That’s a toughy.
    It’s kind of like you asking me why you have 2 nuts when 1 will do!

  22. 25

    Jim King spews:

    Amelia- please be so kind as to correctly quote from the state Constitution in the future- little changes in words make a big difference- even the placement of commas turn provisions on their head. The sentence you quoted improperly actually reads, “Contested elections for such officers shall be determined by the legislature in such manner as shall be determined by law.” Quite a different meaning, having “determined” as opposed to “decided”, and “shall be determined” as opposed to “has been determined” in the Constitution.

    All that boilerplate means is that, We of the Constitutional Convention arte going to leave it to the Legislature to determine by law how any such mess will be decided…

    And bby- I would want to see a statement from King County stating that the data was incomplete, if they in deed DID release incomplete data- I would have thought they would HAVE to release such a statement, since they would have only partially filled the public records request if that is the case…

  23. 26

    Jim King spews:

    Excuse- got two determineds in there- ““Contested elections for such officers shall be decided by the legislature in such manner as shall be determined by law.” Still same boilerplate, found elsewhere when issues were left for the Legislature to decide…

  24. 27

    Richard Pope spews:

    Comment by Chuck— 12/29/04 @ 8:20 pm

    Over 51% of the people voted for someone other than Gregoire. She got less than 49% of the vote. (Same is true for Rossi, almost.)

    Comment by Amelia— 12/29/04 @ 8:23 pm

    I would tend to agree. The legislature has not made any law for deciding election contests. It would seem too late to establish such a law in the midst of an unresolved election contest. Does that mean, if Rossi files an election contest with the Legislature, that it simply cannot be decided, and the Legislature would be powerless to resolve the contest or certify anyone?

    Notice the key words: “in such manner as HAS BEEN determined by law.” It says “HAS BEEN” and not “WILL BE”. Since the Legislature has never made a law governing its decision of election contests, the wording of Article III, Section 4 would seem to preclude the making of such a law now. The contest cannot be decided, and no certificate of election can be issued. No new Governor will qualify. Locke will remain Governor, or can resign and let Brad Owen be acting Governor. A new election must be held in November 2005, unless a special law is passed to have one sooner.

    If an election contest law for legislative determination may nevertheless be adopted after a contested election, then the Legislature must first adopt such a law, before deciding the election contest. Adopting such a law could take several days, or even weeks. Theh there could be the issue of whether the new election contest law was subject to referendum, and therefore not effective until at least 90 days after adjournment. (Hard to say there is an “emergency” to deny referendum rights, when the Legislature has refused for over 115 years to adopt election contest laws consistent with the state constitution.)

    I would say there is a good chance of nobody being inaugurated Governor on January 12, 2005. But buy your inaugural party tickets anyway. It is a great party for $75. And you will definitely get to meet Brad Owen, Sam Reed, Brian Sonntag, Rob McKenna, lots of legislators, and plenty of other important people.

  25. 28

    Jim King spews:

    One might also note that the State Supreme Court, in Foulkes v Hayes, specifically held that the courts of record of this state have a constitutional and common law power to oversee elections, notwithstanding any statutory enactment.

  26. 29

    Jim King spews:

    Richard- you got taken by Amelia’s misquote- the words in the Constitution are “shall be”- the Convention figured that the Legislature WOULD adopt law governing contests, and they have- Chapter 29A.68 RCW…

  27. 30

    Amelia spews:

    Jim King: My apologies. But my basic question remains: where is the case law, or other authority, that interprets “shall be decided by the legislature” as meaning only the process (and not necessarily the ultimate decision) is decided by the legislature? Thanks for your attention.

  28. 31

    Richard Pope spews:

    Comment by Jim King— 12/29/04 @ 8:43 pm

    Foulkes v Hayes was a race for Adams County Commissioner. There are no provisions in the state constitution relating to election contests for county office, as far as I can tell.

    Even if Washington did not have an election contest law, parties would have the inherent right to sue in court under its common law and equity jurisdiction to deal with frauds, errors and wrongful acts.

    Except that Article III, Section 4 expressly provides for the legislature to decide contested elections.

  29. 32

    John Slyfield spews:

    Regarding the wording of the constitutional piece above: It says the legislature has the power to decide such contests….but it appears as they have delegated that to the courts….as they can according to law.

  30. 33

    Richard Pope spews:

    Comment by John Slyfield— 12/29/04 @ 8:53 pm

    The phrase “decided by the legislature” appears only once in the state constitution, and that is in Article III, Section 4.

    If the framers of the state constitution had wanted to allow courts (or some other body, such as an election commission) to decide contested elections, then that sentence of Article III, Section 4 would read:

    “Contested elections for such officers shall be decided … in such manner as has been determined by law.”

    And just because current law seems to say that courts would decide all election contests, that doesn’t mean the laws have read that way for the past 115 years. But even if there never was a law passed for the legislature to determine contested elections for statewide officers, that wouldn’t allow the plain language of the state constitution to be ignored.

  31. 34

    Amelia spews:

    John Slyfield: The Constitution doesn’t just give the legislature the power to decide. It says the legislature “shall decide.” I suppose it’s a question of what powers the legislature can delegate. I don’t believe the legislature can delegate, absolutely, its lawmaking powers. But can it delegate its responsibility to “decide” a contested election (for a constitutional statewide office)? Perhaps so. I just haven’t seen anyone cite legal authority for that position.

  32. 35

    Richard Pope spews:

    Oregon Const. Article V, Section 6: “Contested Elections for Governor shall be determined by the Legislative Assembly in such manner as may be prescribed by law.”

    However, Oregon Revised Statutes 258.036(a) provides for an election contest for Governor to be filed in the Circuit Court (equivalent to our superior court) of Marion County (where Salem, state capital, is located).

  33. 36

    Richard Pope spews:

    California apparently has no provision in its state constitution to deal with contested elections for Governor or other statewide office. So no need to see if they have statutes that conflict with their constitution.

    The framers of our constitution got the most inspiration from the state constitutions of Oregon and California. And our contest language is almost identical to that of the Oregon Constitution.

    I did a web search for “contested elections” and “decided by the legislature”. It is likely that our state constitution is the only one which contains those two exact phrases.

  34. 37

    Jim King spews:

    Richard- my point is that when that language, or anything similar, appears in state constitutions, it has been usually thought of as referring to the legislature determining processes. The “great minds” I have talked to down here believe that no one would have raised the issue of the Legislature involving itself if some idiot D staffer hadn’t got the cute idea that, Oh, we have Democratic majorities in the Legislature, let’s threaten to take it there…

    And ever since, those Democrats in the Legislature have been saying, NO!!! Not Us!!! Not our headache!!!

    If anyone tries to bring a contest before the Legislature, it will tie the Legislature in the worst knots it has been tied since the federal courts ordered them to do nothing until they had redistyricted, back in ’65. They got nothing done for most of the regular session…

    It is a fallacy to believe that Gregoire is a lock in a contest before the Legislature. Any rules governing a contest would have to get past each house, and it would be interesting to see what the stand of the Senate would be…

    No, I think you will find this will be handled by the courts…

  35. 38

    bby spews:

    Mr. C – still waiting for the hot poop on Jefferson County? Were they in on the fix? Why did they not allow the R’s even close contact? . Is this a coverup? Did the long reach of the corrupt Seattle lefties get to them? Are there voters in that county who are involved in the no sex coverup? Who don’t know their sex?

    You know the place – why are you ducking the hard questions? Did the Rad femnazi homo land grab Dems get to you too? Lot of suspicion here. Need the facts today, this election is a mess in all counties…isn’t it?

    Mr C – the Rossi people are depending on you and you alone. Why are you caving? Are the homless and other riff raff registering in Jefferson? Who takes them to vote in that bus with the rainow paint?

    Answers, please.

  36. 39

    bby spews:

    Amen, Jim, the Supreme Court, possible intermidiate stop

    BUT premature to distill the temer of the newly minted LLegislature With Majorities In Boh Houses…..Oh, what a diffeence in who chairs he committees….allows flor votes…you can bake a better list than I…..and no need to suck up quite so much to gt you stuff out the other house….and the ecomy is improving and sales tax revenue of 4 Q of 04 is better than projected….that cash rolls in monthy…

  37. 40

    Jim King spews:

    But the Locke budget was full of smoke and mirrors- half a billion worth- legislators looking to roll budget out early to wipe Locke’s embarrasment off the table- and those are the DEMOCRATIC legislators…

    State employees about to get screwed again- contract payraises, plus some, to disappear into union coffers, pension plans, and health care increases they were told they’d be protected from…

    Feds want tens of millions in FEDERAL dollars wasted in Port Angeles graving dock back…

    Not sure why Dino wants the mess…

  38. 41

    WesternFlyer spews:

    Finally caught Dino’s grandstand at 10pm. He looked just horrible.

    KSTW–11–only station at 10pm to lead with this. Quote from Kirstin Brost of Gregoire campaign that “absurd” and that “this vote has been check, double checked and triple-checked.”
    KONG–6–at about 10:08–played footage of Dino. Kirstin Brost said “absurd” and got in that a revote would cost taxpayers another $4million. Reporter says “some are saying this is a “desparate move.” Robert Mak did a one-on-one and asked whether he was a sore loser.
    KCPQ–13–at about 10:11–played footage. Kirstin Brost quote saying “absurd” and “would cost taxpayers $4million.” Snuck in that Rossi voted for the bill for the count and recount process.

    Vance must be gleeful to watch a nearly-shaking Dino walk this plank.

  39. 42

    Goldy spews:

    OK Goldy, riddle me this, if Gregoire is sworn in without any further contest, then you have to admit that almost 50% of the people will not back her or be behind her. You also have to admit that possibly over 50% will not back or get behind her. She will not be legitament by 50% of the people. So why would a believer of democracy such as yourself be against a final little challenge? (I know actually it is in your liberal blood, you think you won so you are going to take your bat and go home)

    Chuck… If Gregoire had won the first count by 5000 votes, there would have been no recount, and no dispute, yet she still would have received less than 50% of the vote… so really, how is this any different, except for the fact that Republican’s have spent the better part of 6 weeks trying to convince the public that Democrats are all a pack of thieves?

    And yes… I do believe Gregoire won, fair and square… in fact, I believe if ALL the votes were really counted, she’d have won by a larger margin. So I’m very happy to take my bat and go home, just like Rossi and his supporters would be if the roles were reversed, despite the bullshit he spouted at the press conference.

  40. 43

    RDC spews:

    I’ve just returned from an online visit to what appears at the moment to be Paranoia Central. If assertions were evidence Gregoire would be sunk and every Democratic official this side of the Cascade crest would be on his/her way to jail.

    Rossi’s appearance this evening is a real puzzlement, unless it was meant as a trial balloon to guage what would be the public’s reaction to an election challenge (contest). Not even the dumbest fish would take the bait he threw out. The only other possibility I can think of is that he is being petulant and wants to undermine whatever chance Gregoire has of carrying the public trust with her into office. But I’d like to think he would have more character than to be motivated by that.

  41. 44

    Josef spews:

    Comment by Goldy— 12/29/04 @ 10:27 pm

    The difference is, we don’t steal. We know about the white-out and that’s ILLEGAL as Jim King posted here a few threads back.

    Yeah, sure my guy wasn’t as angry as he should have been. But this is only the beginning. At least we can recall what we’re gonna do…

  42. 46

    jcricket spews:

    What’s your point Chuck? If Rossi is sworn in it will be without the backing of more than 50% of the people. When Bush was sworn in after the 2000 election it was after he lost the popular vote and lots of people believed (at the time) that he “stole the election”. Didn’t hurt his ability to govern (partially because he had support in the house). Clinton was elected with far less than 50% (remember Perot?), and yet his approval ratings were very good, especially during the first term. He got bogged down by trying to push a healthcare package through the legislature, not by what % of the vote he won. Ultimately the % of the vote won matters little. Once the person is certified as the winner, they tend to get the backing of a majority of the population, at least for a little while. Other events, external or related to the way the person governs, usually shape how people feel after the race is over. A short way of phrasing it is “to the victor go the spoils”.

    As a counter-example (of sorts), Bush just won 51% of the popular vote in 2004 and his current approval ratings are lower than any incumbent in 100 years. He had a bunch of trouble pushing his intelligence reform bill through a Republican controlled Senate. Iraq has the power to change peoples’ minds too, if it keeps on being a debacle.

  43. 47

    jcricket spews:

    Josef – I’ve really tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you’re far more than a “Dinocrat”, if by that you mean a moderate Democrat who voted for Dino Rossi because you believed he was merely the better candidate.

    Your continual references to “stolen elections”, “Gregovych” and “the Ukraine” border on paranoia. You also seem to persist in believing in discredited “theories” because you really want them to be true (wishful thinking), rather than examing the evidence from a dispassionate stance. To me that’s not the behavior of a “true” moderate.

    So while I might not refer to you, personally, as far-right, I would use that term for the company you seem to be keeping recently – and they certainly don’t have your best interest at heart.

    For example, when the wingnuts at unSoundPolitics run out of theories what do they turn to? Can’t think up anything substantial, blame the so-called “liberal media”. It’s inconcievable to the radical Rossi supporters that their evidence is mediocre, at best, so it has to be yet another Democratic conspiracy keeping the world from knowing the truth. That’s typical right-wing BS.

  44. 48

    Chuck spews:

    Republican’s have spent the better part of 6 weeks trying to convince the public that Democrats are all a pack of thieves?>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    That is exactly what the public thinks right now, whether from the republicans or as I feel from watching the democrats actions for 6 weeks. The smug evil grin, the whole deal. The possibility or her in the seat and 4 more years of this state in a tailspin. The probability of Microsoft taking their game to the state of Nevada. This public deserves and will gladly pay for a runoff.

  45. 49

    Richard Pope spews:

    Comment by Jim King— 12/29/04 @ 9:46 pm

    I think that as much effectiveness as possible has to be given to both the Article III, Section 4 and Chapter 29A.68 RCW as possible, without coming to totally absurd results.

    So the legislature will have to initially decide this contest before certification by the legislature. Despite slight D majorities in each house, they will be tied in knots coming up with a law to govern their conduct of such contest. Probably the legislature will be reasonably fair, despite the slight D majority. If Rossi has substantial evidence of fraud, errors, or wrongful acts that could have changed the outcome of the election, the legislators will be fair and hear it out — and not be inclined to certify the election. If he does not have good evidence, then Rossi needs to not bring an election contest.

    If the legislature certifies Gregoire, then Rossi has 10 days to bring a lawsuit after this certificate of election is issued. This gives effect to Chapter 29A.68 RCW, which allows an election contest lawsuit within 10 days after such event. The courts would basically review the merits of the election contest, after the legislature had first decided the election contest.

    There can also be a parallel lawsuit in federal court, if rights under the federal constitution have been violated. For example, if King County really counted more ballots, than there were voters who cast them, this would violate equal protection — by diluting the votes of legitimate voters with ballots that were not cast by voters at all. Federal law allows such lawsuits to be filed in federal court, without regard for state laws (or state constitutions) setting forth the method of bringing an election contest under state law.

  46. 50

    Edgar is Good spews:


    The difference is, we don’t steal. We know about the white-out and that’s ILLEGAL as Jim King posted here a few threads back.

    Josef, when I read the Seattle Times FAQ, I don’t get the impression it’s white out (liquid) or illegal.

    They said:

    Enhancements included putting white-out tape over superfluous markings on the ballot…
    Q. Why was white-out applied? Was that legal?

    A. It was removable white-out tape that was applied to ballots so machines could read them. If, for example, a voter circled a candidate’s name, rather than filling in the oval next to it, the county taped over the circle and filled in the oval so the ballot could be read.

    so this seems to me to just be misinformation – or maybe the Times (and consequently I) am misinformed.

  47. 51

    Jim King spews:

    Goldy, jcricket, et.al.- I think I’ve demonstrated I’m not for conspiracy theories- why look for conspiracy, or fraud, if incompetence will do? Where I’m at is this- are we dealing with incompetence, or gross incompetence?

    Little things that- well, they MIGHT have made the difference in the count, but we (GOP) didn’t grab onto them early enough or well enough (being all caught up with grander conspiracies), and no court is going to overturn the election based on the little stuff…

    Or BIG things, that even caught late, are of the nature to get a judge to sit up and say WHOA!

    We’ve gone over the military stuff- most likely not quantifiable to a degree to overturn the election…

    I see the permanent remarking of ballots, and the discrepancy between voters voting and ballots counted as being the two POSSIBLE problem areas…

    Now, folks here have advanced theories explaining down these things- fine, but where are the OFFICIAL explanations rendering these void? That is what people like me need.

    If Dean Logan put out a statement saying that they had to release preliminary information, and once all data is entered we’ll have equal numbers of voters voting and ballots counted, I’d hang back and say, Okay, I’ll wait. When he DOESN’T put out such a statement, I am left wondering if there IS fire behind the smoke…

    And I’m embarrassed I didn’t catch the implications of the permanent marking of ballots, rather than the creation of duplicates, during the first recount- especially since Deal Logan’s explanation of not locking away the duplicate blanks was the need to have them available to create duplicate ballots, as necessary, for the machines to read.

    Some things just aren’t adding up here, and although I understand Sam Reed’s ministerial duty in a few hours, I for one am more than willing to do all I can to withhold legitimacy from Gregoire UNTIL I hear credible answers to these questions.

    I am NOT saying that there are not credible explanations that can be made, but I do not hear anyone in authority making those explanations. I just see brushing off, and the first rule is that when authority chooses to brush you off rather than answer, authority is possibly (probably) hiding SOMETHING.

  48. 52

    Jim King spews:

    Edgar is Good- but that still left them filling in an oval- and I’d love to see the white-out tape that covers just a circle, and doesn’t jam one of those machines. Let Dean Logan come out and show it…

    I’ve caught The Seattle Times in enough errors over the years to not accept them as authoritative on this kind of stuff…

    And Richard Pope- I don’t disagree that such as you propose is quite fair- but can you see Gregoire steaming as the Legislature deliberates? She has HER ball scheduled for that Wednesday night, and there will be HELL to pay if that woman is scorned…

    If the Legislature decides that they must act before the court can act, they will take an unrecorded oral vote in the joint session, and let the challenge proceed from there…

  49. 53

    Richard Pope spews:

    Comment by Jim King— 12/29/04 @ 11:12 pm

    I just don’t see how it could have been done with white-out tape. I talked with some GOP observers from the initial counting, and they told me that they had seen literally bottles of white-out fluid being used.

    In any event: “King County elections officials said 55,177 ballots were enhanced and 4,902 were duplicated.”

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....qna29.html

    I am thinking that ballot duplication was only done for provisional ballots that were cast in a different legislative district or county from that in which the voter was actually registered. Only in that situation is duplication necessary (if they are also using enhancement carte blanche). Or perhaps in the rarer case where the voter writes their choices on notebook paper, or uses the absentee ballot to clean the horse’s posterior before sending it in.

  50. 54

    Goldy spews:

    According to the Seattle Times:

    A. It was removable white-out tape that was applied to ballots so machines could read them. If, for example, a voter circled a candidate’s name, rather than filling in the oval next to it, the county taped over the circle and filled in the oval so the ballot could be read. Several times during the hand recount the county canvassing board asked for the tape to be removed to examine voter intent.

    I’m trying to confirm this, but if you don’t believe it coming from the Seattle Times, are going to believe it coming from Dean Logan? I think we are approaching the unfortunate point where people on both sides are ready to stick to their positions regardless of what facts may show up.

  51. 55

    Jim King spews:

    Goldy- Dean Logan is an authority- the Seattle Times is not. I am not going to snicker “Well Dean Logan said it, so what?” I’ll take him at face value, unless someone proves that for the first time in his career he has lied in an official capacity. There are penalties for such lies- there are NO penalties for Seattle Times mistakes.

  52. 56

    Goldy spews:

    Jim… I was using the royal “you.” I trust that you personally don’t disbelieve public officials simply because they are public officials. Hopefully, we’ll have better information tomorrow.

  53. 57

    Richard Pope spews:

    Looks like there could be some problems with the numbers of people voting, comparing with the numbers of ballots cast, in Snohomish County as well. In any event, the Snohomish County Auditor gave the Shark a computer file today, which is seriously off in matching up these two numbers:

    http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/003327.html

    It looks like 3,529 poll ballots cast by real people were simply done away with in Snohomish County (maybe erased from the electronic machine), while 7,729 more absentee ballots were counted, than there were voters actually casting them.

  54. 58

    DCF spews:

    bby, I agree with you completely about Dino’s family being used as props. He does it almost every time he’s on camera, I feel sorry for the kids especially, they have to stand there like little statues, and I’m sure they’d rather be playing a video game.

    As to the re-vote, I am undecided on the issue, but I believe a couple of things: the voter turnout won’t be as high in a re-vote; and don’t know that I want to spend 4M on a new election when I don’t believe our votes will be counted any better this time. Now if history can tell us anything a lower voter turnout will benefit Mr. Rossi, and the Repubs know this, that’s why Dino asked so nicely for a run-off election.

    Richard Pope, you gave a very insightful scenario as to who would be Governor, I would suspect that if your look into the future did come true, Locke would resign as his family will be living in Seattle. I really like Brad, maybe he could be Governor for the next four years if this drags on!

    Edgar, thanks so much for the white-out clarification! It’s taken this long to get to the bottom of White-out Gate. Unbelievable! See anything can be twisted to suit a POV, just leave out a word (tape), change the punctuation, etc.

  55. 59

    jcricket spews:

    Jim – I do respect you, and you’re right that the things you have raised as “possible” problems. I’m guess the reason I’m not jumping to answer is that there are innocent explanations (possibly) and I’m betting that the facts aren’t being fully/fairly represented in the media or on the blogs (imagine that).

    Remember, at this point the Repubs, Snark and talk radio are jumping down everyones’ throats and demanding they immediately answer the questions the way they’ve phrased them (“I demand to know why there’s fraud here”). The first thing that makes me think is to reject the phrasing of the question. Perhaps the data is being misrepresented. More generallyl, perhaps the counties are trying to actually taking their time, rather than responding publicly a tit-for-tat fashion. I think the counties are in an unfortunate position. Delay providing any data/responses and people think they’re trying to hide something. Provide data/responses immediately and you risk releasing preliminary info.

    It’s still possible that the real story behind this election is that we’re under-funding the people/groups who are supposed to manage it. I’m not arguing the officials are underpaid, but perhaps we need more low-level workers, newer and more machines, better databases, etc. All these things can add up to create the situation we’re in now without “gross incompetence” or “malfeasance”.

  56. 60

    jcricket spews:

    Hard to imagine, but Sam Reed appears the real hero in this recount. Acting in a non-partisan fashion to actually do his job, despite all the pressure (from both sides). Here’s a quote from him in the Times today:

    “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.”

    Still, he added, “If I were in Senator Rossi’s shoes I would do what he’s doing” — researching all 39 counties and deciding if there are errors or illegal votes that rise to the level of challenging the outcome.

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....ace30.html

    I do like Rossi’s argument: “A contest will drag this election out for months, and I think there’s been fraud, so Gregoire should agree to a re-vote”. How about instead, “A contest will drag this election out for months, and there’s no proof of fraud, so Rossi should agree to concede.”

  57. 61

    HowCanYouBeProudtobeAnASS spews:

    All the whining about the COST of the re-vote (pretty hard for that to be credible from the libs, but that’s another commentary for another day). Assuming a new election would cost $4.5 million (which is actually about 500K more than estimated), there were 2,805,913 votes originally cast in the governors race according to Sect of State website. That means each voter would have to pony up a grand total of $1.60 for a new election. Gosh maybe you’d have to sacrifice 3/4 of a latte to pay THAT. Hells bells, I’ll send in $9.60 to pay for my re-vote and that of 5 others!
    The cost factor is a NON ISSUE, but hey, nice try.

  58. 62

    jcricket spews:

    Uh, no Ass. The cost factor is an issue. You Republicans are always talking about government waste and the high taxes. Nice try with your latte comment, but that $4.5 million could be put to far better use than giving your poor Rossi a “do-over” because he lost. Maybe DSHS, the needy, hungry kids or the victims of the tsunami could use that money. Or maybe it could go to roads, election reform or any other number of worthwhile causes. Rossi lost, and if you want to give him money to support a court challenge, feel free. But none of us are chipping in to give your guy another shot because he lost.

  59. 63

    HowCanYouBeProudtobeAnASS spews:

    Do you actually read cricket or are you just another of knee jerk libs that react to the ‘gist’ of things? – I said I’d be willing to pay for 5 of you folks that are afraid of the truth in a new election. Hells bells, I’ll pay for 15 and STILL contribute to relief efforts AND enjoy my Starbucks. Feel better now?
    I notice you don’t call on the loopy libs to say to WA taxpayers, ‘Hey no need to reimburse us that $750,000. Hypocrisy they name is CRICKET!

    And DSHS – are you kidding?? What… they wasted the money necessary to bury ALL the kids that die under their care?

  60. 64

    jcricket spews:

    Nice use of prejudical language and a false assumption (“you must be afraid of the truth because you won’t pay for a new election”) to support your argument. Disagreeing with your call for a new election has nothing to do with “fear of the truth”. I merely believe that since Gregoire has won the definitive legal hand-recount, and no election contest has been won by Rossi, there is simply no need for a new election.

  61. 65

    HowCanYouBeProudtobeAnASS spews:

    >65% of the respondants in the King5 poll disagree with you:
    Should there be a revote in the race for Washington’s governor?
    Yes 1,815 65.19%
    No 962 34.55%
    Undecided 7 0.25%

    Which is actually a greater margin than the >57% that said Rossi should NOT concede.

    And over at KIRO:
    Should there be a re-vote in the Washington governor’s race?
    Yes. 3511 71%
    No. 1434 29%
    Not sure. 33 1%

    And UNLIKE the Times poll that Goldy encouraged you all to skew by cheating (hmm, now why does that sound familiar) while these are indeed unscientific, they CAN only be voted on ONCE and they are open to all voters. What I find most fascinating is that everytime you refresh the poll results, the percentage of YES for a re-vote goes UP.

  62. 66

    Goldy spews:

    ProudAss… do you have any idea how incredibly fucking stupid it sounds to express more faith in a bogus online poll than you do in an actual election? Hell… why pay for a recount at all? Let’s just put a poll up on KING5.com and let that decide it.

    Sheesh!

  63. 67

    jcricket spews:

    Oh yeah, Ass, I’ll bet that only eligible voters from inside of Washington voted on those polls. If you believe these polls are, in any way, representative of Washington, you’re truly pathetic.

  64. 69

    Larry spews:

    The real story of this election – if you can see the forest through the trees – is that a Republican TIED a Democrat in the race for Governor in Washington! Can you believe it?

    If Gregoire was the least bit competent, she would have won by 120,000 votes, or more. Obviously, there were many Democrats who voted for Dino, and even more support him now. Regardless of what the Seattle Socialists think, there are many Democrats in the rest of the state that don’t like the fact that King Cook County would decide this election in a manner that appears fraudulent.

    And as for the cost of the re-vote….who cares? Like Dino said – Locke and Gregoire are talking about raising taxes $600 million – $4 million is a drop in the bucket!

    Why not use some of that ‘tobacco windfall’ money? How many billions did the state get? I know that the lawyers took $7 or $8 billion of that – their fees could pay for 2000 re-votes, at which point MAYBE King County would be able to reconcile their books. Oh, and those same lawyers were Gregoire’s second biggest contributors…go figure.

  65. 70

    jcricket spews:

    Yes – a Democrat runs arguably the worst campaign in a long time and the best the Republicans can do is almost tie it. With their self-destructive post-election antics continuing unabated, I expect this is as close as they’ll ever come.

  66. 71

    DCF spews:

    Split the cost of the re-vote evenly between the Republican and Democrat parties, then those that support both sides and want the re-vote can donate their money to their respective parties. Heck, the Demos get their money back now for the re-count, they could slap it back on the table for part of their half, do the Repubs have any money left?

  67. 72

    jcricket spews:

    One interesting detail people have been ignoring is that the requirement is only that the party requesting the hand recount put down a deposit to cover part of the costs of the hand recount. If the Dems had lost, they would have been out far more than what they put in (I saw one estimate of the full hand recount costs being $1.5 million).

  68. 73

    dragonfly spews:

    I am interested to hear opinions on the 8,000 votes that don’t have a name associated to them. I realize that 1,500 per district is normal but when the vote is as close as 129, how can anyone honestly say there is no discrepency? I would love to hear an honest evaluation of the votes that counted the third time that somehow showed up, but weren’t there for the first two? Also, is it true that military ballots were not counted in the recount? How does a person find this out without reading through a biased newspaper? What is the TRUTH?