The AP is reporting that Washington State Democrats have raised the money needed for a statewide hand recount, and have called a 2PM news conference to announce their intentions.
More later.
by Goldy — ,
The AP is reporting that Washington State Democrats have raised the money needed for a statewide hand recount, and have called a 2PM news conference to announce their intentions.
More later.
DRE spews:
I would like to see the following statewide process sent up for the third count;
1. Each vote is examined by a demo and a repub
2. If they don’t agree, the ballot is sent to the state supreme court for them to rule.
Although this might put a few thousand lawyers out of business, I could live with the outcome.
Mark spews:
I’m pissed that we allow little Crissy to do this, but it is her right. On a positive note, at least she didn’t do the chickenshit thing and pick certain counties. All or nothing is good. When Dino wins in the end, I hope that’s the end of this fucking mess. Thanks.
jcricket spews:
Mark – what will you do if Gregoire wins? Will you then be changing your tune and calling for some additional kind of recount process?
D Huygens spews:
Good! This is democracy in action. Period. The law allows this, and we are following the law. Kudos to Gregoire for doing the right, and the legal thing.
Peter A. spews:
The curtin rises.
Jenny spews:
Let the second recount begin! We must know the true result of this election. Rossi can cry all he wants about unfair this is. He wants to win – he’d be doing the same if he was in that position. He says he’d concede, but we know that’s just B.S.
Nelson spews:
Finally, Democrats with enough guts to stop Republicans from stealing close elections. All Americans should be proud of the Washington State Democratic Party!
Mr. Cynical-dy spews:
Nelson–
Before you go to far about R’s stealing elections, need I remind you about Mayor Daley, LBJ, and the election going on right now in Montana for their State House etc. etc.
Both sides fight to win. Isn’t that the American way???
And before you get too high, mighty & noble…don’t forget about the King County Provisional Ballot debacle that is unfolding. By the time this is over, partisan hacks like you will be gasping to justify how your Party Head Pauly Bawley could have taken in all those affadavits….when standing in a sinking ship, you need to start bailing or ask for help!! Not yelling at the guy in the boat next to you that he’s a crook!
jcricket spews:
Cynical – To quote someone you probably love, “There you go again.” Stop throwing around the accusations of illegal activity on the part of Democractic leadership without _at_least_ citing your sources. Even a semi-non-credible source (i.e. talk radio) would be something that we could go on.
Otherwise I’m going to have to conclude that you’re a troll.
Jim King spews:
Well, here we go…
If we recount the ballots, this time by hand, I have no problem with the legitimacy of an outcome that favors Gregoire. Whether I think the secound recount is more or less accurate than the first is a wonderful academic question- but irrelevent to what the legitimate outcome is. The law says that the second recount trumps. Period.
Having written that, however- the law does NOT say reopen all questions. If the Democrats had concerns about the actions of some county canvassing boards, they should have raised the question then. Now is too late. That, too, is the law- although the State Supreme Court may change that. But to do so is to unsettle previouis case law, rendering their verdict suspect in many minds (duh!)
But what of my friend who got home from a trip to find that her absentee ballot, due to post office error, had been delivered to her home- not the Thurston County Auditor’s office. Should we now go find all such examples and include them? There are reportedly quite a few others…
And if so, when do we stop? Do we keep rewriting the rules, or do we live by the rules that had been set in advance?
The problem with two groups of partisans wanting things to go their way, and trying to impact the rules in the middle of such a close race, should be obvious. But the “my side is perfect saints, those others are all monsters” seems all too prevalent…
Peter A. spews:
DUH- What sinking ship? Looks like almost $ 1,000,000.00 of get the boat going money just poured into the lauch/slip yard.
After this is over, the ultra hard core R’s will will still be complaining even if Rossi gains 2 or 3 votes. Unhappy and sad attitude folk carry those traits into every part of their discourse with other people. It is a values thing, ranting, accusing, trust issues, off the deep end.
Apparently the dems are suing for a standard for all counties to follow, since Reed does not deem to issue strong orders, or can’t. Maybe it is his cover, make the court do it, so it does not corrode any good relationships with the counties.
Any one going to be an observer? Please, keep us informed.
Jim King spews:
But 42 was such a FUN number… That’s why I’ll gripe if Dino gains even one vote- or loses 41 or fewer…
Mr. Cynical-dy spews:
jcricket–
Trolls have feelings too! Why do you have to be so mean??? Please change your name as Jiminy Cricket was a nice bug!!
Just calm down and think honestly about the process surrounding these Provisional Ballots. X and I have a good exchange going on the righteousness of this on Goldy’s prior post. Go back one and read!!! I’m sure you would like sources. Intirgue is part of the process…be patient. If all those Provisionals check out 100% with a live human who can be specifically identified….you will never hear from me again. Isn’t that special??? But don’t hold your breath. Even X honestly said he doubted if more than 4 were illegitimate….which would be exactly 4 too many for Mr. Berendt…since he personally turned those affadavits in!!!!! Accountability folks…isn’t that what you are after?
Thomas spews:
It’s a sad day for all Washingtonians … even sadder day when the Democrats manufacture enough ballots for Gregoire. Shameful.
Nelson spews:
The only logical outcome to this situation would be for both the Rossi & Gregoire campaigns to split the cost of the recount and agree beforehand that whatever happens, happens. Sort of like a binding arbitration. That way, whoever would prevail in this count, would actually be able to govern for the next 4 years.
The problem with that scenario, however, is that it would require Republicans to take a statesmanlike stance, and I realize that the words “Republicans” and “statesmanship” simply cannot exist in the same sentence.
Goldy spews:
Jim King spews:
But Goldy- the Secretary of State is represented by the Attorney General, who is…
And I always thought we had to be worried about 666, not 42- shows how much my Sunday school teachers knew…
Jim King spews:
But maybe Jim Johnson would agree to represent Sam Reed in fromt of his future Supreme Court colleagues… Wouldn’t that be a hoot!!!
ian spews:
Well done, Democrats! Of course there needs to be a hand recount; that’s why it’s in the books – it’s the closest we can get to the Truth. This whole process has served to highlight certain players true characters. Chris Vance has taken off his mask to show all of us his true face – an attack and smear artist in the vein of Dick Cheney. His contributions to this stressful month has been nothing but slanders, fear-mongering and total disregard for the political health of our state! But, what else can we really expect from a Bush-era Republican?
However, the person I am most disappointed in is Sam Reed. He has shown zero leadership throughout this whole process. This is the guy, Secretary of State, who should have been at Center stage during this whole process doling out big doses of Calmness, Rationality and a blatant Non-partisanship! Why hasn’t he made statements affirming the fairness and legality of a hand recount if requested? Why hasn’t he stepped in as the front man for the media on all questions about problems instead of letting the county officers bare the brunt of all that critiquing? Unfortunately, I think his real partisanship has been revealed and we have all suffered for it.
Jenny spews:
Nelson, you’re right on the money.
Nelson spews:
Thanks, Jenny.
Peter A. spews:
Sam Reed is no Ralph Munro. He has been so timid and not willing to be in charge. He should be suing to make the counties comply with his directives for clear and conistent standards. Sort of a summary judgement to forstall the parties going to court.
I think he will suffer a big set back in the Dem lawsuit.
Thomas spews:
Splitting the cost of the recount and agreeing to drop the lawsuits and the lawyers? Hmmm … it’s an interesting idea. But the real problem is that solution doesn’t serve either party. The Rs will probably stand so far back from this (other than to chime in opposion to any D lawsuit) … thereby enabling them to cry “stolen election” should the results be overturned. The Ds
willhave filed lawsuits to try to open up the recount in ways favorable to Gregoire … so they wouldn’t agree to let “whatever happens happen”.It’s a novel idea … heck Rs might even agree to split the cost under the rules of letting “whatever happens happen” (e.g. drop lawsuits). But honestly, that’s not going to happen, now is it?
In a “normal” election, costs are borne by county and state budgets. Which, already happened … twice. So I guess in a way the costs have already been split … by every citizen. I liked that system.
But this Democrat-financed count makes me think that maybe all election costs paid for or “split” by the political parties that want to participate. Every count … not just recounts. I mean if it’s acceptable to have a political party financed count now … why not originally? That would save us taxpayers a lot of money.
jcricket spews:
Cynical – Intrigue is not part of the process when you’re throwing around accusations of voter fraud. And I’ve read the other thread. You keep saying, “Look what could happen” or “The potential for fraud is huge” and then spout numbers that no one but you (anywhere) has backed up.
Again, just because it’s possible the affidavits were fraudulent, doesn’t mean they were. And the burden of proof is on you, not the people defending the authenticity of the affidavits. You seem to have failed basic logic (you can’t prove a negative).
Jim King spews:
Hold it Peter A.- you say Sam Reed is timid because he didn’t do what YOU want him to do- some of us think he was quite courageous in backing up the counties against the Dems. Sam obviously believes the counties are already in compliance- as does Ralph Munro. Go listen to Ralph’s comments at Dino’s press conference this evening…
Goldy spews:
Ian, I’m not one to pile on (no wait… yes I am) but I have to say that this is not the same Sam Reed who found some excuse for a press conference every other day during the final weeks of his election. I’m not necessarily commenting on his decisions — I expect him to be partisan — it’s just that he’s been relatively quiet at a time he could have asserted leadership.
Peter A. spews:
Sad that retired Ralph M. would say a word. His only role is no role. He has cheapened Reed’s authority by perhaps seeming to say he is not expert enough and the Ralph is pulling strings.
They, the R’s, are afraid. Munro and Gov Cool Hand Evans.
And the argument is not the counties against the Dems. Wrong battle, sort of the old time game of yesterday. This game is much bigger, polarized parties statewide and the fight over tons of very rewarding ballots or very disapointing ballots. Election folks at the courthouses are just pawns now. As much as I love them all.
Mr. Cynical-dy spews:
Cricket–Tell us your expertise and direct involvement in this recount? I’m a systems & numbers guy who knows when some says they have turned in 400+ affadavits, someone else does a public records request and gets 225 And only 1/2 of those are on the original list of 939…that something isn’t quite right. Then, when it is like pulling teeth to get a list of those 939 provisionals and which of them got credit for voting is even more intriguing. Especially when each County is supposed to reconcile voter list counts with the # of ballots actually counted BEFORE certifying the original count or recount. This should be an easy exercise for King County Elections.
You try to minmize the issue I am raising by pulling things out of context…but jcricket you avoid addressing my concern at all costs. If Chris Vance brought in a box of affadaits after the election along with new voter registration cards because the ballots received didn’t match the original voter registration card, you would be screaming for accountability. As a systems guy, Judge Lean Dum should have thought out his decision & order more deeply so subsequent actions could be tracked & verified..independently. Go ahead & keep trying to minimize. You are obviously troll-like (if I called you a troll, that would be name calling & uncivil) and have zero direct knowledge or direct involvement of this process.
For the last time, the issue is getting the data from King County to independently verify each of the affadavits…a logical step if a group of partisans runs around bringing these in to Weepy Paul. I have asked many pointed questions that cannot be answer by X. THAT IS THE PROBLEM!!! Of course you would be singing a different tune we were talking about Vance bringing in these affadavits his posse supposedly rounded up.
jcricket spews:
Cynical – My expertise and direct involvement are entirely irrelevant. I do not have to prove anything because I’m not the one accusing people of committing election fraud. You are, with no evidence, just repeated accusations.
Who is this “someone else” you keep mysteriously referring to? That’s not citing a source.
For the last time, if you will cite who your source is (be it a Republican party operative, member of the media, etc.) I might be more inclined to listen to what you have to say. As it is, I’m avoiding addressing your concern because you’ve shown me nothing that would indicate any reason to take you seriously. Given the high level of Republican and media scrutiny the initial and manual recounts were under, and except for your assertion, I have every reason to believe the affidavits were correctly and legally collected, and those ballots correctly and legally counted. The burden of proof is not on me to prove otherwise. It is on you.
And please spare me the lecture about name calling, when you keep referring to “Weepy Paul” and “Lean Dum”.
Mr. Cynical spews:
Cricket–As I expected…you have no expertise & no direct involvement in any of this recounting fiasco. By process of elimination, it is apparent you are a Democratic Party Activist who’s role is to discredit anyone with direct involvement & expertise who raises specific relevant issues…especially about these provisional ballot affadavits…the process & lack of controls surrounding them.
Weepy Paul isn’t name-calling…if you saw his sobbing speech you would agree.
As far as “Lean Dum” is concerned…I say his actions & failures in that ruling could make someone feel a little dyslexic….especially when he said the Courts shouldn’t be involved in this…and then proceeded to overrule the King Co Election Dept. If he is so confused, it’s easy for others to be confused too.
jcricket spews:
Cynical – It’s fairly simple. Unless you use someone’s real name or preferred nickname, you’re guilty of name calling. Weepy Paul is name calling. Lean Dum is name calling. So that’s one place you’re wrong.
Second of all, I’m not a democratic party activist. 0 for 2.
Third, your say so does not make this a fiasco. You have presented no evidence and have not cited any sources for your accusations. If they are false, that makes you guilty of libel. Since the burden of proof is on you, let’s call that 0 for 3.
Nothing you say carries any weight because you refuse to cite your source or offer any proof for your allegations. Besides you and Republican party operatives, no one has even claimed that the affidavits were mishandled. And as I’ve said many times, the level of scrutiny was quite high. Your allegations are fairy tales, at this point, with less and less chance of being proven real with every post you make ignoring opportunities to prove yourself by citing sources.
That makes you at worst guilty of libel and being a liar, and at best a Republican shill who is willing to use rumor-mongering disguised as fact to muddy the waters.
Mark spews:
JCricket-
What will I do if lil Crissy wins? ONE- Puke. Two-Send a check to the GOPS effort to fight it. You whiney little liberals need to realize that even most of the Dems that voted for her think she should do the honorable thing and concede. Now that she’s decided not to and pursue this bullshit, I hope a band of rabid aliens from Mars lands on her head and flys her away to a far away place. Yes, I’ve kept my sense of humor, despite being completely disgusted with the Dems. that can’t admit defeat. Thanks.